 I'd like to call for the meeting of the Arlington Redevelopment Board for Monday, November 17. We have a fairly short agenda tonight. The first item is the discussion about the draft master plan. And then at 7.30, we have another item for discussion about Arlington 360 Neighborhood Protection Plan fines, and the disbursement of those fines possibly. So we have Charlie and Bob here from the Master Plan Advisory Committee. If you want to come up and sit with us, if that's more comfortable, that would be great. We might have some questions for you about the master plan itself, the process. We can kind of do this, I thought, as just a free discussion. Charlie is one of the co-chairs of the master plan advisory committee, and Bob has been there for I think every single meeting? No, almost. So these are the two guys in the now. Any questions we might have? So as everybody knows, the process has been going on since about a year and a half now. A year and a half, and we've gone through all the different elements. You want to give a little summary of what we've done so far? Sure. Well, this all started with the Royal Cafe, which was a little over two years ago, which was not part of the formal process, but it brought maybe a couple hundred people together in town to sort of talk about the vision and what people wanted to see in future direction for the town. And then the town put out a request for proposals for a consultant, master planning consultant, and an arcade game was selected. Actually, at that time, it was Community Opportunities Group. It was selected to perform the work, and Judy Barrett has since moved to RKG Associates. So she has been the consultant that we've been working with. And there have been a series of informal meetings, public meetings, interviews. Carol can tell you how many, but I think it's well over probably 50 meetings, and then the subsequent interviews as well with individuals. We've received a lot of input from town residents throughout the entire process. And so now where we stand is after we did a series of working papers on different subject matters, the state prescribes the areas that you have to study as part of a master plan coming up with various issues, for example, housing and open space, transportation, land use. And after these series of working papers were completed, we heard a lot of input from residents. And the consultant now has gone through the process of synthesizing all that information, putting together a draft master plan. So that's where we stand now. There will be a public meeting in January. Right now, we're looking for comments on the draft master plan. January 12th is the public hearing that we're going to hold for residents to comment on anything on the draft master plan. And they'll be at the town hall auditorium. They'll be at the town hall auditorium. That'll be a large meeting. And what happens after that? Do we vote after that, or do we assess it? After that, we do vote. In that same meeting, sorry. Recommendation to town meeting. You would probably vote in a subsequent meeting. Subsequent meeting, I think. Subsequent meeting. It might be a final draft. If the board decides that there are some changes with the committee, that we go into a final draft. At that point, they should be just tweaks. That would be what the board votes, and then that would go to townspeople for endorsement. The endorsement is optional. That's something we think is important to do. It's not in the statute. Yeah, it's important to do all that. So the next milestone is December 1st, which is when input on this first draft is due. December 1st. And that input can be emailed. Survey Monkey, that makes it easy to write your comments. But there are also some questions on the Survey Monkey. We're also accepting hard copy markups as we did with the working papers. But if neither of those is acceptable, and email is your favorite mode, I don't want to refuse any input on that. The Survey Monkey's out already. Yes, it is. If you go to the master plan page on the website, the survey is a link on that page to the survey, as well as links to the relevant document with the implementation section and the plan itself. So that's a good place to start. And there's links to Barbara Thornton's articles there. Are there links to the videos of each element's presentation, like when the housing was presented, economic development? Not that I've seen. I don't think they're on that page. But they're on ACMI. ACMI has them all. OK. But they're not on that page. Not that I've worked. I haven't seen them on that master plan page. They might be on another page. I don't think they're on that page. I didn't look for them specific. So those might be interesting to hear what some of the public comments were at that time. And it's a long document. So there are lots of different ways to go about digesting this document. You do have copies of the implementation table. And I think that each working group is a working group of a committee for each element of the master plan. And right now, they're going over what we received in the draft to review for completeness, for accuracy in the implementation section. Bob and Charlie are with the Public Facilitation Services working group. We worked together on last week. And so one of the things you can do is if you've had any, if you've looked at the implementation table and you have any questions about anything you've seen on there, we can talk about that. But more generally, that's kind of really in the weeds. But more generally, some of the kind of headlines that we think have come out of this are people want exciting and eclectic shopping districts. The Millbrook is a hidden gem. We have a tree-lined town. Another headline out of the master plan is, I can afford to live in Arlington. That's something people value and they want to maintain. Safer walking for all ages, a great town for seniors, our natural resource jewels, and we planned for smart growth. And I think on that last one, I think there's a lot of interest that has been expressed through these last couple of years for clarifying that mixed use is a lot of Arlington and trying to help realize a range of master plan goals through mixed use. I would add growing the town's revenue, our fiscal stability in the future, as well as a major role. It's very important in the plan. And where do we get all those headlines that you have there? The headlines are actually still a work in progress, but I can forward that to you. Out of the press. Because different members of the committee are working on these headlines to try to convey the themes. Even doing that is a little hard because we get very detailed with the themes. But these were the headlines that Sherry Varen on the committee wrote. And they're the ones I thought, she's on the Human Rights Commission, Lankan Town meeting member. She's put these together. So these headlines haven't been ratified by the committee or anything, but it's just an effort we're trying to undertake to communicate and illustrate some of the important themes. Most of those are positive aspects of the town. What about all the controversial headlines that might come out? Give some examples. Cyblox. Yeah, that's all I think that surprised you. Actually, nothing really surprised me. I was really taken in by the variety of things that people are commenting on. And they really did put a lot into what they came back, the feedback we got from them. I'm not sure if I were on the outside, I'd be participating to the same extent. Yeah. But there are quite a few people that really have a lot of interest in this thing. And nothing really did. But that was one that kept coming out all the time and felt the walkability tied in with the sidewalks. And what can this? Each element in the draft has issues and opportunities section. So we can just jump to one. This is random, I'm not saying. This one is especially controversial, but let's go to economic development issues and opportunities on pitch 786. Yeah. So this one isn't very controversial, but it's like, how do you handle this? To forecast an increase in local employment could translate into potential needs for 160,000 square feet of office space, 50,000 square feet of industrial flex space, and 76,000 square feet of retail commercial space. Do we have it? It is the space we have now adequate in its condition and its square footage. So there are some things that, based on forecasts, will we meet the forecasts? There are also some things that we have to strike a balance. We know that we all want to expand tax base. When we did the visual preference survey in the Temple Auditorium, the do you like this or that, we know that people have expressed an interest in allowing somewhat taller buildings, but not too tall. So will that trigger enough redevelopment to make a difference in expanding our tax base? That's one of the controversial items I was speaking of when you say increasing density. And we had a large discussion for the economic development presentation about what that means and what people in town perceive that as, and does extra height necessarily bring something bad, something good, does mixed use development, bring something bad, or bring something good. And the visual preference survey, I think, helped with some of that to show what can be done well in commercial centers with higher density. Yeah, we have mixed use now in Arlington, but a lot of what we have in mixed use predates our current selling point. Yeah, and it's some of our nicer buildings, like above the theater, right in the center of East Arlington, Capo Square, yeah, some of the mixed use. The heights. And then the heights on the mixed use. So people keep in mind those examples when they hear the word density and mixed use. I hope that question comes up and that can be explained if people are hesitating because that's a big one for the town. If we don't start to infill and add density, we're never gonna bring in money. There also seems to be interest in having design guidelines so that there is more predictability, not just for the builder, but for the butters and for people who live in the town who they'll know, these, this is our palette, for example. This is the design guidelines for different areas in the commercial districts. So that predictability, if you can match some predictability with the redevelopment, we can, there's a better chance of realizing some of the objectives. What I hear in terms of the density, height and things like that, I think a lot of people envision massive, looking like a tonneau again. Like five of them. And I think design guides a step back can take away a lot of that fear in them. And that's where I wanna go higher. I'm curious, as you've gone through this process, I know one thing that I heard again and again is parking, and it's gotta be near the top of the list. Didn't make the top 10 over there, but, and I think one thing I'm curious about is we talk about density and we talk about everything else. Do we have statistics to back up the fact that people are moving away from kind of two-car type of arrangement? In other words, I have an anecdotal feeling that people try hard not to have many cars now, right? And I guess you see how people live, they ride their bikes, they take public transit, everything else, especially if you're right along the spine, either Broadway or Mass Ave. But the parking study that happened, as well as other things, is there data to back up that kind of gut feeling I have? Arlington is a member of the 128 Business Council, and they did a survey for us this year of Arlington's transportation practices and habits, Arlington residents and computers. And that's on the website. I don't have it with me, but it is on the website, so you can see the results. It just seems like, what is it, 500, well, probably it's about 500 square feet or something like that. I mean, it doesn't seem like the ratio is right anymore. I agree. I think like so many Metro Boston community suburbs, our by-law was generated at a time 40 years ago. Absolutely. Car was came, yeah. Our habits have changed, and our parking requirements are absolutely a restriction on development. Absolutely. There's no question our parking requirements restricts development in Arlington. And they are excessive. There's more than what the market. I shouldn't make a blanket statement, but in some uses in the by-law, we require more parking than the market wants. So I think an important part of this process when we, you know, before the hearing and everything, is that kind of, what are the neighbors doing? You know, what are the neighborhood towns doing with respect to that, or what have they done? What are the metrics that people are using for parking now? That's gonna be important for us to be able to have, I think, at hand, because I think that, I think that as we talk about density and we talk about those types of things, that issue, I mean, along with height and what it looks like, I think people will trust that a little bit, because we can talk about like the three or four storey buildings that line Mass Ave right now, and that's nice. I mean, you got different heights, you got different architectures. I think everyone can probably wrap their heads around that it's not gonna be this kind of, kind of just monolith canyon going down. But I don't think they're gonna necessarily be able to wrap their heads around parking. I remember we're not just talking about Mass Ave, we're talking about Broadway. Correct, and that's what I meant. I meant the main spines, yeah, the main spines is what I was thinking, exactly. Yeah, Broadway, and obviously, yeah. There is a recommendation to consider a parking study in East Arlington to determine whether there's a parking deficiency and to develop strategies to improve parking management in the area. So that's one example of a parking recommendation. There are, and I could go through that. I'm almost less concerned about, I mean, I myself, I'm a little less concerned about recommendations, because I mean, that makes sense, and I don't know what we're gonna be able to do in East Arlington specifically. I mean, you know, you can talk about the Russell lot and maybe things you could do there or something, and in East Arlington it's a little tougher. But in my mind, it's more about kind of convincing people or showing people that the way that people approach transportation and cars in Arlington has changed, and maybe it's looking at what, I don't know whether Somerville has changed theirs or some of the more dense, like Cambridge or Medford. What are they using now? What are they using now, or what's recommended? It just seems like if we don't get ourselves away from the X number of feet per car or one car per X number of feet, especially at 500, I mean, that just seems very small. So you're interested in, it sounds like you're interested in the results of that part of that transportation study. Yeah, that's- It's just that it might comment on how many cars a household has. Yeah. Or are you talking about benchmarking? It's both benchmarking and that study, I think. I think it's also benchmarking. To understand what people don't do. That's a really helpful thing to do. I would second that. Yeah. Like you just have to see how other towns did it. And if we have to break out on our own? Well, that's fine, but we better understand what we're doing. You want us to study what other towns have done. Well, it depends on what the issue is. So you go from parking to density. But just let's stick on parking for a second. So you're looking to see what other communities have done to change their parking requirements? Yes. Oh, okay. Like just a comparison, what is Cambridge calling for? You understand the master plan isn't going to change our parking. No, I do understand that. That that'll be a part of implementation as we kind of talk through these things. But if we're talking about more density, then we have to, as a corollary to that, or as an adjunct to that, be able to say, and as far as parking goes, folks, you know, yes, we're asking for more density, but understand that our bylaws are a little out of date with respect to the parking requirements. And therefore, although this might seem like it'll require a lot more parking, if you look at, you know, the overall usage of public transit and everything else, it actually should not have the really tough effect that we think it might otherwise happen. I don't know. I mean, I think we need something. That's a great idea. If there are other projects we can point to that would happen in other towns, that might be helpful too. Yeah. Although I think that might be kind of getting ahead, because you don't really need that. You know, the data that we got from the transportation study that we went 28 did is available, and that, if it isn't, I believe it is actually cited in the plan. If it isn't, it should be, and should actually be an appendix to this. Okay. So that we can present, here's a snapshot, one slice of what current Arlington resident transportation commute to work practices are. But that doesn't completely get at how many cars, and we shouldn't question how many cars people have. We shouldn't need the real specifics, but in generalities, because the real specifics are gonna come out when the zoning bylaws are looked at and all the density charts are looked at, and that's not the master plan. Yeah. But Carol's trying to say, I think, right, Carol? No, but I think unless you have, unless you have in your back pocket, something other than, well, don't worry about the density, because, yeah, something to be able to say, well, you know, our parking's already out of whack, and we need to correct it regardless. So that's all. Maybe that it's out of whack by, you know, a certain percentage compared to surrounding communities. Yeah, because then they're just not thinking about density as more parking. Right, right. And also just you mentioned to make a judgment that's not gonna be a corridor with high buildings on both sides, and it won't even be high everywhere. Right. I mean, I would imagine that that it's somewhere between, you know, where we have the opportunity to have more density like we have in the centers. I mean, right now we have high in the center, and then maybe a little high in the capital district, then high in the center, low, low, low, a few little bumps, and then high in the Arlington Heights. And over time, we can figure out where we wanna allow more double-loaded, more and more intense development. But we still wanna keep, I would imagine, at least in my opinion, some of the open space and the feeling that it's not a real city, it's still kind of between a city and a suburb. But even to some of the things like allowing infill in areas, taking some of the residential properties that are right beside the commercial areas, along Mass Ave, and allowing those to be converted to a different use that's more commercial and business oriented, that has mixed use, that helps to infill some of that. Yes. Yeah. I think it's less- That's increasing density. Oh yeah. And it's not necessarily going up at all. Well that's what I'm wondering if there's a way that they can produce that so that people understand that it's not going to- Am I going back and making the lots, the lot coverage requirements not as stringent, and the parking not as stringent? In many ways it is mixed use already when you go up Mass Ave and look at those big old houses there, that's right. That's right. There'll be ones already. There aren't many people living in there with kids. That's right. That's right. Right. And even what we do with the mill brook corridor, coming up with design standards, allowing access, public access along the border in key places, what the buildings will be like there, what the density will be like there, that whole writing up all of that will come later. I see. Suggesting that we need to do that is what's in the master plan. Having the big vision that yes, that's something important. I didn't see that yet, but I'm sure it was. There is a recommendation in there. Yeah, it's varied. I look for it in land use. I saw the mill brook, but I didn't see it. You don't get to it until open space and recreation. I saw mill brook, but not mill brook district. One of the things we need to do is to make the whole brook district. The term still isn't right. Yeah. Because we've created a district. There are two things. There's the mill brook, which is itself a great asset. And there's the potential in that zone that we identified of where a lot of our industrial properties and also future large sites are located to provide a special attention. And the committee spent a lot of time on that, I think, thinking about what could happen there and visualizing it a little bit with the consultants. And yeah, it's, I don't think it belongs in the open space and recreation. The mill brook. The mill brook district should be an economic development. Or everywhere could be in land use. But it feels like it needs to come forward. Yes. The corridor is more of the recreation and linear park. And that's part of the district. The corridor is part of the district. That's the open area. That's open space. That's open space. But right now, the whole mixed use district is buried in that open space and recreation. Because it kind of bridges everything. Because it's got public space. It's got historical aspects. Yeah, and that is not highlighted well at all. Right now in the master plan. It's a work. It's, yeah, that's. That's for room maintenance. These are constructive comments. Oh, no, these are amazing documents. Yeah, really, it is. Yeah, it's a first cut. Yeah. And it's not clear on the website, too, that all the charts and stuff are missing since we're on TV. Maybe somebody wants to explain that all this is a draft that's going to be put into a different computer program. And then all the color graphics and everything and all that stuff will be added. Some of the previous working papers had all that stuff in it. And you've noticed maybe that now it's just black and white. And just text. One of the things we did, too, is go back in time and look at the 1926 master plan, which I think was the last normal master plan that was done by Charles Eliot, who was a professor of hardware. And it was pre-automobile. So it was interesting to see his vision of what Arlington would evolve into having a train station subway stop at Arlington Center, realigning streets, a parkway along Spidey Han. I think he had some vision that the automobile was coming, but didn't know to what extent it was going to come. And so one of the things we challenged the consultant with is think a little more broadly about the role technology will play 10, 20, 30 years from now. I mean, the younger generation, who would have thought about Uber or Lyft as a means of transportation even three or four years ago. And so that could have a profound impact in terms of how we move about more on-demand transportation as opposed to having to own a car. Great, and that's to his point. Yeah, that's exactly to the point. But that's something we really have to push the consultant on is, again, looking back 1926 to 2014, we should be looking ahead at least 30 years. That may be happening. Yeah, and that's not an area, but that's a tough one. No, but I think it's, I agree. It's a role of technology. And it explains a lot of what you want with respect to density and everything else. I mean, you're close to the city. There's a different way of traveling now because of that. And this is supposed to be our vision for the town, for the future. Although, like, technology changes things every five years. I mean, like I said, wow. What are the concerns you think we're going to hear from residents at the hearing? Things you've been seeing in comments. I think housing will be an issue as well. The affordability, that's a major concern for people who are renting right now, knowing that the price of real estate is increasing faster than the Boston region as a whole, which means rents go up. And I think that's a problem for people who have lived here for a long time. How we tackle that is going to be a big issue as well. And that's, again, where the mixed-use development may come into play with a studio, one-bedroom apartments that are more affordable. A redevelopment of single-family houses where people can age in place. What we try to do with the in-law for the community department. Accessory apartments. Accessory apartments. Right. Yeah, I mean, I think if that comes up again now in the future, maybe it needs to be looked at a little more seriously by a town meeting and looked at it seriously. Yeah, yeah. Hopefully more favorably. That might be a little too tactical for this though, right? Doing this would make it into a plan. It's in the plan, right? Oh, it is. There's a recommendation that it's a very good way to increase affordable housing. Interesting. It doesn't count as affordable housing, but it's a good way to increase it without increasing density and it's very little impact on existing residential areas. It may be that the bylaws that was drafted that week before town meeting weren't the right fit for Arlington. Exactly. We need to look at it closer and see what we can change. Just consider that the future. Yeah, so that was a recommendation. Consider that. As far as public facilities goes, the town owns quite a few buildings. The question is, does it really need to own all buildings? We're using them efficiently. Are we maintaining them efficiently as well? I think that the town is doing an excellent job with the resources that they have. But I think we have to look at future space needs as well. We've gone back to the consultant again to look at the projections for school-age children, because we don't know whether we have enough space in the school system as well. So we're looking at that as well. Did the consultants have any recommendations on our cemetery dilemma? It's an item. No, it's an item to reckon with. Most specific recommendations. Yeah, develop a plan to address cemetery needs, I think is what it was. We've tried a few things. Yeah, I think every town is grappling with this. Maybe somehow can be worked into the redevelopment of it. We tried that. Well, yeah, we tried it, but maybe it might not. In a different way. In a different place. In a different place, I think, that isn't developed yet into a park. It's all open space, though. Potentially. It's still open space, yeah. Thanks, this is great. Very document, really appreciate it. Appreciate all the hard work, that's for sure. As you continue to look at it, if there are any recommendations or implementation action steps that you have questions about or concerns, make comments, or the committee meets next on December 4th. So please do, if you see anything that you have a question about, you can ask me. I can engage the committee and the consultant. But do get your input. And we want to make sure you have concerns that they're addressed early. Input on December 1st, though, I wrote that. Yes. And I think we should point out, too, that Christine's been coming to a majority of the meetings and providing input throughout the process. Absolutely. I've had a lot of written-up, there's a lot of rubble. And I think it's been very helpful, so that's great. We appreciate it, that's for sure. Yeah, and it was nice to see all of you guys at the last one. Well, that's great. Also, I'd like to thank you for that. Thank you for coming in. We'll be going to the Parks and Recreation Commission to talk to them about the master plan on November 25th. Oh, good. Good. And some other boards and committees, the board is open. They had a lot of comments, right? The Parks and Rec Commission. Yes, they did. And that's good. We want to make sure that they're addressed very good. One other thing that I hear, and that's because of the people I hang around with, a lot of seniors feel as though they're being shortchanged in a lot of ways in terms of a facility or a place to go, whatever. And since what's going on back here, they feel as though we're being pushed around a little bit and so forth. And so that comes up every now and then. And I can't agree that we include something in here, some mention of how to somehow address some of those issues. And some of that is in there. I read something in there about how important it is to address the issues of aging, not just aging in place in your home, but facilities that are needed. What's interesting is what we've found, too, in a lot of public meetings, there are older people who are moving from the average suburbs to the town. They may not want to come all the way into Cambridge or Boston, but this is halfway point. And we may see actually an increase in the number of older people as well. And the other thing is the young professionals are the ones that are now in Cambridge or some of them are dating and married and have kids. And it's just kind of within reach. And I see that in some of the neighborhoods, and that's where they came at. We have a lot of people here that've been here less than 10 years. I think that was in one of Barbara's articles. She does a nice job with us. Yeah. But they're worth reading. They're kind of. Oh, yeah, those are great. I get to some of the controversial points. The next one that will be in the advocate historical resource areas. That is up. I saw that. It's online already. OK. Because I went to the website this afternoon. It was up there. So one more. That's one of the public facilities, I think, isn't it? No, I think you took public facilities anyway. She's not going in order? You can do one on public facilities. For some reason, I read something. Maybe it wasn't Chris. Well, thank you, both. OK. Thank you. Thank you all the time. Good to see you guys. I had a bit of an answer. Thank you. It's a little bit. Yeah. I want to listen. OK. OK. I think I want to mention that. Are there any other questions? So Audentum 360, Carol, do you want to start on that one? Yes. Make a protection plan. Oh, with me. So I don't have. I think it's 26,500. 26,500? Yeah, 26,500. OK. 36,250. I thought it was 250. OK. Because the amount that has been collected, it's in a fund already, correct? That's right. Well, it's in an account. Collect the interest. The neighborhood protection plan made a provision for fines to be collected when there were violations of the neighborhood protection plan. So it's $26,250 on account. And it's the board's obligation to distribute those funds. And I suggest that the board, I've provided to you the original 2000 and official policy statement of the town board of select men on the Sims debt exclusion. And one of the goals of the town was open space, to protect on-site open space. So for that reason, I'm recommending that the board consider devoting these funds or a portion of the funds to the Sims Stewardship Fund, which is described in the management plan for Sims. It provides for maintaining and monitoring the conservation easement. And there is $30,000 that was provided, according to the terms of the special permit. And the documents that flowed from the special permit about the conservation area, there is $30,000 on account. And so I'm suggesting that because this is a labor-intensive and resource-intensive task, I'm suggesting that that go to that Stewardship Fund, not to create something new or a new relationship or a new administrative structure or organization, but just to devote it to that purpose. Other purposes you might consider affordable housing because that was also an objective of the Sims removal project. You have an email that I forwarded to you from some of the abutters who would like to consider their funds being used for screening of three properties. I distributed that to you. I don't have too much more to say about it. I think it speaks for itself. It's self-explanatory. They ask for arborvide or a fence to be put up. I feel, in my opinion, that it's always the board's duty to consider the real purposes of a project and also to consider the greater public good. So I hope we'll consider the purposes of the Sims urban renewal project and the debt exclusion. And there are some outstanding issues, still with the developer, that are being addressed. You had some conversations with Mike. Right, one of the issues that's still being worked out is you're aware that the lights on Sims Road are brighter than they were supposed to be, according to the photometrics. Mike Burns, the building inspector and zoning enforcement officer who worked with the developer and very insistent that the lights be changed out to meet those, the photometrics that were provided from Brightview and for Ireland 360. And I have faith that he's still very determined to make that right. I think if, I should actually say when, that happens, because I do believe it will, that should go to, that should really address the abutter's concerns because it is the lights that these abutters are concerned about screening and the lights are bright. So I feel that it would be ideal if all of the lights on Sims Road were brought down to the photometrics that were approved. I would satisfy everyone's interests. There are also some landscaping concerns that are not specifically conditions of the special permit, but they were things that the developer, the Ireland 360 agreed to do. For example, do you have that list there? So there's a not-lead mitigation plan, if you guys remember the lower vista part on the slope there. There's not-lead and it's a three-year aggressive plan. So hopefully they started it this fall, which is, I believe, with a consultant with a recommended. They couldn't do it at the time when the not-lead was seen. So all these items we need to find out from the developer, whether these have been addressed, installation and approval of boundary markers for the conservation easement areas, replacement of failed screening plantings. You may have gone up there and seen some browned out evergreens that are now just gone. So some of those maybe haven't been replaced yet. Replacement of other failed park plantings, both in the lower, mostly in the lower vista part, I believe. I think the upper vista part is probably fine. Replacement of failed planting from the trailer restoration area. And there I didn't know there were any failed plantings, so there must be some down there. These are all items that we didn't specifically have conditions on, but they all certainly need to be addressed. And whether we address them directly with the developer or bring the developer back in, if they're not being addressed, I think they all should have been addressed by now. So if they haven't been, we may be at the point to bring in the developer. Didn't we, what? Keep some money for, I thought we kept some money for a few of these things. Remember when we released the, yeah. We need to keep some money. Yeah, yeah, so. But we don't want it to accomplish. Right. It needs to be done. No, I know. Well, I mean, well, now it's probably too late, but in the spring, I would assume that we'd use whatever money we kept and do it ourselves. And this is what we said for last spring. Well, the NAWT eradication is a multi-year. Yes, I remember that one. That's where they pulled it, and they didn't move it. And they couldn't move it because you're not supposed to. I remember all that. I mean, that one's a little different. The other ones, I should think that, I mean, I think we kept a good amount of money. So I should think that that would be enough to deal with those. I'm not sure why they didn't address it last spring. But regardless, I mean, that doesn't really have any impact on the NPP anyway. It doesn't, because those are all separate items. And that is kind of the point that doing anything with the lights is also a separate item. That's a requirement of the developer to do. It shouldn't be something that the fines aren't necessarily used for. The reason I'm bringing them up in the same conversation is that I thought it was appropriate. Because the butters do have some interest in making sure that these things are, these remaining things are addressed, I wanted the board to be aware of any, the status of these punch list items that still aren't addressed. But it doesn't relate to the NPP model. No, it doesn't. But only, I just wanted to be sure that if, because the butters brought up a butter issue, that is related to a punch list item, the lights, that there might be some reason to know what the rest of the punch list items are. Yeah, the neighbors that are listening out there may also have noticed the trees are missing and the plantings aren't finished and there's other items. So maybe it would make sense to bring Jake back. I think it might make sense to have him come back and tell us what his plan is. I'm sure you're going to get Jake back, but welcome. I'll send it from the developer team to find out what progress they've made. Because, you know, we're assuming none of these have been done, maybe some of it has been done. I know ALT and the Conservation Commission maybe are keeping a close eye on it also to find out what hasn't, hasn't been done. The arborist report was finally done and it's almost time now for the annual report to be due. So it'll be another report coming out shortly. Yeah, so the Neighborhood Protection Plan funds. We could discuss that tonight and see whether we want to distribute that to, to the maintenance, the ongoing maintenance. Now, remember they have the 30,000, they also have 10,000. It was the initial 30 and then later there was 10 that was added to that for the CIMCR monitoring contribution. So they actually have 40. We could give them the other 26, 250 into that same fund that they managed. Can I ask one question? What is, what are some of the alternatives for affordable housing care? What, what funds are out there? There's the Housing Corporation of Arlington. They're an independent non-profit that's produced a lot of stuff. So as affordable housing in Arlington, the housing authority. Okay. But do these funds have to be distributed or allocated? Now? There is no time limit. There's no time limit, but there's no reason not to allocate them. If you don't have to. Why wouldn't you hold them? Why would you hold them if you want? Why would you hold them? Why not let them do their work? So there's no, there's no reason to have any funds available for neighborhood protection that buildings built. No, the neighborhood protection is all construction now. Okay. So we have to. And the punch list items are, like we said, a separate, a separate issue that needs to be dealt with as punch list items. They're not part of, they're not part of ongoing maintenance. And even if we put this money into the SINs, into the conservation easement, the ALT and the Conservation Commissioner are managing, it doesn't go towards the lower Vista Park or the upper Vista Park. No, I understand. Those are separate maintenance contracts. How do other conservation lands get funded for maintenance? I don't think they necessarily do. Yeah, I mean, I've got a little strip of conservation land right across from me and I'm the one that's maintaining that at this point. So. Donations to the ALT and the Conservation Commissioner. I think this is a, this is a rather wealthy parcel at this point. So I guess I'd be a little bit curious, you know, I understand there's the housing corporation. I guess I, I think, I think it would be a kind of a nice thing to, to maybe split between the two. And, but I'm not sure the housing corporation is necessarily the best vehicle. And I guess I'd love to understand whether there was anything else either. I'm not, I'm not sure. So I guess it's the, yeah, I'm not, I'm not. I seem to remember that there was something else that when I was doing this, I kind of remember us talking about a different affordable housing trust fund. I guess I'd like to understand that a little bit better myself. Yeah, we don't have to make a decision tonight. Yeah. I guess we should make a decision sometime. Find out if that's active. Because I do, you know, from my own perspective, sorry, I'll stop hijacking, but, you know, I think that putting some money towards the Sims Conservation Area makes sense. So that it can be endowed well enough so that it will be able to perpetually go on. However, I'd like the idea of affordable housing being an important part of what was done up there. And to be able to take some of that money and put it to good use that way too. I'll try to provide the board with as much information on any housing. I would just be helpful. I would only urge you to consider providing resources to whatever organization has been doing the most to produce the most units. Because that's really what's in our interest is, are they producing units of housing? So that information would be great to have. But the only question there, I guess, is because, I mean, that's probably the Erlington Housing Corporation, right? They produce more housing every year. But can that happen? Can we provide that money to them as a non-town entity? I guess that would be the other thing I want to understand. You can provide it. I think it's the language. Do you have a neighborhood protection plan there? I do. I guess I just want, I wouldn't want to go outside though. She's got the $500 fine payable to a town of Arlington entity of the town's choosing. Yeah, a town of Arlington entity. When, okay, I'll double check this. But earlier this year we checked this and it was considered, the interpretation was that it was Arlington community, but. Would you mind just checking with Councilor? Not at all. I do not mind at all. I think it's important. Thank you. Fine point. Because I agree. I mean, it'd be great to put it to work as, to the most productive way, but. And I know the ALT thought that the money that they had was good, but it wouldn't be enough. Yeah. For a really sustained effort there. That it was, they were going to go through it quickly because of what they were tasked with. Okay. Andrew, any? I think we covered it. We'll set it. Okay. So we don't need to make a decision tonight and get that extra information. The ALT is not a town of Arlington department. Right. So bear that in mind. That's interesting. I don't know. Although this is, yeah, although we've already put money into that. So we're required money to go to that. Okay. So all we have left are approval of minutes. Thanks for coming. All right. Do you want to start? Any comments? I think just way down on the second page, just about halfway down, it says Mr. Fitzsimmons said the zoning bylaw is enabling legislation or restrictive bylaw. You see, it's about data. Mr. Fitzsimmons said the question is whether the zoning bylaw is enabling legislation or restrictive bylaw. And that's what he said. And then there was just a, it doesn't matter. But on the next page, there's a typo, four paragraphs down. Ms. Sipinski opened the environmental design review. It says environment. But otherwise, he's so great. I mean, I think I'd like to point out that Amy's doing it. You're doing a great job of keeping the minutes and then her. She does better job than I just. Yeah, it's great. Super. She's okay. I'm all set. Okay, I had a few things. The top of the second page, Mr. West confirmed and asked for confirmation that all units will be affordable. Shall we strike the first confirmed band? Mr. West asked for confirmation that all units will be affordable. And then the third paragraph there, Ms. Sipinski commented. Okay, I have a few things to be changed there. That's not exactly what I said. Ms. Sipinski commented that the vegetation along the fence, and then I want to scratch out, should be removed in the 20 foot tall trees. So it should read, Ms. Sipinski commented that the vegetation along the fence in the driveway gives a visual separation between the driveway at 1173 Mass Ave and the adjacent parking lot. So we're just scratching from should down to trees, tall trees on the second line. Then I wanted to add a line right after that. All healthy trees should be retained where possible. And then I have another scratch in the last sense of that paragraph. Ms. Sipinski, then we start the scratch, asked for confirmation that HCA plans to remove one large tree. Scratch that hole. I'm sorry, I was still writing. Second to the last, the last sentence. Second to the last line, what starts with Ms. Sipinski? Sorry, the same paragraph. Ms. Sipinski asked for confirmation. Yeah, so I asked, the asked for confirmation that HCA plans to remove one large tree, scratch all of that. So it should just read, Ms. Sipinski requested a plan showing the existing trees that are staying and those being removed. That we're adding and those being removed at the end of the sentence. Okay. Okay, and then if you go down to, I'm sorry, all healthy trees goes in after the phrase parking lot? Is that correct? Yes. Okay. All of the trees should be retained where possible. And then one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight sentences up from the bottom for paragraphs that starts with Mr. Fitzsimmons. I'm not sure that was Mr. Fitzsimmons said the additional parking space would go vacant. I don't remember that being Mr. Fitzsimmons. Can anybody else remember saying that? Because he was talking about the parking being needed. But he did say that the paradox of what, I thought he said that. Was he the one that said it? Okay. The irony of the fact that the bylaw requires it, but it wouldn't be used. You're right. He did say something about the irony. Maybe we should add Mr. Fitzsimmons said that ironically the additional parking space would go vacant. Okay. And then on the last page, the second paragraph that starts with Mr. Oguin. Okay. I'd like to, Mr. Oguin said instead of A, Mr. Oguin said I want to insert the insulation used is, and then more energy efficient. The insulation used is? Is more energy efficient. Okay. And the cost to remove, so add and the before cost and then to remove after cost would be about $25,000. And then there's two types of in the next paragraph. Mr. Maragas asked if there could be a stipulation that if instead of is, the noise is excessive, we could impose control and governors. I don't know what governors are. I think it is, but it was governors. Okay. That may be that was a typo. That's it. Excellent. These hearings are tough. Capture everything. I also took liberty to change Mr. Timiz in front of Sipinski on the second page. No. On the second page? Oh, yeah. There we go. I'll move to approve as amended. Second. All in favor? Aye. Okay. That's all we have on our agenda. Does anybody have anything else? The plan of the landscaping for LO73 is now in my office, so I can provide that to you if you want to take a look at that. Okay. The trees to that tree, it's still rolled. It was delivered late this afternoon. Nothing rolled it, but I know it's there. Okay. Okay. Great. You want me to stop down and get that? Or I should stop by another day? At your convenience. I just wanted to let you know that it's now. I'll let you look at it first. Okay. And now I'll stop by. Okay. Motion to adjourn. Second. All in favor? Aye. All in favor? Aye. Okay. Second. Second. All in favor? Aye. Second. All in favor? Aye. Second. All in favor? Aye. All in favor? Aye. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Bye.