 Okay, Jack, you're good. Okay. So, Amherst media is on. And want to welcome everyone to the Amherst planning board meeting of November 4th. 2020 based on Governor Baker's executive order. Suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law. GL 30 a. I'm Jack Jumsick. I'm Jack Jumsick. Chapter 20 and signed Thursday chapter. Excuse me. Thursday, March 12th, 2020. This planning board meeting is being held virtually using the zoom platform. So my name is Jack Jumsick and as a chair of the plan, Amherst planning board. I'm calling this meeting to order. At what six thirty four. I'm calling this meeting to order. I'm calling this meeting to order. I'm calling this meeting to order. Minutes are being taken as normal. I will not take a roll call. Board members, when you hear your name. Called unmute yourself. Answer affirmatively and then. You know, place yourselves back on mute. So Maria child. Yeah. And myself, I'm here. Tom long. Here. Andrew McDougal. McDougal. Here. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. Thank you. Board members. If tech. Technical difficulties arise. We may need to pause temporarily to correct the problem. And then continue the meeting. If you do have technical issues, please let Pam know. Discussion may be suspended while the technical issues are addressed. And the minutes will note if this occurred. Please use the raise hand function. To ask a question or make a comment. I will see you raised hand and call on you to speak. After speaking, remember to remute yourself. Opportunity for public comment will be provided during the general public comment period. And other appropriate times during the meeting. Please be aware of the board will. Not respond to comments during. Excuse me. Please be aware of the board. Will not respond to comments during the general. Public comment period. That's a little, I'm sorry about that. But if you wish to make a comment during a public comment period, you must join the meeting via zoom. Teleconferencing link. This link is shown on the slide and it can be entered into. You know, a search by. The following link. You know, you have that shown. Great. The link is also listed on the meeting agenda posted on the town website via the calendar listing for the, for this meeting, or you can go to the planning board page and click on the most recent, recent agenda. We should list the zoom link at the top of the page. Please indicate if you wish to make a comment by clicking the raise, raise hand button when public comment is solicited. And. If you have joined the joint, the zoom meeting using a telephone, please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing star nine on your telephone. When called on, please identify yourself by stating your full name and address yourself and put yourself back into mute when finished. Speaking. Okay. Residents are welcome to express their views for up to three minutes and at the discretion of the planning board chair. If a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds there are a lot of time. Their participation will be disconnected for the meeting. So with that said, I'm going to go back to our agenda. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. What do we have for minutes? What do we have for minutes here? October 21. Okay. I'm pulling those up. Okay. That's in the packet. Janet McGowan made a request for an additional sentence. And maybe Pam can pick that up. Or put that up. Okay. I have, I have them up. Okay. Okay. Janet. I don't know if you have your hand raised or not, but. Oh yeah, I can. So I thought that. The minutes were great on then on page five, they left out. Andrew McDougal question about the site plan review requirement that the lights be turned off at the end of business hours. And so I thought that was kind of important because that's a big issue as we'll see later. And so I just, it, I sent a sentence to Christine. I can read it. I can read it. I can read it. I can read right now. Do you, is that easier? Yeah. So it's on this. Okay. I can't. I have some. So. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. I can barely read that, but. Can you zoom in on your end, Pam. I know we can do it on our end, but it's might be easier for you. I think I need like some kind of. I can read it. Yeah. I can read it now. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. So that Mr. McDougal asked at the site plan review permit language. At section 11. Two, four, one, seven. That all site lighting be extinguished after business hours, except for safety and security lights was a rule or guideline. So that was, I just wanted to put that in because. That's going to be, that seemed important. That may have been my comment, Janet. I'm sorry. I'm not speaking clearly. Okay. No, I didn't. Cause I said, Mr. McDougal. Wait, I'm sorry. Is it Tom? Yeah. Okay. I'm sorry. But maybe, but maybe, um, maybe Andrew raised it also. I think it's yours, Tom. I'm sorry. That was your son. Okay. Sorry. Okay. Does it, does it make sense to be adding that comment and not. Providing what the answer was. Um, I guess that makes sense because I think I remember Christine Brestrup saying she felt like it was a guideline. And then I said, I thought it sounded mandatory, but I wanted to look at it some more. I think that was the just, is that right? Is that what you remember, Doug? I didn't go back and listen. I just had that in my notes. I don't have a clear enough recollection of it. And then I just think it doesn't make sense in terms of putting it in the minutes. Half of it. Um, let's see. Yeah, there's not really a response. I thought Christine, I thought you said something back and then later on. Um, it says that I was, I wanted to ponder the section. I think I said, this is Chris Brestrup speaking. I think I said that it was, um, something that the planning board needed to look at when they were reviewing the site plan review application. And I, um, thought it was a guideline, but that's something that can, um, be discussed with the building commissioner who actually is, is here. He's present. Um, so if you want to discuss that now, or if you want to discuss that when, um, when the Emily Dickinson museum case is being considered, I guess you could do it either time. But I believe I said, I thought it was, it was a criterion that the planning board needed to look at, um, during their review. I felt it was a guideline, but there may be more. It may be more regulatory than that. And then I guess if we add that in, and then it explains why I'm pondering later in the minutes. At the, at the, um, The end, like there's something where it says. Um, Ms. McGowan added, she would like to look at other lights downtown and take some time to ponder section 11.2417. So I think, I think if you put Christine's response in that, it all, it kind of makes sense. It's like, you don't want to do a transcript, but it's an important issue. And I definitely we're going to be looking at that tonight. Okay. So. We're just trying to get these minutes. I'm a little bit confused, um, with where, you know, what, you know, what section we're looking at here. But, um, yeah, we're on page five where we're talking about the Emily Dickinson lighting. Um, and the kind of like what the board was talking about, like the conversation that we had. Jack, Mr. Marshall has his hand raised. Okay. Doug. I'd like to make a motion that we table this conversation and have Janet work with Chris and Pam on. Bringing back a complete. Okay. Proposal to the next meeting. Second. Okay. Um, Any comment help you out with that as well. Okay. Thanks, Tom. So, uh, any other comment. Who wants the board? Okay. So. You know, based on, um, Doug's motion here, let's begin to do a roll call. So Johanna. Hi. And Andrew. Hi. Tom. Hi. And Maria. Yes. Are we approving to postpone the approval of the minutes? Is that what we're doing? Well, we're approving postponing. Yes. Oh, okay. Yes. Okay. And then. Um, Janet. Yes. Yes. Okay. And, uh, okay. I apologize. Uh, have I forgotten? Did I get everybody? Doug. Mr. Marshall. Yes. And then myself. Yes. Okay. I think we got it. Thank you. Great. Okay. Um, You have two people in the attendees who are. Related to the next topic. So I don't know if Pam wants to. Oh, okay. Is there like a public comment thing? Are you going to do a public comment first? Excuse me. Public comment first. Yeah. Okay. I don't, I don't see any raised hands, but, uh, I don't see any raised hands. But, um, I don't see any. Do you? No. Okay. All right. So the public comment period. Okay. So we're, we're good with that. So I'm going to move. Selina. Um, Um, Weber. The panelists. And Martha Lyon. And Jane Wald. Okay. So we can ask. Um, Okay. I don't see any raised hands, but, um, I don't see any. Do you? No. Okay. Um, Jane. For the public comment period. You have like three minutes. So, um, Jack, do you want to read the, um, What is it? Preamble that read. To continue this public hearing. I think. Pam had sent it a couple of days ago. Okay. Pam, do you have it up there? No. No, I don't. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. The preamble for. Preamble for the Emily Dickinson museum. Oh, I thought we were taking public comment. No, the people who just came in are people who are going. Okay. Okay. Okay. Yeah. Oh, absolutely. I can, I can do that now. Okay. I was a little confused. Sorry. Um, I have it. Somewhere. So many files. Um, Okay. I have it here. So. Okay. Thank you. Uh, Any accordance with the provisions of MGL chapter 40 a. This public hearing. Continued from October 21st, 2020 has been duly advertised and noticed. Thereof. Has been posted in as being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity. Or interested. Citizens to be heard regarding SBR. 2021. I don't know. The request site plan review approval to install a permeable. Pedestrian pathway between the two historic homes. Including lighting the pathway and to install the lighting. To illuminate the facades of both homes. And this is on lot map porting be parcels for parcel 16 and 27 RG zoning district. So are there any board member disclosures. I see none. And the applicant may present at this time. I just came for these things you just mentioned and We had a discussion about it a couple weeks ago. And there were some things that were still, I guess, you wanted to consider some more and Can you hear me okay. Yes. Um, so we're here to answer any more questions that you might have about The pathway, the lighting and the tree removal. So, um, I mean, I personally did not go by there. I mean, I, I thought that they struggle commission. They're, they're there's a ticker of approval there. But anyway, um, I think we're going to have a discussion on that. Thank you. Johanna. Thanks, Jack. So what I remember coming out of the last meeting was that a bunch of us were just curious to see what it looked like at night. And today, right before dinner, my kids and I drove by and my reaction was just that it was so tasteful and so beautiful. And I just thought it was just so nice to see that. And it was just so nice to see and even my 11 year old son said, it's perfect. So, um, my, I don't know if this is jumping the gun, but I would like to go ahead kind of just in the spirit of time. And I feel like we spent a lot of time on this last week to go ahead and move to approve this. This proposal. Okay. I do see a, you know, by Doug and, and Andrew. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thanks to Johannes. I don't know if you have additional comments or you want to. Yeah, I had, I had a question for the applicant. Should I proceed or not? Yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. Um, I did go by and look at the, the lighting. I don't know if you have a question about the security light that's on a pole behind the. The second house whose name I'm blanking on the evergreens. I think it is. Um, would that security light stay on all the time as it does now, because it's kind of. Kind of harsh and kind of all out by itself. I wondered whether it might go on after. You know, it would go on when the architectural lighting goes off. That's my question. Right. So the plan is to put in new security lighting at the backside of the evergreens. So the current security lighting wouldn't be operational anymore. And the new security lighting would be. Yeah. I think it's going to be. Somehow, somehow less jarring. Right. And it's at the back corners of the evergreens, the two. Corners pointing down. At the, you know, towards the ground. Okay. Share my screen. Do you want to see where they are? No, that's fine. It sounds like I'm fine with. The fact that you're looking at that. Absolutely. Okay. Okay. Is there anyone who want to second. Johannes. Well, I'll go ahead and second it. Okay. Yeah. For the discussion. Chris. Yep. One of the things you were waiting for was to. Hear from the local historic district commission. And they did meet and issued a certificate of appropriateness, which you have in your packets. And they were recommending word. And they issued the certificate to approve what was being proposed. So I just wanted to point that out. Okay. So, you know, I think we've gone through like a site visit report. Because people have gone by. I don't know if there's any other comments from. From the board. There were questions about. Whether the board could approve this to be on after. Business hours. And also a question about whether the board could. Approve this. To not be completely downcast. And so I sent you some information today about. The, the level of restrictions that planning boards can place on. Non-profit educational institutions and. I quoted from. Chapter 40 a section three, which states what kinds of things can be restricted and it's things like height and mass and. Setbacks and, and that type of thing. And so that's what I wanted to point out. And I didn't mention anything about lighting. So I wanted to ask Rob Mora who was here, the building commissioner, if he would make some comments about the level of. Regulation that the planning board can put on. On lighting and in specific with regard to. Section 11. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question. I think that's a good question of the zoning by law. I thought he might be able to enlighten us about that. If you would recognize him. Rob. Hi. Thank you. Rob more building commissioner. So to respond to. Ms. Preston's questions. I think they're. There's definitely. A limit to the amount of regulation that can apply to these. Relative regulations that. Doesn't. Talk about. Is what cases have over the years told us. Is that these uses are subject. It can be subject to site plan review with reasonable regulation. So I think, I think that it does give you the opportunity to look at. But when you look at lighting that might be unreasonably regulated, I would think of something like an athletic field where reducing, limiting the height or eliminating lights would really render the use non-existent. And that's what the Dover Amendment is intended to prevent. So I think if we're dealing with a use where lighting is more architectural or parking related, serving its purpose, but done in a way that is appropriately found by the board, I think it can be regulated. 11.2417 is pretty interesting because some of those guidelines that they're pretty specific, and they almost read more like rules. So they can be a challenge for projects. I know in the zoning board of appeals world, we struggle with this oftentimes because the architectural lighting that is desirable and done tastefully and appropriately sometimes doesn't really work consistently with the language we have. There's a lot of language in that section. Some of it might be a guideline or some criteria to judge the proposal on and something like that might be more firm of a requirement. Thank you, Rob. Chris Breastrup has her hand raised. Okay. I just want to make one point, which is that in the second sentence of 11.2417, there's an exception and it says, except for architectural, and then it says, and interior lit signs, and I think there's a word missing there. I think it should say, except for architectural lighting and interior lit signs, all exterior site lighting shall be downcast, because the last sentence says all site lighting including architectural sign and parking lot lighting. So that indicates to me that there was a word missing from the second sentence. And after the word architectural there should be the word lighting. So I just wanted to offer that for your consideration because that to me would give a little more flexibility with regard to architectural lighting in this particular situation. Is he Janet sand. So, um, so I did, I did a drive around Amherst around seven o'clock on Sunday. And I was just looking, you know, as one of the things I noticed when I moved to Amherst it's extremely dark. And so I started in my part of the town I went to the months in library, and there was a door light on a lamp like at the entrance that you could see the entrance. The South congregational church was dark except for two lights by the door. Everything I went by was just lighting doorways, you know, the Johnson Chapel was an exception they had a spiral, their spiral was lit up. And there was like a light, you know they I guess these lights were going up and on their clock and flag. The bowl went in had lights at their doorways and the building and sign but between that and the street lights you can kind of see everything and also being white. So pretty much everything was not lit up after hours except for lights for entrance ways or think about safety or security. Amherst work works did have a light onto its building. You know it was kind of like off from the ground, pointing up it's like a floodland, but it's also has its hours or it's open 24 hours a day it turns out although I think right now it's not. And first congregational church had a spotlight from the ground up onto this front. And so everybody was dark. Fine arts building had a hideous blue lights on some facade and maybe it would be an art project. But I didn't do the whole look at UMass which obviously is open 24 seven and so that was sort of my, my field trip and so you know buildings aren't don't have architectural lighting as a rule except for Johnson Chapel and those exceptions. So that's one thing I've been looking at the language for at this section of 11.2417. And when I first read it when Tom called their attention to it I was thinking, it sounds like to me you have to turn your lights off when your business is your business hours are over. And for the Emily Dickinson Museum, you know I don't think that necessarily is when the last guest leaves or visitor leaves it could be when the staff leaves. And then today I was kind of reading it and I started to see it in a different way that maybe if there's an approved site management plan with business hours, we could follow that, which is what we have now that the lights go off at 10. And so I went into this, you know windshield wiper of legal analysis, which made me feel like I wanted to know, what did, what did the planning department, the planning board select board in town meeting, mean when they wrote this for any, you know, sometimes the planning board has commentary was that issue discussed with a trying to make sure, you know when you walk out the door at the end of the day you turn your architectural lights off and everything but safety and security like so to me that's like an open question. And then Christine. I didn't really get a chance to look at that last thing about chapter 40 a, but I think Mr Morris interpretation makes sense to me because it seems like it might be too strict to say you couldn't do lighting so. So I sort of leave that to the board, I feel like a, you know, and then the other thing is I looked at the Emily Dickinson Museum, when it was lit up it looks beautiful. I love the Emily Dickinson Museum I think I've been there like seven or eight times. But I don't know if we have the power to say, yeah, you can leave the lights until 10 and so I'm kind of left in that dilemma and then I was trying to think of a way to approve this project. So, you know, with some coming back later to see how late the lights can go on we can do that look into the legislative history and figure out what a town meeting and the planning board and the select board mean when they said this or the planning department I don't know when this rule gets written. So that's my that's my physical journey. I think the lighting looks fantastic. I don't know if we can let you keep the lights on after the last person leaves other than safety lighting. Thank you, Jenna. And Doug. Yeah, I wanted to say that the first congregational church, more or less across the street from the evergreens has facade lighting that is on at least late if not all night. The police station also has exterior lighting or or else it's well illuminated by street lights I can't remember. So there are a couple of instances right in this neighborhood where there are already architectural lighting going on. So I also was wondering whether my colleague on the board who just spoke is an original list in and whether we need to find out what the intent is of every single article in the in our bylaws. That's a good, good question. I mean, I, I mean, who who on the board has actually viewed the lighting, you know, and in the evening. Okay, so I because I have not. Okay, so Maria, you're on a dug and Tom, and obviously Janet, okay. Do go has his hand raised as well. Okay, let me put that back on there. Alright, Andrew, please. Oh yeah I so I did see the lighting I thought it looked beautiful as well. I do. I mean I do think Jenna's questions are valid like do we. Do we have sort of Chris and Rob feel comfortable that that this is compliant I think that's one thing I just would love to have that maybe be stated a little bit more definitively. For the minutes, but yeah I mean I had some similar concerns around, maybe similar but as I was contemplating this, you know do we do we are we setting any other precedents that might impact other buildings that we just have not considered at this point. So that's a case or not. But yeah, I would, I would love to have an answer to Janet's question as well to really feel comfortable because I would love to be able to approve this. Chris Rob not sure if you might feel comfortable. Back. Thank you Andrew. I guess we could, you know, pull in with that. Chris. Well I did want to go back to my point about potentially a missing word in 11.2417. It says protection of adjacent properties by minimizing the intrusion of lighting, including parking lot and building exterior lighting through the use of cut off luminaries light shields, lowered height of light poles screening or similar solutions. And then it says, except for architectural. What does that mean, and interior lit signs. Are they talking about architectural signs. That doesn't make sense to me. It makes more sense if you say except for architectural lighting and interior lit signs, all exterior lighting shall be downcast and she'll be directed or shielded to eliminate light trespass on it and then it goes on. So I, I just think there is a word missing there. And that architectural lighting may be an exception from this. In other words, if you have a pole light, it's got to shine down but if you have a light on the building. And if you have a pole light, does that have to shine down too. So anyway, I'm just offering that for your consideration and I wonder if what the building commissioner thinks about that interpretation, whether he thinks there might be a word missing or or not. And if that makes any difference because I know that, you know, many people believe you have to read the black letter of the law. And even if there is a word missing you have to go along with whatever the words say, so. I pull Robin to see if he has comment on that. Sure. Yes, I do agree with Christine on that. They're definitely, in my opinion, is a word missing there. And we have to oftentimes try to interpret what's there and apply it in a way that that makes the most sense so I would agree with that but it does sound like to me. The question here is about the time when the lights are extinguished, not so much whether or not the lights can be there and be used. And I think that's really up to the board to make that call I think it's not wrong to have the lights on for, you know, extended periods of time. On the other side, it's certainly to regulate their timing. So it really does, you know, depend on the board's view of the business hours that are established, you know, extinguishing outside of those business hours established under the plan and how much flexibility. The board wants to have with the timing of those. Thanks Rob. Janet. As as to Christine's point, it might just be a typo so if you went back to when this was on the town meeting warrant, it might be that word architectural lighting that phrase might be there so this could just be a typo of transcription. I guess my question is, is, do we have the discretion to extend business hours beyond, you know, when people are really using the building. And so when I was doing my drive around Amherst, I had like never had thought about this issue before. And since almost every old beautiful iconic building I saw was dark except for lighting of, you know, doorways, which you would do for safety. I wonder, is this a rule, you know, like, you know, when you're when people aren't there you turn it off some some, you know, buildings had interior lights on, although nobody seemed to be in there. And so I don't know if we had the disc what this last sentence means and so as you know I don't know if I'm an originalist but with a question like this I would go back and say what's the legislative history what what was meant at the time. What was the legislative body or the planning department and it's like where was this issue discussed and if people are like oh ask the question and the answer was given where it's in something you just say okay this rule is very narrow. You can't have lights on after business hours, or it could be like no if the business the site management plan has a limit that could be the limit so it does seem technical but I think that on one hand you look like if it is a rule looks like most of the town is lying and maybe not first congregational church, although they may see that as a safety light, but I just, I don't have the answer to that like I just kind of went back and forth between interpretations. And I thought, you know, Lord knows that when we decide things in this town about zoning there's a lot of, you know, information and writings on it and be good to look at. I think we can go back and look at what was on the warrant because you know that missing word architectural lighting and interior, but the signs might be in there and it's just a typo, and how this was described. Um, I, you know, I kind of, I want to approve this project to I just want to know to do it the right way, following the bylaw. And then the other thing about what Andrew said is. I mean, maybe changing the rule and we might be just starting to light up all our buildings and Amherst, which may be lovely or not, you know, I just, I just want to know what people meant at the time when they approve this. It's very detailed. Thanks, Janet. So somebody must have. Sorry. It's a very detailed, very specific rule. So it seems like there's a lot of thought put into it. It's just this last little sentence that is confusing to me and I just don't come out on one side or the other. And so then it goes to go to the intent. It's not originalist it's kind of the normal way you would interpret any kind of ruler law is to look at the legislative attend if you need it. Thank you. Maria. I think that this project is not going to set a precedent for other projects. Whether or not we follow the letter of the law, I think the intent is that this is like, like that bylaw that Chris Brescher upset a few weeks ago like Somerville, they make exceptions or a different sort of consideration for like monuments, landmarks, and I think that's what this is. It's basically, it's not like a business hours issue. It's literally they're lighting up a landmark for the town. So I'm not as concerned about, you know, meeting the letter of law regarding business hours. I think this is a special case. And I think we're treating it that way because we're allowing like the actual fixtures are not down dark sky compliant but that the design is and so I'm not worried about this project being pointed to by other projects saying well you did this for the museum so I feel like you know if Mr. Mora and this brush up or you know I've been saying it's open interpretation. Well my interpretation is I'm fine. I'm fine with them, leaving it on for the appropriate amount of time like a beyond what other buildings in the area do and I think that I when I drove by. It was a lot less clearing than the photos because when you take a photo it kind of catches the hotspot so it was very nicely designed and I. I know there's a motion on the table and that it's been seconded so I'm eager to move on that. If we can but that's my perspective. Thank you. Maria and Doug. Yeah, two things first of all I just received a call from somebody who's trying to get into this meeting as an attendee and they are saying that the zoom link is not letting them in. So I thought I'd let Pam know that that's at least what apparently five or six people are not being able to get into the meeting. Although I see that there's a bunch of attendees so it's working for some people. Then, at least the way I see the the bylaw. You know it looks to me like we could establish the business hours during which the lighting can be illuminated through approving the site management plan. So I can't remember whether we've received a site management plan to review, but you know it seems to me whatever hours are approved in that plan is consistent with the letter of the law. We did get a management plan I believe Chris and I believe I have it. It would be in the packet from the 21st of October. Yeah, I just wanted to follow up and say that I agree with. I agree with Maria, as well as Doug and I was the one who raised this and it was more of a question and I think that it's good for us to dig into these kinds of questions to try to better understand what it is that we are and are not legislating and what it is that the intent was behind this. I think that regardless of what the official intent was I do agree with Maria that this is not a case that other that a Home Depot could use as a precedent, or even a bakery for that matter. I think that this is a landmark and this has a unique position in our community and therefore it is that our interpretation is open in that way. And I do agree with with Doug that the management plan also allows us to better understand that to approve that and allow us to move forward with approving this project in haste. Great. So there's not any other questions from the board we can open this. Oh, Janet. So just an idea is, would people eject to finding out more information about why this with why this language is this way would just take us two more weeks and so that would that's not. So I do I don't want to like, you know, if we make decisions that are not what the language says we're sort of becoming legislators. You know, I appreciate that the Emily Dickinson is iconic. But it's there's no exception for iconic buildings in this town and there's lots of historic buildings in fact I was thrilled at how many beautiful buildings we had and so I think we could be opening the door to a lot of requests to light up and it could be fantastic but if the town meeting didn't want that to happen, and we have all this language about dark sky and keeping things low. You know, let's follow the intent in the language but I do see the interpretation the other direction that's why I would like to go back and find out was this is Scott so if people. You know, could we take two weeks to look at that and find out what they're saying and then see if this, this is a typo leaving out the word lighting in front of architect I mean just, I don't know. But I ask people to consider that. Um, Rob. Just offer a little something here because it does sound to me like it's the hesitation is only about the language in the bylaw not about the project of the design itself. And, you know what Christine brush up earlier with the 40 a section three language, it is really appropriate for the board to determine that this section pieces of it are reasonable to regulate and others may not be. So you've you've received sheets on shielded proper lumens, angle of positioning and determine that, you know, regulating it to that degree is reasonable, but extinguishing at a certain time when the staff leaves, or even applying a standard that raises a question on, you know where it comes from is unreasonable to apply in this case, and you can simply move on from that point and just establish that under a nonprofit educational institution application. Jane. Yes, thank you. There's only one comment I'd like to make and that's about the issue of precedence. Emily Dickinson homestead is literally a national historic landmark and there are. Maybe I. It's almost unique in Amherst for having that status. In case that helps with the question of precedence. Thank you. May I make a comment. I wanted to make us. I wanted to comment on the. The ability of staff to research what the intent was and I the reason I'm saying that is because section 11.24 is largely based on the special permit criteria, which are section 10.38 and the wording. One of the criteria and 10.38, which is actually 10.393 is essentially the same as 11.2417 so my understanding of this is when site plan review was adopted and I think it was adopted in 1988 or 87 something like that. And so I think that the. Town looked back to the criteria that the ZBA used to accept or deny. Special permits and they pretty much adopted the same language so we would have to go back to the time when the special permit was adopted by the town and I don't even know how far that would be that we'd have to go back so I. I don't know if there would be planning board reports from that time Rob may know more about when special permits were first adopted by the state. And it could go back into, I'm sure it goes back to at least the 40s because we have special permits here from the 40s and into those records is going to be challenging so that's all I wanted to say. Thank you. Doug. Chris cited 10.393 it does read exactly the same. If there were a missing word it's in both sections, which starts to make me think there's not a missing word and that architectural is modifying the word signs, not lighting. Thank you. So thank you. I mean, amongst the, the architects, you know, on the board. I appreciate that I'm a little confused with the garden, the extent that we're deliberating this but I'm trying to like, you know, get this to a vote. And Janet. So now that we're in another area. Is there for the architects is there a difference between an architectural sign and an interior lit sign is that the interior list, lit sign like a neon sign versus just like a, what's an architectural sign is that something like a wood sign or and I believe this reference is an architectural lit or interior lit sign and so it in architectural should have a hyphen after it. Meaning that the lighting is shining up on like an architectural lighting onto the sign, or that it is internally illuminated with light bulbs inside of a translucent material from the inside out. So I don't know why we're dealing with this now but if it had a hyphen, that would make more sense so we can rewrite that sometime in the future. So, um, I'm confused, not being architect and this whole lighting thing so I would hope one of the board members would make a motion to you know, amend or approve the project as proposed. And Maria. Johanna and Doug already most made the motions and seconded. Are we ready to vote. Okay. Discussions over and we can vote. Okay. I kind of lost track if that is the case. Yes, that is right. Okay, so, so, all right, so we are ready to vote but but Janet had one more comment. Do we, do we have public comment on this or do we have a moment for that. I'm just wondering. Is that, isn't that when do we normally do that or do we have to do that or we can skip it. No, we do have public comments from. I don't know if that's a good question period so. So, Jack, before you do that, can I just say, sort of in response to Doug receiving a telephone call that people could not get on I've been in contact with the IT folks. They've checked the links. They're all the same. They are having no problem getting on so the IT people are suggesting that people try again. If they, if they could not get on. So just to say that, if, if you're going to do public comment. Okay. I don't see any hands raised at this time, Jack. Okay, okay, so one has popped up as soon as I said that. Alrighty, who's that. Hi, Elizabeth. Veerling and allow her to speak. Okay. Hi, Elizabeth. Yes, can you hear me? Yes. Yes, I just wanted to comment that the problem with getting on to the, into the meeting was not that the link was not working. The problem was that the link was not available. It was just on the town website. And we had received an email from Chris who's been wonderful and keeping us apprised in the neighborhood. But that link was not functional. So that was the problem is that if you go on the town website, you could not find a link for this meeting. Thank you. Interesting. Doug has his hand raised. I don't do you want to respond to that, that Chris, I mean, or Pam, I mean, I'm, it's in the meeting posting that I know and also the link, the zoom link to the meeting is also on the agenda. So that's also posted in a few different ways. So, yeah. What I T suggested was was that maybe that they were trying before we went live. But I don't think that that's the case because the link would still be there. Because when I go back after a posting has been submitted and I see that it's posted and I go to check to make sure everything is is there and correct. It's there and visible. So I'm not as I'm not exactly sure, but I'm really happy that this be early and pointed it out. And so we can, we're still looking into it here. Okay, thank you. Thank you, Doug. And we have another hand in the public comment. Yeah. Am I correct that the thing we've been talking about for the last half hour is whether we are legislatively allowed to approve a design where some of the lights are not downcast. Is that what we're talking about that, you know, all exterior lighting shall be downcast and shall be directed or shielded to eliminate light trespass on to any street or a budding property. Well, I think all the lighting that we're talking about is directed away from a budding properties and away from streets. It is not all downcast. So, I guess, you know, it seems like most of us think this is a decent proposal and I don't know whether we're better off just approving it and having somebody object later but maybe Janet maybe you could you could confirm that's what the problem is. Thank you. Thanks. Thanks, Doug. Also, Jack, I want to let you know there, there is another hand in the public comment. Yes. Mora. Okay. Mora, do you want to say. Yep. You are. Were you live sort of thing. I'm more keen and I live on Dennis dry the numbers, but I once responding to Elizabeth's comment that the way to get on is to go to the planning board page of the town website and then the agenda is posted there and the link is on the agenda. If you go to the main town website page, it's hard to get on. Thank you. So, at this point, I see no more hands from the public. And the applicant, you know, I don't know if you have any other responses. No. Okay. So final comments and questions from the board for conditions findings. Can we discuss. If you did receive conditions. In your packet. I don't know if you want to look at those or look at the findings. Yeah, I'm bringing those up myself. We also have them on the screen. I can share my screen. So that those are in our packet, right. You're here to Jack on the screen. Can you. Do you want me to read them Jack or do you want to read them. Good. That'd be great. All right. So these are draft findings for the Emily Dickinson museum site plan review. 2021. Oh, five. So the board found. These are findings that the board needs to make 11.2 400. The project is in conformance with all appropriate provisions of the zoning by law and goals of the master plan. So I'm going to go through them. I'm going to go through them. Just to let the new members know what usually happens is we go through these and read them. And then if someone has an objection or comment about one of the findings, they raised their hand and asked to be recognized. And I'm going to be reading this. So I won't know if anybody's raising their hand. 11.2 401 town amenities and abutting properties will be protected through minimizing detrimental or offensive actions. So I'm going to go through them. And then we'll go to the next slide. So the next slide. I'm going to go through a question of a tie into the town drainage system. The catch basin on main street, which the town engineer has reviewed. And about which he has not expressed concerns. 11.2 402. Yes. I want to let you know that Jenna McGowan has her hand raised. I'm not sure when it popped up. Okay. Jack want to recognize Janet. Yes. I'm not sure. I think the best criteria. The project is in conformance with all appropriate provisions of the zoning bylaw. And I think I, I feel like I can't say yes. Because of the issue. That Tom had raised about whether lighting can go on past business hours. And now the issue that Doug has raised, whether downcast lighting, I mean. All lighting should be downcast except for those limited areas. And so I think. I can't really say, yeah, we're meeting the sections of the bylaw. We have two discussions going. Not clear on what this bylaw requires. So I can't say yes to no. And then we're going to start talking about the lighting. Saying lights will be downcast and shielded or directed. You know, and so I think. I kind of just need to know more about what this provision needs. And so. I don't think we can say yes to that. We're meeting all the provisions of the bylaw because the issue is raised. Thanks, Janet. Do you want me to keep reading? Yes. Okay. 11.2402. I think I just read. Oh wait. No, abutting properties will be protected from detrimental side characteristics. Resulting from the proposed use. Lights will be downcast and or shielded. And or directed. So it's not to spill onto adjacent properties or streets. So that's really the issue having to do with it. The lighting's effect on. Adjacent properties and streets. Not on. Exact reading of. 11.2401 seven. Okay. Section 11.2403. Adequate recreational facilities and open space are available. Because the property is large and open and will include substantial lawn areas. 2410. Unique or important natural historic or scenic features will be protected. The local historic district commission will be. Has has reviewed that has to say has. Has reviewed the proposal and. Has issued a certificate. Of appropriateness. I wrote these. Suggested findings back before the. Local historic district had made its determination. 11.2411. The project provides adequate methods of refutes. Disposal as described in the management plan. 11.2412. The project is connected to town sewer and water. No changes are proposed to the sewer and water connections. No changes are proposed to the town sewer and water connections. The drainage system within an adjacent to the site will be adequate to handle the stormwater. Mr. Tempsick and this brass drop. Mr. Marshal as his hand raised. Okay. Yeah. I thought that I thought there was a new connection to the town. Sewer. Well, there is a connection to the town drain. Drain. System, but not to the sanitary system. And this. I don't think there's a connection to the drainage system. There is another item here that relates to the drainage system. Okay. Thank you. So 11.2413, the proposed drainage system within an adjacent to the site will be adequate to handle the stormwater. Underdrains are being added under the proposed pathway. And in the lawn area to the south of the proposed pathway. The town engineer has reviewed the proposal and has not expressed anything else. So I'm going to send him an email from him, which I think I forwarded to plan with members saying that he was fine with the proposal to connect to the drain system in the street. 11.2414 provision of adequate landscaping has been addressed. The project includes significant existing vegetation that will be maintained. And some existing vegetation that will be removed to return the site to the conditions closely resembling those at the time that were built. 11.2415. The soil erosion method control methods are considered adequate to control soil erosion. Both during and after construction. 11.2416 adjacent properties will be protected by minimizing the intrusion of various nuisances. And here's the bug above 11.2417. Adjacent properties will be protected from the intrusion of lighting because a condition of the permit. The lighting will be downcast and or shielded and or directed. So as not to shine onto adjacent properties or streets. New lighting will be directed towards pathways and structures on the site. Except for the lights that will shine upward to illuminate the facade. All exterior lighting will be downcast and directed or shielded to eliminate light trespass. Onto any street or abutting property. And we'll eliminate direct or reflected glare perceptible to persons on any street or abutting property. And we'll eliminate direct glare perceptible to persons on any street or abutting property. Other than security lighting. Sight lighting will be operated by timers. And we'll only be on from dusk until 10 p.m. Mr. Temsek and. I see Doug sand. Yes. Yeah. Once again. I'm not sure that's quite. Exactly true because there's those. Lights at the two pedestrian entrances through the fence. I don't know what to say to that. I don't know if that's going to be clear or not, I want to go back to the front. Probably not honestly up, but on the. On the. On the law on the fence post. So except for lights that will shine upward to illuminate the façade. Or fence posts. I would add those words. Good comment. I'm ready to talk. Tom has a comment as well. the building and the fence post and other things. So maybe not so specific as fence posts. Chris, can you- I shall agree with that interpretation. No objection. Okay. All right, 11.2418 is not applicable because the property is not located in the flood prone conservancy district. 11.2419 is not applicable because there are no wetlands on or within 100 feet of the property. 11.20 the planning board did not choose to refer to the design principles and standards set forth in sections 3.3040 and 3.2041 of the zoning bylaw because the local historic district commission will undertake a review of the proposal or did undertake a review of the proposal and considered issues of design and issued a certificate of appropriateness. Okay. 11.2421 is not applicable because there are no changes proposed to the setbacks, placement of parking, landscaping, and entrances and exits. Chris, if it's not actable, I think we're good with that. You know, you don't need to read- No need to say- Okay. 11.2422 not applicable. 11.2433 not applicable. 11.2424, screening has been provided as appropriate for storage areas, loading docks, dumpsters, rooftop equipment, utility buildings, and similar features. No changes are being proposed regarding screening. 11.2430, the site has been designed to provide for the convenience and safety of the vehicular and pedestrian movement within the site in relation to adjoining ways and properties. No changes are being proposed. 11.2431 is not applicable. 11.2432, the location and design of parking spaces, bicycle racks, drive aisles, loading areas, and sidewalks have been provided in a safe and convenient manner. Parking on the site is limited and no changes are being proposed to the parking area. 11.2433 is not applicable. 11.2434 is not applicable. 11.2435 is not applicable. 11.2436, the requirement for submittal of a traffic impact statement. I'm assuming this is true, but when you get to the waivers, you'll be able to tell me we'll be waived. There's very little traffic expected to enter and leave the site given the limited amount of parking on the site. And 11.2437 is not applicable if you waive the traffic impact statement. The waivers are listed in the development application report. So you might want to look at that if PAM can bring it up. That was in, I don't know if you have it in this packet, Pam. I do, just tell me again where it was, development application report right here. But it should be like on the second page or something like that. So go back to the pages. So the waivers are listed here on the second page. They've asked for a waiver of the sign plan and the traffic impact statement. So do you want me to read the proposed conditions, Jack? I'm just trying to find them myself on the packet here, wait one minute. Pam has them up on the screen. Okay. Oh, okay. I blew right by them. So please, thank you, Rush. All right. So these are draft conditions. Development shall be built substantially in accordance with the plan submitted to the planning board and approved on whatever date you approve this. Development shall be managed substantially in accordance with the management plan submitted to the planning board and approved on whatever date you approve it. All exterior lighting shall be dark sky compliant to the extent feasible. Exterior lighting shall be downcast, shielded and directed and shall not shine onto adjacent properties or streets. Shielded directional flood lighting that is aimed so that direct glare is not visible from adjacent properties will be permitted for the purpose of lighting building facades, with the services of other vertical structures such as fence post elevations and entryways. I think I took some of that wording from the summer regulations. Changes to the project and or substantial changes to any approved site plans or to the exterior of the building shall be submitted to the planning board for its review and approval prior to the work taking place. The purpose of the submittal shall be for the planning board to approve the change and or to determine whether the changes are demand or significant enough to require modification of the site plan approval. And then one hard copy and then digital copy of final revised plans shall be submitted to the planning board. Thank you so much, Chris. So with that, I'm sorry, I'm looking for so is there a motion to close this public hearing and and prove with any amendments? You have a motion on the floor, Jack, from Johanna and it was seconded by Mr. Marshall. Okay, okay, Johanna's motion didn't include closing the public hearing or approval of the conditions, the waivers and the findings. So you last time around, you decided as a board that you would take these things separately, that you would close the public hearing with one vote and then you would move on to approval with approval of conditions, waivers and findings as a second vote. Johanna has her hand raised as well. Okay, Johanna, thank you. I'm sorry if I jumped the gun in terms of process. I don't quite, I don't quite know whether the right thing right now would be for me to withdraw my motion and whether that needs approval, but it seems like that makes the most sense and then take them sequentially. So I withdraw my motion. Yeah, I don't think that needs a vote. Okay. Okay, so again, you know, there's been a lot of discussion on this and I'm just looking, you know, I'm trying to reset here. We've been to this for like 45 minutes or more. So would there be a motion for, you know, the applicant that meets the relevant criteria of section 11.24 of the zoning bylaw and. Excuse me, Jack, I think what you want right now is a motion to close the public hearing. Okay, need that motion. All right, Janet. I move to close the public hearing. Okay, thank you. And Andrew. I second that motion. Thank you. Okay. Do we need more discussion at this point? Mr. Mark, I think what you need is a motion to approve the project and then to include the conditions and findings and waivers in the approval. Okay, so as presented. Well, Chris, we didn't do a roll call vote motion that's on the floor to close the public hearing. So we should do that first, right? Okay. So, Jack, you want to do a roll call vote on. Absolutely. Okay. Janet. Yes. All right. And Johanna. Bye. And Andrew. Think about, no. Yes. Wise guy. Doug. Hi. And Tom. Hi. And we got Maria. Yes. Did we get everybody? Johanna. Jack. Yes, it's only you, Jack. I'm good. I'm good. Yes. Yes. Yes. I'm flipping between the participant's little frame and then our frame of our, you know, Brady Bunch. Okay. Okay. So, all right. So we're good with that. Now you need a motion to approve. And to approve the conditions and findings and waivers. Okay. So. I would like to make that motion, please. Great. A second. Doug. Second. All right. Great. Thank you. Thank you. And. No, for the discussion, right? I don't see any hands. Okay. So, so the motion is that the, the applicant meets the relevant criteria of section 11.24. The zoning bylaw. With the. Conditions and waivers. As discussed. Okay. So roll call. All right. I'm going by the pictures this time. So I'm clear. Andrew. Doug. Hi. Tom. Hi. Janet. Abstain. And Maria. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And I approve. So that's a six. Zero one. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Martha. And Jane. Selena. And. Oh, where I like. There you go. Selena. Sorry. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you all very much. Thank you. Thank you. So we have an 80 o'clock. No joint. Hearing with the CRC. And can we, maybe we can take care of the apple brook. Yes. Quickly. Okay. So we go to old business. And. Chris, if you, if you want to present this meme, it seems like we've got the appropriate. Recommendations from the town engineer. And from the, from the site development representative there that. This could be a go. So this project has been on the planning boards plate for a long time since 2007. It's. An under construction now for a while. So we have a lot of work to do. The roadway has recently been completed to the. Extent that the town engineer feels that. It has been completed with the exception of. Some minor work related to looming and seating for the amount of about $4,000. So the town engineer doesn't have any. Reason to recommend that you don't release lots seven. And not to take any other lots under the covenant. And therefore all of the lots in the subdivision will be released. And seven can be sold to be developed. So that's the request. And we do have a certificate of performance that Pam. As available for you to look at, you're going to be asked to sign this if you agree to release lots seven. So we have a lot of work to do. Pam, can you put that certificate of. I'm working on it. I think I sent it to you late this afternoon. Here it is. Can you see it? Yeah. Thank you. And Mr. McDougal has his hand raised. Oh. Whoops. Sorry. So Andrew, yes. Thank you. Lot one was highlighted. Is that, was that just like a. The way the map had to get pulled up or. The locust map. When we get that from the GIS, it's hard to. Select numerous items without one of them kind of standing out. So when it stands out, I think on that map is the. One that was the original house that was on the property. Yeah. Yeah. I just wanted to clarify. Thank you, Jack. Thank you, Chris. Thank you. The actual lot that is asked to be released is shown on the. A and R plan, which Pam can bring up. This plan here. Seven is this pork chop shaped lot. So that's the one that they want to be released. Okay. Okay. I'm just going to make sure that it's still saying that was. The road was substantially completed. Correct. Yes. Okay. Miss. Oh, Mr. Marshall. Yeah, I just wanted to make sure there was. Documented evidence that it was finished. Except for that $4,000 worth of loman seeded is finished. Okay. I just wanted to make sure we didn't need to make a site visit to see it ourselves before we certify. I don't think so. I think we can take the word of the town engineer. Yeah. Great. So. I see Andrew. Yeah, I'm just right. So can do we just need a motion then? I mean, to close this all business out a motion to release a lot. I believe so. Yeah. To close any public hearing because we don't have a public hearing open. It's just part of the public meeting. So you just need a motion to release lots seven. Okay. I'll make that motion. I'll second. Great. Thank you. Thank you. Any discussion? Is that Janet or Johanna? That was Janet. Okay. Yeah. Any discussion? We can go slow and we can go fast. And yeah. Yeah. Okay. So. Andrea, I'm going to start with you. Roll call. Approve. All right. Thank you, Doug. Thank you. All right, Tom. And Maria. Johanna. Did I get Janet? No. I'm sorry. Oh, there you are. Very top. Oh my gosh. All right. Thank you. All right. And Jack. And Jack. Oh, and me. Yes. Approve. So. I'm going to sign this. I'll try to combine it with something else that you can sign. So you don't have to make. Is it just for that? In fact, I might offer it to drive to your homes. And hopefully it won't be on a rainy day. Thank you, Chris. You, you, you go. Beyond. You know, Duty with regard to coming to our houses and that. So I really appreciate that. I know. I appreciate that. I appreciate that. Other board members. I think the same. So we're right. You know, right at eight o'clock. I know we were, we're going to talk about the. The, the 40 R for, for downtown. Yeah, that's very conceptual. I can give a report for two minutes until we get to eight o'clock. If you'd like me to do that under new business. Sure. Implementation. Okay. Yeah. So Doug Marshall and I have been working on. Filling in the master plan implementation matrix. So far we've spent. Let's see. One and a half, the three, about five hours. On working on it over the course of three days. And we've gotten pretty far, but we haven't quite gotten far enough to present the matrix to the planning board yet. So I just wanted to make that report. And hopefully we will be able to present the matrix to you. Soon. Great. Thank you. And thank, thank you Doug for. Taking that on. And so at this point. You want to have nine by my computer, but we could start asking the CRC people to come in. Yes. Because they should be here in the 10 days. I just kind of wanted to ask that. I got you. Miss Hanneke. I see. I see Mr. Ross. Okay. Shalini. I do not see. Or Mr. Shriver. Unless they're here by a different name. to list the names of the people that she expects to attend. Well, we have Evan here, Mandy, and Sarah has been promoted over to a panelist. So I don't see Shalene or Steve Schreiber. I believe they are attending. Let me make sure I don't have any emails from them. So I'm not getting any messages that they're having problems coming in. We have a quorum to be able to start CRC. Shalene has just arrived. Oh, yeah, there's Shalene. Okay, let's get her in first. And then I will... Oh, there she is. Hi, Shalene. I will call us to order. Since she's in, we'll keep watch on the attendees to make sure Steve, so that we can get him in when he does join. But since we have a quorum, I will go through my call to order stuff. So seeing a quorum of the Community Resources Committee, I am calling this special meeting of the Community Resources Committee to order that is joined with the planning board at 8.02 p.m. on November 4th, 2020. Governor Baker's March 12th, 2020 order suspending certain provisions of the Open Meeting Law, MGL Chapter 30A, Section 20 allows us to hold this virtual meeting, special meeting of the Community Resources Committee. I believe the meeting is being recorded for future broadcast and any votes we take will be by roll call at this time. I'm going to make sure all the committee members can hear us and we can hear you. So I will take roll, essentially, at this time. Shalene. Here. Evan. Here. Sarah. Here. And Mandy is here. Steve is still not here, I believe, right? No. So Steve is missing, we will keep track to see. And then at this time, I am going to pass the virtual gavel of the CRC meeting to the Chair of the Planning Board, Jack Jemzic, who will open the hearing on behalf of the CRC when he opens it on behalf of the Planning Board too. I think that's all I have to do at this time. Okay, so what we have the Zoning By-law article 14 amended. You have a preamble that Pam sent. Okay, I thought she already stated that, but. So you should probably. It corresponds with MGL chapter 40A. Is this the correct? Because I do have a couple of different copies here. It's the one having to do with article 14. It's a special one that Pam prepared. Okay. Let me get to that one. Sorry, I apologize. It would have been all the same email, Jack. Got it. Yes. I just, I have, you know, multiple emails here from. We've bombarded you with emails. Um, Um, It's the one having to do with article 14. It's a special one that Pam prepared. Okay. Let me get to that one. Sorry. I apologize. It would have been all the same email, Jack. Got it. Yes. I just, I have, you know, I have. It's the same. On. Can you bring it up on a screen? I actually doubt Chris lesson learned. I think I have it. If you want me to bring it up. Why? I just, I keep getting the, the, the one that Mandy. Had sent me and that's not the same. Is it not the same. It's not exactly same. Okay. Here I got it. Um, in accordance with the provisions of sections five and 11 of chapter 40 a this joint public hearing of the Amherst planning board and the community resources committee of the Amherst. Council been duly advertise and notice thereof has been posted and mailed to. Mass department of housing and communication development and the primary valley planning commission and abutting towns. This hearing is being held for the purpose of providing an opportunity for interested citizens to be heard regarding the proposed amendment to the Amherst zoning bylaw. This amendment will be on the agenda for. Town council at an upcoming meeting zoning bylaw. Article 14 amended temporary zoning regarding permitting for certain uses during the coven 19 emergency and it's aftermath. So this article is to see if the town will vote to amend article 14 of the zoning bylaw temporary zoning regarding permitting for certain uses during the coven 19 emergency. So this is to see if the town will vote to amend article 14 of the zoning bylaw temporary zoning regarding permitting for certain uses during the coven 19 emergency. So this is to see if the town will vote to amend article 14 of the zoning bylaw. So this is to see if the town will vote to amend article 14 of the zoning bylaw temporary zoning regarding permitting for certain uses during the coven 19 emergency. So this is hereby the recommendation building fire or police station and other government use not specifically listed here in to help businesses to more quickly emerge from the economic disaster created by the coven 19 pandemic. Any board member disclosures and do we see, I see none. Chris and Rob or to provide a presentation. I think Mr. Moore is going to provide the presentation and I'm here to answer questions. Okay. Thank you, Rob more building commissioner. You is a proposed amendment to article 14 article 14 was adopted this summer. To allow administrative approval for certain types of use. That was to inspire mid December. So what we have here is in a proposal to not only extend it through December 31 2021, but to expand it a little bit to include some additional uses that we think, you know, we'd like to be prepared for the possibility of meeting either additions or alterations to these types of uses. And the effective uses section of the proposed article. We are adding office park and PRP zoning districts, specifically for the option to allow medical office uses to be able to expand if needed, alter the site or, you know, anything that might be needed to help accommodate whatever those uses might be dealing with during the pandemic. Beyond that we are proposing temporary uses and a definition to go along with that. What we saw during this so far is a need for things permanent temporary structures like tents and storage buildings. And we are talking, we have talked a lot about things like portable bathrooms and other facilities that possibly can be needed. So we thought we'd include a temporary use provision that allows for things to happen here with the intent that when this is all over that the use service site returns to its original condition, which is how we define that process. We included a variety of uses here, class one, class two, farm stands are thought there is that maybe in the spring, there will be increased interest in opening or expanding farm stands. Again, this is all to allow things to happen quicker but not really bypassing any of the bylaw requirements, nonprofit educational institutions, and government associated uses are included in the list for possible temporary needs. The rest of the bylaw will remain the same as proposed and so far just a little bit of background. We used a few times one permit addition or alteration and a couple of things that were temporary for outside use for personal care establishment. There's quite a bit of talking and planning going on for possible use of this bylaw and certainly an extension to the end of next year would give confidence to a business owner to move ahead with a proposal. Thank you, Rob. So, any questions from planning board or the CRC on this? I see Andrew. Thanks, Jack. And thanks for the presentation, Rob. I have a question related to the memo from Paul. I'm sorry, from you and Chris to Paul. I just wanted to make sure I understood this correctly. That talks about a structure going into the public way. I can just read this paragraph if that makes sense. It says if the use is in the public way, sidewalk, roadway parking lot, it will be likely to expire at the end of the authorization period for article 14. If it is a newly constructed patio, it would be unfair to expect a construction of a permanent structure and not know if they could continue to use it next year. They would want to know that the approval is permanent. Therefore, such constructions will generally deemed to be permanent. The last sentence saying generally deemed to be permanent. Does that indicate like that structure would go beyond the December 31st, 2021 timeline? Rob, do you want to answer that? Yes. So one thing I just want to just bring to your attention is that the deadline that we're proposing is. December 31st, 2021 is the deadline to actually grant the approval. So it doesn't necessarily mean everything stops at that date. It could, but it, but it doesn't have to be that way. So up until that point, we can, we can consider granting an administrative approval or something that could go on for some period of time or permanently. So we, you know, we are, we are open to, for these types of uses listed in effective uses in the first section, we are open to both temporary solutions to deal with whatever limitations or HVAC systems or whatever else might be going on. And we're seeing mostly, we had seen mostly outdoor dining for that purpose. But we are also not discouraging businesses from thinking about maybe long-term permanent use for outdoor dining or possibly other types of extensions or alterations. And be open to hearing that under administrative approval, where it would be permanent rather than given a deadline to be removed or turned back to its original condition. Jack, may I add to that? Yes, Chris. I think there is also a question that Mr. McDougal raised about the difference between the right of way and private property. The intention is that permanent structures or installations would only occur on private property. And any installation that would occur in the public way is considered to be temporary because that is land owned by the public and things need to go back to the way they were. That is exactly what I meant. Thank you for clarifying. And thanks, Jack. Thank you. Any other, I don't see any other hands from the CRC or planning board. Well, Janet. I have a question for Mr. Mora. So you have a, so an applicant puts in an application and then you have 10 business days to approve it. How has that worked out for you? Because it looks like you must have had quite a busy summer. And I asked that. And that's one question. The second question is, is there any other questions that you would like to ask? Now that we're in a slower period of the winter. Would it be useful to you to have more time to consider things, especially since their permanent structures are going in. I'm having a little trouble hearing you. I don't know the quality. Is anyone else having trouble hearing Rob? Like, it's not great. I'm quality. I hear him, but his video is. Not. Choppy. With his voice, but. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Is everybody else hearing Rob? Yes. Okay. Okay. So, um, yeah, it is a great aggressive timeline to review an application, but, uh, it's from a complete application. So just within our land use permit applications, we split the time with an applicant getting their. The application is deemed complete. We generally are in this case, I wrote this point, uh, know a lot about the, the proposal and probably be really comfortable with it. And the 10 days might be used to finalize any review and questions from this breast drop or any other. As a result of that, it's been a very, very, very long time official that we need to read out. To your final comment before grant approval. So 10 days has been. It's, it is aggressive. And it's most of the time beforehand. That is, uh, that. It takes more time beforehand to prepare for an application to be So you're saying that it's 10 days from a complete application but people are coming in and talking to you about how to fill it out and get everything together and that gives you more time. Is that what you're saying. Yes, but we're also talking about the project itself so we're really working and finalizing the documents from the design during that period to complete the application. There's often, you know, I'm working with people right now that I expect to have an application for under Article 14 sometime in the future. So, there's quite a bit of time sometimes that go by working with designers and preparing an application insurance. In a condition that could be considered for approval. Okay. Thanks Janet. I also wanted to do to make a motion about involving the public or, you know, a butters in some kind of notification. And so I've sent in the language and I don't know Pam can you pull that up or should I just read it. I'm having actually as usual a little trouble reading my own handwriting. Well, I'd like to make a motion to add the following sentence to the end of the first paragraph of starting application process. And then I'm having trouble seeing this, you just shrink it a little. Applicant shall prom prominently place notice of the application of its application with contact information for the building inspector and planning director at the main entrance of the building on our front window. I'm actually make it for the view people front window door or citing. So I think if I get a second, then I can speak to the motion. Yeah, I'm just, what's the other public notification that that we have going for this because I'm wondering about signage and you know how effective that is. There's no public notification because we talked about this the last time and there was none. No. It's an expedited process and there's no notification. No public okay so a sign in a window is that going to be. Is that going to make a difference I guess is as a question I say Mandy. I just have a process question. We're in the public hearing stage. And normally at least in council public hearings, the motions for things like that would happen after the hearing closes and we've heard from the public and all I don't know when motions like that happen in typical planning board hearings. Whether it's done during the hearing or whether it's done after the hearing. Good point. I can wait. Yeah. Thank you Mandy. What was that I withdraw my motion until later. Okay. Okay. Getting back to my. So any other further questions from the board or CRC on this. And I see none and we can accept public comments at this point. All speakers should ask to be recognized by the chair myself and should be identified themselves by the name and street address. All questions comments should be directed. To the chair. What do we have here. We asked them to give their, their address. Name and address yes. Okay. Yes, yes. Okay. Yep. Good morning. Yes. Hello, thank you. I had a question to either Rob Mora or to Chris Brestrup. At what point would a request for permanency. Come before the planning board at what point does it does it. To move from Rob's approval to a more official. Review of something that is being requested for a permanent structure. Thank you. Rob. Do you want to answer that? Yes. Sure. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. For these uses that are identified in article 14. That would occur after the expiration date, December 31st, 2021. I think may I. Yeah, make a comment. Yes. I think what Miss Rooney is asking is. For things that are approved during this time period. Is there a time when those things would have to come back to the planning board or the zoning board of appeals. And my understanding is that no, the things that are approved during this time period, if they're considered to be permanent. Would be then considered to be permanent. And their approval would be. Would be recorded in our. In our records here in town hall. And there wouldn't be a requirement for them to go back to the zoning board or the planning board. I think that's what Miss Rooney was asking. Absolutely. So. Rob, do you have any. Anything further to add? Okay. Pam. Do you have anything. No, that. Thank you. That answered my question. Okay. It appears that there are a number of. Permissions that can be granted during this time period. That may or may not be wonderful. Additions to the town, but because of the need to move them quickly through the system. We hope that Mr. Mora would direct them to the attention of the planning board. If they come across his desk and he feels that they do need a little more in depth. Review. Thanks. Great. Thank you. And I. Oh, we have. All right. Pam. Pam's hand is. Is it still up? Could be down, right? Okay. And. And then the proponent. Okay. So I think we've heard from, from Robin and Chris in terms of the proponents response and final comments, questions. Okay. So. Any motion to close the hearing and approve the. The. The amendment would just be a motion to close the hearing. Okay. All right. Any motion to close the hearing Andrew. Make that motion. All right. Second. You're on. Second. Great. And any discussion. I'm going to, I'm just going to note as chair of CRC, that this is going to be a joint motion that we'll do all 12. Okay. There's 11 of us. As a roll call. Okay. Since it's a joint hearing, it makes sense to be one motion to close. Okay. And so we're looping you and. And just want to make sure that's. The CRC. Members have a. You know, opportunity to comment. And I see none. Okay. So we can do a roll call. Andrew. Doug. Hi. Tom. Hi. Janet. Hi. Maria. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. Hi. And myself approve. Mandy. Yes. And Evan. Yes. Sarah. Yes. And Shalini. Yes. Thank you. So that looks. To be seven. Oh, on the planning board and. For zero for the CRC. And Mandy, what do we, anything else that you. I think now we move to general discussion and that would be my guess is the time for Janet's motion and any other discussion. Okay. So, Janet. So, I'd like to move. If we can put the motion back up. At the end of the first paragraph of application process, the following language, and I'm trying to get it bigger. I'm sorry to be, I'm getting my screen is jumping around. Applicants shall prominently place notice of its application. With contact information for the building inspector and planning director at the main entrance of the building on a front window. Door front door or sighting. And if I have a second, I'll speak to that. Anybody want to second them. The motion Andrew. I'll second the motion. Okay. Thank you. So when this article first came around, I was very concerned about the fact that a butters, not just property owners within 300 feet, but business small businesses within 300 feet. And I was very concerned about the fact that a butters, not just because a lot of the, you know, buildings might have people living upstairs would have no notice that anything was happening. They wouldn't know that there was, you know, outdoor seating coming in or sidewalks are being moved or tents put up. And they just would have no idea what's coming at them and they would have no way of participating in the decision making process, which is not a normal. I think that we're in different times like I think in the summer that the urgency was there to get tents up and seating in and tables put out and you know the barriers and everything to, you know, because the summer is a short time. I think now that we're into the winter and there's going to be obviously less. There are people applying for outdoor seating or tents that we, you know, it's still urgent but it's not as urgent as you know, and I think we have time to reflect. And at this point the residents business small businesses nearby and abutting landowners have no input into the process. And that could lead to permanent outdoor structures and dining forever. And so I think that people, you know, the butters people nearby may have ideas concerns issues, make a correct request for a change and might be accessibility issues. People and walkers might have need more space than we think. I trust the building commissioner and Christine Brescia to consider everything they can think of but I also know that being, you know, hearing other people's views and is important. So I think we have the time now to add a change. People who are could be affected by this, you know, building permit and the change don't know what what is happening when it will happen and who to contact. And our town hall is closed and it's not obvious to anybody had a kind of, you know, that they should go talk to Christine Brescia or Rob Mora. So I think, and so I tried to draft the simplest way to notify people that would involve no effort by the town staff other than maybe preparing, you know, a one page thing of saying notice. And this idea of a notice was suggested by Steven tribal at a CRC meeting. And it reminded me that twice in my travels in the last years I've seen in Florida and also in Colorado you drive by a house or a lot. And there's this big sign that says notice, you know, this building, you know, has, there's, you know, has applied for X permit, and will be here on this date and they give you a little number at the bottom and I thought, okay, putting a notice that this is coming to this area this change has been requested by this company or owner, people walking by walking into the building will see it, and they will know who to contact if they have concerns. So I tried to do the simplest thing. The shortest thing I tried to work inside the 10 day timeline. And so that's, that's the purpose of the motion is to keep the public involved that people affected by changes have some way to participate and comment on them and maybe shape the final decision. And that's my pitch and I hope you guys can agree with me. Thanks, Janet. Johanna. Janet I just really appreciate your digging into the details here and I think to me this seems like not very prohibitive or arduous for the applicant. And, you know, if you're a neighbor and you see the sign you, you might notice or somebody might flag it for you and so I think this is in this, I think it's in the spirit of community engagement and expedited review that's critical right now. Those are my thoughts. Thank you, Mandy. I know this is going to be a planning board vote and then so CRC won't have a chance to really vote on this until we get the planning board recommendation but I thought I'd put my concerns out there right now, because maybe that can be fixed before it gets voted on my main concern is there's no timeline for both when the notice needs placed and how long it needs to stay up there. I think that would be in some sense a quote easy fix to the language, but it just says prominently place notice of its application at the main entrance of the building but it doesn't say when that notice has to go up and it doesn't say how long that notice has to be there. And so I would ask the planning board consider those concerns as it looks at this language. Thanks. I forgot to start that sentence with the time of its application and I don't know if it's going to be a complete application I assumed your application was your application so I, you know, you're applying to the building commissioner and the planning department. And you just put notice on your window and I don't think it would stay forever. It seems logical you would just take it down after the permit was issued. I tried not to put too many, like, when I was thinking about this I was doing all these kind of literally like this that and I thought, you know, just pick it up, you know, and you're right when do you have to put it up and it's when you at the time of your application on the day of your application. You know, and that would that would actually be much more clear. So I appreciate that idea. Yeah, I'm a, I would like to call on Rob, but, but, but Chilini has ran up. So certainly please. I just wanted to highlight the fact that this was a concern that was brought up earlier and for those of you didn't attend the CRC meeting. I had asked Rob Marra the question of how many complaints. Did he hear in this process because this was a trial run of some sort and we had an opportunity to see what would kind of concerns would come up from a butters and so forth and he talked about only one situation where it came up and it was and then they responded to it in a way that it worked out for everyone. So, I just wanted to highlight that. And the second thing is I think this seems like a reasonable thing to let people know and and and it's not slowing down the process because my main concern earlier was that ease of essence, even though to us, it may seem that it's winter and there's no such urgency, but I know that being a small business and when there is money invested and so forth. They're all kinds of, you know, emergencies that we may not understand. So helping them in any way psychologically, structurally, whatever way we can support I think it's important. But this seems like it's not going to be getting in the way of anyway and I just wanted to hear maybe from Rob and Chris if what they're, they have more experience in working with the local businesses and what if, if any concerns they have about putting them in and what is like this. Thank you, Shalini. Maria. Before we hear from Chris and Rob. Well, you're muted, Maria. Oh, sorry, I was going to ask exactly what Shalini asked, which is what do Chris and Rob think of the work involved in this. Okay, but I just before Chris and Ross speak, I do, I feel like the word emergency in there kind of elevates this into something that is again, temporary. And, and as of a higher order where the, you know, notifications I think I saw some communications from Rob that it's not necessitated because it's it's a you know, at a different level. It's great that someone has a sign in there but I'm wondering like emergency. What does notification work when you have an emergency with COVID related things so Chris. I would say that it's going to be some work for us to help applicants to figure out what to put in their notice, because you know people who are applying for these things some of them don't even speak English so we'll probably have to work with them to come up with appropriate wording for their notice. And one thing Rob brought up to me, which may have been addressed by the fact that he works with applicants ahead of time before they actually submit their application but the fact is that when people come to us they have an idea of what they want to do. But it's not necessarily what they get approved for in the end, and it could change substantially, even the location of it could change. So, whatever the notice says may not actually reflect clearly what is eventually permitted and Rob may have more ability to talk about this because he's worked with the applicants and I, I've really been kind of at arms length from this process. Yeah, I think, you know a lot does happen from when we, you know the initial contact with the applicant, but oftentimes that's not the moment when we're receiving an application. I think, you know there's a couple of good things about this discussion I think that will help establishing that, you know, it'd be at the time of the application is helpful to the language that I saw earlier. I think the expectation would be more that this is a notice as a courtesy to the butters, but maybe not so much. It may not be an opportunity for in a butter to have a part in the decision making process, it may, but I don't think that's a guarantee, depending on the timing and our availability. If you did decide to move forward with this, I think I would propose that we would in this isn't part of the bylaw material but I think we would put a template notice in the application package where it's a very simple fill in this information and a brief description of the project I think it can be very simple. And I would probably have like a checkbox on the application that this has been posted, and maybe even ask for a date that it's been posted just so we can confirm it but probably not go much further than that. So I think, I think it's nicely done as a simple solution. And if the notice piece of it is desirable. And I, and I'm not really worried about the time that it might, you know, how much time would affect us done in this way. Okay. Thank you Rob. Any other comment from honey board or CRC on this. Sorry, I can't remember what was it shall any who said that to date with all the different kind of temporary structures and emergency requests there's been one instance where there's been a concern, or yeah and then that was worked out because I'm just trying to figure I don't know, are we, are we inventing a problem that doesn't exist I think to some extent we'd be heading off problems by just making sure that this is in place but I'm, you know, kind of, I understand the emergency nature and I'm just trying to. Yeah, I still think it doesn't strike me as super arduous but I, I'd love to know, you know, whether we're coming up with a solution for a problem that doesn't exist. Thank you. Thank you. And Shalini speak to that. No, so Mr Moore, is the person to answer. Okay Rob. Rob. I think she was referencing a comment I may have made in a prior meeting, when asked about what type of complaints, river seat. time with everything we've done with moving dining out onto the public way, private property expansions of outdoor activities, and a couple of the more permanent installations. And I've only received one complaint. Most of our feedback is very positive. I mean, we are pretty actively out there trying to help all the businesses any way we can. And you can see that with what's been done with the dining and the heaters and all of that. So we're pretty visible out there helping. So we haven't, I haven't heard a lot of complaints. The one complaint I did receive that I mentioned during that meeting was when we set the Jersey barriers and took away part of the bike lane on South Pleasant Street. And that was a complaint I received. And now, as you probably have seen that, that's been corrected with somebody striping and reestablishing the bike lane. But we are a complaint response type of department. That's how we were designed for more for residential rental property type situations. So anyone who calls does get a response, whether it's through COVID hotline or directly to our office, all the complaints and concerns get a very immediate response usually within a short period of time within the same day. Thank you and Chris. I just wanted to say that now that Rob Mora has made the suggestion of having a template in the application packet and having the applicant fill it out and posting and taking responsibility for posting it. That means that the planning department doesn't have responsibility for that. And that makes me feel better about this recommendation or the suggestion of Janet. Thank you, Chris. Yonah, is your hand still up or is that an artifact? Artifact. Okay, Janet. So I know that the inspectional services is super responsive to complaints. My concern is that nobody would know how to get to you or that there's a problem. And so I actually like most of the changes are made too but I also think that if, say me, somebody in the second or third floor above a restaurant may have trouble hearing their client if they're talking to their clients and that might become annoying noise. And you might just kind of sit with it but it might be annoying and you don't say anything. And so I'm not trying to drive complaints to the town but I think that it's hard to figure out how to connect with anybody. And here we're just giving people notice this is coming, here's the people you can talk to, if you have concerns, you know, that kind of thing. And so I mean, we're in a really hard time to connect. Like I've been wanting to return a book to Christine and I'm trying to think of like, oh, when I'm gonna wait till I have to sign a decision to take, I don't wanna take up her time. Most people don't even know who to talk to in the town and it's really hard to do that. And so I think it'd be amazing if there's only one person that's been hurtful with change. And you know, but I think that there are probably more people out there or people who'd preferred to have been a little more input in the process and this change could have helped me but I'm not complaining now kind of thing. So I'm not trying to drive complaints to you but I think that people just don't really know how to get to the government right now. I guess just given, again, this is like amendment driven by an emergency situation. I would think some people would, you know in that situation Janet that they would have some empathy that, you know, this is what this is all about. And I would think there'd be some tolerance for such clients that you mentioned, but that's just me. Andrew. Thanks, Jack. I think it's a great suggestion. I agree with what Rob laid out in terms of this being an opportunity for really kind of having some more visibility. When you think about the folks who are putting these signs up, I mean, they're asking for the seating. Many of these folks may be like just barely hanging onto their business, right? So like if I'm going through town and if I see that sign, I might, you know maybe I'm more compelled to go there, right? If I'm trying to make a choice of where to eat and I see that somebody is really suffering then even if it's a 10 day head start it's probably still a great idea. So I really, I think this is a wonderful proposal just for that visibility, if nothing else. Thank you. Mandy. Yeah, I was just gonna say, I think it's good. I would like to see some language added like at the time of application and for no less than 10 days or something because I know Rob has 10 days to approve it to the beginning of that phrase. But I think we need to also remember that part of the concern for a lack of notice that this bylaw has right now is that these aren't only just temporary grants sometimes. And we heard it from the public commenter during the hearing, we've heard it as a lot of questions both in town council and in these hearings and these discussions that some of these grants can be permanent grants that will not show up back to the planning board or the ZBA for any public review. And so I think the solution Janet has found to that concern is a good one. So Mandy, so right now it reads applicant shall permanently place notice of its application and you mentioned. You know, I'm not sure I can make a motion to amend because this is really going to be a planning board vote. But if I could, it would be something like adding the phrase to the beginning of that sentence adding the phrase at the time of application and for no less than 10 days. Okay, thank you. Did you get that Chris, Pam? All right, so. Janet want to amend her motion to include that. Janet. Yes, I do. Okay. I'd like to move to amend by adding the phrase at the time of its application and for no less than 10 days, comma, and then just go. Thank you. I second the motion. This is Johanna. Great. Thank you, Johanna. Any other discussion? And do we need to public comment on this, this point? It's like there isn't any. Once the hearing closes, public comment isn't necessary. Okay, sorry. Okay, so we can do roll call at this point. And this is just the planning board, correct? Yes. So Andrew. Approve. Doug. Hi. Tom. Hi. Janet. Hi. Maria. Yes. And myself. Yes. So that is seven zero in approval for the amendment with Janet's motion. Johanna. What? Where's Johanna? Oh, way down there. You're below everybody else. I'm sorry. It's next thing. This, this, the Brady bunch, you know, all right. So sorry. My apologies, Johanna. I approve. Okay. All right. Okay. So. Good. And. Mandy. So I guess the question is, was that an approval of the motion to amend the amendment? Or was that an approval of the whole phrase? Number one. Approval. Approval the whole phrase. And the amendment. Okay. So I think your next order of business is to move to recommend the council of mend. That that motion. I see. Okay. So. Do we have a motion? I mean, I'll move. Do you want me to try and read. Potential motion. Oh, please. Even though I'm not on the planning board, someone else is going to have to make it. Okay. So. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. So moved that to recommend the town council amend zoning by law. Article. Hold on. Let me find the right one. Article 14 temporary zoning. Yeah. As shown in the document named. I'm not sure what the name of the document is. I have those me and if you want to hold on one sec. Just add it into the motion. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. Number four, 2020 to make it effective until December 31, 2021 at office park and professional research park zoning districts is permitted zoning districts. Medical uses as affected uses. Add a definition of temporary use at a notice provision and add several uses to the affected uses for temporary use. Okay. Okay. So the planning board states in accordance with charter section 9.8 G that these amendments are not inconsistent with the master plan. Can you send that language to Pam and Pam's got it up on the screen. It's option one. The only thing I added was the phrase. And revised on 11 for 2020. Okay. After the name of the document because it was just revised tonight. Okay. Okay. Thank you. And I added the and a, Add a notice provision too. So I, Pam, I will send you the final. That would be great. We need to write a memo to the town council. I believe is due no later than Friday. So we need to button this up. Pretty quickly. So whatever help you can give us to. Make our work go smoothly and more easily would be helpful. And I see Mr. Marshall has his hand raised. Yes, Doug. Yeah. I think you need somebody from the planning board to make the motion that Mandy just read. So I'm offering to make that motion. Great. Any, anyone want to second that, Tom? Okay. Okay. So I can do a roll call. Or discussion. I see none. Okay. So, um, Andrew. Move. Doug. Hi. Janet. And. Oh my God, the names are bouncing around here. So. I'm sorry. I apologize. Well, I'm going to hit you, Hannah, because I, I skipped here. So you're on that. I approve. Maria. Janet, did I get you? Yes. Okay. You're good. Tom long. Tom. All right. And myself approve. That's seven zero. And I think now it's the CRC's turn. There you go. All right. So I am going to look for a motion from a CRC member. To recommend the town council amend zoning by law article 14 temporary zoning as shown in the document named article 14 temporary zoning amended. Temporary zoning regarding permitting for certain uses during the COVID-19 emergency in its aftermath. And revised on 11 for 2020 to make it effective until December 31. 2021. At office park and professional research park zoning districts has permitted zoning districts. Medical uses as affected uses at a definition of temporary use. Add a notice provision and add several uses to the affected uses for temporary uses. Is there a motion from a CRC member? Don't move. Evan moves. Is there a second? Sarah second. Sarah seconds. Is there any further discussion? Shalini. Can you clarify whether this, I mean, I'm sorry. I missed the first part. Did it include the notice thing? Change. Yes, it does. It does. It does because the planning board amended that document before it made its recommendation. Okay. And then my follow-up question is. Can we still got, we'll still count the first reading when we meet or is this going to delay it in any way? So it. The amendment will not delay the first reading or the second reading because we're allowed to amend things even after they've been posted on the bulletin board. The first reading will still happen on this coming Monday. Is that the ninth? I think that's the ninth. And then the second reading on the 16th. Okay. Thank you. And I will, if it gets amended, I will let Athena know tonight to update the bulletin board. Thank you. Also, can I just make a statement? It's not related to this, but it was in the planning board. Someone said that the zoom link was not available. It was an easily available. So I'm going to go to the zoom link. To attend the planning board meeting. And I just wanted to clarify that that's there on the calendar. On the homepage of. Armistown, the calendar. And if you click on the planning board meeting. On the calendar itself. There's a link to the zoom. Meeting. So I'm just clarifying. Because people could not find the access to the zoom link. So. Thank you. Thank you. You're welcome. Any other discussion. Seeing none, we will come to a vote. It will be by roll call. We're going to start, I think I'm the next in order. So Mandy is a, yes. Evan. Yes. Sarah. Yes. And Shalini. Yes. That is unanimous with one absent. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you to the rest of my meeting, which is. Items not anticipated by the chair. I don't have any. If I don't see any hands for CRC members to have any. And so I. Before I close, I want to thank Rob and Chris and the planning board for hosting CRC tonight for the joint hearing and getting us through it. And the motions. Again, the first reading at town council will be this coming in a second reading. So I'm not sure if it's at six 30. I don't know when we will get to. The actual discussion of this bylaw that probably won't happen until at least seven 30 or later. And then the second reading, if all goes well, we'll be the 16th. And that would also be when a vote occurs. And with that. Chris, did you want to say something before I joined the meeting? I just wanted to bring that Mandy Joe will send. The motion. And I also want to submit. Article 14. To Athena. And that I won't be doing that. Mandy Jo's going to do that. I will do that tonight. Once the meeting is finished. I'll, I'll copy you Chris and Pam and Rob on that. So that you guys all have it. But I will send, and I will send the motion language. To Pam and, I'm going to adjourn the CRC portion of the meeting. Thank you, Mandy. At nine o'clock. And the rest of CRC. Hi. Thank you. Thank you. Good night. Good night. So Pam, I don't know if you want to wipe that out. Article 14. Good, good. There you go. There you go. Now, what did we skip? All right, so we got Emily, we got article 14 done, and now we're looking at Applebrook, plus your subdivision. We did that, Jack. We did? We did. Okay, we fit that in. That's right. So now 40R and we have, it's nine o'clock. We've been at two and a half hours in. And this is a broad subject that I'm not sure how much we want to get into this. And then also we have the master plan implementation as new business. I'm open to suggestions in terms of, you know, directing the last, what I would hope the last half hour of this meeting. Jack. If, yes, Doug. We did the master plan implementation update because Chris gave her update on the work that she and I are doing on the spreadsheet. Right. Oh, that was brief. All right, that was very brief. Nothing more, okay. We'll put that on the agenda for the next meeting so you can have more of a discussion about that if you want to. Okay. All right. So I guess that brings us to 40R. And that is, that is, you know, just a topic that we're trying to follow up with the guarded last forum. There was some interest. And then who do we have in the attendees? Cause I know we talked about Rob Crowner and. Yeah. They unfortunately have a lab. Yeah. So I think I guess I would suggest we, we, we push that. I mean, this is the meeting again, two and a half hours in and 40R is, you know, kind of conceptual nature. I don't really want to take that on right now, but I hopefully, you know, if anyone has any questions about it. Um. Mr. Marshall has his hand raised. Okay. He has her hand raised. All right. Yes. So, so go ahead, Doug. Yeah. I wanted to ask when Chris thinks the consultants might have their final report with the revised bylaw that they were, that they had drafted back in May so that we have a more coherent product to talk about rather than, you know, we have the bylaw that was done back in May. And then we have the presentation that was done in October, but, you know, that presentation doesn't seem to reflect everything that some of Rob Crowner's responses said would be fixed. So I think it'd be great to just have a single, consolidated, you know, coherent product for us to talk about. I don't know when the consultants are planning to have the work done, but I think it's going to be very soon because I believe they worked on it over the weekend and they've been working on it this week and they, you know, took into account Janet McGowan's comments and they took into account Rob Crowner's comments following that. So I would just, I don't really know when they're going to have it, but I would assume that it's within a few weeks. We could put it on an agenda for November 18th, which is the next planning board agenda. The only thing I have for that agenda so far is a new building that's proposed on the UMass campus for the Newman Center. And they're required to come and show us drawings for what they're proposing. There's no permit process because it's within the ED zoning district. So you could have a discussion about 40R that night, which by that time you may in fact have a product. So do you want me to put it on the agenda for that night? Yeah, please. And I want to thank Janet for her comments, very detailed, per usual. Thank you, Janet. And again, we asked Rob to chime in. And this is all good. It's all for betterment of the town and our vision for downtown. And I'm just thinking that we're confronted with so many things with COVID and businesses closing and then housing issues. And we get information from the school committee or school administrator, Mike Morris, that our student population is going below a certain threshold that further harms the town's ability to finance our existing school system, which so many people move to the area to participate in it and so I'm very concerned about what's going to happen within the next months and year from what we've seen. So this 40R thing will be a very good discussion for us to have amongst the board. And with that said, Jack, just like per Ryan, if you guys read Rob's comments, sorry for speaking out of order, but hopefully we don't have any five story gas stations or nuclear power plants or whatever he had all out in there. Let's, let's. Only in your backyard, Andrew. That's it, that's it. So we were going to talk about Bruce Carson's letter if we're finished talking about 40R for now. Okay. I'm bringing up, let me bring up the agenda. I'm sorry. I'm kind of trying to go digital and now I have paper in front of me, but give me one second. Okay. To bring it to the attention of the board. Send the letter to the board and when the board is considering zoning amendments, the board may wish to consider the things that Bruce Carson mentioned in his letter. Oops. There are things that came out of a project that's being proposed at the corner of strong street and East Pleasant. And it's a proposal to create a converted dwelling out of an existing garage building. And many residents have expressed concern about it. It's going before the zoning board of appeals, but this letter is specifically about the issue of resident manager. And that topic isn't really addressed in the zoning by-law. So it isn't well, it isn't well addressed in the zoning by-law. So Mr. Carson is bringing this to the planning board's attention in hopes that the planning board will consider more clear language with regard to what exactly is meant by a resident manager with regard to some of these rental units that are non-owner occupied. And you can certainly discuss this tonight if you want to, but we just wanted to bring it to your attention tonight. And then if you would like, we can put it on the agenda for a future meeting. Yeah, I mean, this really brings up a lot in terms of like, you know, planning board making recommendations to the town council to, with regard to critical issues, you know, within the town, this is a great example that I'd like for us to wrestle with a little bit. And I'd like to end this meeting, you know, in 20 minutes. So we have 10 minutes of discussion maybe before we go through the, our committee, you know, reports. But this is the sort of thing that we're talking about in terms of planning board being able to discuss and be, you know, in lieu of not having the zoning subcommittee, this is, I think will be real productive for us to advance and, you know, personally, I mean, my daughter is moving 45 minutes away because you can't find housing with her, you know, husband and twins, you know, in the Amherst area, which, you know, just brings the right home to me that, you know, we have issues and those issues are because, you know, housing and rental housing, going to student, you know, population that then that whole ball of wax. So Andrew. Yeah, I was, thank you, Jack. I was only gonna say that I have not had a, this is the letter that came out earlier this afternoon, is that right, Chris? Yeah, I was just gonna say, I haven't had a chance to review it. So if you did want to talk about it, I wouldn't be able to really fully participate. I think the intent tonight was really just to bring it to your attention and to let Mr. Carson know that the planning board has seen the letter and that you will consider this at a future date. That sounds good to me, just wanted to make sure. And sort of in this whole concept, I mean, I've, you know, and 40R, I'm just, you know, in terms of like affordable housing, getting young families into town, someone brought to my attention this residential exemption, it's not in the purview of planning board, but when it comes to, you know, our taxes, how do we make it easier for owner occupied, you know, homes to, you know, meet the, you know, municipal sort of, you know, property taxes, et cetera, versus people that are developers that are, you know, renters and that sort of thing. And this residential exemption thing was brought to my attention. And I think that there's like 12 towns in Massachusetts that participate in this thing that, and then there's, I guess it's MGL chapter 59, section 5C, that allows it, maybe, you know, Janet, I know you're pretty good at this sort of thing, but, you know, it's not our purview, but I'm wondering with the news that we got from Mike Morris that, you know, our student population is going below a threshold that we're losing money, the ability to gain money because our schools don't have adequate, you know, population there. It's like, you know, it's just like a catch 22 situation. Janet? So one thing that comes to mind, and this is in one of the, I think the Housing Production Plan or the other, the Amherst Housing Market Study, is you can require that students can't be in housing. So, you know, this is just literally off the top of my head. If you say the living resident, you know, the manager cannot be an undergraduate student, can't be a student, you know, because I think, you know, what Bruce Carson is identifying is like a huge loophole. And so, you know, any, you know, I can picture a very responsible college student being a very good resident manager to his roommates and the people and the students next door. I just don't think it's probably a great idea in the long run over time with lots of people. And so, you know, there, we can say no undergraduates, we could say no students. And so, you know, and make some space for non-student housing in town. Because I think, especially with UMass adding so many students the last decade, I think it's a huge amount of pressure on the lower income houses, the cheaper houses, the neighborhoods that are, you know, with more ranches are converting more and more to student housing. In the study, it says that kind of goes back and forth. You know, sometimes it's, you know, a lot of families are buying sometimes lots of, you know, developers or landlords are buying. But I think in the last 10 years with 4,000 more students in the area, and the pressure is gonna be on those lower priced units or to convert a garage. You know, we thought, oh, you're gonna convert a garage but it's owner-occupied. And then there's no owner. And then it's college students or the rental managers. So it seems like a slippery slope and we can just put something in there. It just says, you know, the rental manager cannot be a student, you know. Yeah, I mean, I remember. Making some space, you know. Yeah. I remember discussing with folks in the planning department and I felt like that that wasn't possible to kind of restrict it at that level. But maybe by the tax, property tax option is more viable than, you know, trying to put it in, you know, restrict is there. So the property owner, if they lived there, then they would be able to file an amendment or an application, an abatement. And they, you know, so they would get, you know, like say 20% off of their taxes. And, you know, so it's complicated, but there are like 12, you know, a dozen towns in Massachusetts that do this, Nantucket, a bunch of towns, Boston number one, but another town. So it's just something, and it's not in our purview, but we could recommend that. But it's this, you know, Bruce's request here kind of just brought to mind and, you know, also, if you want to encourage people to convert and build more housing out of garages or, you know, sheds or buildings, and, you know, to build support in the town, you don't want to have eight undergraduates in a house and then the garage living, you know, like that could really turn your neighborhood. And so I think we should think, I think we have to talk about the undergraduates and the impact on neighborhoods. Some in Northamera, some of the neighborhoods, it's really had a very negative impact. But I think the tax abatement you're talking about is also a really powerful tool to make owner-occupied, you know, multi-units much more attractive to people. It's not a big market here, but, you know, those units are really sought after in the cities, because they're great deals for people, you know, to have a few rental units and live there. Doug? Yeah, I wondered if between now and the next meeting, anybody was thinking of coming back to us with a proposed alteration to the text of the bylaw so that we could use that as a starting point for a conversation. I don't know if that's something that Chris's, Chris or her staff would have time for, or if somebody may be on the board who no longer has to go to zoning subcommittee meetings might want to take on and come back to us with, or somebody that's new to the board and is really looking to cut their chop. Yep. No, I just, I feel like with the COVID, you know, we have this article 14, you know, businesses, you know, lack of students, lack of town revenue. I'm really concerned, and I just want the planning board to help the town to the extent that we can with regard to recommendations. So I'm just, I'm really worried about our town right now. So Tom? Yeah, I'm just, you know, I'm just wondering if, you know, with a set of questions in mind, if, you know, that's something that we do spend time, maybe not so much writing, said bylaw Doug, but thinking about, you know, how we might propose language or what areas we think changing language might help going forward. And that way we can have a more robust discussion about whether, you know, there's room in 40R for that, or there are other things that we need to start to address and, you know, how we can make recommendations and proposals and put things into action that we're not doing yet. So, you know, maybe finding space in our agenda in the next meeting and homework being, you know, doing some thinking and writing and research on that ourselves. So I would ask, like Chris, you know, can you work with me, you know, for the next agenda that we can kind of like, it sounds like the next meeting will be a little bit, you know, light? Right side, yeah. Okay, so maybe we can, you know, take this up and talk about the 40R in a little more detail and, you know, have Rob and John Hortick present. And yeah, because these things this way heavy on my mind. Doug? And we're going to talk about this resident manager definition. That's what my comment a minute ago was about. That would be, you know, getting into the specifics, yes. So... So I will consult with Rob Mora. He's more used to dealing with the resident manager issue because the zoning board of appeals is the board that normally takes up this kind of application. So I'll speak with him about if he has any suggestions for language. So this was kind of a, well, tangent off the 40R, I guess, but for old business topics, not reasonably anticipated 40 hours, 40 hours prior to the meeting. That was Bruce's letter. I'm sorry, I brought it up. And nothing else. No. Okay, good. So new business, we talked about the master plan implementation, we'll carry that on. And then anything else, new business? Nope. That's okay. Form... Form A. A and R. No, form A's tonight. All right, great, great. Upcoming ZBA applications. Pam would know about that. There is, but I should be scolded because I don't remember it. So I will have to report it to you at the next one. Chris, do you remember it? I was gonna make it a slide and I got so busy doing other ones that I forgot. Sorry, I don't remember. All I remember is that there is this case before the ZBA now about the converted garage, but I don't remember any other cases. That is the one, the converted garage. The converted garage at the corner of East Pleasant Street and Strong Street. So that is going before the ZBA, but I think there's been a request to continue that public hearing till January. But I will, I would like to announce to the planning board the good news that the zoning board of appeals approved the comprehensive permit 40B. That's awesome. 132 Northampton Road. And we're very happy about that. I think we in the department feel that that's a really good project. And we worked hard with the zoning board to help them to get all the information they needed. And I think that they came up with a really good decision and good conditions. There are almost a hundred conditions. And we had a good lawyer working with us from KP Law, John Whitten. And so it turned out really well, but I think there were probably eight to 10 public hearing sessions. So it was a long process, but I think the result was very worthwhile. I should have saved that for the report of the staff, shouldn't I? I can put it in their press, ZBA thing. Yeah, I mean, I try to attend some of those hearings and then, you know, but my gosh, that is laborious sort of approval process. So kudos to, you know, the Valley CDC getting that through. And then we can go upcoming SBP, SBRS, SBB applications. None that I know of. No other things out there, but none that I know of. Good. Yeah, I'm just thinking of, you know, Pioneer Valley Planning Commission report that I kind of pundit on the last meeting. And, you know, I'm wondering if I just should send, you know, a report to you that you can distribute, Chris, because. An email would be good. Yeah, I'm into the weeds there and I can't really give a brief synopsis. So I'll do that and then you can distribute. How's that? Good, yep. Okay. Nothing per shaking as far as I know. But I would like everyone to be aware of what's going on. So, and then Community Preservation Act. Yeah, I think that we meet tomorrow. Be our third session. We've got four more proposals we're gonna hear from. Great. And Ag Commission, any news on that? I think Doug's appointment has not yet been finalized, unless he's heard something different. But I wouldn't be surprised if they take care of that at the next town council meeting. They seem to be doing them little by little. All right. Maybe I'm too controversial. Should I withdraw? You have that great background in your picture. Yeah. Yeah, we should send a snapshot of that to the town council. Yeah, as long as Doug, as long as you can keep that background, you're kind of like in contention, I think. Design review board, Tom. Yeah, we had, I actually had a meeting today at five. So I've been on here. It was a long time. Oh, my. So, and I had to leave early, so that was fun. So there are two things that we're viewing. One was they received a grant. And I'm sure Chris knows some of the details of this about they're going to use for funding for bus stops downtown, sort of bus stops in area or bus shelters in areas that currently don't have them. One in front of St. Brigid's on North Pleasant near Coal Street. And one on South Pleasant by Spring Street, right across from the Common, or basically right across from the other bus stop, the Peter Pan stop. And then as well, possibly replace the bus stop on the corner of Main and South Pleasant. So again, by the parking lot there. So they're trying to get them to match in line with the existing ones that are across the street. So using the same aesthetics for them. So that's pretty simple stuff. And then I was, I had to leave before any conversation or detailed debate, which I was hoping to get an update on. I didn't. There was a proposal for a new kind of digital way of finding system for town, sort of updating people on news and events and programming. Some electronic charging stations for people's phones and devices as well as part of this package. It wasn't going too great the moment I left. So I'll probably have, there are very contemporary signage systems. And they didn't match very well with some of the existing systems in place or match with our proposed signage and wayfinding system. So there was a little conflict there. So I'll have an update on that next time. So to let people know this is part of the CARES Act funding, it's not money that's being author or appropriated by the town. It's money from the government to help us to emerge from COVID-19 and the communications manager and the town manager have come up with this idea. It's called SUFA signs. I don't know if I'm pronouncing it right, but it's S-O-O-F-A signs. And Janet may be familiar with them because I think they have them in Somerville. So I just wanted to mention that. I have a question. Yes. Yes. Janet. So in terms of the bus stops, is there any way to make them fun and kind of arty instead of just generic kind of city-like? I think about this. So yes and no. So part of the discussion was that there's a lot of different things that are happening already and that they're totally uncoordinated. And so hence the signage that came up, the SUFA signs was also a thing that felt uncoordinated. And the suggestion was to merely just match the ones that are across the street, rather than do something different that kind of draws more attention to a new thing. But I do think that there is room to start thinking about some other things that might stand out. But those are things that wanted to disappear, like right in front of St. Bridges Church. There was the design review board was not very happy that there was a thing that might block a photo. So I think they want to kind of disappear, at least the bus stops themselves. But I do agree that there are other opportunities. The nice thing about art is it doesn't have, you don't really want it to coordinate, but I could see one, maybe that being invisible, but sometimes I thought it might be just take it in a different direction. Yeah, I agree. I agree. I think about the bus stops. The bus stops are another thing that's being paid for by a grant. It's the Mass Department of Transportation grant that we received for shared streets and sidewalks. Anyway, we have to spend the money by December 31st or they take it back. So we're in a big hurry to get this approved, get these bus shelters agreed to, where they're going, what they're gonna look like, and go ahead and buy them. And then maybe we'll end up with more than we actually need and we can think about where to put some more in the future. But for a couple of them, we really want to nail it down. And we have a very short timeframe to do that. So I just wanted to share that with you. Andrew. Chris, can I just real quick. Is a town responsible for those or for PVTA? Most of the time that PVTA is responsible for them. I think that the town puts them in, but PVTA buys them. In this case, since we had this opportunity to get new ones and some of the ones we have that were pretty old, we thought that would be a good thing to do. And so it was part of the shared streets and sidewalks grant opportunity that we had. And some of those may have digital information that updates on bus time schedules and whether they're on time and bus routes and things like that. So it's also part of figuring out where those go and whether we can afford to do all of them is a question PVTA would manage those going forward. Thanks, Tom. And the zoning subcommittee has some, that is, you know, no issues, but in the report of the chair, I just want to, you know, circle back to Amherst Hills and the paving. It seems like that's going to happen within the next week or two based on a recent communication. Is that correct, Chris? So it seems. Okay. We'll see it, but so it seems. All right. So let's keep, you know, keep an eye on that. And then I think I had a conversation with one of the someone with regard to what's going on with Spring Street, you know, in terms of the construction there, it seems like it might have been halted. And I guess, you know, there's be some, you know, concern that be, that doesn't progress. So, but I know in the age of COVID, it would be nice to get a report, I think, on the progress. I will ask Rob what he knows about that. Okay. And that's all I have. Andrew, Andrew has a stand up. Yeah, thanks. Well, it's just wondering, does anybody know, you know, the tent we approved at the Jones Library, I see the structure there. One of my kids indicated that it may have blown, like the covering may have blown off of that. Does anybody know what happened there? If that happened or not? I haven't heard that. But the day after that big windstorm, it wasn't there. Okay. Yeah. I think that was maybe the rumor on the school zooms, perhaps, but all right. I would have taken it down to avoid the windstorm. Yeah, that's not back up though, so. You know, I mean, on that topic, all the structures that we talked about with, you know, at the high school and the tents, that there's one at Crocker Farm that I walk under pretty much every day. I don't know why people are thinking, you know, with these tents and are they, I don't know that they're ever, they will be used. It's unfortunate, but. Well, if Article 14 passes, then you won't ever have to have this come before you again. In the realm of the town, of the building commissioner. Yeah. I mean, that's more of a school issue that, and again, they've delayed, you know, student attendance at the, you know, but they were thinking warm weather, obviously, but, so a report of staff. Verity gave my report about the ZBA approving the 40B application for the Valley CDC at 132 Northampton Road. Oh, okay. And so we can adjourn, 936. And we're meeting, what, the 18th? The 18th. Okay. Right. All right. Good. So thank you all. Thanks. Thank you. Thanks, Pam, for holding us together. Pam, you were stellar. Thank you so much that I, I had to report my own faux pas. How are you? Yeah. All right. Well, good night. Good night, everybody. Bye bye.