 A call to order the November 16, 2015 meeting of the Arlington Redevelopment Board. First on our agenda this evening is a public hearing environmental design review hearing for 1398 Mass. Now, Doctors Express is here with a special permit amendment. If they are here, I would ask the proponents not to come to the table. My name is Dick Peschen. I'm an attorney that used to be in Arlington, now at Lexington. Sorry. I represent Doctors Express, which has a name change, which requires a little bit of a modification on our sign request. But basically, to my left is Sherouk Jelisi, who's a physician and who will be the medical director of the facility. And Mushmi Saleja, who is the manager of the LLP that will oversee the operation. Can I have the spelling of the names for the minutes? Or do you have a card? I have a card. That would be fine. I'm sorry. Then I'll spell my name. Why don't you write it on L, so then we'll be good. May I do one better? I do have the curriculum vitae related. Dr. Jelisi, that might be helpful to the board. And if you have one, you can ask the board. Basically, we are here to ask for a modification of an existing permit for 1398 this afternoon in Arlington Heights. And I just want to briefly set the stage for the location. In 1997, the Abriar Associates purchased land that was owned by the MBTA that was for many, many years a parking lot for the MBTA. And he later acquired the Maron printing building next door to it. And that was operating as a tail of rental at the time. The net result was his ability to combine those two acquisitions into what was then portrayed as a gateway into Arlington from Arlington Heights. I think the board then, in 1997 and then 2006, looked upon with great favor the proposal which resulted in the two buildings and the parking in the rear that is there now. In 2013, the board may recall that it granted an amendment to that existing permit and permits in order to allow Bagelville to operate where the proposal that's before you tonight is located, as well as to approve a very similar operation for care well urgent care services, which was to be located where the Sherman Williams operation is today. That was as a matter of right because it was less than 3,000 square feet. This proposal is 4,036 square feet. Consequently, because it's over 3,000 square feet, requires a formal hearing for the amendment. The proposal for the amendment is such that we are requesting At least your feet. Just speak up, I guess. Don't speak too soon, either. Just be noise. Right. In any event, the proposal for care well, I should say, required an amendment because we needed to move handicapped spaces to a location close to where the care well operation was to be. We're asking that that amendment be amended so that we can move those two handicapped spaces to a position where the new location for the urgent care facility will be. So we're looking for that amendment. Plus, we're looking for your approval of a special permit because we're going to be in excess of 3,000 square feet. Be happy to answer and respond to any questions the board might have. And try to provide any information that might help you reach a decision for our clients. Sure. Yeah, I do have two questions. I went over your plans here over the weekend. And I have a question of where are you planning to locate your trash? I can handle the X here. Tom, do I have to work with Bear Burn? Oh, I do. Gartner? Gartner, G-O-D-E-R-E-Y with Bear Burn development. If we look at this plan here, which shows the overall site for both buildings, we have a common dumpster enclosure, which is screened here. You'll see with an 8-foot chain link fence, which is used by all the tenants for common X-area trash. Yeah, and I understand that you probably use that for your labor waste and stuff like that. But what you're going to do with it? So for hazardous waste, we will utilize the service industry cycle, which does that for us at our washroom location as well. We have three, now that we've grown as an entity and missing much higher patient volume, we're doing about two pickups a week. OK, but where do you plan to store it? It would be within the existing space. Do you have the plan? Yes, I have. So this should set a red bag in there. This should set a red bag in there. This should set a red bag in there. Right there. OK, so that's a designated area for the washroom. Then it's handled in front of you. Then it's handled in the scolding. This should have a requirement by the Department of Health. I just did not see it on the plan as far as wood heads. And then that answers that question. Thank you. Well, the question is, yes, I understand you're wishing to relocate the hand-capped accessible parking close to your entry. You guys have a drop-off or a pick-up, designated parking area in the site plan there for yourselves. And let me clarify what I mean by that, OK? Most people, if they're sick, they're not going to drive themselves. They're going to be driven there. So I don't think we all know where your building is. There's no ensuite parking in front of your door there. I don't want people to be double parking out in front of the mass have to drop people off. That's been another cause of traffic in the nuisance. Is there a designated space somewhere where you park a lot, where you have a quick drop-off, where you just drop them off and take a pick-up and come in from the back? What's your preferred entrance? That is something that we've requested our landlord to approve two designated spots for a patient drop-off, for exactly what he needs. And do we have an answer on that? And we don't. We need to wait for further approval and figure out where those spaces will be designated. And any signage or anything like that will need to investigate further. So there's nothing in place right now where there's discussion. And then follow-up on that question there. Let's say something turns into urgent, and you require an ambulance pick-up. Because since you don't handle that kind of facilities here, that would be done in the rear or the front of the building. It would essentially be wherever the 911 folks want to bring their equipment, they usually arrive with one ambulance and one engine company. And as I was mentioning earlier to my side of the table, the sunrise experience and the ones on Mill Street, the housing on Mill Street and at Winslow Towers, in all of those situations, equipment arrives and they park where they want to park, depending upon the circumstances of the 911 call, wherever they're going to park, they're going to park. Even if we designated a location, they're still going to park at the most expeditious and convenient place for them. And the sunrise experience, which is right across the street from the development here, is that the ambulance pulls up to the door and the engine company stops on the avenue. And that's almost the same experience on Mill Street where the low-cost housing is, and also at Winslow Towers. I see a point where a fire truck is going to park out on the street. Yes. And that's clearly seen. They have the lights on, the strobes on. But what about those instances where they say, you have an ambulance pick-up? Are you calling up for an ambulance transfer from your place to a hospital? That's not a, let's say, it's not a 911 call. Well, we don't have that. It's only 911. It's only 911. It's only 911. It's only 911. So even in Watertown, we do about one-a-month kind of thing. But if you call 911 from your home, they cannot drop you off at urgent care facility. They got to take you to ER. Can't they with us? Yeah, I realize that. But let's say someone is ill and comes to urgent care and then develops into a, we can't handle this person here. That's a 911. Straight call, EMP, ACLS, have to show up with the engine and then they go, otherwise everything should be handled over there. May I just amplify on that? I should mention that the petitioners here also own a facility on Arsenal Road in Watertown, Arsenal Street in Watertown. And they handle in their space about 40 patients a day. Seven days a week. And their experience is that one call a month is to 911 average. And in the event they do show up, it's always in the front. Like I said, even if you have a designated spot, parking lot, we have right next to the building. And the school fight typically in the front. And the fire department there as well. So it would really depend on the EMP coordinator on duty that day. It's a concern. But you have a question. It's a good question because you're right. There are certain facilities where people get picked up in an ambulance just regularly. We don't do that. So ours is just someone sick comes in, let's say someone is having a chest pain, a heart attack. We're like, you've got to get to the ER. And that by law, we have to put him in an ACLS ambulance. 911 go out the door. And so it's not like, hey, just come and get him off with an ambulance. So that's not what we do. But some facilities do that, right? Only hospital-based satellite offices would do it. We're not a hospital-based system. We are a pre-standing urgent care system. It's a very different thing. But that's a great question. It's a very good question. If it's a non-emergent nature, and the patient needs to get back, and they're not willing to drive they got back for any reason, they cannot stop it. I think that's about it. We're going to call that an ambulance on the 911. But what I'm trying to lead to it is trying to get most of your vehicle traffic from Mass Ave to the back of the parking lot. Absolutely. That frees up the street. Yes. And it makes it less dangerous, just less, you know, a lot of things going on there. That's my main concern right there. That's too much I went ahead. OK. Just a couple questions. So you've got the reception desk here out of the farm. What's going to happen with the back entrance? OK. What's the flow going to be like? So because of the nature of this business, everything has to be centralized. So since we have Mass Ave, we have an entrance here so there's any wanting to update people, you know, coming by public transportation, you can enter through here, go down the corridor, and register at the front desk. Very good. OK. And then people from the back entrance were coming through here at the corridor. OK, so it's that corridor, I think. And that's where we have that. And is there a bell here? Or is it blocked? It's open door. We probably have a bell. So when we are there, some of them are walking through the door. There's a camera and the thing, so. OK. But the main reception would be right here where the patients would sit here and they'd registered. And then the medical assistant would call them and they'd take them to the exam room. I should emphasize that the original square footage for Bagelville was this area right here. And because of that whole question that you raised, it prompted the requirement of taking square footage from this currently vacant space. Oh, OK. Just allow it. Oh, that's what's going on. OK. We just wanted to make it visible. Yes. For people in computer science, so we want to take that extra space just for the corridor. Plus, we also want the parking people in the back. Yeah. Well, that's why my question is because I want to make sure that. I saw the reception up here and I got scared that someone would make it. So that's the reason for getting that extra space. How much will that be here? Because we want patients to focus it back here. OK. On the parking lot. OK. And on the front windows here, is the plan to keep them open and unshaded at this point? Because frankly, there's a few stores down there that have covered up all their windows. And I don't even think that's correct, basically. So I think we require these to stay open so to present a little bit better storefront to the neighborhood. I need to follow up with the town requirement. OK. And then the other time, we have this past tool like decals, which might just say vaccinations are available here. But it's. But otherwise, OK. It's really. But we do. We've kept them like half the windows. It's still open. You can still see. Yeah. And see from both ends. And again, it was allowed over there. Yeah. Yeah, I definitely would want you to work with staff and build a coordinator on that. And then lastly, and I think Andy's kind of talked about a little bit more. But I think that this right here, probably from my perspective, is especially lit up, is not what we'd usually find in a sign. And that I think what Andy's going to talk about is maybe just trying to put it as an underscore over here versus over there. It's just not. It's not typically something that we've done in town. Could you get it over here and just do some rearranging and get one long line that says. Walk into it. Walk into it. It's a week. Yeah, that's just. It looks a little. Yeah, it's. It's just the way they allowed. One of the towns allowed it in one of the recent locations. So they suggested we can always. This is not, you know, moving it around. Sure. You've got a lot of room in here. Can we then have another AMC doctors express logo right there? Because we have essentially two storefronts. Or can we have the word urgent care over here? I would prefer that the logo go there. But that it should be in a red background like that. OK. With white lettering. I'd rather get it all in here if you can. But if you're going to do it, just make it look nice instead of kind of clovery like this. This is, yeah, I think it'd be definitely nicer than the way it's. This looks like so much just writing on there. Yeah. So take a red panel and put it right in there like that. And then use your white letters so it's kind of nice and neat and clean and looks. Bruce was here and says white letters no, right? We can actually. I'm channeling Bruce. I said red letters. I meant red letters. Whatever you want to do. But on the red background. Obviously it presents the remnants of the actual location so this is done much nicer than the way it's looking right now. But we're happy to move just a little bit. And move all this here. This just looks like it's going to start blinking every other second. Yeah, it looks a little. That neon sound. So would you allow us to kind of work with the planning department on how would you want to develop this so that we can satisfy both the landlord. We can give them a permit and ask them to come back with the sign. Yeah, with the sign. We'd like to see the sign. Would you be willing to do that? Yeah. To represent the sign. No, I think what Lars and too, so long as, I mean. No, I'm sorry. Give the permit on the condition that it be reviewed with. That they have to come back. Either come back to the board with the signs or the staff. Staff approved. The very least they should come back to the staff. Yeah. Yeah, definitely. But anyway, so those are my comments for it. But it still will come to that. So in Watertown you have four or five, did you say, that are running through per hour? Examinants? Examinants. No, patience. Formality. And here it's, so it's four an hour there. And here's going to be six. We're hoping, because of the larger size. And our limitation in Watertown is the number of exam rooms. I see. And our size. And we have 18 exam rooms. So we see with two providers it's very easy, six isn't easy to do. And how does Watertown work with parking? We're looking now at your risk. You're requesting the 80% requirement, right? Eight to six. Yeah, with the parking. Yes. So it's, we really, our turnaround time is within the hour. Door to door. So each hour that we are seeing six patients, we will essentially be using six spots. Is that the way it's working in Watertown? We have a much tighter parking lot in Watertown. And we are carrying four patients with just a 15. 15, yeah, 15. Do you expect people to drive you well to take public transportation? How do they? We see everything, I'll be honest with you. Most of the people prefer to drive because, you know, people are safe. They want to just pull up right through the doors. They are intimate. So we really keep the turnaround time for that reason within the hours so that we can make sure, without compromising on the quality of care, we just want to make sure that the time spent where the provider is maximum instead of them just sitting and waiting in the waiting area or in the exam rooms. And that really helps. So you have 15 parking places in Watertown? Yes. And with less patients? Here you have. No, but we have another, not a cold time. We're a standalone facility there. So we share a space with... We have seven, we have seven spots for us. I see. And then the cold time next to us. So it's the largest 15 spaces. Oh, I see what you're saying. Seven designated spots there. And here you have eight. Might I point out about the parking, Mr. West, that the entire project has an 80% reduction. No, 20% reduction. But the original permits granted parking with the benefit of the reduction in the spaces. If we can honestly compare to Panera, it's going to be the way fewer cars. Panera was really a height. That's what I wanted to ask you. I don't think Bagelville ever had the traffic that Panera had by... You're saying it's part of a larger shared parking lot. Not a good parking. We're not at traffic congestion. So you think that the overall parking lot, 67 spaces. There's 68 shared non-exclusive spots for all the tenants in the plaza. Right. Eight of those will be designated for... None of which are going to be designated in the sense that they're exclusive for their use. It would really just be use for the overall center. Can you identify yourself for the minutes, please? I'm sorry, Christine Cannon. I'm the representative for Bear Briar Development. Christine Cannon? Cannon CA and I know him. And you're finding that's working out? I think you hit the nail on the head. Panera was really the main driver and people would come in, have lunch, bring their laptop and spend a few hours. Bagelville, I don't think, had that same traction. Not only did they not capture the audience, but the audience that they did capture tend to come in, either take their food and leave, or come in, have their lunch and leave. So you don't have that same kind of campground atmosphere that Panera created, which caused some of the parking restraints at that time. But you're going to have... These are going to be full of these eight parking spaces because you're churning through. Yeah, coming in a little bit... Eight per hour, yeah. That load is going to be adequately taken care of, do you think, by your overall... Yeah, some of the other... the co-tenants in that bazaar don't have such a heavy parking requirement. For example, there's a massage envy and cap unit opposite to where their space will be, and those are mainly appointments. You know, do a lot of walk-ins, so those are kind of scheduled. And we can certainly get a customer account from them to get an understanding of that. You know, same thing, any Petco, you kind of come in, you do your shopping, and you go, I'm sure we'll only have the same idea. So there's not a lot of people coming in and spending a lot of time at the plaza, and I think that's what helps with keeping the parking turning over. Do you have any management of that parking? We have a property manager who visits the site regularly at least two to three times a week. And although we do not... he's not in charge of policing in regulating the parking there. He does monitor it and report back to us. And like you guys said, with Panera no longer at the plaza, there really hasn't been an issue with parking for the tenants there. Do you encourage employees to park anywhere and do they park there? We encourage employees to use public parking opposed to the parking that's on-site. We ask them to use the on-site parking for customers. So where do they park across the street? I think some people park on the street and I think some people may park in public blocks. Is that a public lot across the street? Yes. Right next to Sunrise. It was designated as part of the Sunrise Improvals that regardless of the sign that says it's reserved, the Sunrise, I think it was designated. We had talked about that. So do you need a car to get there? I'm sorry. Does one need a car to get into that? It's the honor system right now. It's self-policed by the businesses up there. Chuck Papp is Ion the budding property in 1386. It's self-policed right now by the employees and business owners that use it. Occasionally the MBTA sneaks in and something has to be said. How much of it is able to be used by employees of the businesses? That whole side is open to all the business owners to use. How many employees are going to be at this unit? At a time we'll have 15. 15. But the only part that we provide even in our Watertown location is just the provider. The staff has to find parking of the parking for the two spots that we needed for the two buildings. Yeah, those are the two buildings. So we have a physician and a PA who would really provide on-site parking. Anyone else? We'd be expecting to see six patients an hour and then two for instance eight spots would be required. So are they talking about the number of people working? There's only five. 15? Overall. But at a time. I'm so sorry. They're all driving. They may or they may take public transport. We have folks right now come to Watertown on public transport. It depends on their needs. There's a bus that drives right in front of folks. A lot of people take the public because they don't have cars. Some people drive the parking of public cars. It would be useful because we're putting this together as part of our whole town parking. They call it net parking management plan. But to know that there's half of being made to not have the employees park where your customers are parking or at least to minimize the effect. I think that happens quite a bit where these parking places get plugged up by the people who can potentially. So it's a question of how many are available if it was five. It could be less than five because some are taking public transportation but that a number of them might be encouraged and able to use a lot across the street so that that would leave the eight spaces available for the mixed use that's going on. And it enhances the benefit of the home. Would you be willing to put that as a condition that you will be looking at managing the employee parking such that it frees up the maximum amount? Right now in Watertown we have a neighboring lock where the employee will park. They don't park on our center's line. So you have to kind of coordinate with the businesses that are already around there. We'll do what we can to help our employees park elsewhere so that the spots are available truly for the patients. It's better as a board I think for us because we're giving an 80% already but we want to start hearing for obvious reasons solutions that are good solutions. We have our center administrator that enforces this and then when the time it gets worse you know when the snow comes and the parking lot gets more tighter you have to be sure not to reinforce them. Mr. West, it also works to the business owners advantage that the employees away from what are lessing with parking. Then the only other thing I have is the lighting. Something you mentioned Laura about the lighting and neat details not given. Oh, fully shielded. What is that? Was there information about the lighting? Maybe the lighting isn't changing. There's no change in the lighting. Will there be light on the sign? Outside sign? Yeah. Then there's no issue on the light. We'll open it up for public questions. Just some comments on listening to your emergency vehicle, the occasional 911, just keep in mind if you're on the street, if the fire truck is on the street which you'll have to be which he does on other calls that have been there you then stop the bus traffic because they cannot get in and they can't get out of their lot. So just something to keep on mind on that. The current lot that we're using and her first herd 15 we couldn't handle that but five can handle fine just keep in mind that's a shared lot also still for sunrise. There are some days that it's completely full so it would be best if you can get some of the employees to do public transportation. There is nowhere else. There is no offsite lot anywhere up in the heights. The only alternative is on the street which is time limited. So just can urge that. My personal opinion I'm disappointed on the use of this building because this goes completely against all the things we've talked about are planned for the retail district. It takes away another spot of retail. It takes another service or restaurant which would have been greatly a better choice there but in no way would that have that influence any business that fits in a proper space on that. The other thing is we still have one store open there so all the thought process still has to be what's going there. Will that then if we're constantly always approving buildings at 80% parking. I personally am a guest on developments especially when there's alternatives. There were alternatives when it's built but that's too late on that. The other thing I'll mention is anytime that building changes use my parking lot changes use and I get tired of being the bad guy of kicking the other customers out because our parking lot is much more convenient because they drive by the building the single entrance parking lot. My driveway is right there. Your building and your use is right there and when Jenny Craig was there we could have paid somebody who made money kicking them out. My error took a year or so of training until we got people but just keep that in mind when you do open up that when your customers come in just maybe ask them did you park in back in case they did park next door for me. That's all I have. Any other comments? Anything else from the board? We can make a motion I think. We'd like the science to come so there's a few conditions that we want to make sure just the general conditions are already in there and then a few additional special conditions as well. To modify the signage from what's presented to consolidate it in a single area or augment the suggested location in a more attractive way. No? Yeah, no. Do you want to come back here or do you want this to happen? I guess I want it to come back. If you get rid of that completely I'd say... I'd prefer to get rid of it completely. I agree and I think it can come back to staff. I think it can come to staff if it just does here. If it's just one sign it can go to staff but if you're playing around if you expand to the wall I think I'd like it to come back. Or I think we bear enough. I wanted to say something about and with the condition that Tenant employs parking management practices which reduce employee parking within the main lot as well as monitoring overflow monitoring parking that would be designated I'm trying to say not to park in his lot. Absolutely and you know we see that in Watertown and we do work with it and encourage people to use transit sometimes. And to utilize the spaces provided in the main lot rather than other businesses. By the main lot you mean... We require applicants to kind of explain where parking is appropriate and available and to afford other lots. So that they actually actively say as the gentleman said there's a sign there that says parking for this facility within the lot only. Sure and so there is a parking a very clearly labeled parking sign on the monument sign in the center that directs traffic that should direct traffic directly into the back entrance where her customers will be there. And right now our current experience is sometimes patients you know that say they're driving in they don't realize they're put into the wrong parking lot if the neighbor comes and says you know they parked in my lot the staff just tells them they're very happy to move it to the spot they just don't know but we will implement that as well actively. We do that in Watertown just you know sometimes people are not focusing where the parking lot is now. So if there's if there is ample room in the parking lot it might be better for the employees to park in the lot rather than on the street because that's where the casual shoppers are. I'm talking about the lot across the way. But Austin Park is time limited so it's not like the employees would park there they can't be going out there all the time. I don't think that works for employee parking. Employee parking should be across the way as well as in the other lot. Or by transit. That's what they want to encourage. The point is to get the public to be able to use all of the street as much of the street spaces and the parking spaces so you get more active, you get more availability and business does better because you can park you have a good experience. I'll put a condition. So I sort of moved that the special permit for application by Health Recs LLC, DVA Doctors Express be approved with the conditions set for. I second that. All in favor. Thank you. Thank you very much. We'll either meet at the conference. Am I going to be great or the I think so. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, okay. Thank you. Sure. Sure. I can tell you, Tara has been primarily was one of the main issues of the larger restaurant, people spent a lot of time there and they had the capacity to see you know 45 board people every given time. where a problem was created. We're not seeing those same issues today. So when you go back there on a busy time, are there empty spots? Absolutely. A lot of them. 10? Official reasons. 10 plus. I'd say 20 plus. As I left there, I'd go by there, and I'd go in the back, and we'd obviously see 15, 20, 20. Yeah. OK. That's kind of what I wanted to get a sense of. And then I would say. There are employees in the back. That's a better place. We would rather not have tenants develop that habit in the event that we did provide a restaurant use later down the line. Because once tenants kind of get into a habit, it's very, very difficult to regulate it. And we would like to be able to keep that lot available for customers only in the event that we did have somebody who had higher parking use, I guess. Which floor footage is in that vacant space right now? So with this now being moved forward, the existing space is 2,400 square feet. They're going to take about 500 square feet of that. It's going to be reduced down to about 1,900 remaining. 1,900. About 1,900 square feet remaining. Give and take. And when that wall is moved over, we'll have to remeasure it to get an exact square footage. But it's going to be in that range. Do you have anybody? Are you looking at anybody for that space? Sure. And we're kind of staying along the health and wellness theme. In a 1,900 square foot space, it would be difficult to put a real attractive restaurant. I know that the other gentleman is kind of encouraging more restaurant use. But we're kind of keeping with the health and wellness theme. We are negotiating right now with a user that would be similar platform to Massage Envy. It's in that service beauty category. And so I think it would help with the Massage Envy sales as well as hair cuttery. I think it's a lot of the same customer. Couple of tree. Yeah. Thank you for coming. Sure. Thanks so much for having us. And you're OK with moving the hand to cut spaces? They said if they talked about that, that would do it. Yeah. Provided it as part of the lease. And now I think it's just a part of making sure that it's a regulatory. Everything involves that with that. I'm assuming a curb that's moving with, is it right? Exactly. Yeah, so there's going to be a lot of movement. He said a lot. No, there's a curb cut. They showed it, yeah. They showed it. In the front? Ramp. No. Oh, in the back. So that'll have to get relocated. And there's some regulations that go along with that. I don't know if the sidewalk might need to be widened. There's some other regulations that kind of go another part of the package. Yeah, it was pretty useful. And anything else, please feel free to send me an email or call me. I will. I have my registration there. Thank you. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Moving on, discussion about zoning amendments for upcoming town meeting. I have a report from the massive planning of this addition committee. OK. I'll call on one. We met. The Managing Plan and Pivotations Committee met once. And then each of the, they formed three working groups. One was to look at changes to the residential zoning to deal with the problem of large additions and tear downs and much bigger houses going in. And then one subcommittee, not subcommittee working group was met to talk about mixed use and parking. And then we also had a group to talk about the historic grant that we were thinking about the plan for. But we're now not thinking about the plan for that because it turned out everything we wanted to apply for had been done. We just didn't know it. So we do have the all day dog, which you weren't here for that, but these people came in last month and said they wanted to do a dog boarding, like a dog daycare during the day, but also overnight boarding. And our viola does not allow that now. So they have a 10 registered voters petition coming in to change the zoning to allow overnight. So that is definitely going to the board. And Ted helped them write that. So the two other things are more complicated. So the residential, the meeting that we had about the residential zoning was with the billy inspector. And he came up with the idea of counting the garage area in the square footage, which makes the house in relation to the lot bigger. And I mean, the square footage counts so that. Well, basically what it is, is it increases the amount of open space required. So right now the open space required on residential lots is linked to the size of the house that you put on it. So included right now, garage area is not included. The gross square footage calculation, this would include it. And thus add 30% of that actually added space to the required set-aside for open space. We also would consider increasing the amount of gross square area set-aside for open space as a means of further control with massing. Looking at possibly going from 30% of gross square for open, usable open space to 40%. And we're. From 35 to 40%? From 30 to 40%. Right now, the minimum is 30%. Open space? A gross floor area is reserved for open space on the lot. And we're looking for the 40%. So that will control the massing that the house can't. It won't be able to be quite as big. There's also we're looking at and working with the engineering department to put a maximum grade for driveways. Right now, there's a number of developments with new developments with driveways and garages beneath. The habitable levels and basements, some of them are very, very steep. And they're able to fit, because the driveways are so steep, they're able to fit larger homes than just along the walks. And the building instructor was in favor of having a maximum grade for driveways, not only to help control the size of buildings on small lots, but also to improve egress and just make sure developers build driveways that people can get into and out of, especially during the winter. I guess I want to add one thing for Andy, in particular, that it doesn't deal with the problem of having the big driveway in front of the house with the two garages and the big curb cut on the sidewalk. And if you go to a street that has a number of those, you'll see it's like huge curb cut and then a little bit of sidewalk and then another huge curb cut. And we haven't really. Two garages? Sometimes there's two car garages at a two-family house. We'll go next to each other. Oh, yeah, it took two minutes. Well, it could be a double wide. It could be a large garage that might hold one larger car and then have space left over for storage or whatnot. But they're fairly, they're the biggest garages that can fit underneath the town hall. Right, and it's a 20 foot, how wide can the carpet be, 24? 20 feet. Well, the radius is 24 feet, but the driveway is 20 feet. If the garage is down below, is it still within FAR? And you're a recommendation? Well, right through the building inspector recommended against implementing NFAR calculation as part of the zoning. But it's within, it gets counted as the floor area. It's not counted now as the floor area. Right now, gross floor area does not include attached or accessory parking. Including underground garages. Right, we're proposing to include parking space now in gross floor area measure. Whether it's above grade or below grade. Right, towards the FAR. Well, there's no FAR requirement for residential zoning districts right now. But the way it plays out is that the gross floor area, you have to have open space is 30, I think it's 35%. 35% of the floor area has to be open space. Oh, and now it's, yeah, the usual open space required on a lot is linked to the non gross floor area. Not footprint, just gross floor area. Gross floor area, not footprint. The total gross floor area. Okay, so now you, but the important distinction is right now that does not include parking spaces. Are they attached garages or attached garages to the main building? So if you want to put your two-car garage in your house, you've got to have a smaller living area. Well, the whole trip, the house would have to be smaller is what you're arguing. But when you're trying to just make it smaller buildings, I'm sorry, you're trying to make smaller buildings fit more on scale of the character of the context of the neighborhood, right? Correct. And so you're adding, you're counting the garage as part of that space. Correct. And you said the other way, they're only just increasing the square footage open area, right? You're doing two things. Yes, well, as a result of these discussions that we had with the residential working group of the master plan implementation committee, we are right now advocating looking at two primary ways of controlling residential building mass. One is including parking area into the gross floor area measurement. And the other is increasing the minimum amount of usable open space to 40% of the gross floor area. So the coverage of the lot, it's now going to be? Well, and there's also a lot covered standard, which is 35%. That's the maximum footprint you can have right now. And are you proposing to do all of those, or is one of those? No, right now in R0, R1, and R2 zoning districts, the maximum lot coverage is 35%. We're not proposing to change that. Also, right now, the minimum amount of usable open space required on a lot is 30% of your gross floor area. We're proposing to increase that to 40%. And that's it. And we're also, right now, gross floor area does not include parking garage. So you would do both. That's what we're saying. Exactly. It's hitting on FAR. I know, it's in roundabout way. Right, and that was the building inspectors suggestion, not. Yes, no, no. I just wanted to say, we looked at setting an FAR, right? Now there's no FAR. And it just became tricky, because in some neighborhoods you might want to have the numbers were like around 50, 55, 60, and where the bigger lots are, you might want to low a little more or a little less. And it just, since we have to go by zoning district, we can't go street by street, neighborhood by neighborhood. I didn't feel comfortable with any number that we came up with, that this was the right number for the whole town. So that's why we then started to say, well, let's look at it in relation to the law. And then also, there was this problem with the garages where there are these big, big garages that are not counted at all towards the floor area. I can see how it varies, you're saying. So if you have a regular two-family house in East Arlington, you couldn't go in there and put a garage in it for free, so to speak, for no effect. You could add that and lift the house up. Right, which is what the developers are doing here. So it's, whereas it doesn't prevent those houses from being nicely, that's the neighborhood, that's the character of the neighborhood, next to each other. Whereas if you did an FAR, you might, excuse me, try to change that character of that neighborhood because you have to reduce. Well, they're still subject to the total coverage of. But if you add an FAR requirement, they'd be bound by the lot coverage requirement and the FAR requirement, bound by two, and the open space requirements. I'm just trying to be curious how you analyze the neighborhood type. Well, we used assessor's records and GIS records, and I looked at every parcel and calculated an FAR based on the assessor's records. And say, like in some neighborhoods, what was the range of FARs? There was a wide range of different neighborhoods. I looked at it by street, by precinct, by district, zoning district, and there was some neighborhoods had a wide variation and others not as wide in Arlington Heights, especially around the Dallin School. Those were a little bit more uniform, those streets were a little bit more uniform. They averaged around an FAR of 0.4 to 0.5. That was typical of post-war suburban housing, especially smaller units geared for veterans and blue-collar people. The interwar suburban development up around the water tower in Arlington Heights and around Robbins Farm tended to be a bit larger that FAR averages about 0.54, 0.53. They were built for a different market segment. And then the Victorian era homes that survive, they average about, their FAR averages about 0.53, 0.54. They're higher than they are? They're bigger. And they're bigger. But they seem to sit back and work. Right, some of the lots are bigger as well. And what about in East Arlington? Oh, well then in East Arlington, you get more two-family homes, those out there are much higher. They average about 0.8, 0.9. And what about the newer houses that have been built? The newer houses, houses built after 2000 average, around 0.67, 0.7, so significantly higher. The town-wide average for all types of single-family housing is an FAR of 0.49. I'm just trying to get my hands around what you're saying here. And I'm trying to see how does that affect families or not families buying homes? I'm just saying, for example, say families right now that buy homes in Arlington, most likely they'll be due income, two cars. If you start adding, they're gonna need two cars just for working. So you start adding that car square footage into the house square footage and you're taking away some of the square footage from the house. So you're living in two-bedroom, instead of three-bedroom, so. I'm just, I don't know, I'm not saying, I'm just thinking. And what happens then, now that now there are less three-bedroom homes because of this change and this less families? Or it might be less, you know, recreate basement, you know, discretionary space as a playroom or something like that. But that's not counted now anyways. I mean, well, the basement is a basement. I mean, you don't count the basement. Well, it is counted if it's, height is over seven feet, three inches. And it's not used for mechanical purposes. So that is counted right now. That same thing with attic space, if it's over seven feet, three inches, that's, and it's not making. It needs to be closed, heated, and everything else. Yes, yes. But I'm not sure. I'm just questioning the fact that, you know, I don't want to just encourage families from living in arctic. Right. Well, household size has been dropping for years. And so we're seeing, you know, relatively smaller households and have it a lot more space. So your point is well taken that it could, in some cases, inhibit the number of bedrooms being built on certain lots, on smaller lots. But I think what we're seeing now is very large homes being built for relatively smaller households. There's a lot of room in these new homes that can shrink down. No, I understand what you're trying to say. And I encourage what you're trying to say. I'm not just encouraging that, okay? I'm just trying to see what the ramifications are by just making this thing happen and then what it affects on all the areas. Sure. And that's, and I don't know my, I don't know the answers. Okay, right. I'm just bringing it up as a question. Sure. And we thought a little bit about that too and working with the committee. Right. In the process of the master plan, one of the complaints that people had was that the houses that are being built are just different than the houses that are in the neighborhood now and they're changing the character of the neighborhood and they're looming over the smaller, less tall houses. So we're trying to respond to that criticism and see if we can find something that will help to control the, you know, to keep things more in keeping with the way the networks are now. And they'd be done with heights, setbacks. I don't know. I'm just bringing up things up. Just, we could consider, you know, we've had thought of different setback controls too. Right now in residential districts they're 10 feet side yard setbacks. One thought we were looking at was having a 25 foot total setback and one side could be, you know, two 12 and a half setbacks or one side could be 10 feet, the other side could be 15 feet or something like that. That's one idea we had considered if we could take a look at that again. Sure. I'm not trying to say, no, I'm just trying to do it. I encourage it. I'm just concerned by doing these two things here what happens, you know, they're gonna stop building two car garages. Fine. And they just do two bedrooms in because I don't think the car is gonna go away when it's due income. In some neighborhoods, one, you're seeing more cars with one, more houses with one car in East Arlington, walkable to airway, but less so. We spoke with some realtors last week and they said like Pleasant Street is the cut off. East of Pleasant Street is a less car focused population. The new owners and the west of Pleasant Street is still more two car people. So that's worth it. Yeah. The bylaw still requires two parking spaces per house, so. Regrettable. But they're not in garages necessarily. No, they're not. It could be a driveway. It could be tandem. It could be. On the side. Yeah. Not the front. You can't park in the front. Not in the front. Right here for you. Say like on a 6,000 square foot lot if we added in for a square footage, can we give them an estimate of what the difference in the house with the house size would be? Not today, the next time we get back. We could work out. Why don't we try that? I think it would be interesting because there's each neighborhood kind of is a meal. Yes. Take each neighborhood and test it and see what would happen. Literally to the house. We're setting up an exercise, the building inspector will work with them. I think that's useful because what you're doing may just be right. It just has to be tested against. Yeah, we'll be able to prove it or else we're not going to win. Yeah, yeah. Right, right. Yeah, yeah. Do you have any thoughts about the driveway problem? The driveway? Well, I agree with that. I know you don't like this, right? But. Because I think it just breaks up the lots and now you've got this big ramp in front of you. It's not a good model for any kind of housing. It's not very welcoming. And you can't walk across it. So now you've got a break in your whole, there's no yard there. It's a gully. I don't think it's a great housing model, but I don't know how it's going to be. That's what's being built, like a hundred percent of what's being built. It still has, it's had that now, yet. Yeah. That's the jersey model we're after. I think there's one on Kylin Avenue right now that's on a real steep driveway. I booked in and I said, well, I don't see how that could be safe. We went down to Margaret Street, which is right in Starlington and there's a whole row of them. It's a whole row of them. It's just like there's no sidewalk there. It's a little driveway. And they're very steep. Yeah, very steep. Yeah, I would imagine that some cars would hit there undercarriage or something. Going into the bottom out into the garage. Is there some sort of zoning right now for, can the driveways be, has to be so far away from each other? Not that I, not that we have seen. And what about curb cut width? Curve cut width is prescribed. If you have a 20 foot opening, the maximum curb cut width of the radius is 24 feet. So you can have a double wide. Right. A sloped wall, sloped. Right. If you have one driveway, you can't have two except by special permit. One driveway, but double width. Right. Yeah. 24 feet, as you see with every hand. That's two yards. That's two family homes. And then we have a frontage of 60 feet, so that means almost half of the driveway. Yeah, right. Third, a third can be driven out of here. All right, well, we'll have to keep going. Well, maybe that's something to attack. Well, we're trying, but we'll have to come up with it. That's hard. To one car. And then you stack. Mm-hmm. Like everybody does. Mm-hmm. That's, that's, that's what you have to allow. We'd have to change the parking to allow parking on the driveway in the front yard. Because now you can park in the driveway if your driveway's on the side. Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah. I see. But not at the front. Which I understand why that is, but in this case, it's just added to wide drive. And if you push parking to the side, then you have the, instead of having one big curb cut in the middle, you have two 10-foot curb cuts on the side, so you're breaking it up. You're differentiating the segmentation, but you still have a lot of segmentation. So to add to those curb cuts, still the same. Right. Yes. It's something that we'll look at. We'll definitely look at that. We'll work with that. We'll try to refine that. Would either of you or any of you would want to be on that subcommittee that if we can get a working group together to talk about it again with the master plan implementation committee and the building inspector, is anybody interested in trying to attend? Sure. I can. Oh, no, no, that's good. There's always been an alternate. OK. I didn't want to wait, please. That's your interest. I don't want to know. I'm interested that you'll fill me in. Right. The meeting's here. Well, for the next meeting, we'll loop you in. We'll loop you in. OK. Sure. And then, what did you want to talk about? Did you have some suggestions as to what? Yes, I have a couple of questions and a couple of points I wanted to raise. One is just a question. We've all seen examples of this. House has totally torn down, but two walls are left standing at the corner. What's the deal with that? And then they build a monster house on top of it. I think that's a question of a while, but I think that's what is considered a renovation. Because they could tear the whole house down and build a new house as it were. Oh. Good night. With the same setbacks? Maybe they're trying to. I'm not conforming law. Are you doing that? There's so many of them. I can't believe they're all non-conforming laws. I'm just curious. I don't know how to answer that question. I would guess what you said, that they're using a grandfather's addition. A lot of them are corner laws, where this happens. But anyway, that's just a question. I guess nobody seems to know the answer to that. But I deep ask you. Well, as I mentioned when I was with you before, I have a small committee that's working on some zoning ideas. And I'm glad to hear that we kicked around some of the same things you guys are kicking around. We thought about FAR. We thought about much lower numbers than you were talking about, certainly much lower than 0.67. We talked about. Do you want to come sit and join us? Want me to sit up there? Well, we're talking about it. Talking about it. That makes it easier, OK. And another idea was saying, OK, the side yard setback. We haven't cast anything concrete yet. We're still doing research. But the side yard setback remains 10 feet. But it must be at least 30 feet from the house next door. Say, EG 30 feet. Oh, in the exterior walls? Yeah, OK. So that, well, you see what the point is. No, I don't. You're going in some of the same direction. The side yard setback is 10 feet, but the lot line has to be. No, the building wall. So if somebody else is going closer, you have to go farther back. So the distance between the two building walls? The distance between the two, instead of being 20 feet, which could be 15 feet. I know a guy in East End whose house is that far from the border. You know, it was built 150 years ago or something. But so something was next to him. It couldn't be, because that would be the whole lot. You see what I mean. It's part of the crowding issue where these new houses are so big. Another thing we looked at is looking at the how you measure this third floor attic space. If you notice, a lot of the third floors, the half-story third floors are so close to a full-story third floor that I used to say, how did they get to there? And apparently, the building department has some curious way considering what's usual space, what's not. There's a particularly egregious example in Venner Road, the house in the corner of Hillsdale that on the cocares is old lot, where it's a full-exposed basement, two floors, and a third floor that's the one I mentioned at town meeting last year, the third floor is kind of a few shallow slopes. I don't know how to get to that. If I could just interject, there's one area that we did look at. Two is right now, usable spaces defined as anything over 7 foot 3 inches. In our zoning code, under the mask building code, it's 7 feet. And we propose, as kind of a minor amendment, is reducing our standard down to 7 feet instead of 7 foot 3. Because right now, if you build a 7 foot basement, it's not considered as a story. Or an attic. Or an attic. Yes, if you have a 7 foot attic, it's not considered part of a half-story. Even though it's habitable under mask building code. So we're proposing to reduce our standard down to 7 feet for habitability instead of 7 foot 3. Does that make much difference? Yes, I think it could. Around 6 feet. So if they put. That would attack FAR. Yes. But it doesn't attack the massing, is what you're called. Massing is part of what we're looking at, as you know, is these big houses looming over the little house next door. And so that massing is having that third floor. So, you know. And you raise a great point. We're also looking at the height, which basements are allowed to come up. That's another thing we're proposing. We're proposing, instead of 4 foot 6, that we have right now, to reduce that to 3 feet. Reduce that by a foot and a half. And that would help a little bit, at least, to bring houses down. OK, another aspect we're looking at is kind of related to that, is this curious way they have of measuring from the original grade when they're talking about the height of the building on slopey lots. And that, again, that thing on Vanna Rose, the worst example I can think of. That the measurement should be from the lowest part of the exposed basement to the highest peak of the roof. And I can't look at the building and say, well, that's 35 feet, or that's 37 feet, or it's 25 feet. I don't know. I can't look vertically. But to get it all in, it would cut the looming part. And the C. We're looking at the thing I mentioned earlier, the question I raised earlier about the two remaining walls and the possibly nonconforming building or lot or something. We would propose amending that. And those are exempted from special permit. They're exempted from the large addition. So it really basically tear the whole house down, except for these two walls. And then you build this monster thing on top of it. Every neighborhood is sustained, one of these things I hear about in all over town. That we take out that exception that built on the original footprint or the original foundation or something like that. Because the original foundation, they include the patio in the back and the slab under the side garage. And you end up, because the best example I think of recently is Clyde Terrace, like the first house on the left, as you walk the hill towards Winchester. That was a little, quickly like a little house. And now there's a big monster house, which is for sale. That has grown to mushroom, what was there? That existing wall is at a low grade, right? At the corner, it's dipping. And they can claim that that's the average grade or that's the grade that they can do. I don't think they're building on the original foundation. It's the average grade. So they don't have to deal with the average grade. Actually, that's about a fifth is a flat lot. Because it's after the crest of the hill. The other thing we're looking at is, oh, well, the garages. Now, that was raised, I think, Lauren, in the memo you had before the board last time. What can we do about the very thing you were talking about, these other things? A solution that we were talking about is saying that the front of the garage must be at least 10 feet behind the front wall of the house. Do away with that whole tunnel under the house. You're still going to have garage doors in the front. Just at least the door a bit more prominent. It'll be back. And if they wanted to put it in a trench like that, we know why would they. Well, maybe they just go away. Can't tell what development is. Well, they want to put it underneath in a basement space. In a lot of cases, they don't want to. If the door were back, at least it wouldn't be that door scaring you right in the face. It's quite as bad, particularly if you want to do a double one. Also, the other point I should like to make is not so much a building point, but a social and environmental point. These little one and a half story capes to a lot of more built like after the war are the nearest thing we have in town to what we call a semi-affordable single-family home. They're pretty small, but a lot of people growing up there and raising families there. You tear them down and replace it with one of these mega things that they want a million bucks for. You talk about families coming to Arlington. They can't afford a million bucks if they're ordinary people. I live in a story and a half cave. OK. You know what I'm talking about. It's my house. You might want some more space sometimes. And the aspect of that is that semi-affordable house which would be more affordable if our zoning laws didn't allow the mega house to be built on top of it because it couldn't just get the land value. That was built probably a long time ago of good materials, not garbage board and the soft wood you could push a nail through with your thumb. And all that is taken down, taken away, goes out of town in a truck to the dock. And so that waste of those materials and that labor and all the stuff that went into that building is just thrown out. That's not very sustainable. We're supposed to be a green community. We should be thinking about things like that, both on the affordability aspect and on just conserving the materials, the time, the labor that went into creating that build. I'd like to think about how, because part of it is it's just a big block. They build it so high. Some of the things you're talking about could help that. The basement production potentially, if you look at the houses that seem scaled, they're either low, like in heights, or they're shaped so that the whole thing isn't one big, high block, which is what these houses look like to me. Wait a minute. There's no shape to it at all. Well, when we were driving around looking at different homes, you definitely could. There was a discernible difference between the homes. In my neighborhood, at least, that I know had an architect design them. And they're much more varied in terms of height and facade treatment. And the ones that weren't designed by an architect, they're a slab. Contra, that's cookie cutter. Yes. One size fits all. It's like a monopoly hotel. I kind of like it. I don't know. I don't know a lot. You really can see the difference. I don't know how we encourage that in zoning, but it really makes a big difference. So you have a height limit, or a number of storage limits. That's what we have. Two and a half storage. Two and a half storage. Could you limit the size of an attic? Because what's happening is it just, there's no set. Well, I was thinking, right now, we have in residential R1, R0, and R2 zones, the height limit is 35 feet and two and a half storage. I've been thinking in the back of my head, instead of 35 feet, how about 30 feet and two and a half storage. The one point you're going to hit in town meeting is, and I think we're going to run into this anyway. Just to be clear, it is that you're going to make a lot of buildings not conform. And that's, of course, the grandfather. But if they want to do something different, it may have a big variance. I don't disagree with that. And I wish I knew what some of the heights of these buildings were. But part of it is the way they measure the 35 feet. And that's something we'd like to get at. And you have to deal with the fact that half of our length is on a hill, or some hill. And so you have to be fair to the guy's building on a hill. But you don't have to let them put his 35 feet on the highest part of the hill. Well, there was some concern in the committee and in the working group that going from 35 down to 30 might encourage, it might have unintended consequences. So we're kind of looking at those. The other thing that we're looking into is trying to do some research on what other towns are doing to deal with the definition of half-story, and how to get it back. Because I think that's something that we all have a concern about. Well, I think that half-story, in what sense of what is the half-story is important. Is it important? It's important not to get rid of that. Not to get rid of it? No, no, we don't want to get rid of it. We want to see how other towns are just maybe they don't have any better idea. How do they measure it? Is that what you mean? How do they measure it so that you can get the traditional half-story, not this thing that's a little slope and forth. The gambrel roof is the half-story. Yes. So what they're doing now, and traditional houses and so on, now they're going up, and they're just doing all dormers. I think that's what you have to do, because if you get rid of that, I think if you get rid of that, you start having these flat rooms everywhere, and you lose the character of letting them in. So that's what we're trying to get away. Is there a way to operate on that, just to reduce the bulk, which is sheer bulk of it? Right now, our zoning is a lot three feet wide. Or the percentage of space above in that half-story is reduced. It becomes maybe like a quarter-story or something like that. With the amount of occupiable space, so you can't just go up and right. We can definitely look at that with the director of inspection services. Because if you're not allowed to occupy it, you're not going to build it. Well, right now, a half-story is defined as if more, your space is a full-story in our zoning bylaw. If more than half of its horizontal space is over 7 foot 3 inches tall. So you can have an attic space, if less than half of that horizontal space is 7 feet 3 inches tall, then anything under that counts as a half-story. If more than 50% of it is 7 foot 3 inches, then it's a full-story. So they're designing these roofs so that 49% of the horizontal space is at 7 feet 3 inches, and the rest is under. And that's how they're designed. But you can put, for example, what they do is, you don't need your closet to be 7 feet high. A closet can be 6 feet high, I'd say. But it's only foot less than you do it, so on. The storage areas, and so on. Maybe in front of the bathroom. Now, if we lower that standard from 7 feet 3 to 7 inches to comply with the building code as it is now, that'll help a lot. Does it even help a lot? I think that's a good thing. That's a very good thing. Are you committed to the building code standard for that? Yes. As a matter of fact, our standard used to, back I believe in the 80s, there was a change in the mass building code from 7 feet 3 inches for habitable space. Our zoning code adopted that change to comply. But we have to adopt that? I don't think we have to. But it's good to be, it makes sense to me, at least, to be congruent with it. But then it dropped, right? Right, then now the mass building code has dropped again to 7 feet for habitable space, so. But we're still at 7'3. We're still at 7'3. So you could build a third story right now all of 7 feet, and that would not count as, yeah, that's good. Right, so I think it's important that we, you know, it is a small change, but it could have been a matter of time. I guess that's why I didn't realize that. I think the view of the fact that it is so difficult to make small changes is not a bad thing, because we can see what impact it really has. And we're not so, you know, making a radical change. It's not really a change as we were realizing back with it. Right, I think that's the approach. Which the bylaw originally was, how do you know that makes it easier to adopt? Yeah. John, I'd like to meet with your group. Okay. You're meeting against them? We haven't scheduled our next meeting where we have some research assignments that we're working on. I guess mine is coming to this meeting to see what you guys are up to. So. Check. It seems to me we're, we have the same or similar goals. And we're thinking about some similar, kind of similar tools to get there. So I think we're not across purposes. So maybe, you know, hopefully all our efforts can be consolidated and redeveloped or bring in some set of zoning bylaw amendments that everybody is happy with and hopefully go. We like the master plan, a few cranks will object. And everyone else will vote for it. Sly girl, sail girl. Okay, all right. Well, let's talk. Keep me informed of what you're doing. Oh, okay. Give me some email addresses. You don't have my email? Oh, I will. I must have your email. We can give him a copy. Pay to my email because I before A. You gave us a nice copy list of all our board members in there, Chris. Oh, I think so. And that has your, I got this. If you give me another one, I'll give this to John. No. Okay. Here we are. That's, do give me another one. That's a good valuable thing. Yes, it is. That's okay. They're still missing a member. Well, that's a notice. Yeah, we are missing a member. The state appointee, we're missing. I understand from someone who's sometimes touched with the state that they have a million appointments to make and that they're doing them one per day. So they might get them all done by the time the term is up or something. Now that's a slight exaggeration, but I mean, it's never taken this long before. I don't know what the problem is. Okay. Well, you know, Michael, do you send me your notice? Anyway, we haven't set our next meeting yet. If I didn't say that, we were doing some, we're doing some research and stuff and trying to get our, I had a bunch of concepts and we talked about them. So I said, no, you can't do that. Some people didn't want to think we should do FAR requirement. I was, I had something drafted, said 0.3. Quite great. That's a little low, I think. Well, in my neighborhood that would not, well, you live in our neighborhood. Come on, you're cut straight. I think that's for the lot for them. I don't have as much lot area as you do, I think. No, no, no, I have, I have one of the larger lots. We'll keep talking. Okay, good. So we'll do that. Thank you for coming. You folks aren't planning to do anything for the special town meeting that was mentioned when we were here last night? No. Is there a special? It may be a special determining in January. But no, we're not gonna have anything ready for that. Okay. All right. Well, good. All right. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I don't think we've met. Ted fields. Okay, a few of us. Now with development planning. Nice to meet you. Oh, thank you. Being a three-spot, three-piece suit man myself. But I don't have it on tonight. It's good for this weather. It's good for this weather. It is. We'll have a longer discussion next time. I'd like to have a longer discussion. Okay. I will send you materials at a time that you want. Okay, great. So we will meet that December 7th or 6th, December 7th. We'll be our next meeting of the last one this year. That will hurt. Great. And we'll talk about the design. We'll give you everything. I think that makes sense. Okay. Okay, so that's the meeting. So central school leases. Central school leases. So, DMH and DMR, who use together about 8,000 square feet in central school, are not renowned. And we were a little surprised by that. We're having a meeting. I'm having a meeting with the town manager and the central school, Christine Bajorna, the Health Human Services, to talk about whether the town needs that space for town uses or whether we should go out and look for new tenant. And it's my feeling that we're gonna have to go feel a little more aggressive than we have in the past. That's what we really need to. Which level is it on? Which floor is it on? Second and third. Yes. Which one? Right next door here, central school. Okay. 20 Academy Street. Second and third. So you go up the stairs. It's right there on that level. If you go from Academy Street, it's up one level and up two levels. Okay, got it. Yeah, it's over $100,000 that we get a year from the two tenants, so that's it. Where is that going? That's a serious problem. She wouldn't tell me. I called them and she said that they can't discuss it until they have at least signed with another landlord. So, I don't have, I'm gonna be at the time or not. But they wanted more space and we couldn't give them more space that she said was the main reason. I can try to find, I can call them up or something. I'm curious. I'm curious too. The central school planning committee has been on hold for a little while, but I'm sure that will come up in our next meeting, which I think will be at some point in early December. So, Christine was working on setting that up. Another meeting? Hasn't set out the dates yet. So, I think you'll be involved. Okay, good. I assume. But, yeah, certainly replacing that one would be okay. Yeah, so I have other ideas that we can talk about now. Okay, I just want to let everybody know that that's gonna be it. We're coming down the pike in the next few months or so. Okay. And we don't have minutes. We don't have minutes. Sorry, I don't know how that happened. You provided us 2016 meeting dates. Yes. Is this firm? Yep. Do we need to discuss this in detail? Only if you, if anybody has any problems with any of the dates, other words, no. The dates are fine. They're as firm as they can be at this point. You know, as you know, sometimes we cancel a meeting. Or we get snow and have to get another study. We did. I know, I know, I know. You know, Thursday, oh my God. I know. Okay, good. Well, I want to welcome Ken to the board. Yes. And have a chance to do that in the beginning of the meeting because I want it to fit into the hearing. Thank you. We'll get you a name plate. That's okay. Yeah, it's a little bit of a warranty on some things, so you know. The properties we manage and all this kind of thing. You may know already. We'll give you a list. Yeah. Yeah, me. Yeah, that would help. I get an idea. I know. Yeah. I didn't need it when I asked you. What are you talking about? Yeah. We manage. What we'll do is just assign you to subcommittees and just kind of figure it out on your own. But you have my email, so you'll send me a, when you're nice, if you send me a meeting, I would love to join you guys to talk about issues. Yes, you will do that. And I'll give you money. I'll let it contain a motion to adjourn. There's nothing additional. So moved. Second, all in favor. All right.