 All right, I'm going to call to order the Monday, November 4th meeting of the Arlington Redevelopment Board. First up this evening, we have a continued hearing for environmental design review, special permit number 3348 application by Gary McCoy of Point Science for CVS at 833 Mass Ave. Mr. McCoy, if you could come forward just a minute. I understand there is some desire on the public's part to speak this evening. You can have a seat. Oh, I'm sorry. That's okay. Sorry. My name is Chris Ram. I'm representing. All right. You can have a seat up here. We'll go through it. There is sort of an associated issue with CVS, which you may or may not know about concerning the house to the right of it. Okay. It's called the Atwood House. So this board has control over both of these buildings as they're part of the same special permit. There are people in the audience this evening who are going to want to speak about the Atwood House. I'm going to allow it. Sure. I would remind the folks in the audience tonight that as you speak, this gentleman has no control or authority over the Atwood House and no ability to make a decision. He's here to discuss CVS and primarily sign changes and internal changes, so please keep that in mind. I will allow you to speak. I just want to not take it out on this gentleman who's just here. Nothing presumably. CVS. So we had continued this hearing previously, so I'm opening that up here this evening, but if you could take us a minute here. I think the board itself is also going to have some comments as to the Atwood House and some things that may or may not be requested of CVS as part of this process. This is just to give you some background. This is a long standing issue in the town, one which residents in this board feel strongly about. We appreciate your hard work and we don't mean to put you in a position where you shouldn't. I was like you should be put, but I'm just sort of preparing you that a lot of the discussions are going to come up. You may not get a decision this evening. I was just understanding that the landlord had already come in and addressed a lot of these concerns. The landlord did come in and we had a conversation with the landlord and I don't think that this board is particularly satisfied about some of the answers that we got. This is the redevelopment board. It's not necessarily our place and our authority to enforce a special permit. It's still our special permit and if enforcement isn't taking place then it's up to us to look at the conditions of the entire special permit and make an appropriate decision. This is a building that's created a lot of intense discussion over the last several years and unfortunately for you, it just so happens that with CVS asking for the special permit to be reopened, it's given us an opportunity to have a long, long overdue conversation with the building owner and the landlord, so I just wanted to give you some history there and prepare you for that. It's nothing personal with you and your organization. I don't understand why it's fine, I'll sit and listen, I just don't have any I will, again, I will ask the folks in the audience when they speak to keep that in mind as well that their comments, I'm going to allow their comments for the record and they can direct them as they see fit but not you. Sure. Okay. So, go ahead, please show us what you've got and tell us what you're here asking for. Well, basically for CVS throughout the country really, we're just trying to upgrade their signage to their new logo on their signs, we're not looking to really replace anything, or should I say improve anything, we're going one for one with the signage and that's it. I think we were adding one, if I read it correctly, we're adding one, sorry, I just read through it so I would know this. One do not enter sign, other than that it's pretty much sign for sign, one for one. Personally, I think it's a fine, you don't have any issue with any of the signs, I'll defer to other members of the board for comments, I'll begin down at the other end of the table this evening with Rachel. I too, I don't have any issue with the specific signs, I do think that there is an issue in reopening the special permit with the lack of attention and the lack of follow-through with what was originally required of the special permit of the Atwood House on the property. I missed the meeting the last time CVS was here, but I watched the video online, so I am able to discuss it and vote on it. I also missed the meeting where the Atwood House was discussed, but I did watch that online too, so I am able to discuss and vote on that one also. I do have one question related to the site plan, which is I think this, so can you bring that up for a second? So when I went over to CVS today, I noticed there's a sign that's not on the site plan and the sign is right here and the sign points that way and it says drive, drive-in or drive-thru or whatever it exactly says there, so there's a sign missing from the site plan. A directional sign I suppose? If you see right here, there's a sign right here that's about this big with an arrow pointing that way that says drive-in or drive-thru or whatever it is and it's not shown on the site plan. I'll make sure I make a note of that. So if we were to approve this, I think we would need to just probably add that into the signage. I think we could make that a condition where we would have that sign indicated on revised site plan. Right. That's other than the whole Atwood House issue that was my only real comment on this. Sure. David. I had no additional comments regarding the signage. I also agree with my colleagues that we would like to see a resolution to the issues with the Atwood House property. Atwood as well. Okay. Yeah, I have no issues with the signage. I know you're rebranding and the signings that you have for this rebranding is fine. I've been thinking long and hard about this and I think we have to somehow amongst us members today come up with a fair and reasonable solution where it doesn't drag you through this all the time. Mm-hmm. You've been here twice already. And to be fair to you and to your company and CVS, but also there's other issues there. Understood. So, you know, I don't think we should talk about almost ourselves. Yeah, I think what I'll do is turn to the public and allow for public comments. Okay. And then we can deliberate. Okay, that's fine. I could talk a little more about that. Okay. Some of my feelings about how we should go about this. Sure. Yeah, thank you. At least my opinion. Go ahead, Jenny. So in addition to that, one extra sign that was noted by Mr. Benson, the other thing that is actually different than in the original application that was approved is the landscaping that was supposed to be installed in front of the building between the building and the sidewalk. Okay. Was never installed. I don't know if it had been installed previously and then removed at some point in time, but that would be... I was not aware of that. That was that a CVS thing? It's a CVS thing. Okay. Yeah, so it's just one other thing that we would want to put into a condition to ensure that that's actually installed. So it was another condition of the original special permit? Of the original permit and on their original plan. Okay. Landscaping between the front of the building and the sidewalk, which was never installed. Now, granted, I don't know where exactly that would go, but it is on the site plan. That was approved at the time the decision was issued. So we can discuss that further. I don't know if that would be tonight, but that was one other note. Is it all hardscape there in front of the building? It is all hardscape. Yeah. I think we're going through the building and there's a couple of benches there. Yeah. It's supposed to be landscaping. I mean, it's between the parking lot, there's some bushes and stuff there, but I'm not familiar with it, so that would be a CVS thing more solid. The building is right. We would add that in, I think, to any special permit condition. So at this point, I'll open it up to the public. Please keep in mind the direction I gave at the beginning of the meeting. This gentleman has no decision-making authority with CVS, but the five of us are happy to listen to what's out there and what you have to say. So Mr. Warden, I see your hand about to go up, so I'll call on you first. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I sent last week or so a group of papers to the board since none of you were on the board when it's originally happened ten years ago. And I trust you've all looked at the permit, the special permit that was issued for this whole project, the CVS and the Atwood House, and the permit, and I quoted particularly in the 2010 memo for the board, the specific provisions that related to the Atwood House, were very strong about the house was to be used for some useful purpose and so on. And then it said that the owner had said, well, he wanted to get the CVS underway first, and then he did think about the Atwood House. Well, it's not about for ten years, and meanwhile the owner and his lawyer came in a month ago, as you will recall, there questioning the structural stability of the house and so on, and quoting just a single line of that decision, it said no motion or no application for the destruction of the house could be made within two years and just overlooked all the other things about the house and how the board and the public and everybody involved thought that it was soon going to be developed into something useful. And in fact, I was working with David Levy, the then president of the Wellington Housing Corporation, and he had lined up preliminary funding and so on to convert that to building into affordable apartments and to also put a wing on the back of it to accommodate a large number of units, and in fact, the permanence, you know, sets aside some parking places behind the house for that purpose. Well, what happened is he was ready to go and the landlord said, well, I'll only give you a ten-year lease and that would not have allowed them to make it financially feasible for the investment they would have to make to do that. So and so so so they ten years ago and they do nothing, but sometimes they didn't even shovel the sidewalk that they've let it be broken into. It's boarded up. You're not supposed to have boarded up buildings and commercial areas, but it's boarded up, as you know. There's been a certain amount of vandalism and others saying, well, maybe it's maybe it's too unstable because because we let it go so long. It reminds me of the story of the young fellow who killed his parents. And then when he got to court, he threw himself in the mercy of the judge and said, I'm an orphan, but that doesn't wash. It's a self, all lawyers know, a self-inflicted harm doesn't get you off the hook. So I would urge the board, you say you don't have enforcement. Somebody must have some enforcement authority. I have written to one of the letters I sent to you about three years ago was to the building inspector, asking him to do some enforcement. That was particularly the boarding up issue. But somebody must be able to do something to make the promises and the undertakings and the decision of this board 10 years ago happen. Because that's an important part, and Mr. Atwood is going to speak to some of the history of it, but just very briefly. Dr. Atwood, after whom the house is named, although he wasn't the first owner, and later Bob Kerry, some of you may have known him. And Mike Foley, some of you may have known Mike. These were doctors who served the town, served the town well, had their offices in that building. And not only did they take care of us when we were sick, but they lived in the town and they took part in his public affairs. And you don't see a lot of doctors doing that these days. So this is important for various reasons. And I hope you will see that something is done about it. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Atwood. Well, I'd only like to add to what Mr. Wordlin said. Could you introduce yourself for the record? Yes. I'm John Atwood, and I'm the grandson of Dr. Atwood, who lived and practiced medicine in that house for nearly 50 years. And I came here today merely to offer some comments on the historical context. And I also have three photos, which I'd like to submit. We'd also like an address. I'm reminded by his rate, an address just for our records, please. You want that now? Yes. OK, now I have an apartment here in Arlington. I'm frequently here, but my primary residence is in Arlington, Virginia. I work for the government. So which one do you want? I have email. We'll take your primary address, please. 523 North Oakland Street, Arlington, Virginia, 2203. Thank you. I have email. So if I may just try to give some history of the house and Dr. Atwood. He grew up in Rhode Island on the family farm. And ironically, not too far from the CVS offices today. He then went to Harvard College and Harvard Med School, graduating from medical school in 1900. On the same year, he married his high school sweetheart, Ada Gorton, who had also gone to high school with him down in Rhode Island. So when he was about to begin his career, in 1900 plus his internship, he looked around for a pleasant and promising place to begin his career, and he settled on Arlington. And so he came here. I'm not sure of the exact date, but I'm positive he was here before 1906. And then when my uncles and fathers started being born, from 1908 to 1914, my father and his two brothers. Anyway, they all lived there in that house. Dr. Atwood was very active in his profession, with Sims Hospital a lot. And I think he was a town physician at one point and on the Board of Health. And many years later, Sims, before its demise, created a gallery of honored physicians. This was many people who had been instrumental in the founding and working of Sims Hospital through the years. And they invited families such as ours, physicians most of whom were deceased, to submit portraits or photo pictures of the doctors, which we did. That event in the 70s was covered and showed me and my mother presenting Dr. Atwood's picture. And so that moving on to the house itself, it was really elegant in its day. And unfortunately, it's shameful what's happened. Inside, for instance, there was a wide two-tier staircase with a landing in the middle of it. My grandmother would always used to say that Mr. Billiford, the woodworker, had done that. And I know there are a lot of Billifords in Ireland, who probably still are. And at the landing, where it turned second time to go to the second floor, was this beautiful stained glass window. And so that now has all been smashed, obviously, by vandalism. And when boards were finally put up on the bottom windows, none were put above that. And I mean, of all the windows in the house, that would have been the most significant one to protect. It was completely destroyed. It's gone. And the lovely garden, which they had out back, is now paved over as a parking lot. So yes, changes happened. And so what happened in 1962 is Dr. Atwood suffered a stroke. And he had to go to a nursing home from which he never returned. And my two uncles, my father being didn't, and their mother and my grandmother, considered what would be a proper disposition of the house, where they were raised and doctorated in practice. And my uncle, Bob Atwood, was a good friend of Dr. William McCarty, who was the son of the legendary track coach, and Dr. McCarty. And so Dr. McCarty said that he would create and affect a medical center, having doctors there. And so all the family thought that was an excellent disposition and tribute to Dr. Atwood and so on. And so that was how it came to pass that the house was sold from the house to Dr. McCarty. And at first, it worked well. Doctors came in and so on. And then, unfortunately, Dr. McCarty died young. And ever since then, it's been complete unsettled. So that was basically some of the history and up to date of the sale. And you're familiar, and Mr. Wordman has explained what's happened since it went out of the family. So I realized it's very difficult to balance the public and private interests here and economic and practical. But I think the house is, unquestionably, of historical significance to the town of Ellington. And both for the story it represents of that period in time and for the architecture. I mean, just today, I went around and looked at the four of the iconic structures here, the Jarvis House, the Pleasant Street, the Wayside Inn, the 393 Mass Ave, the Dallon Cutter House, and of course, the Jason Russell House. And those are good examples of colonial architecture and federal. This is later, maybe Art Nouveau. I don't know what you'd call it exactly. But I think it would be important because of the prominence of that house on what's really the main street in our town, that the house should definitely be preserved. I mean, it should at least be a plaque or a marker or something there. And I know it's very difficult to find use for it. I mean, ideally, if a doctor would appear and be there, it would be great. I thought, is there any type of partnership? Do these other houses I just mentioned, each one of them has a different history? And I suppose you consider that. But what the status of the ownership is, the status of the usages, like the wayside inn, that's like a hidden gem, really. You can't even see the plaque. That was as old as the Jason Russell House. And it's in quite good shape. And how does this come about? So I would only urge that consideration be given to indeed the historical significance, architecturally, socially. And I mean, the family did a lot of the town with one interesting thing, perhaps, was my grandmother. I think she was maybe the first woman town meeting member. One of them, I'm pretty sure. And so it's, as I say, we've had a century of experience there. And I guess that would be my complete mark that it really is historically significant. And I hope that somehow the house will be preserved. And I understand the challenge in finding the useful aspect. I think that the preservation is pretty much given, but the usefulness is very difficult. But it has not been well maintained. I've gone over there, including today. And so the deal needs to be more honored. So with that, I will thank you. Thank you. I'd like to add something more. Go ahead. Just follow up on what you just said there. I did go by that building maybe a year ago, and through the history of the building, there was also another stent where it was a dentist's office. It's what? A dentist's office. Oh, well, that would be good. In fact, we like the idea of the pharmacy being next door. Well, I'm just saying, well, it was a dentist's office. That's good. It took a lot of liberties in transforming what was a very grand house at one time. Yes, well, I gave you the photograph. Yes, and I'm saying... I actually lived there my first year in high school when my grandfather became sick when my mother and I moved in. But it was a lovely place. But a lot of those details you're talking about on the inside. Yes, yes. I'm not there anymore. I'm sorry to say. I love the challenge. And, you know, where they bolted the chairs down with the new round of plumbing and the hydraulics and all that stuff, it's still like a mess of strul in there, okay? I just want to follow up on that. It has transformed. Yeah, that's all that's true. Yes, sir. Yes. Oh, hi. My name is David Baldwin. I'm here to speak just briefly. Six brief points. Could you give us your address? Oh, yes, 49 Academy Street. Thank you. I'm a member of the Island and Historic District Commission, a former member of the Historical Commission, former chair of the Old Schwann Mill Trustees, former president of the Island and Historic Society. I've been around for a while. In entering the town from Cambridge, you come across the sign very prominent that says, welcome to historic Arlington. Unfortunately, prosperity has not helped preserve Arlington's history. Most of our 17th, 18th, and a good part of our 19th century structures have been either moved or demolished. So what is left is more important to us that since, again, development has done away with the others. If Arlington is to, on one hand, be promoting history, we should not be, on the other hand, raising the historic structures. I guess in conclusion, I firmly believe that we're all stewards of the historic past. And it's up to us to make a stand for historic buildings. And this is the legacy that we leave to the future. Thanks. Thank you. Mr. Wagner. Thank you. I'm Carl Wagner, 30 Edge Hill Road in Arlington, Mass. I wanted to thank the ARB and the citizens for the October 7th meeting that I attended, where the discussion was made of the Atwood House. And it brought back a lot of things that just about 42,000 people in Arlington wanted to hear, which is why is that house next to CVS in such bad shape always? Because it seems like all my life it's been in bad shape. And I understand that this body may not be able to do enforcement, but I hope that Arlingtonians will reach out to the Inspectional or Enforcement Services and get that house taken care of before something awful happens. And I hope that the work that this group is doing with the owners and the citizens can make it better. I'd like to say that I learned on the October 7th meeting, I think thanks to Crystal already, but also perhaps to members of the board speaking, that the 10 years ago instructions were given to the owners or the users of that site, they must not knock it down. And that's really important for people in Arlington to know that the original ARB instruction was don't knock it down, work with it, build from it or something like that. And as I walk along the line with David's comments, as I walk past the Whole Foods on the opposite side, you get to Nice Church, I think it's a Baptist church, and there's grass. You can all see it in your minds if you close your eyes. And then there's the house, which could be what the grandson of the owner has said was wonderful. We could use the photos, we could learn from it and get details. And then you get essentially in that grass and that at-wood house, you get a sign, a free sign for CVS because it goes church, wood frame house, and there's the best store in Arlington, at least for the purposes of this meeting, right? And then you've got the old historic high school right after and a tastefully done parking lot by CVS, by the way. So it looks and feels like a nice town area and it talks about history, but it also talks about people walking and using things in a nice public transit friendly get out of your house and walk around instead of being a big bad urban environment. So this is all really good and it's the right vibe. Unfortunately, 887 Mass Ave, the Carney Building is a disaster and part of the reason I come to meetings like this now is because I understand that this board made 887 better than it could have been by law. Well, 887 is pretty awful. That's the white building on the other side of the high school. Please, whatever we do, keep in mind what the at-wood house was and could be and how it fits into CVS and the church and the feeling of our town. And then keep in mind also what 887 came out to the rest of us, even if it was done legally. So thank you very much. Thank you. Yes, sir. My name is Peter Bloom, Jason Terrace, 15 Jason Terrace. I've been really discouraged watching what's happened to that house over the years. I'm a neighbor, I live around the quarter from the at-wood house. It's just been really depressing seeing what's gone on there. And, yeah, it's part of a streetscape I've always admired, especially going east towards the church that we were just referring to. And now, I mean, it just looks like the backdrop for any number of assault or drug overdoses you might see on the 86 o'clock news. And I don't understand how this could have been allowed to go on for such a long time. And I really hope that you can all do whatever you can to try and turn this around and not let the house basically just collapse by default. So thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else wish to speak to that? I'm going to close public comment. If I could actually add one little note to that that I forgot to mention. I mean, we're losing the high school's architecture. And to me, it's a really unfortunate loss for the streetscape. And it makes the at-wood property that much more valuable to me as a neighbor and as a citizen of this town. Thank you. I'm going to close public comment at the time being seeing what else wishes to speak and turn it back to the board to deliberate how to move forward here, keeping in mind that what's before us is separate from the issues of the at-wood house. And we may be limited in what we're able to do and decide tonight. So I'll begin with Jean. Since I so rarely begin with Jean. I don't think I have anything to add to what other people have said. I just don't know if there's any way for us to connect the application that's in front of us to what the condition of the at-wood house is. I don't know if anybody knows whether we can do that, but I don't know that we can do it. I don't know if we can somehow condition the sign permit on something because we're not going to see something for the at-wood house for I don't know how long. So I'm interested to hear whether other people have some ideas about it because other than what Ms. Wright mentioned about the greenery in front and what I mentioned about the missing sign on the drawing, I don't see how we do anything other than approve the change in signage that they suggested. I was sorry I missed the meeting on October 7 because I was going to suggest that we look into the possibility with the building inspector of getting that at-wood house condemned and maybe doing a taking by the town of the house. But I don't think that's the subject for this. No, I think I would defer to the building inspector and town council as to that. I've given this a considerable amount of thought and I've been on the board for six or seven years at this point and only one other time have we been asked to reopen a special permit where there are other conditions that aren't being lived up to. Every other time a reopening of a special permit has come before us, or the landowner as the case may be has lived up to the general conditions and special conditions put forth by the special permit. This is sort of a unique case where you have CVS on the one hand that as far as anyone can tell has been an excellent neighbor to the town. I've gone back through the history of that decision and people were concerned about the CVS building at the time but it's become a part of that block of mess as the general in the back said. And I don't necessarily think it's entirely reasonable to keep CVS down from moving forward because of this other situation. However, the special permit is what the special permit is. And when enforcement isn't taking place it's up to some other entity to manage that. At the very minimum the special permit laid out in special condition number five that its reasonable and diligent efforts shall be used to maintain its present condition to prevent any damage from the elements or otherwise until it's redeveloped. It doesn't put a time frame on that. It doesn't put a plan in place. It does say that the owner has to come back before us before anything does take place but nothing's taken place in the last ten years. And so unlike other situations I feel a little bit more comfortable telling CVS hold off until we get something here. This is not a situation where back up for a minute the other time we asked the landowner to come in the property owner to come in one of the major wireless carriers was looking to put a relay tower on top of a building further up Mass Ave and there were some issues with the building. What they were proposing was non-invasive didn't have any impact on the streetscape didn't have any impact on traffic but the building owner had been in violation of the special permit for a number of years and again it had gone unenforced. We had the building owner come in and deal with things like traffic and particularly parking and storage on the site. The building owner came in and made certain commitments to live up to the terms of the special permit that this board none of whom of these members were there when this happened I don't think felt comfortable moving forward with a vote for the special permit. This is a much more severe case and again I'm speaking to you but I'm only speaking to you because you're the person who's going to go back and talk to CVS. The historical and cultural implications of that house not really standing. It has been that is another board's purview to determine and what should be done there and I don't want to weigh in on that this evening. The house is falling down. The windows are cracked. There are people climbing in and out of there at all hours of the night I'm concerned for not only the safety of people that may go in and out of there but the church next door and the CVS on the other side whatever else might be there should something happen to that house. What we have here is an absentee property owner who came in a month ago and told us that through his attorney that they were looking at options but a month later we have nothing further from them and as Mr. Lau mentioned earlier he went into the house and it's much worse on the inside than on the outside. Unfortunately what's happening is you're punishing... I get what you're trying to do and I'd like to see a person who's really getting abused here a support on the side of CVS and I'm sure you have your own considerations and I understand that you have no control but I think there are some questions for town council and some other entities in town about what to do and how to proceed with people that aren't causing the problem but as a long time tenant of the ownership maybe CVS has influence over Mr. Noyce and how this property might be managed and taken care of at least cleaned up so that it's not in the situation that it is and again I apologize for sort of brow-beating you on that topic but I think it's important. This remains to be seen but it can't continue to exist in its current state. I was comfortable taking the opportunity presented by reopening the special permit to try to address the issues with the Atwood House in the first instance I'm not so comfortable continuing to stall CVS from moving forward with the signage and I'm struggling with it and part of what I'm struggling with is regardless of what pressure CVS might be able to exert on Noyce any kind of redevelopment of the site is going to take a while to work through that process even if reasonable progress is being made towards something and you know so are we going to hold off on issuing the permit for CVS's signage for potentially years in order to maintain leverage to make sure that that process continues or do we have another alternative because the owner has clearly violated the conditions of the original special permit so and there's there is on the face of it seems like a pretty strong enforcement clause in the original special permit I mean is there anything else that the town maybe not this board but that the town can do from an enforcement perspective to put pressure on the owner to do something to at least maintain the condition of that property so that we could allow CVS to just move forward I don't think we'd be having this conversation if we knew the answer to that question that we're here for but is a little bit outside of what our role should be who can answer that question the building inspector of town council so before I reopened the special permit I spoke with town council I spoke with the director of inspectional services and that is why we reopened this was so that you could obviously this is a sign company not even CVS by the way no I understand just to be clear about that CVS is applying but via the sign applicant which is often the case we often just have a sign company come here so there's only so much that we haven't talked to anybody at CVS in all of this time we've only been speaking with the sign company so we haven't we don't have a direct access point to CVS in general but I'm sure that we could figure out one that's one possibility but we reopened it so that you could have the conversation with the property owner and his attorney what occurred we didn't have a plan of action come out of that meeting we didn't have any terms provided to the property owner in terms of saying we need you to come back in one month to report back on progress and have an action plan we want to see these things I think that that would be a reasonable next step working with town council I'm glad to figure out a way to make that happen but that wasn't something that we discussed at the last meeting or you discussed at the last meeting I think from my own perspective it is okay to continue this conversation if you so desire but it should come with a limit in terms of to your point if you're asking for redevelopment if you're asking to see something happening it's hard to know exactly how long that timeline is going to take for anything to be executed and how long you continue to hold off on issuing something to a tenant essentially of the property owner so I would be careful about that speaking with Doug Hine the town council about this we've looked at this decision there are a lot of actually there's points in it that are not necessarily enforceable that's something to think about in terms of writing decisions about protecting properties there are mechanisms that we could use as a town to further protect this property including a preservation restriction other mechanisms that we might want to put into place and we can talk about that further maybe at another point in time but I don't know it directly relates to this tenant and their desire to install signs and also make interior improvements which is currently what is being held up they're not able to proceed with inspectional services at all at this point in time and yet you know they are a business in town they are trying to do their best in the midst of this challenge that we're talking about we don't of course have that direct challenge with the property owner because they're not dealing with the property owner they're just a sign company I have one question and then I'll let you and then I'll let you go Ken so the general condition of the special permit gives the board continued jurisdiction over the permit and it says that after a duly advertised public hearing we can attach other conditions we can reopen we don't do that we have done that with other permits that we've reopened not necessarily this board right now but the board has done that would theoretically have the opportunity to enter into further discussions and under its own authority reopen the special permit and place conditions specifically on the noise property the output house to take care of things I have some concerns over that that I'll take up outside of a public hearing but I don't think it would be an appropriate way to act if the board was so inclined we have various ways to enforce things that aren't commonly used by this board one of which we're exercising this evening but I think indefinitely imposing that is not necessarily the most equitable way to go about these things and I'm thinking through this as we're all talking as I'm sure the rest of you are but Kim go ahead and continue this discussion well like I said I've been thinking hard about this for a while at least in my opinion it was maybe three meetings ago that I motioned to continue this hearing and I felt really bad taking this out on you at that time actually it was probably Gary at that time and I'm in my opinion right now is to go ahead and approve your sign docket here and what Andy says we have some authority under the previous approval to reopen it and go after the right person not you, not CVS just so that people know that we treat people fear in this town and we're not here to leverage other persons or businesses for other people I don't think that's just right I don't like doing business that way it sets off a bad perception of what this town is and all the points that we made are good, I definitely want to do something with the house if we could save it but not this way so I'm reconsidering what I said earlier about continuing this and I think I would like to see what the rest of the board say okay let's approve the sign let's find all the avenues to open this case and see what we can do about getting this issue fixed by not putting CVS and dragging you as a business owner a sign company we already dragged you for two meetings already there should have been only one okay so thank you for that patience and like I said I feel for all of the speakers and I wish we had some kind of leeway but I'm not even sure CVS would have leeway it seems like they have their mind made up of they may or may not do anything it's horrible because we have we want to obviously continue to be fair I think we realize that what you're here asking for is a fairly reasonable minimal ask and you've just sort of fallen into a situation where that's a decade in the making and we all have to look at this balancing the idea of being fair to business and allowing people to transact business without jumping through hoops and hoops and hoops on the one hand but be the idea that property owners can't allow their properties to fall into the state of disrepair and I know it's common practice in other places to really force landlords to have conversation with Rachel earlier today I brought this up where it's perfectly reasonable and good practice to hold off on a special permit unless and until landlord acts but I'll let Rachel address that and I will continue I too again I see no issue with the signage that's being proposed I certainly I work with retail brands as an architect and I fully understand the speed at which when there's a rebranding effort it's important to cascade that across your portfolio and I I certainly am sympathetic to that I also think that there is an opportunity here for CVS to understand what the challenges are of the property that the outward house which is on their property which is you know as we've talked about has dangerous activity happening within it adjacent to their patrons coming in and out of their property and I think that having worked with many national retailers they it's important for them to understand what the risks are in any property that they operate so I actually think that it would be important to have somebody from CVS potentially attend this hearing to understand what the concerns of the town are and to then understand how important it is for them to work together with their land owner in order to expedite a resolution for their customers and for the town so that in my view that would be an appropriate next step in this process I think that's reasonable had I known that we probably would have set that up for tonight yeah no no I understand I think this is all part of the process very much an ongoing process is there anyone else on the board that wants to make a comment well do we need to track him back here again again to me the importance is for CVS to understand I think we can vote without him presence because I think I'm just trying to be fair I appreciate that I think we can close testimony I think we've heard what we need to hear I think we can close testimony on behalf of the sign company and at least oral testimony on behalf of the public but I don't think that having a CVS representative come in at our next meeting would be particularly onerous and then we could sort of decide when to vote at that time after we've spoken with CVS possibly if the department and one or two of us could have a conversation with CVS and do that outside the meeting I mean maybe the way to do it is not to continue this again but to add another condition to the permit that requires of responsible representative of CVS to come to the next meeting where we put the Atwood House on the agenda so in addition to the two conditions that we mentioned earlier we would add that third condition and therefore they could go ahead and do other signage changes and we will get somebody CVS at the next meeting we have about so let's think about that as a matter of timing and practicality we have a couple of busy meetings coming up I think if we were to if we were to call the noise folks back in I think we should do it as an additional reopening of the special permit which would require advertising and expense and we have to have a date certain for that I'm certain that their attorney would be willing to come and speak to us plus the fact that the attorney said they hired the attorney and they've hired an architect that's what they stated at the last meeting well let's see what the architect came up with yep I mean was it just all talk I don't think it hurts to try to fish out their intent because they should have some schematics or some sort of idea by now they said they wanted to do their own independent review of the structure they should have done that by now that would mean that they are moving forward if they have done none of that stuff then they have not done anything and then I would feel very comfortable saying let's you know what this board has not felt has not dealt with them we're dealing with them now so I want to give them a little bit of benefit and let them prove let them prove themselves one way or the other well the board is currently constituted has not dealt with it you're right my only concern is and I'm playing devil's advocate to an extent here is if we vote this evening I vote in the affirmative what recourse do we have against CVS aside from not a recourse leverage leverage we have against CVS the reopening of a special permit because if we reopen that special permit that puts CVS at risk and that puts it at larger risk just a simple sign that they're doing business there right okay I can live with that let's do a couple of motions but before we go into an actual vote is that sound palatable to everyone is that something we can all move forward with and feel comfortable with this evening I think we can what we can do is we continue to have an ongoing discussion about the property itself at a time when it's a little bit more appropriate I do not want to continue having discussions about this particular property without the owner and his attorney discussions are being had but can we choose a date now I'd really like to put a time frame December 16th is the only date it could be so can we choose December 16 then we will reopen the special permit get the owner of the property there and have CVS at the meeting on December 16th let's approve this for now approve that with the third condition that they come to that meeting but would still just help they can go do all the signage changes it's just another condition that they come to the meeting on December 16th CVS and the building and the owner so they can come and do the sign I'm okay with that but again it sets up another violation if it's not followed through but we are going to have to reopen it's a both and and I think it's warranted yeah I'm okay with that I like that solution we do need to try to make sure that whoever comes from CVS is the right person to deal with these kind of issues we can write in with decision making authority and that it's not just like the person at CVS who's in charge of signs for instance that wouldn't be helpful more the manager of the store it has to be someone else Gary who was here at the first meeting he's been yelling with CVS for many years and I'm sure they're well aware of the situation and what's going on and what is taking so long to get the permit they're not in the dark about it I assure you of that but he'll know the person that would have to talk to and chances are it will be one of their lawyers with them because they're a big operation and that's what they're going to do but I don't think it's going to be an issue I like Rachel's language with decision making ability yes absolutely I like that okay so just thinking through procedure so I guess we can do it in one vote in that we will vote to approve the application for special permit 3348 with the conditions as a layout can you read those back to me adding the directional sign and correcting the landscaping I'll get the exact wording and then the language for this I actually need a little bit I've heard various things so what would you like other than attendance at the December 16th by CVS official with decision making responsibility so that would be the motion along with the ownership well no I think we need a second motion if I could suggest and the second motion is to reopen the special permit and for December 16th and to have the owner of the property in CVS authorize the department to advertise it so let's take the first vote first and then do the second one so we have a motion so moved second all in favor and so next we would motion to open special permit 3348 reopen special permit 3348 to be advertised by the department and held at a public hearing on December 16th 2009 2019 I'm looking at 2019 I'm looking at the decision and to have property owner there and CVS and a representative from CVS with decision making authority so moved to discuss can I get that ad in there yes to discuss the violations of the special permit second all in favor all right good I'm happy with that thank you you don't have to come back unless you want to I've got to be here thank you to those of you in the public for your input do appreciate quick question will we be able to view this or will it be notes taken yes it'll be online by the end of the week thank you all very much and you'll eventually get the written you'll get the right decision thank you alright that was positive I appreciate everybody's input I think that was a good discussion and a good outcome so I'm going to close that portion of special permit 3348 to be reopened we'll move on to an update on the central school renovation project just quickly while people are walking out I see you're welcome the next meeting I wanted to let you know Apatka will be here on the 18th for public hearing they are the applicant who is proposing a retail use the application is actually even the novice agenda is not up yet I just wanted to let you know the application was actually posted as a news item on the ARB's page so if you go to your page right at the top it says news item and all of the materials are posted there just from the applicant there's not any memo it just says basically the public hearing notice since we've been receiving requests because it's already been a published notice I wanted to make sure that it was posted what's the sequence have they already gone to the select board they have a host community agreement and now they come to the board where is it again where Swiftie printing is currently located okay is Swiftie's only half the building is it in the whole building? no, Swiftie won't be there anymore they're taking over the building except for the bank ATM would still stay there oh that can't we'll talk about it at the end but that's actually a separate tenant technically that's the property that we're talking about so I just wanted to let you know for your all the viewers the application materials are posted because we posted the notice many people have contacted the office to be able to view them the meeting I think I scheduled it in a different location it's not here it's one of our bigger spaces I haven't looked at the materials yet but are there any traffic or parking studies as part of that? there will be a traffic report or parking utilization from my office and beyond that we don't have a lot from the applicant it's pretty small alright so we'll talk about that at the next meeting I just wanted to make sure that you knew because you were asking about other hearings coming up good so we're going to talk about future hearings but let's talk about let's talk about central school the update here is I wanted to give you a couple updates one of them is just the schedule of the project which is it says exhibit F because it was part of an invoice from the architect that you had the current timeline of when things are happening we're hoping to go out to bid basically next month and start getting bids in and hopefully enter into the contract early next year and then all of the tenant moving around and the construction will begin which we've reviewed at a prior meeting but I wanted to make sure that you knew where we were at we're still on target for the same schedule that we've talked about in the past and then I wanted to get to discussing potentially an endorsement by this board for I spoke with Bond Council about the role of the board and ownership of the building and they thought it might be wise to have the board endorse the bond what was bonded by the town it actually was bonded by the town at town meeting so it's a bit in retrospect since we did not do it they thought it wouldn't be a bad idea to have it on the books it's not completely necessary because obviously the money has already been bonded by town meeting we are in the process of going through all of the legal documents to ensure the bonding is accurate and correct and the town is not in any risk what I provided to you is the report from the Capital Planning Committee to town meeting which just simply outlines the project itself and then the actual amount that was bonded is $8,055,000 which is under if you look on this page with a spreadsheet directly from the financial plan it is under planning senior center central school renovation $8,055,000 which is the amount that is being bonded for the project and then on the last page in the packet the board might do is the budget which goes back to what the $8,000,000 covers which was provided to the Capital Planning Committee of course is this process in order to budget the funding so what I was hoping the board might do is vote to endorse it's really just an endorsement of the bonded amount by the town in support of the central school renovation project that's all that I was looking for glad to answer any questions about the status of the project or any other details you have can we get copies of the PDFs of the working drawings the drawings are actually on it's Arlingtoncommunitycenter.org so it's online it's also on the ARB page in relationship to the properties that are managed by the town and then if you want to see the full sets of documents which are not the full entire sets are not uploaded there's a lot of pictures on the counter they're very giant the schema design those are on Arlingtoncommunitycenter.org and then the exhaustion manager's budget did they have that spelled out somewhere? that's also in this budget we didn't get it in our package do we? no I'm giving to you right now but I have given this to you this was last year when we talked about the budget for the project it was changed to this last December so the OPM if that's what you're looking for? is that the one? the construction manager? well the construction manager didn't they verify all the pricing for all the they verified all the pricing so do we have their worksheet and all that stuff? I just want to look through that quickly I'm confused the worksheet for well when they submitted the budget they would have had all the line items that's what this was actually this was Vertex reviewing the submitted budget Vertex but this two years ago it's from 2018 it's December of 2018 which is from this is from the design development drawings that's what we needed to do in order to submit to town meeting for the budget the next time that we get a cost estimate for the full construction documents so that's on the schedule actually the pricing set the cost estimator went out for us going out this week so when I have the revised pricing set I'm glad to provide this board with a copy of that if you're interested or if you're interested and we're interested in that yes yeah so that's the final the final set is being priced this evening would just be endorsing it's just an endorsement of the bond can you say again how much how much is the bond? 8,055,000 it's the 8.056 55 it's 8 it's in the financial plan which is in that packet what the town bond did is 8,055,000 if you go to this spreadsheet under the item that says planning major repairs 8,055,000 they essentially round it up by town meeting already I don't see a VE face here I would usually what the bids come in I see that excuse me you saw it under item 1121 review pricing set and cost yeah so that happens the last two weeks in November the VE face between 1121 and 12,04 mm-hmm while they're doing the 100% CDs okay I was looking the next year okay here the reason I said 8,056 if you look at page 12 in the Heriton the top paragraph are predicted at 8,056,000,000 yeah I don't know why that's their narrative it's the capital planning committee's narrative what they bonded was 8,055 so I don't have an answer for that sorry this is just drawn directly from the capital planning we're just being asked to endorse to endorse the bond to support the Erlington central school renovation project to endorse the bond it just simply means that as an owner of the property and really it's the town of Arlington as the owner but since the redevelopment board it's still an urban renewal property we wanted to make sure that there's a support by the board for the project I don't have any other vote by the board related to supporting the project other than my check-ins with you we have never had a vote of any kind related to I think that's fine I don't think there's a endorse was my word okay and we're not really endorsing the bond we're supporting or endorsing the bonding for that amount well this is why I say I think it's been done already it's not even done yet this is retroactive the bonding of the central school and the amount designated by town meeting so moved second all in favor aye thank you if you want more information about the project those are all the ways to find it there is also the permanent town building committee that's where all of the conversations are now occurring by vertex the OPM with the permanent town building committee so if you have other questions about it let me know okay so committee updates what I put into the agenda was a request that I would make some updates and then some of you might make some updates about committees that you are serving on so the reps on different committees include the zoning by the working group is David master plan is Andrew and CPC is still Jean and the CPC and then Rachel is on the Arlington Heights committee which is meeting tomorrow the kickoff meeting is tomorrow night at 5 30 p.m. ACMI which I will unfortunately miss because I am going to be in Atlanta for the next 4 days so would anybody like to go in her place tomorrow what time 5 30 yeah can I I'll send you the agenda I can't really it it's a short it's only an hour and she's going to send me it's just basically setting up and we've already communicated about you know yeah it's a tough one to make that's a traffic it's reverse traffic but it's still it's bad traffic yeah okay well you'll let Cheney know but there's no application I'll try my best to make it there I'll send you the information okay so they're just yes so they're just kicking off they have not started meeting yet the housing plan implementation committee their next meeting is on November 13th at 7 they've pretty much been meeting trying to be regular about meeting I'd say it's like every sometimes every month at this point they're talking about the real estate transfer fee as a possibility of something that they want to propose at town meeting I don't know if that will actually move forward it would be in the form of a home rule petition and it also requires some state legislation in order for it to actually work and then a no it's a tax no it's a tax it's a fee it's a fee it's a fee it's a portion of a real estate transfer that would go towards affordable housing and then as part of that we need to have a municipal affordable housing trust fund set up in order to accept those funds so the companion piece that the committee has been exploring is the setting up of the trust fund which is under mass general law chapter 44, 55C which is a few familiar with it already you probably know that it's basically an entity that could hold onto and keep funding for affordable housing year over year without it going back into in any way the revolving or general fund seems like we should have that whether or not the transfer tax goes through yeah agreed so those are the two things that that group has been talking about can we have them come and update us on that at some point yeah definitely after their next meeting yeah let's see where that's going I'd like to discuss that as a board because it'll ultimately come from us I'd like to know where that's headed I'm intrigued but I think there are probably some questions we have for them about what it entails, how it will be implemented and what the ask will eventually be I guess I was told that it once went to town meeting and didn't pass I don't know because there was some dispute about who would get to control the money and the trust fund so I guess that would be something to try to yeah I think there are a lot of questions about that that we have to be aware of do you know if any of town's does this lots of towns do it and actually Doug Hyme is attending our next meeting with the committee on November 13th to talk about this with me because I've actually set up a lot of them in municipalities throughout the region in my former life not now, don't worry so the next one on my list is actually the Zoning Bylaw Working Group would you like to give a quick update the major update was at the last meeting we had voted to move forward with getting a consultant on board to do some of the work called for under the Heights action plan and I believe that that has proceeded with the department you mean the industrial zones economic analysis of industrial zones yeah so we hired RKG actually after we had a number of very strong proposals to review and the entire committee I think voted unanimously to hire RKG they started doing their work which is basically an analysis of finding ways to kind of reinvigorate the industrial zones understand the industrial zones a little bit more which was already explained in the master plan but to kind of pick up where that left off and see what kind of remaining opportunities are still available but also to protect and preserve the economic opportunities that's there right now and sort of a little bit of reinvisioning of the industrial spaces funded through the town or that's funded by the town actually by an appropriation of town meeting so that was one of the that and then the design guidelines were funded by town meeting through appropriation has there been a discussion and I know this happened a while back of hiring a consultant to look at all the various zoning districts up and down throughout town but really up and down the commercial corridors we haven't done that yet now that's what we're going to do last year but we didn't have any consultant bid that's what led to just the sign sign guideline there was an RFP and then Steve's here, he remembers this Steve's on the same bylaw Steve Revillac Steve Revillac, 111 Sunny Side Avenue, yes the reason why there was a plan to the original RFP for the sign proposal involved doing the sign bylaws and an examination of the business districts and nobody, there were no takers so we scaled it back to signs and there was a taker if I may ask a question I saw a new RFP go out for the residential guidelines have there been any nibbles? There have been nibbles this time yes so that went out previously and nobody bid at all actually so it didn't go anywhere so we reposted it we've had some interest the deadline is actually I think Wednesday of this week so I'll report back on that one for the next meeting I will provide you with the schedule for the economic analysis of the industrial zone so that you know what's forthcoming they were doing some amendments they're also meeting with the zoning bylaw working group on December 4th at 8.30 that's actually kind of the kickoff meeting with the consultant so I'll have a better sense of the actual schedule and when you can anticipate they would actually come and talk with the board which is something that I know they're planning to do the master plan implementation committee you know better than I do I haven't been able to attend many of their meetings because of timing and scheduling conflicts I mean they meet quarterly their next meeting is on December 19th at 6 typically when they meet they're meeting ahead of a town meeting where they're meeting for a check-in on the implementation plan I don't really have a lot to report from that particular committee at this moment in time I don't think there's much maybe time to look at that committee's makeup but some another including me but that's another meeting then CPA Community Preservation Act committee we had our first meeting of the fall a couple of weeks ago we got I think 12 applications and we invited all of the applicants to put in a full proposal the first application is just a preliminary proposal so that we can see whether we believe that they qualify for CPA funding and so we can give them feedback and suggestions about what we would like to see in a final proposal so all are being invited back and all of them or almost all of them are being given suggestions about what to do about getting from the preliminary application to the final application the disappointing thing to me and the other members of the committee is we had zero applications for affordable housing so as you know under CPA there has to be at least 10% funding for each of the designated areas so we will need to set aside at least 10% for affordable housing to be used in a later year so that was disappointing other than that a number of applications for recreation open space and a number of applications for historic preservation was there any carryover from last year's budget that wasn't used in dividing the quarters? I don't remember how much there was some but the point I was going to make and thank you for that was because of the not very much carryover plus but some plus the amount we expect this year we think that there won't be a need to say no to anybody based on not having enough money we may say no for other reasons or may cut them back for other reasons but it looks like we will have adequate money to fund the proposals at the amount that they at least request an employment or application great good just to add on to this four of those 12 were submitted my department I tried not to hold back this time so the somebody gotten back to you with comments all wonderful feedback as always so the municipal we updated the historic a number of historic property cards as part of the towns historic property inventory we're planning to continue doing that but mostly just for municipally owned properties we learned a bit of a lesson about updating private properties the last time around the other element that we're planning to pursue is an archaeological survey of the town which was something that was recommended from the survey master plan if you haven't looked at that survey master plan I think it's actually a good follow up to the comments made by Mr. Atwood this evening and also by Mr. Baldwin who spoke about why they're interested in preserving more recent structures and more recent history so the survey master plan actually outlined some interesting sort of by area of the town and areas that could stand for additional preservation and protection is that online? It's online I'd be happy to donate the old bottle I dug up in my backyard a couple of years ago so many things can go wrong if that's the criteria the thing I thought that would most intrigue the board would was to implement bikeway visioning that we've proposed doing so we have a sustainable transportation plan that we've kicked off we have an advisory planning committee for that we also have funding through town meeting and various other sources to hire a consultant the consultant should be chosen in the next couple of weeks but we don't have any real deep dive into and also kind of a re-envisioning of the bikeway but we have a lot of commentary that we've heard about bikeway hours improvements to the bikeway all kinds of different things and not to mention bike parking is important and David Watson I didn't know about this it's not a formal nomination it's just a proposal at this moment in time but if we could have additional funding through CPA I think that it would help us to get a better sense of the bikeway needs and some rules and regulations potentially signage a lot of other things I don't know about that talk to Jean I should take back that we were inviting all of the applicants I think one of the applicants we were suggesting that they were not the right applicant and maybe the right applicant could be submitting the proposal but they weren't so there may be one less proposal final proposal then preliminary can I back up for a minute can you tell us about the design guidelines and what's happening there basically we put it out to bid the first time around we did not receive any responses at all so we put it back out to bid it's still out to bid there is a committee there are three people who are ready to go but not until we have a consultant on board and we have something to actually do but yes that's kind of the status good the last two items are Envision Arlington and the open space committee Envision Arlington technically the two of us are serving on the standing committee and also on the advisory committee which hasn't happened in a while I don't even remember hearing about a meeting in at least a year so I was thinking that maybe we could get Julie Brazil to come to a meeting to provide a broader update about Envision Arlington yeah I think some night when we don't have a whole lot of happy lifting it might be good to have her Julie Brazil come and a representative from the housing planning committee and maybe a more formal update on what the Zoning By-law Working Group has been working on I do appreciate the regular input from Steve and David but I think an overview of all of their in progress would be a good use of our time okay the last one is the open space committee and technically Wendy is serving on behalf of the board Wendy Richter so I have not received any sort of update from her but Emily Sullivan who is one of my staff also serves on the committee and all I know is that they are working on securing funds to do an update on the open space recreation plan which is due to expire and that was one of the applications for CPA okay that's the update oh I guess the other day on Envision Arlington the survey for 2020 is going to include housing questions so I just wanted to give you a heads up on that good that may be important for this board to weigh in on particularly the the zoning bylaw working group and the housing plan implementation committee probably the design bylaw group as well since all of those groups have sort of taken up work of other committees so things are duplicated but it would be good to have them all communicating to Envision Arlington what those questions should entail what kind of data we want to receive back I think would be helpful so there are a lot of overlap of good people that can work nicely okay number four announcement release of bike parking guide now this was voted on by town meeting so we can't make any changes well not the bike parking guide but the bike parking the bylaw the bylaw itself this is just a companion document and we would love to do more of these types of things when necessary to advise and guide applicants on what to do and what are some of the best things that we want to see so we thought this was a great model we really appreciated David's comments and feedback and other folks around this table who also provided feedback I just wanted to kind of showcase it and thank my staff Dan Amstutz who helped to pull this together I'm open to any comments however if you have some technical edits I'm glad to make them maybe we don't necessarily have to do it here if they're extensive but glad to take any other feedback let me just say our photo was terrific I thought a lot of the graphics in the photo were really helpful in explaining things I think it's going to be a wonderful wonderful resource I do have some suggested wording changes which I can email to you separately not many, just a few I like it I have a public comment when you're ready for it about the bike guidelines I'll allow it now Steve Revolac 111 Sunnyside Avenue for the purpose of this discussion I thought being using a bicycle was my primary mode of transportation for about six years I typically ride about 100 miles a week and I also park have to park at times overall I think the guide is wonderful you really did a great job and I commend you for the effort I liked the examples of what constitutes a good versus a not so good bicycle parking area or bicycle parking facility especially the pictures that were taken in town I've locked up at several of those and I generally agree with the assessments it's not so much a good versus not good but what would make them better and one of the things I've just kind of come to believe over time is that if a person who's never ridden a bicycle and is not in the habit of locking one up they need to be shown they need to know what to do in terms of the rack needs much clearance from a wall or should be oriented a given way and the fact that you the guide has a lot of examples of that with measurements leave this much space here, leave that much space I think it's great and hopefully as more bike parking is installed in town this will be some improvements so the last one other example the light in particular were although we don't have them in town were the corral parking systems where you basically take a parking space and you put a cage in there that holds bicycle bicycles they've struck me as being a practical way to kind of retrofit bicycle parking into an area that was really designed to accommodate automobiles and they're also a really good illustration of how space efficient bicycle parking can be you know what I was thinking about that this is not one of my wording changes it's not related to the guide but it would be interesting for the town to set some of those up for town meeting next year just outside the town maybe the one block on the other side of Jason Street and the one block on the other side of Mystic Pleasant Street they can do some of those so I think that would be a nice thing for the town to think about next year for town day for multiple different yeah I think that's a great idea worth mentioning to whatever the town day committee is going to be interesting can I just make one really nitpicky graphic comment it's interesting to me that on the front cover it almost looks like an example of the not to do because you actually want the bike to you to be where the frame is right? if I'm reading the correctly so I just I might just update that graphic and not be nitpicky I'm going to be nitpicky that's a good comment that's pretty epic sorry well the bike is also not locked to the rack I understand we don't have so many actual locks but it's in motion I wanted to express my appreciation to the staff I also think it's a great job and I think it's going to be very helpful to people who are doing development in town to employers to the schools to people doing events in town and I hope that it is widely distributed I would like to see it distributed in some way to the existing larger residential and commercial properties to give them ideas about how they might incorporate bike parking into their buildings if they don't already have it or to improve their existing bike parking I'm sure a lot of the older structures in town just don't have much or anything and I think this provides some good guidance and might give them some ideas that would perhaps attract some new tenants or new businesses I was going to do a news notice once we were done with this just to announce that it's available and ready for view but I think maybe a special letter to certain property owners in town would follow up definitely good meeting minutes 923, 107, 1021 do I undo the meeting schedule? let's do the meeting schedule let's do that first so I just a couple of notes it would be great if we could do the actual first and third Mondays every month but that's almost impossible given holidays also it's still at 730 but I am open to a change to that we used to meet at 7, we went to 730 I'm not sure that we need to do that but I just wanted to put it out there and then the other thing is I put in here the town meeting evenings which includes April 27th and the 4th it could potentially include the 18th just as a heads up and then if we went to a special town meeting all which is what we've been talking about doing in relationship to other warrant articles for zoning that would likely be December 7th but because December 7th of 2020 I was just going to ask one date I think October 16th was a Friday I think it might have been the 19th alright just to take a look at that October 16th is a Friday 19th then and only one meeting is September usually we have one in August and we have two in August September is rough there's a lot of holidays going on so if you wanted to meet on a day other than Monday for an additional meeting that month I think we can do that in July or August yeah I mean there's also two August meetings I don't know that you necessarily want to meet twice in August or the week of July 4th no okay it's a good start I like to keep the 730 730 it makes it easier to make I don't know what the rest of the board feels like it's fine I just wanted to check in we kind of annually do a little check in on this it makes it easier much easier to get here I wonder if on nights other nights where we have a lot going on we can make a motion in advance to pump it up to 7 but in general I think leaving it at 730 would be a good idea okay I'll correct the October 16th date to the 19th okay so we'll move to adopt this schedule so motioned second all in favor okay do we need to adopt the parking guy or not I thought that's done already no it's not we adopted the bylaw that the guy is staff okay we endorse it we can endorse it once the cover is once the cover is fixed and the wording the nitpicking wording no I think Andy is endorsing it it'll be fine if no one wishes to make a motion I'll move on to meeting minutes for real it's time we have September 23rd any comments? one comment it's on page 90 well this is 95 of 114 near the end Mr. Laugh pointed out the design elements were different on the plans and both buildings that's not quite what I said I said that I agree with Rachel as far as making them similar so they both buildings look alike but I liked the other buildings trim work better but either way it was fine we wanted them to speak to each other more pick one yes and you pick one and I pick one either one is fine either one is fine I like having two architects on the board so the other thing with the minutes here and it's repeated in the other minutes is they have the chair you moving a lot of them the chair move to approve the chair move to approve and I don't think you actually made all those motions what I've been doing is I will say so we have a motion too and then Ken will say so correct because you're he's not the second no no no what I'm saying is Andrew is not actually Andrew is suggesting a motion so all of these need to all of these need to be changed to the language service suffix for example it says the chair move missed allow motion to so these need to be changed because you could say the chair suggested right so there are at least three or four places there are many I think we could make that change across the board I'll move I'll move so I make a motion with those changes that we adopt sorry one more sorry so on the first page of page 95 the bottom of the second paragraph we're talking about the sign band where it says Miss Zimbari suggested leaving up a sign but that comment was actually relative not to them changing the signage in the future but relative to having a clear differentiator between the residential and the business entry so enough of a sign band so that the business could be signed at the bottom of the paragraph that starts with the color of the facade is that the bottom of the paragraph that starts with the chair then introduced the first agenda item I'm sorry I'm in the wrong one suggested leaving enough of a sign band so instead of in case there is a change to the signage in the future they intent what we spoke about was having a clear differentiator between the residential and the business entry so enough of a sign band so that they could actually sign the business entry because there wasn't an opportunity for that currently can I now move we adopt the minutes of September 23, 2019 with those amendments I'll second it all in favor moving on to October 7th these are pretty heavy what happened that night I think I will do the same thing with this one though it says move to so I'll change all those I didn't have the substantive changes but I'm sure I only had one and it was on the wording of on page 100 the top paragraph where it says missenberry talks about extracting some of the wealth what I said was to redirect the wealth in our community to our own commercial base rather than to our surrounding communities redirect that's better that's great thank you it's important to look for your name to make sure that that's right for the chair instead of my name I did notice that Jennifer Seuss' name is misspelled on page 100 that's why I highlighted that yes I see that now not doctor Seuss school committee member Seuss perhaps she is a doctor she is Jennifer right now she does have a THB she is doctor Seuss but not that one okay any other comments on the 7th the 7th October 7th look at the grown up I moved to adopt with modifications discussed second all in favor abstain I wasn't the term let's make sure you're not in attendance he's listed as absent October 21st any comments the same thing I'll do the same here I had no other comments moved to adopt October 21st second with changes all in favor I I'm looking at the last next to last paragraph how did that MIT I'm still waiting the sort of debrief from the students they said they would provide us with a summary of everything they collected we had about maybe 20 people there including Don attended and David was there I think it was a very good conversation a lot of people seemed very engaged very excited to talk about this section of East Arlington that doesn't normally get discussed transportation was definitely the biggest issue but also people were interested in the other topics that were around the room but transportation probably got the most attention that evening so it was very informative we had a lot of 10 meeting members in attendance the state rep was there garbally and I thought it went very well and I see there's plenty to come in the fourth there's any talk about the cemetery not that I'm aware of but there was a whole table of people there were people who were talking about open space well there was I was in the group that was focusing on the Leahy site and we had a little bit of discussion about the difficulty of activating that as a commercial corridor because one side of the street is a cemetery it was the question of why the cemetery has two bus stops a lot of people died what's the problem with cemeteries it's a valid question it's certainly something to observe alright okay open forum are there any members of the public that would like to speak this evening Mr. Seltzer Thank you Mr. Chairman Don Seltzer, Irving Street I just have a question regarding 887 Massachusetts Avenue when it came before the board for review it was presented as having commercial retail on the first floor that has not come to pass and I understand that there are alterations going on now for different usage which will probably have very different needs particularly in regard to parking and traffic so my question is what is the process at this point does it come back before the board for review to see if there are any changes needed because of an entirely different use for which you originally approved so you approved mixed use it is going to be a preschool on the first floor and we have followed the board's guidelines in relationship to a dover review process in concert with inspection services and also with input from town council and now they are proceeding with as noted their renovations taking place on the site I would be glad to share any other details about from what I understand about what is being put into the space and in general if there are any other questions about the property I don't can we so it's a non-profit preschool yes I think it's a good use for the area I just think that it's the kind of thing where it is quite different from what was presented for your review we discuss a lot about the parking and traffic situation in your initial review and I think it probably warrants at least hearing what they are doing and seeing what opinions you have as to whether any changes might be needed because of this different use I mean there is certainly a concern that the traffic parking is so much different in that there is going to be heavy flow at the same time that there is going to be a lot of traffic for high school in the morning unlike regular retail and also maybe concerns about the construction that is going to be going on for the next few years and Skyward Court its traffic pattern is going to be changing over the years and how this impacts the site and just the simple question of where are kids going to be and where is the parking for that and the safety issues I have a day care center at the bottom of my street and it is very heavy usage as far as parents dropping their kids off and they take a good amount of time whether in there and I don't know how that is going to interact with the high school traffic at the same time of day okay thank you anyone else wish to speak address any other comments from members of the board seeing none I would take a motion to adjourn motion to adjourn second all in favor bye