 Call to the order of the June 20th meeting of the Ireland Community Development Board, recorded by ACMI, first on our agenda this evening, is a continuation of discussion, or the housing production plan put in front of us. Jane, do you want to get this off there? Absolutely. So this is the continued discussion. We have received some feedback, and I believe there are also many people here who might wish to provide additional feedback. I was actually going to put this over to Laura, who can walk us through some of that feedback, and I believe there may be something in front of you to that effect more quickly. My care went through the draft and made a number of comments, and I'm going to just walk you through them. They're not that extensive, and some of them are kind of carried through, so I don't think we'll take very long to do that. They're not... I mean, there's subtle changes, but I think they do make a difference, and I don't want to speak for Mike, I'm sure you'll speak to yourself, but I think you felt like it made it more responsive to the master plan, primarily with the main dissident. So on the first page, the only change is from what had been moderately dense suburb, you're going to change to a dense suburb. Yeah, just above that, instead of with large family households, it's just a larger family household. Oh, sure, thank you. So there's a typo, but maybe not a typo. Yeah, there's a typo. Okay, and then on page seven, there's a couple of copies up here, if you want, of just the changes. This is a change that was made throughout the document, so instead of saying, encourage mixed income housing and mixed use development, mixed income housing through mixed use development. And I think that is reflective of the master plan, which was that we wanted to encourage mixed income housing in the commercial corridors with commercial. And I said that that's a change that was made in four or five times. Yeah, at least, yeah, it's probably like eight to ten. So that takes a lot of the changes, doesn't it make? The next one, the iterative four-glued units in a range of housing types into the fabric of our engines and systems, is for redevelopment of certain underutilized properties, not just underutilized properties. And number three at the bottom is, again, multi-family through mixed use. Now on page eight, create a list of mixed income through mixed use again. Right here, excuse me, don't seem to be reflective of this. Right here, right here. Back, back, back, back. Yep, that's a good look. Number seven is, again, multi-family through mixed use. Number 14 on page eight, consider establishing a municipal housing trust fund instead of establishing a municipal housing trust fund. And I think Mike was remembering that we did try this once before and it wasn't successful. So he didn't want to just put it in there as if it was the first time we ever but let's say that change on page nine is pretty subtle. Yeah, let's just. Page 59, goal two, encourage mixed income housing through mixed use development of business districts. And then in that second line, basically adding wealth, preserving the commercial base. So the message being to look very selectively and carefully at some industrial zones for potential to make mixed use districts, but not wholesale. All industrial should become chill out residential. Right. Yeah, no, I think the key there, and we talked about this in our mixed use discussions is really protecting the commercial base. And not encouraging mixed use as far as residential is concerned rather than straight up residential. And again, that's reflected again in goal three. And now page 61 were some bigger changes. Do you want to explain why you- Sure, so on strategy two, we do. The lead up to strategy two does say the town can help address the issue of zoning amendments as follows. So it's not saying that the town should do it. However, I still think that the bullet points taken alone with just an allow or adopt is more definitive than what I would suggest. I think as the implementation committee gets together and this board gets together that we do need to consider all of these things and in respect of accessory doling, that's certainly reconsidered. But that's why I think we should kind of qualify each one with a consider, reconsider, consider, consider. I was also going to put explore on there. But I think if this, if we put that in there, then I think we get a better flavor for the exercise that should really happen before we definitively say that it should be allowed or it should be adopted. Page 62, again, multi-family through-mix use. That same change in three places on that page. And in page 63, same change again. Mixed income through-mix used to go. And that I believe is it. It's really not a lot of changes by time they are coming. No, I think most, I think those changes are good. They are substantive, and I think that they achieve some of what we have discussed last week as far as creating this, making this more of a tool kit. Everything that comes out that will have to go through committee will have to go through discussion of some sort. Just because it's in there doesn't mean it has to be used to have money to make sense of it. But especially the changes of it, as far as things are saying, not hard and fast, the goal is to get it done. Yeah, and if I can just comment. So most of these changes that I made are kind of follow up what I said last week, which I thought that the plan, while good, just didn't quite go through the Arlington filter a little bit. Or what we've tried in the past, it just didn't read new for a lot of these things. And we have tried different things and everything else. So that was important to me. I think the other thing that I'll mention again, because I think I mentioned it last time was, I think one of the potential issues with the report itself is that it's using an average number that I think skews a little bit higher because it includes prigams and includes sims in the average number of housing units that are created in any particular year over the course of the last 10 years. So because of those large developments, it skews it from a mean perspective. So I think we've got some work to do in order to actually add housing. And I think we've all discussed it and we all, but the way to do that is through mixed-use development. And I think that should be really hit home and the focus of this thing. And by my changes, which are subtle, what I tried to do is really put the emphasis on, you know, that the way we're going to do this in the next five years is really through encouraging that mixed-use development. So that's my view on that. I just want to bring up one issue just to talk about us, because, you know, I don't have as much history of, as Mike does, of all the history of all these different studies, but I was thinking of maybe adding a different strategy. And one of the rules is maybe encouraging the forwarding of housing in our own city. What's the forwarding? That's incorporation of our own city. Maybe they can go after, maybe do some joint ventures with existing property owners in certain strategic areas where they can assist those property owners in getting certain things permitted and things with in mind that there'll be inclusionary housing in the court for it into that. So let's say someone who has some property in our own city, but doesn't know all the different steps that go through it, doesn't know how they're going to realize all the value of the property. So it could be a win-win for both sides, and that's something that we just put into that sort of spills it a little bit more. They touched on a little bit there, Mike. Yeah, they got it right in 12. But it's not exactly, you know, I don't want to just bring it up a little more clearer than that, you know. Yeah, I think you want something more than mechanism. Do you want actual, do you want partnerships to the introduction? Yes, and this way here there's actually a more of a grassroots way of actually doing it. And, you know, it's a win-win for people who own property, but they don't really know what they're doing. They may have a one-story building or something that they have from generations and, you know. And then this way, this housing theory can help streamline it, getting it processed through. And then through that partnership, we develop more formal housing units in this mixed-use housing. Now I'm talking about one house, two houses, up in the multi-family. So I don't know, I just bring it up to you. Yeah, just doing a quick, very quick read-through of the full tax for strategy 12. One-pitch, 72. I think, naturally, I'm 67. 67? I'm going to go full tax for strategy 12. The narrative, you know, we may have to refer to it in a language you could put in there, but I think definitely that's something that could be explained in full tax for the narrative. It's an idea to bring it up for you. Yeah, I think it's a good one. Could we just add private entities? Yeah, I mean, the majority of that discussion focuses on a, well, right, a set of trust. But I think if we focus also on the partnerships that we've developed in there, that's a good signal to whatever organization for me is put together in the next few months, that that's something that we'd like to see them do. Public-private partnerships, is that what you think? Yeah, I think I'm 68. I think it also encourages, you know, having one project, all of formal housing, all, it's actually integrated, which is, I think, a much better way of developing this housing. So you could say something to the effect of, oh, sorry, in number 12, explore mechanisms on page 8, just in the forefront here. Just, I mean, and then we can flow through the strategy 1267. But the first time strategy 12 comes up is on page 8. And I think you could say explore mechanism and work to facilitate creation of affordable housing and entrepreneurship opportunities through the HCA, community land trust model, or partnership with other private nonprofit organizations and entities, essentially. So it's not just nonprofit organizations, it could be entities as well. So I think if you did both of those things there, you could say private nonprofit organizations and entities and put in work. So it's not just mechanisms, but we actually put some effort into it as well. So I think maybe that will support those things there. But also I'm talking also with actual funding where you would have, you know, if a true partnership, it's not just someone who just talks it and says, hey, you need to do this and do that. I'm talking to someone who would actually truly go and do partner off. Say, here, we will help with some of the permitting process, some of the after funding, you know, the hard costs and some of the soft costs. Well, okay, I guess I was trying to, that's why I was trying to use an active word like work. Yes, I'm not sure. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm just hoping you guys help me out here. Yeah, that's why I was trying to do an active word like work, explore mechanisms and work to facilitate. I thought you were just saying facilitate creation and make that an explore mechanism. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, I just started there, yeah. They opposed it, they opposed it, but it's fine. Mr. Warden, I don't have your term, it's because any chair can keep quiet, please. Yeah, that's fine. I'm not quite sure what the word is about. You know what, what meeting is, what you want to, what's the word? Yeah, I compare that to San Antonio. Okay, are you sure? Okay. I don't know if I'm doing it right. That's what you do. That's what I'm doing, that's great, okay. We will take questions from the audience now. Not a public hearing, but a question and answer is fine, whatever. Well, now that's what your place, I think Mr. Chair used a great phrase that they haven't necessarily applied the Arlington filter to the shed. I feel like this is a little bit of a one-size-fits-all for a dense community that kind of gets us on a path towards Sunville or Cambridge, which I don't think is what the master plan indicated people want. And then I have two very specific comments on page 56 down at the bottom of my copy, it says that there were 56 teardowns between 2013 and 2015, indicating those units did not suit market demand. And I don't mean to be cynical, but I think it's likely that a good portion of those did not suit developer needs or desires. There are good number of houses that have been torn down, strictly to build larger, more expensive places. And the other thing I wanted to comment on was the accessory units, which was raised twice during the public comment period of the master plan, and was rejected twice by residents during that comment period. So I'm a little dismayed to see this pop back up again. And I think that the stated wish to preserve and protect established neighborhoods is going to be threatened if accessory units are allowed. Thank you. Thank you. All right, great, to an extent. And that's why I put in the word explore, I'm sorry. Reconsider. And it's just that, if we're having an affordable housing issue, we should take things off of the table as far as I'm concerned. We should always talk about them and have a conversation. And it's in my world, it's not right to take things off of the table that should be. Now, I can tell you that if it does come up, it's not something that I probably, it would need to really be something new for me to really feel good about it. But I have no problem saying that we should always reconsider things. There's no reason to take things off the table. That's why I changed it the way I did. So I'm just giving you the reason for my change. So, John Word and Jason Street, we're just taking up Mr. Care's point. I want to thank Mr. Care for going through this and finding, I don't know if Mr. Belser could send you his comments. Yeah, those are received by the board late in the day today. Yeah, well after I did mine. Okay, you should pick those up. But I appreciate you putting a little outage and filter on this. But let me start right at the beginning of the executive summary. The other filter that should be applied, not just the master plan, which is important that they think about that, is the open space plan. And we start off the report saying that Arlington has ample green space when our open space reports for years. They've said we need more green space. We need to preserve green space. We haven't got nearly enough green space. I mean ample compared to what, Chelsea and Everett? I mean, come on. Then the accessory apartment thing, when I came up, the first time I came up and decided to reject the by-town meeting, an amendment that I proposed was okay if they're rented at affordable rents. They haven't mentioned that yet. We didn't mention it either, it was okay. You know, if we're talking about affordable housing, and we're saying we're going to turn every, we're going to consider turning every single family neighborhood into a two-family neighborhood. But we're not going to require those to be affordable units. Aren't we talking about the baby with the bath water? The other point I noticed is that throughout the document, they're talking about the 10% 40B requirement. But we have met, you know, we have met the 1.5% requirement. The selection has adopted that position, and it's been asserted in the thing at Lowell Street, it's been asserted with respect to New York. So all this talk about we've got to build, build, build to meet that 10%. That's irrelevant. That's off the table. That is off the table. And we, I think, want that off the table. Now, and getting down to the, that there is a mistake that even Mr. Carey's legal, I didn't catch. Section 1108 has amended, you know, the 7th. Where are you looking at that point? 1108 is the zoning bylaw for Browning. I'm stuck in here. You can say that's a mistake. The age 62 of the currentization, and it's not changed. It's now on page 63, where they talk about the inclusionary zoning bylaw. They are still quoting the old percents. The percents are now bylaw. I know what you're talking about. We changed the. They are 60 and 70, not 70 and 80. The income limit is still 70 and 80, but the affordability is set at 60 and 70. Well, but that's not what it says here. It only says that the affordability that households who purchase them have to be at 80% for ownership and 70% for rental, and that is correct. No, that's respect. It's 60% and 70. 60 and 70 determines how the rents or the purchase price is determined, not the buyer. It's called the window of affordability between the two. Right. I'm just going about what the bylaw says. And I submit that if there are these two percentages here, you say so. But I think they both should be expressed. The point that whatever the percentages are, the idea of this, making the developers provide some affordable units, and that's why we pushed the number down to make them more affordable to the people who really need it. That was the purpose of this inclusionary zoning bylaw. And now to expand it to say we should expand it to help out the lower middle class or however you wanted to find them, people making up to 120% median, that may be a worthy goal. But that's not what the inclusionary zoning bylaw was designed to do. If you want to help those folks, what you should do, as Evan referenced, is adopt a policy that prevents developers from scooping up little possibly affordable houses that may go for 400 or so. And tearing them down and building huge houses when those are the kind of houses that could be bought by people who are near that edge and made with a mortgage subsidy program like the Heaven City of Newton. That would help those people. And it would not make it tougher for the people who really need a lot of help because they're really poor. I would suggest that the Accessory Apartments that we've already talked about, that's it. Anyway, I would suggest that those changes need to be made. And that the review and incorporation of the elements, not only the master plan, but the open space plan, which has been adopted by John Lee. Thank you. Well, overall, I really like that. Oh, please. Steve Rebelax on East Side Avenue. Overall, I really like some of the ideas in here, particularly using excuse development to provide affordable housing and also catering to a wider range of AMIs. And I also agree with Mr. Here. I think that accessory units or accessory buildings are worth exploring. I think they could be useful in at least in terms of providing rental units. Could I say one other thing? When you're talking about the cooperation, as Mr. Lao mentioned, cooperation with outfits like HCA, I think you ought to consider, indeed, cooperating with the biggest affordable housing outfit in this town, the housing authority. That's part of that strategy. 12 that we're looking at. Or not that one. Not very specific. AHA. If you actually plan on the number six and on the number six, what I was going to say next is we can accept these comments, and we'll do our best to fold in what we can, including the work of the board. And we'll give that back to MPC so that they can produce a revised document. But the step tonight is whether or not you are going to adopt the plan. Once it's adopted, then it moves on to the board to select them, likely the July meeting. Those are the steps that need to be taken, and that's up to the board. And any other like editing or type those or anything along those lines that you find along the way you can send to us? So it would be as amended. Should you choose to adopt that? Yeah, I mean, point taken on the open space and ample green space. We never have enough. So I would actually suggest that's a good comment, and we should just take out ample green space up in the first sentence there. So it just says, on the test of Barbara, awful town with good schools, you could say a few trees if you want, in close proximity to Cambridge and Boston. I think that makes sense. I think the other comment was about exploring accessory dwelling units as affordable. Well, you know, and I think that's fine, but I just. There are other municipalities that do that. And I think that's all part of the mix. I mean, I don't know how that's not part of the conversation when it comes up. I don't know if there's any reason to delineate that particular thing, when a whole bunch of other things need to be talked about. I mean, is it outbuilding or is it inside? I mean, there's a lot of talk about it. Every strategy that comes up recommendation will be done for the plans. And through hearings and everything that. Do we want to adopt Mike's changes? Have those incorporated in the plan? We would just hold in those changes into one adopted plan as amended. And any further, I mean, I don't know what other amendments might come in force if you have any other type of graphical. I think you've provided everything so far. OK. So I'll make a motion to adopt. Is that the word? That's adopt. I'll make a motion to adopt the Arlington Housing Production Plan as amended through the changes presented this evening, as well as the ones made this evening by the Arlington Redevelopment Board. Before we vote, I should ask, it goes from here as adopted as amended and adopted to the select now. That's right. Does it come back to us? No. If they have an issue. No, I mean, if they have an issue. If that changes, if they have an issue. Or they have an issue. Sure. Yeah. You could also choose to attend. One of you or two of you could choose to attend. They're probably going to be there. OK. OK. More than 10%. Oh, second. All in favor. All right. OK. Thank you. Next up is a continuation of public hearing from our last meeting for 9-3 Broadway screen board schools. Or to come forward and have a seat. Reintroduce yourself to the board. Some changes. Some parking would be allowed on the Thompson side. Last meeting, the conversation really focused on the number of parking's parking on site. There are several items for this continuation. One was officially submitting a transportation plan, which we have. The second was a transit statement and policy sheet from screen board schools, which, again, is already submitted. And the third was to have a meeting with the traffic committee about what will happen to the on site, the street parking once all the traffic cuts are taken away and approved. In fact, I had that meeting with Howard Hughes. And in addition, we did a walking survey of a 600-foot radius around the site, counting and measuring all the available on-street parking spots. And you have not seen that for Baton State and I can talk about that as well. But maybe the best thing is just opening up to questions based on previous meeting. Can you have the most comfortable last time? So when you talk to the PBW, what did you say about having a lead-in or a drop-off that we pick up? I along North Union Street? So we talked to Howard about that. We were trying to figure out how many parking spots would be on that side street. And what we ended up with was he felt that it wasn't really necessary to do an inlet there and then making a wider sidewalk that's probably beneficial based on the entrance on that side of the street for parents coming and going, strollers, and bikes. So we have a 7-foot wide sidewalk on that side, which is a little bit wider than what's recommended in a complete street's package that we actually referenced with City of Boston, so we finalized it on Arlington, but for Neighborhood Street, this here is a 7-foot wide sidewalk. This is a 10-foot wide sidewalk. So that's... The other issue is worth proposing to reuse the existing building. So in order to have a cut-in, we'd really be squeezing if we kept that existing building with the foundation on right there, we'd really potential decide what to do there. So we're kind of reluctant to do that if we can get with Howard's comments, we can get free car parking to these parks right there, which is great. It brings our total up to four of the permit on the streets as important as it is for us. So this box gets shown in the front there with the corner. Yeah, he's saying we can't park there. Well, that's a bus... Yes, that's exactly it. So what we've done, and he suggested, is we flipped the flight pole arrangement on the... And so now it protects this bus drop-off point and the bus stop as its own thing. So whereas before we had the driveway coming up here, we had a parking spot there for this total to protect the bus stop. Which we thought was a good thing. But, Ken, does that make sense at the moment for you? Did that answer your question? That answered my question. Between the last meeting and today's meeting, I did have a chance to go over there. The sidewalk is not enough room for the existing building. And we probe that you have a drop-off point that will make any center unsafe. That's right. And it'll walk by. It doesn't make sense. And so that agree with you. And I think what it is, it is right there. There's those three spaces. I'm still telling you, I still feel very uncomfortable. You guys only have three spots on parking, on the side there, okay? Why don't we do a handicap? That means you're not counting that handicap for everybody. It's only for a handicapped person. Huge. All right. So you're really, if you look at it, you know, I say you want 80% of people there, or maybe 90%, don't have handicap plates that could be used in that drop-off. So do you just think we need two spots? I thought I was made clear that I was really encouraging you at one more spot at least in that parking lot there, such that it would relieve some of my issues about not having a parking lot for that building there, okay? You have 100 students there. I know what I read there and what's going on there. And yes, the neighborhood, there's a lot of parking around the neighborhoods. Yeah. Also part of us is not to change the character of the neighborhoods by imposing all this parking and all the neighborhoods there. Sure. Okay? So, I mean, yes, there is ample parking around there, but, you know, all of a sudden, you know, someone lived in different years now have this unflux of parking maybe. Say maybe, okay? Yeah. Because I don't know if I'm not sure. I mean, there's a drop-off that they didn't have before. I'm just trying to consider all the neighbors around there too, okay? And some of the feelings. I just felt strongly that, and I still feel strongly that you, you know, we don't have no parking there. So, how do you feel about the four-on-strip spots? I mean, do you consider that part of, you know, the additional parking provided? I believe that there is some additional parking there. Okay. But also, I believe that's also seasonal too. All right? Because I've been up and down Broadway during the wintertime, and when it snows, all right? And those snowmiles really build up after a while, and they really push the cars closer in. It's pretty wide street right now, but when you go down there in the wintertime, and people park next to those things, I'm just thinking of safety too, because when you say, okay, we can park up there, now we have to bring the kids up around these snowmiles and stuff like that. Just sharing my personal, I'm not sure what the rest of the board's doing, okay? I'm just sharing my feelings, what I see here, okay? Now, yes, I understand there's four additional practices up there. Yes. Okay. Kim, what we were going to propose is remember when we first met, we discussed that in the 28 years we've been at GIFs, we've run studies in terms of our pickup and drop-offs. We've done it internally for ourselves, and we've done it for the town when we prepared our APs, and we incorporated that spreadsheet here. And that's what led to the amount of parking spots that the architects put in, okay? So to address your concern, though, that let's assume that the habits of families change, and maybe that increases. And what we thought made sense is give us some period of time. We proposed, say, 12 months. And if, in fact, we do need that additional space, I'm willing to put it in, you know, to accommodate with Europe the concern that you have. And we will, we'll put it in. In fact, when the architects designed it, they, I think they even prepared something to show what we would do in the event that that was the case. Like I described it. Yes. So I think that what we would do is we would take a spot here. It's 24 feet. It will work. It meets the dimensional requirements. Ideally, I'd like to put the handicap spot here, but that's not going to work because you have to ramp it up to get to the entrance. And that would push all of this that way anymore. And we'll write it a borderline of the amount of green space we'd like to have as a class outside. So we would put another spot there. We'd still have some greenery blocking, you know, buffering it from the street. If you would put, say, one or two additional spots in that green zone there, right, would that, you still would make the criteria to have enough open space and green space for the project? The answer, I think, from our point of view, and you can speak from the other side of the plan of view, is it will function. It will be able to operate, but as we drove down, you know, we're coming from the front at the Gibbs. If you know the Gibbs, I mean, there's almost no green space. There's a couple of sandy playground spots out in front, but there's zero green space. So we're hoping to convince the board that we really want to maximize the green space because if you can drive down Broadway, there is almost no green space in terms of this area that we're in. So we're just hoping to maximize it. I mean, it seems like that is more of a general public amenity than one or two spots. No, I applaud the group. That's great. But I'm just speaking purely through the zoning requirements of the open space. Do you still need open space requirements? I believe you would. I'd have to look at that to see the question more closely. I think we're not increasing. It's all available right now. I know. So I don't think you have to make it. Yeah, I don't know what that risk is. I don't know the exact percentage that would go away as a result of cutting in for a parking spot. I would just encourage the board to listen to the interests of this particular group and what they're interested in doing, how they run their facility, how they've been running the history of running that facility and this opportunity that they now have to develop something new and perhaps sort of with a more refined approach to how they do the parking and how they manage that with their staff and also with their clients. So I understand the limitations and the limits of that, but I just hope that you can hear that side of it as well. Thank you, Jenny. I just want to point something else before that maybe you don't know much about us as an organization. That Marianne and your program, and you can feel free to ask any questions about the timing of drop-offs and how many, you know, we've studied this, we know this very well, in terms of how often pick cameras pick up and drop-off. But as an organization, we, you know, our tuition is significantly lower than any of the centers on the center part of town or the heights part of town. And we could easily raise our tuition levels 30% and still be below some of these other facilities that are in town. But we choose not to do that. We don't do that because, I mean, we know that, you know, if you look at that income bureau, there's a lot of families that just simply can't afford that. So I only mentioned that because one of the, what's extremely important for us on our end is our budget. You know, we have, you know, we're not rich people. We don't have a, you know, our bank is behind us, but it's, we have to be very careful with our pennies in terms of doing this project. And I want to emphasize that before that's important to us. It's a point of order also if we can have everybody introduce themselves. Sorry, for the minutes and also Andy. Yeah, Josh, from all of us who are from the second. Zeke Brown, from all of us architects. Nicole Lowry, program director at Dr. Echelon. Mary Echelon, founder of the school and also executive director. I live in this school here. Yeah. Just grow it out. Kevin, plan her again. Well, I don't want to monopoly this whole conversation. I'm just going to say, I think I would honor your promise. And if you were to incorporate that in part of this approval, that if within a year it was found that additional partners required that you put it in, I would support this. Well, I like this project. I think it's a great project. And, you know, I'm open. Okay, I would support that. I think that would be part of the records. That's right. It is. I was just moving in the special condition number three, it's actually in your packet. We say that if vehicle usage increases, the owner will work with planning director or designated further reduce vehicle usage rather than finding a parking stop for more vehicles. Try to work out more means to reduce vehicles. Remember, I also let me add that. We talked about this last time, but there's no parking day over. We actually have very strong incentive plans with our staff and our families to not drive or bring cars. And so that's something that works for us in particular. It's an important feature for us. I've said enough about parking. I'll show you guys. Yes, I would. I would be able to plan with that. And do one more thing. I just also requested you guys to put a gate. Trash areas. I'm sure you would put something there. Security areas, right? Is there going to be a gate there? Yes. Shield. Yes. The dumpsters and trash for walking by. Absolutely. We don't want trash to be seen by a hit company It just doesn't show that. I used to ask him. Andy West was not present last time, but he did review the materials. And it's familiar with the project to be able to vote. You know, I had nothing further to add. Before you take a vote, there were two things that Zeke had talked to me about this afternoon that I don't want to forget about. In the special conditions, on page two, condition five, there's a landscaping plan, a condition that the landscaping plan be approved. There is a submitted landscaping plan, and I think Zeke wanted to know if that was sufficient or if the board wanted to see something else. Just a note about the gate covering the dumpsters. Where is that at the gate? That's in the map. Right there. That's the service area. Yeah. Yeah, we can do that. We can certainly add information on the dates. Yeah. We'll have the proposal followed. It's a nice project. So is that sufficient for the board? Fine. Then also, condition six, there was some information submitted about, not a lead checklist, but information about environmental impacts and some green actions that were going to be taken in design. So just to fit in the criteria that was submitted long ago, it looked like this. So you were suggesting just taking out the narrative, explaining the, starting there, but keeping the lead stuff? Well, I guess I'll just ask you, if this is sufficient for you or if you will, the dodge list was provided last, looks like this. So environmental design review. Okay, sorry. And the last, number 12 on page two, sustainable building and site design. It's not going to be a big building, obviously, but we have sometimes required a checklist. So you guys, are you guys, no, we don't, we are not. We certified. I think we made the right thing. We agree with what the lead is trying to do, but we're not going for a lead-serve kind of thing. No, I think the one that saved you the money, this big piece of paper is like $30,000 now. It's not worth it. I've been there myself, and it was just a ridiculous thing. It's not worth it. It's not worth it. It's not worth it. It's not worth it. It's not a ridiculous thing. Would you have someone that is a lead AP that can say it's recertifiable? We know plenty of architects in our group who we could probably today pull in and ask. This is what we're trying to avoid, just because it adds a level of... Yeah, but it's just a checklist though. It's not being certified as a checklist. Yeah. That's a problem that's present. I pretty much have that here. I don't get it. These are substantial. And it's why I asked Laura a question. It's not sufficient in lieu of the checklist. I don't know. I think it's sufficient in lieu of the checklist. Yeah, I don't know about you. It mirrors the checklist, but it's written in a different format. So you'd be accepting something that's slightly different than what others have presented in the past. Let me put it just simply. Do you think that such a precedent would put us at a disadvantage? Right. The only thing I worry about is that everybody has to fill it out. But you've got all you have to do is put a different format. These are very substantial. So staff is confident that you could get the same information from any project and feel like you're getting kind of a lead in the checklist. It's equivalent. Can that information be transposed? I think we're suggesting you can take the information that you've provided and put it into the actual format and checklist. You have a format. Yeah, it's all on what I was talking about. Can I say leave that portion of it and simply fill it in there to explain the positive environmental impacts of the project? Right. I think that's what we're saying. You don't need it because we've done enough. Yeah. Oh, right. Yeah. It's the requirements you can change. So it'll now say, six will now say applicant shall provide a lead checklist to the director for review. Correct. There were some suggested amendments that we also received, I think, late in the day regarding some of these, which is the vision of the management plan. This is actually two of the specialists. Do you want to talk about that, Miriam? Your suggested changes and that they're going to change before you come here. They're, I would say, a reminder in nature. Is it anything? They're clarifications? I mean, the, mostly all we were trying to do here is there are some things that are a little bit unknown in terms of, for instance, you know, like the bicycles. You know, right now, Zeke was telling me that he thinks he can get 12, but it could be 10. But we, so it might be between 10 and 12. Where are you putting them? Yes. We've got two spots. We've got cover. We've got two covers. They're not drawn in the plan. We apologize for that. But basically right here and then additional ones here. So they're both, it's all covered. How many? That will take 10. I should say five. Assessing where you are. Because you've got to operate this thing efficiently. Obviously, it's here. Well, it likes it if you had to. Oh, yeah. I mean, that was a good one. Right. Here, we talked about putting them in front. I was thinking... Oh, shoot, man. I was hoping she was going out to try the A to C better. Is this something that... I mean, this is five spots. Six, if you make them a little bit denser, I could move this door down a little bit. We can get six there easily. Here, we can... They wouldn't be holding spots. They would be two and two and two underneath the canopy, which gets us up to 12 right away. And we've got a sort of the sitting area. Here where we could also do additional, like bike parking under there. If we wanted, but it's right at the main entry, so it's not... But the one on the side, usually those that are, well, guess what? They can pick it up and drop it off, but that's what they... Yeah, well, I think... I mean, they'll bike up and pick up the kids there or tie it up. I mean, I'm using a handsome looking bike rack. It's not one of those just steel bar things, but some sort of, you know, maybe a hoop that just is sticking out in a concrete curve in a nice sort of decorative way that when they're not... and they don't have bikes on them, they're still interesting to track the thing to look at. And I'm a little bit... Just I don't have advice to go static bike rack. It's just a bike rack. Well, we've used this quote a lot, subjectively, I mean, to say. Those are the new... I wouldn't say just that, yeah. There's nothing in the zone here, nothing in the... No, no. So, we could do bend animal shape. You know, we could get playful with that. Yeah. Which I think is kind of cool. I just want to make sure that you're saying something, and then there's something, you have to do it this way, and there is... There is more. Okay. I had two of us today in this project with a condition that additional parking is required. And that you would try to... Really, that you're decreasing it by adding proper space, and also by including a fence that you guys... I wouldn't have to go and cover the trash area. The changes that were proposed, are you accepting all of these changes? This document here, that... I've got... I think you should look at it. Or maybe you're not accepting it. Maybe you want to use the ones that you received earlier. They're proposing a few changes to our condition. Okay. Yeah, so... I think you should just look at them before we... Yeah. You want to read them off? Actually, so they're actually incorporated into the newer, the version that was handed out. Yeah. They're incorporated and that's 50% sub-state, which was one of the edits that they deleted. Oh, you don't... Yeah. You don't... It's deleted. So, if I can go through it. Yeah, the first deletion is 50% sub-state. Okay. Is that something that we just got today? That's great. That's great. That's my excuse. Okay. So, they suggest... I think it's just... It just... It can't be like 50% sub-state. All right. So, employees will be offered a sub-state for purchasing transit passes. Learn to grow with the sub-state for purchasing transit passes for staff. See, on-site cover parking, all bicycles will be provided. See, LTG will provide emergency ride home to employees who do not drive to the site. All the transportation is not available. This might include LTG from the tax affairs. You're just going to be able to go through the changes. The changes. Yeah. See where you want to accept them. Okay. The first one is deleting the 50%. I personally don't mind putting a number on. I like... I don't mind taking 50%. I'm leaving it a little bit more generic. I'm finding the theme open. So, we just know... Yeah. It's the next one I'm going around. Okay. So, right now, it says in the event it is determined... It had said in the event it is determined by planning director, other town staff or LTG management that on-site parking remains in place, the following procedures will be implemented. Right now, it just says in the event it is determined that he was making that determination, I don't think that works because I don't think we need to have a fight about who's going to determine that. So, I would suggest that we actually put back in that particular direction. That's my idea. And that's typical procedure for these things. Because someone has to decide that this would be offered in an incentive to not direct the story of the girl and pick her up. I'm okay with that. We can leave that for the discretion. We also meet children at their cars and on their facilities short of vehicle duration. It looks important. That's actually a licensing issue. I'm okay with that. I'm actually okay with that. Do we have enough? Yes. Is that significant to me? No, that's what we were proposing to Ken after the year. That's going to keep that in mind. I have three. So, they're taking out that they have to do it annually. And you like that change? Versus what? Well, it doesn't say that. That's exactly right. But that's the end. If you encounter your period that's supposed to end, you're going to meet every country after every conversation. I'm okay with that. I'm going to hold them up to them. Thank you. Meet them every year. I feel like you're either going to have it or you're not going to have it. I don't know. That's my group. That's good. No. I don't have a problem with that. Sorry. Can I just go back to that? If we take out annually, then it's if vehicle usage increases during the first year. That's basically what we're saying now, correct? Well, I'm not talking increasingly. It's determined after the year that additional parking or something you see. Right now it doesn't rate that way. So it looks like at any time if vehicle usage increases, this is what would happen, but that's not the case. If vehicle usage significantly increases during the first year. That's a good addition. Well, no, I don't think it significantly increases anymore because you only have one year. So it's if vehicle usage requires is determined to be annually is determined to be more than as presented here. Basically, it's determined to be I would add, if I may, I would say that the reason I put the word significantly is knowing that it's going to come back here for review. So if it just increases, let's say if you look at my spreadsheet and it increased it in one time slot by one car then you would say it's not, it's increased but not significantly. I think the word significant from our perspective, from a self-interest perspective, if it happens, why don't we figure out one of this, but I think the survey should be once it's done should automatically be presented to the director and then it's up to the director to decide whether to bring it back for us. Yeah, and the director determines we'll conduct a survey and you will share it with the director. If at the director we'll bring up the survey. And then then the procedure would be a back student to review. No, it's just with directors. That's just with staff. Only for the issue. It would trigger something that she'll bring up. I don't think that's the procedure. I think it would stress these additional items after we've met with the board. You don't talk to them any longer. We do. It's worth a welcome to talk to them. You've got your survey. Yeah, but hold on. I'm just trying to do, I'm just gonna show up in the second sentence so you have after one calendar year from the day that everybody can work that to survey by the way. The survey that you survey which shall be provided to the director will include some director questions to determine the additional orders and increasing non-vehicle travel to the site. If the director determines that vehicle usage is increased to an extent for acquiring reconsideration owner will work with planning director designate to further increase on-site parking or reduced vehicle usage with methods including but not limited to. Yeah, that's, that was actually slightly what I was starting to edit in there. But yes, I'm, I'm okay with that. You can get a message from your if I don't have to. Yeah. Good. Yeah. Good luck and I get that. Read it up later. Yeah. So I think I'll second. All in favor. Aye. Great. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate you coming back. I love that roof. The roof too. The roof planer. Yeah, that's cool. Looks good too. Can we have one more? Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Good luck, John. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Steve Jim and I'll present United Life Sign as far as promoting this operation, allowing Herm kirby of this sign, allowing this sign sign because it seems like the name is theill the Beslaus market sign sign similar size. This is the owner of the French horse, As Steve said, we understand that the largest allowable letter size of the sign is 13.5 inches based on the administrative sign review. We're asking for 20-inch tall letters. And we understand that basically the signed envy and prime butcher are in the same building and they've sent a precedent for the sign size. The sign envy looks like it has 24-inch tall letters. What we understand is that the criteria specifically stipulates that the height of the sign letter should be 24 inches and makes no mention of the total size of the height. And so we believe that we're right in line. Our size would be the same size. Our size would be right around the same size as the size of the envy and the prime butcher and we believe that that's the right size to ask for. So what color is this going to be? What is it? How is this going to be? Well, during the daytime you'll see this. This is a 3M film. It's black but it has little white dots in it. So at night when the LED's go on you will see this. So it's going to be white? Well, when it gets dark it might be white. It's a black sign during the day and it lights up as well. Just as prime butcher next door, you lit up as well at night. Not a prime butcher, but the metal letters that's back in it. Am I incorrect there? Not yours, I'm talking to you. Most likely prime butcher is backlit. Actually I think all the signs on the building are backlit. We're also going to be backlit. I think you meant from a solid front with backlit? With a halo. Yeah. The other thing that we'll also have is a halo, except for rose glow and halo also. What's the name of our sign panel? Signsense. Have you looked at our signsense guidelines? I have not specifically looked at them. We have signsense guidelines that kind of lay out exactly what we'd like to see in signs. One of the things that we don't like is, I'm getting this from a former member of Bruce, white letters at night is very distracting. It's not something that we have, I'm trying to think, we've discouraged that in our past. Those materials were provided to nightlight signs? We do the glow behind the letter. We're not illuminating them. No, they're illuminating. I'm sorry, on this sign? That's what I'm saying, but we normally don't. I mean, massage is glowing behind it. It's not an illuminated sign. Yeah, I think two challenges you have is, number one, the fact that I do think those might be behind, but the other thing is the double height on that is difficult. On ours or on yours? On yours. No, because massage envy is normally high. You've got twice the size. Massage envy has a 24-inch, and they also have a wave underneath, and when we're proposing ours, it has a little underlying wave kind of change. So their height is 24 inches, and they also have a wave, which we believe that ours is going to be the similar size when combining both outlines versus there. Yeah, and I remember that here, and it was somewhat controversial. Yeah, but I think we got kind of comfortable with it because it was thin, and it kind of, I mean, I guess I just look at that, and I guess from a, I think if you were to look at our science sense materials, that this probably doesn't comport because it's taking up almost the entire facade. Yeah. So that's not something, and once again, and I think if you'll also see in there that says, you know, a backlit, fully lit white is discouraged because of distraction. So, okay, so that's a good point. So the color thing I can absolutely take off the table because I was actually leaning towards just being black with the rose halo. Yeah, that would be much, yeah. I was actually against the white. So I was going to toss back into the light. I brought back into the light. Is this your logo? It is European accent. So I'm following up. It's a corporate logo. Is this the French accent? Oh, that is the corporate logo? Sorry. Yes. It's a funky European accent. It doesn't even line up. Yeah, it's supposed to be. It's actually kind of like a, it is kind of, not a good, it's not good. It's a franchise. There's $515 every now. That is the, that is it. Can you show me a picture of another store? I have a store in Westford. Show me now. I've got to see real quick. It's actually a beautiful one in Coolidge Corner. I'm not sure if I have a picture of it in handy. Cool, cool, cool, cool. Yes, you probably could. Because it's in the same sort of situation, but tucked in literally right on Harvard Street. It's like you shouldn't have an org service. Like European or the other one should be the wave massager. They've got like two different, they emphasize one wide. So European has given a little style and smaller and wax it or something. So you can see it's a little offset. The words are offset. That's the design that we don't really like. Yeah, not good. Like, I don't care so much about the design aesthetics. I mean, it wouldn't do what I do if I started one, but you can start not to franchise what the company itself is. You're not even using them, right? But I think... Yeah, that's the actual logo. You'd be three lines. Yeah, no, that's the logo, but the actual word, the letters are... That's the sign. That's the way the sign is coming. I can find the actual sign. That's the logo that you see on the website. May I make a clarifying point? Yeah. Andrew? Yes. So the main issue here, and we can talk about the lettering if you'd like to, but the main issue here, why it can't go through just my own review, is that it's bigger than whatever had been approved the last time that it was here. So... Yes, exactly. If you wanted to... So if you want to instruct the cyclist to shrink it a little bit, that might be an appropriate recommendation, but in terms of how they're... the design of their corporate logo, I'm not sure we'll be able to... No, no, I was trying to get it something, so... But that's the main problem right now. Take your overall height that you have on the Sergeant and use that middle line and just flip your two letters a little wider apart. Don't cram them all in. Make the overall height I'm suggesting maybe the same height as the new one line. No, you can still keep the two lines. Because I don't think you're going to get it in one line. That's another option. We looked at one line as well. If you can tighten it up, make a little more room between them so it's not all mushed together. There's a certain design I think that we have to adhere to the corporate design. I'm fine with making it the same size as the Sergeant. I think what our point is just is that we want to have the same size as the other new stores in the building. We don't want to be smaller than the others and be sort of in guilt and not be noticed. So I could get behind it if they... I'm not sure what Janet Craig had there before, but I do think that there is a need to kind of shrink it down. Shrink it down because right now it's taking up the full facade. And Jenny, I appreciate that. I think the Scienceense guidance can have to do that. When science does come up though, we all have our kind of pet peeves on it. So you definitely hear about that whenever this happens. But I think the logo is the logo. I'm not trying to do that. But the two things that I would need to see is this get shrunk down probably by maybe as much... I'd like to see what it would look like as two thirds or three fourths or those two different sizes. What would that be? Three quarters? Yeah, three quarters small. Or bigger than the overall massage? Yeah. It doesn't have to be bigger than the massage. It's a special building development. Yeah, it's got a pretty big sign. It does. It's got a flare to it. And I don't have problems with that. This one's just kind of for the size of it. Yeah, this one's just getting out of the park. I appreciate that. So what if we came back and did the same overall sign right as massage envy? We took away the white I think I'd also like to see some soft. What if we went to like 15 inch letters? I said 24? 15 is actually... No, ours right now is 21. Ours is 20 inch. I'd like to do a little bit more than 15 if it's possible. 18 would be great. I think 18's not going to be enough. 18's not going to be enough. I think I'd like to see 15 or... Yeah, I think that's appropriate. I think we're looking at 15. That gives you like... This is 36. And this is... This is like 42 or 43. Before it took up more than half of this space. Now it takes up like... We're taking 10 inches off it. I'm fine. I think I'd also like to see what it looks like in context of the rest of the building. I noticed the doctor at Express signed one up. I'd like to see what it looks like there, there. Just a fine... The doctor at Express was just there today. He's significantly smaller than Prime and Masajin. I think I'd still like to see what your proposal looks like in context with the rest of the building. He's only given us this corner so far. There. The one full society gave us his life. We can see all four signs grow. Just give us one banner and a quote. Let us know what it looks like. That might be better as far as being able to grasp overall height, not just letter height. When's our next meeting? It's July 11th. Definitely hurt you? Our construction is due to be... I'm going to be... I'll be country for... July 10th. The administrative review. If we trigger it, it picks up to the chairman. What we can do is you can work with staff with the director to determine whether it's appropriate. She feels that it isn't because it isn't. You don't have to come back before us. But I think you can work with staff. Show her the overall elevation as Andrew has suggested. We can operate it with them so that the letters would not be illuminated at night. He's already agreed on that. I just kind of understand with the glow behind it. They're glowed back with it. Right. About 15 inches. Of course it looks a little bit like that. I'm fine with that. I'm sorry. It will still be a strong size. It will still be a good size. It's a good logo. I didn't mean to... If that's going to work for you, I think it's going to be as long as... We'll do it in an hour. We're talking about a good design. She'll have to pass it. But the staff won't be approved. Going on the same board and meeting for 40 years, see if there's more to this. I'm fine with that. We still have to do it. I'll move to approve as amended, so 15 inch metal backlit and to work with staff for the director to approve. And provide an overall context. And to provide an overall context to the director. Or a design. Absolutely. I'll take the 15 inch. Okay. Are you comfortable? I don't know if we can. I think you're going to have to leave that in because of the way that I think we need to approve that I think we need to I'll second it. I'll second it. All in favor. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Yes. I'm sorry. I should close in here. Have your guests. Thank you very much. Thank you. Oh, Oh, I'm gonna thank you very much. I have here. that was You see, that's why I just thought I should show up. Yes. All right. So Central School are the lease agreement. You have before you a lease with the Arlington Retirement Board for the ground floor space. You should have your packets. It has been reviewed by Town Council, by the Retirement Board, by the panel which includes Mike and Adam Chapterley, time manager. And it is ready for you to sign as presented so that they can move in officially on July 1st. OK. And start. Hang around. I unfortunately didn't have a chance to go through this, but you just go over the term and the rest of your data. OK, sure. The term is to begin July 1st, 2016. And it extends through June 30th, 2019. It is for 772 square feet, more or less, which is located on the ground floor. It includes actually one thing that changed is this space originally, when it was devoted to the Housing Corporation of Arlington, had one parking space devoted to it. That has since been increased to two based upon our conversations. That is parking that's actually behind the Masonic building. So it's not based at the Central School. And the fixed rent, which is noted on page 4, is $15,112.50. More monthly, $1,259.00, and some change. There is also a suggested fixed increase in here for rent. And then they're also going to be paying operating expenses. And the capital contribution. I'm sorry, capital contribution, not operating expenses. The capital contribution is not operating expenses. The capital contribution is 50 cents per square foot of reasonable space. Do they intend to do any alterations, construction, improvements? They can't do anything about the approval or my approval, it means there needs it. And my understanding is it means they may be moving sometimes around, because right now there's some fixed, a couple of fixed spaces in there that they might change, but nothing not dramatic renovations of all their approvals in front of my house. Have they asked for the GI? Any money? No, they don't approve it. No, they're just moving it. Yeah, it's as is, and that's essentially the rate all of the leases were from the assets. Insurance, okay, insurance. They have to provide insurance as well for the property, which not just for the entire property, but for their space that they're renting the property. Yeah, I understand. I'm glad you said that. Just to be clear. Yeah, yeah. Okay, we tried the full property. Yeah, I didn't think they'd call the town kind of. Yeah, cool thing. No, no, they don't want to. It's still the town, it just didn't make much sense. No, it just didn't quite work. Okay. But actually the only thing that changed this is a model lease that we used with all of the tenants in pretty much all of the buildings with the town rents. And the only thing that really changed in here was the parking space. We increased the parking spot. And that's acceptable. This is acceptable to the retirement. The other tenants, most importantly, the manager. The other tenants, the parking spot? Yeah, but it was actually an unclean parking spot. Okay, don't admit there were any of those. There might be others. We're not here. We're doing that from the beginning. Well, they're currently being claimed by people posting pieces of paper with masking tape on the signs. So I need to clean that up. It's not a word I don't. So it's been cleaned up administratively. And it's been cleaned up, yes. A non-contentious item. Fine. So you moved? So you would sign the lease as presented to the board. Yeah, so I moved to authorize the chairman to sign the lease as presented. Second. All in favor? All right. All right, so the other one is the Mystic River Watershed Association, which you don't have before you. I have been working with the executive director of Mystic River and working on the terms of the lease and also the exact square footage of the space that they're interested in. And have come to some, and working on some negotiation in terms of what they're interested in renting. And I've presented to them lease terms. They have not yet reviewed all of those lease terms in detail. The board looked at them, but more needs to be done. So I don't have something to present to you tonight. What I was hoping you could do is approve the chair's ability to sign that lease amendment if that would be possible. Because it would actually be amended in the lease. You've amended it. They have an existing lease because they currently lease space from us. You actually amended that lease in February. Now you'd be amending it again to include additional space. I move to authorize the chair to amend the lease for Mystic River Watershed in the sort of increase can do this. Or increase can do this. Increase that can do this. Increase to amend the lease to increase space. I'll sign. All in favor. All right. The caveat there is this will likely not this will mean that they will not make any changes to their lease for July 1st. So we're not looking about this first just to be clear about that. It would likely not occur in the next week based upon timing issues. So if something comes up, you could bring this to July. I could potentially bring that to July. There's two July meetings. Two July meetings. And then the last is that we're still working with our working center for the arts and trying to consider them as tenant for the third and fourth floor spaces that are still available and will continue those conversations of the panel and reviewing additional documentation that's provided by the center that will be continuing into July. One more thing is it was brought to my attention that the school department is also seeking some space and so I have started conversations with Kathy Boody and towards some of the space before that is still available that even if we do enter into a lease agreement with the Arlington Center for the Arts, that space will not become immediately occupied. It would not be occupied likely until July 1st of 2017. So we still need to find a tenant for the space and for the months that we will not have rent. And the school department will be able to fill some of that space and also pay some portion of rent. So I'm investigating that this time. Our designee to the Arlington Preservation Fund. So you have in your packet a letter that you need to... It's a vote to nominate me to be the designee to the Arlington Preservation Fund. And then be afforded by the Board of Selectments. So the letter actually goes to the Board of Selectments. I gather you've done this in the past for previous directors. It was probably before everyone's time, but it was three years. You actually did something like this. I think David Fields had been. Yes. Desigbeven. But never served. I had no problem with it. I had to move to author of the show to sign the letter for the deployment. Seconded. All in favor? Aye. Congratulations. Congratulations. Congratulations. Yet another hat. I've already attended my first meeting. There you go. A meeting crasher. Director's report. Someone would just get this. There is a verbal report. Good. Good. So what I wanted to talk about are basically three big things and then two sort of updates. So one is just that we're going through staffing changes in the department. I'm not sure if all of you are aware of those changes, but I wanted to bring them to your attention. One is we have a new administrative assistant. Her name's Amy Quinn. Amy Fadago had been our administrative assistant for the past two years. Then she moved into the position of the CBBG administrator. In the last couple of weeks, she gave her notice and Amy Fadago is now going to become the management analyst in the town manager department. Okay. Taking these positions. Which is great for her, but a loss to our department. And so we've posted the CBBG administrator position which is a very critical position in the office administering our entitlement money from the federal government. You still see that as a full time? Being on my CPA. That is definitely a full time job. Okay. And then we are losing Joey Blushko who is retiring June 30th. Actually Amy's last day is on June 24th next Friday. So June 30th, Joey is leaving. We had initially posted her position which is actually was a junior planner position and after assessing the needs of the department with Laura and we've been taking into account other staff's feelings about the transition transitions we decided to up that position to become a senior planner position and also to eliminate our, there's this GIS technical planner position which that was David Fields position. It's been open since he left. We've been considering going forward with that position which we have of the department had like a quarter contribution towards that position. We're taking that funding and adding it to the planner position to create one senior planner which I think if we have the right person in we could have somebody who has some GIS and technical planning skills as well as more senior planning skills which we need desperately at this time. So those are just some staffing updates which means that essentially it's a little bit of a skeleton crew for a couple of months while we get reoriented. So I wanted to let you know that. And now that I've said that I'm going away on vacation. It seems like a bad side way. But it is next. Starting tomorrow through July 4th so I'll be back on July 4th. We don't have another meeting until July 11th as the next meeting. I just wanted to let you know and Laura and I have discussed what's to be done in my absence and so if you have any questions about them you can of course ask me or direct those questions to Laura. And then I guess that brings up your next meetings once July 11th and you have July 25th. The question is do you want to meet in August? We have sort of a placeholder that just says TVD but I think we may want to have like just schedule, find a date that we can meet in August and then if we need it great if we have got it if we don't need it that's fine as well. What may come up? I think there will be a couple more special permits coming up. One for the Medical Marijuana Facility and two for a new business that's coming to open up along the bike path. Was there a facility on that? By the way, 11 Water Street. Water Street, yes. There's a lot of supply around here that I like to know. Any bills though? Awesome. And we see that because it's... This special permit is so Laura is working with that applicant right now and I started to work with the applicant for the other property. Anyway, it may... Either one of these things may or may not hit a July meeting but I think it would be helpful to have it on the state. You know, again, just in case we need that. So that's a question to you if you don't want to do that now we meet in September. And then I was going to give two more quick updates. I think I'll be using the dollar for a quick meeting. Well that would mean likely that you'd have to continue a hearing so you should... You can continue to some data... I will probably be here but it's a possibility that... What? I'd like to move that. It will likely be for that. New business. Yeah, I can't do August 8th and I can't do the 22nd. I can't do the 8th or the 22nd and August 15th might be a problem. 15th would be the only... I think I can do the 15th Pick a date. August 15th? Sure. Is the best? I think it sounds like mostly maybe. And this is like a... This is a maybe meeting. Yeah, definitely. I just wanted to... In case. Okay. And then this brings me to a different question which is I'm wondering if we can move the time of these meetings to 7.30 instead of 7.00 p.m. That would be possible for everybody. My understanding is that in the past things to be at 7.30 and one minute to 7. And then just to go to 11. Well, we seem to be wrapping up in two hours. Most of the meetings are at 10.00 p.m. So... It's a while back. In a while. I don't know, maybe 8 years. Yeah, not sex. That's for sure. Thank you either way. I think one of the reasons we always did 7.00 was because of talent and to be able to have an hour before town meeting. I think that was just one of those. You could adjust what duration of your meeting. I think I'm okay with 7.30. Yeah, I think it's 7.30. So starting at 11.30 or what's the... We could start it on the 11.30. You could start in whatever the meeting is after that. Since those meetings have already been posted at 7.00 p.m. I don't know that that matters. We haven't done the official agenda. So it could move to 7.30. It's fine with me. Just remind us. I will remind you. We'll send out actually our revised list of meetings. Fine. Alright. Two more quick updates. The Zoning Recruitification Working Group this past Friday was the last day for the town manager to accept applications. We have the applications. We're going to be doing some interviews with the applicants when I return in early July and then hoping to have a first meeting with that working group by late July or early August. So I just want to give you that update. And then two initiatives just to bring to your attention. One you might be familiar with which is the work that we're doing in Arlington Center including Mass Ave. And then we might be doing some other planning initiatives too around Broadway Plaza and other discussions with a group who's interested in supporting Arlington Heights Center. Similar group formed in Arlington Heights called Support Arlington Heights and we've been working on a planning initiative with that group of individuals and we'll have a public forum on July 28th. That's a Thursday night. I believe it's at Dalton School. And that is to share the information that the Support Arlington Heights group has been gathering which they've been doing a survey they've been conducting some sort of surveys around in that immediate community in the neighborhood and so they'd share that information and they'd be able to give people an opportunity to provide some feedback. Bring it to a larger forum in the fall. Can you provide me with that? If it's closer I may want to do that. Yes. When I have actually a save for date I'll send it to you. These are the only things that I wanted to keep you up to date on before we move on. What about our fifth and open seat? Sure. I've been talking with the town manager about that and also other people who might know people who could be interested in becoming a member of the board and I've promised that I would work with that member to move it up with flagpole at the state having contacts in the governor's office. I feel strongly that I'd be able to do that but I don't have an individual to work with. We don't have that individual that's no longer interested from last year. So if any of the members of the board right now have suggestions you can send those to my attention or to Adam's attention. But they have to get a point you have to get a point it's fine. The governor? Yes. It's a gubernatorial appointee. There's an application process that's quite lengthy but it's we have a person who's committed to the process I can help work with them through that process. Okay. We have to get a point because we're saving money now with the reductions. All right. Approval of meeting much from June 6th. I do have one change that you don't have. We just wanted we just sort of on the third paragraph you quoted me saying that expressed concerns about the success of the housing. Oh, yes. You changed the word success to a presidential election. So I have this point. Oh. I don't want to make simple notation. Yeah. Okay. Andy was not present. That's me. Yeah, he was both present and absent. He's present and absent. Yeah. Because he's always with us. That's the way I do it. You channel them. That's the way I do it. That's good. Thank you. Are you looking about that? Yeah, I do. Yeah, I do. I feel guilty when I miss it. There you go. See? You're here. Put that out. I will. Sorry. Just one other. I just have two small I think in the first sentence. I'm sorry. The second sentence. Funny how we all catch our own things. In the third paragraph, Mr. Garrett expressed concern. I think you just need about adopting a plan which includes strategies that the town has and then get rid of the work that had previously and has previously and then successfully proposed. Okay. Thanks. Actually, keeping in that. Talks about workshops. I don't know about workshops. Is there a mention before that? I would just say it was stupid and lost about the public process. Right after the one, Mike just shows the next sentence. The past couple of months. Yeah, yeah. The guy asked you to explain plans developed. Okay, so just add hope. I'll move to approve a minute. That is amended. Second? All in favor. All right. Anything else? Other business? Old business? New business? I'll move to adjourn. Second? All in favor. All right.