 And we're ready and now I'll share my nice one second. So you're ready to go it. So here we go. Can you see the agenda. Yep. Got it all. The pre appointed hour of six o'clock having been reached. I call this meeting of the Amherst zoning board of appeals to order. My name is Steve judge as ZBA chair. I want to welcome everyone to this meeting. Pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021. This meeting will be conducted via remote means members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so via zoom or by telephone. No in person attendance of members of the public will be permitted. But every effort will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological means. Additionally, the meeting recordings may be viewed via the town of Amherst YouTube channel and the ZBA webpage. In accordance with the provisions of Massachusetts general laws of the ZBA and article 10 special permit granting authority of the Amherst zoning bylaw. This public meeting has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted and mailed to parties at interest. We will begin with a roll call of the ZBA members and panel for tonight's meeting. Steve judge is present. Ms. Parks. Mr. Maxfield. Mr. Meadows. Here. Mr. Meadows. No. Mr. Meadows. Hello. Present. In addition. Mr. Cochran as an alternate member, associate member is also on the call. Also attending the public hearing tonight is Maureen Pollock a planner with the town, Rob Mora will be attending. He's the building commissioner and Marine is Dave. What shevitsk also going to be on the call today. No. momentarily. All right. The Zoning Board of Appeals is a quasi-judicial body that operates under the authority of Chapter 40A of the General Laws of the Commonwealth for the purpose of promoting the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the town of Amherst. One of our most important elements of the Amherst Zoning By-law is Section 10.38. Specific findings from this section must be made for all of our decisions. All hearings and meetings are open to the public and are recorded by town staff. The procedure is as follows. The petitioner presents the application to the board. During the hearing, after which the board will ask questions for clarification or for additional information. After the board has completed its questions, the board will seek public input. The public speaks with the permission of the chair. If a member of the public wishes to speak, they should so indicate by using the raised hand function on their screen. The chair with the assistance of the staff will call upon people wishing to speak. When you are recognized, provide your name and address to the board for the record. All questions and comments must be addressed to the board. The board will normally hold public hearings where information about the project and input from the public is gathered, followed by public meetings for each. The public meeting portion is when the board deliberates and is generally not an opportunity for public comment. If the board feels it has enough information and time, it will decide upon the applications tonight. Each petition heard by the board is distinct and is evaluated on its own merits and the board is not ruled by precedent. Statutorily for a special permit, the board has 90 days from the close of the hearing to file a decision. For a variance, the board has 100 days from the date of the filing to file its decision. No decision is final until the written decision is signed by the sitting board members and is filed in the town clerk's office. Once the decision is filed with the town clerk, there is a 20-day appeal period for an aggrieved party to contest the decision with the relevant judicial body in superior court. After the appeal period, the permit must be recorded at the registry of deeds take effect. Tonight's agenda, ZBA FY2022-11, Fearing's Sunset LLC, represented by Tom Reedy Esquire, request a special permit to allow the construction of two apartment buildings and four, is that the correct, this has been changed. Yes, the two apartment buildings and four duplex buildings, the total of 17 residential units, including two affordably, see that is the old, I took it from the agenda, I think that's the old, the old description, is it not, Maureen? You are correct, so this was the, this is the application as published in the public notice and legal ad, but that's fine, you can read this. We'll act on this, yeah. And it's just being changed, that's okay. Yep, okay, so I'll start over. ZBA FY2022-11, Fearing's Sunset LLC, represented by Tom Reedy Esquire, request a special permit to allow the construction of two apartment buildings and four duplex buildings with a total of 17 residential units, including two affordable units and an approximate 2.04 acre property, under sections 3.01, 3.3211, 3.323, 5.10, 6.29, 10.38 of the zoning bylaw, located at 164 and 174 Sunset Avenue, map 11C, parcels 9 and 299, general residents, RG, and neighborhood residents, RN, zoning districts. This is continued from May 26. Also on tonight's agenda is ZBA FY2022-16 and ZBA FY2022-15, Killerine Properties LLC Care of Valley Property Management, request a special permit to allow a non-owner occupied duplex, and to request a special permit to extinguish the previously approved ZBA FY1992-52 special permit, under sections 3.321, 10.33, and 10.38 of the zoning bylaw, located at 80 Pine Street, map 5A, parcel 86, neighborhood residents, RN, zoning district. After that, we'll have a general comment period from the public on any matters that were not before the board tonight, and then other business that was not anticipated within 48 hours. Subsequent to that, we'll adjourn. So the first order of business tonight is ZBA FY2022-11 Fearing Sunset LLC, represented by Thomas R. Reedy, request a special permit to allow the construction of two apartment buildings and four duplex buildings with a total of 17 residential units, including two affordable units on an approximate 2.04 acre property, under sections 3.01, 3.32, 11, 3.323, 5.10, 6.29, and 10.38 of the zoning bylaw, located at 164 and 174 Sunset Avenue, map 11C, parcels 9 and 299, general residents, RG, and neighborhood residents, RN, zoning districts. Are there any disclosures from members of the board? If not, I'd like to summarize our site. We had a site visit before. I don't think we need to go through that. We've not had a site visit since that time. And unless there are any other disclosures or comments from board members, Mr. Reedy, we'd like to have you present for the applicant. This is the third meeting we've had on this. So I think we have a pretty good understanding of the project. Maureen? You can, if you haven't already, I don't think you did state for the record the submissions provided by the applicant, which is highlighted in blue. Yep, it's highlighted in blue. No, I have not done that. And that's why it is so good to have staff. Thank you. So I have got the old, I have the May 26th Project Application Report. Here we go. Here's the June 16th. So submissions that we've received since the last meeting, submit to the into the town record. We have a series of drawings prepared and stamped by Andrew J. Bollin RLA Place Alliance. These include an amenities plan, sheet one L100, sheet L400, a landscape plan, sheet L500, a lighting plan, and sheet SL1 site lighting photo metrics, schedules, and specifications all dated May 23rd. In addition, we have new model views submitted May 31st. We have email correspondence dated June 15th from Attorney Tom Reedy. We have a project application report from June 16th. We have a breakdown of proposed units by size, bedroom count, prepared by the planning staff. Those are the last two are staff submissions. And that last one is dated June 15th. Public comment submissions. We did have one today from Anna Butter, Mr. Dick Terracie. It was dated June 23rd. And I do remember seeing a email. I thought there was one public comment, a new public comment from Mr. and Mrs. Gillan that perhaps was just addressed to board members or emails. But I thought I thought there was one additional public comment that I saw, which I didn't see in the public comment. Oh, yeah. I'm sorry. I might not have reflected that in the latest project application report. I believe it is listed on the town calendar. They emailed correspondence, I believe, last week. I didn't get the exact address date if needed. You can just fill it in for the record, Maureen. That'd be fine. But I wanted to make sure that we noted it. Ms. Parks? I was just going to say, I think you missed one of the sheets. Sheet L300, the site details. I did. Thank you. Those are all the submissions that we've had, both public submissions and from the applicant. So Mr. Reedy, please identify yourself for the record when you speak. Oh, and Mr. Chair, sorry to interrupt. And I think there was slight confusion. So Connie and, Connie, and I forget his first name, Gillan, they sent an email on June 17th, 2022. And the other person you reference who sent an email today, Teres C or something, he submitted comments for the other public hearing listed today, not for sunset. That's correct. Thank you. Thank you. So, Maureen, you may want to send people, members of email to Connie and Bill's, Gillan's public comment, because otherwise the board wouldn't have benefit of it. So if you get a chance to email that during the consideration, it'd be helpful. So, Mr. Reedy, we've had, this is our third meeting, and our third attempt to get to you tonight. So there's some, there's some symmetry here. Lucky threes. Well, if you don't mind, I'll just, I'll keep it brief because this is the third. Yeah, what I would like you to do is just comment on the new submissions because I think we have a pretty good, you know, I think we have a pretty good understanding of the project. There was a list of questions which we can go over and request and then just respond to those as you did, and that would be helpful. And we'll open up to questions from the board. Excellent. So for the record, Tom Reedy at Turner with Bacon Wilson here in Amherst, here on behalf of the applicant here in Sunset and its application is the chairman noted with me this evening, Andy Bone from Place Alliance, our landscape architect, and Barry Roberts, who is the site developer. I'm also, I stayed at the office so that I wouldn't have a poor connection because I see Craig's tuning in from Columbia. And if he can do it, then I better not have a worse connection than him. So thank you, Mr. Meadows, for being here. So yes, we, last hearing, we had modified the plans to eliminate the access onto Sunset. The model views did not reflect that at the time. So we had submitted those. So now you have updated model views that actually show the, what is going to be proposed, save for one change, which I'll talk about right now. We've also updated the landscaping plan. We had proposed, proposed 25 Arbor Vities and now we're proposing 25 American Holly. I think that was a discussion that Mr. Meadows had. We wanted pollinator and in talking with Andy, you know, we think there's a lot of pollinator species within the site, but you know, I think having some more probably can't hurt. So we're proposing 25 American Holly. I think they're three to five feet at planting. And Andy, if I'm saying anything wrong, just shake your head one way or another, but I think that's exactly what they are. So we have provided that updated landscaping plan. It actually came in after your project application report. I credit Andy for turning it around so quickly, but that's one of the other changes. And then we really just updated the landscaping plan and lighting plan to reflect. And I will just share it very briefly so that you can see, because I'm looking at it and it probably helps if you're looking at it too. So this is what it was updated to show, you know, so now as you all recall, we put that sidewalk across, there's going to be plantings here. So all of these model views were updated to show that the landscaping plan was updated to show that as well. So that's any changes to the landscaping plan were really just to bring it into compliance with what the base plan is going to be. And the same thing with the lighting plan, because now, you know, we don't have that area right there. And then lastly, the landscaping plan, you'll see called out. And I'll probably do this. So over here, we're just calling out 15 break and then 10. And then that's the, it's like IOX, which is here, which is those American Holly, which are three to five feet of planting. And there's 25 of them. So that was one of the changes that we made. But otherwise, really what we did with the plans was just bring it into concert with what we had talked about last time. So really no major changes there. The model views I had just talked about and the purpose and what they had done. And then I did provide an email because there was some discussion last time and Maureen was kind enough to put some of those questions and writing in the first one was just specifically described the roles and responsibilities of the management company, the onsite manager and the property manager. And so understanding that it's a kind of a hierarchy or a tiered approach. What I did was I went through and talked about how the project going to be comprehensively managed by the management company, the onsite manager and the onsite resident manager, the level of discretion and authority without ownership input reduces at each level. So it starts, you know, it's owner, the management company, that onsite manager than an onsite resident manager, or ultimately the decision making authority rests with the owner as you'd expect. Management company is going to be the overall project manager and the owner's representative. And this is really just memorializing what Barry had talked about last time. So we've just put it in writing and making it a condition or accepting this submission as a, that's fine because this is how it's going to be run. Management company can enter into leases, issue violation notices, begin eviction processes, coordinate move-ins, move-outs, inspect the units, contract with maintenance, landscaping, snow removal crews and the like. The onsite manager is going to occupy the onsite management office during weekday typical business hours and be responsible for the day-to-day onsite operations and working with the management company. They'll also use the onsite management office as a leasing office and where residents can go to provide feedback, issues, compliments, hopefully, or complaints. And then the onsite resident manager, and I wanted to make a distinction because Mr. Moorer had brought up last time that resident manager is a term of ardor in the zoning bylaw. That's not specifically what we're looking to avail ourselves of. And I think with this tiered approach, there's plenty of management. So I say, well, it's not a resident manager as defined in the Emersoning bylaw. It's a responsible resident that Barry's going to pick out and with input of the management company and the onsite manager to be the presence when the management company and onsite manager are not present. So they'll handle issues like lockouts, alarms, be a point of contact for resident after hours, and we'll inform the management company and owner of scene violations. We wouldn't expect them to, you know, there is obviously responsibility of the owner of the management company to go beyond what that resident manager would do. But at least to have, I'll call it boots on the ground, that's the idea with that resident manager. So that's kind of the hierarchical approach, comprehensive nature of the management, just spelled out as Barry had talked about at last time. There's also a request for an explanation of the applicant's goals for providing student non-student tenant mix. And this was something I reached out to Mark Tanner, who's one of my partners. He's the chairman of our litigation department. And I said, what do you think about this? Just because there was some concern about Federal Fair Housing Act, Massachusetts Fair Housing Laws, because under Mass Fair Housing Laws, it's unlawful to discriminate based on race, color, national origin, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, ancestry, genetic information, marital status, veteran or active military status, age, familial status, meaning children and source of income. So when you get that list, my antenna just goes up and says, I don't want to put a policy in writing saying we are going to selectively choose or not choose a group of people. And so really what we've said is we're relying on the project design, the layout, the infrastructure, the interior finishes, the amenities, and the management in support of Barry's desire for a well-balanced community development. So we just wanted to be sensitive to it. And that's really, if you look at our tenant management plan, we talk about all of those tiers where it really does start with design. You've got this amenity area here. We're going to have, as far as affordable units, as we'll talk about probably a little later, a one-bedroom, a two-bedroom and a three-bedroom affordable, which we think is going to be really conducive for families. You've got the parking and you've got the management. You'll have the updated interior finishes, the nice interior finishes, et cetera. So we think that with all of that, and marketing too, who do you market to, apartments.com, working with the university, et cetera, that's how you can help to define the balance in the community. So that was our response there. A written narrative explaining what happens if and when there's a breach of the lease. And I think in your conditions, you've talked about maybe four different steps that would be taken. And essentially what we say is the lease identifies in general and specifically certain expectations about behavior in the community. If those obligations are breached or provisions violated, the applicant has the authority to move it to tenant. We always want to allow the owner to have reasonable judgment and depending on the severity of breach, the overall behavior of the tenant, have they done something previously that was not a victim? Have they done something that was evictable? Are they contributing to the community and they just made a mistake this one time, taking all of that into consideration? Plus the lawful right to exist, the applicant will, and I think you've got the tiers in your conditions, but there's a first notice and then it progresses from there until you actually go to, and sometimes somebody might do something so egregious where there isn't a notice. It's just, this is it. Here's your notice to quit. You've got to get out for breach of the lease and the lease has sufficient teeth to be able to do that. The next question was indicate which unit per bedroom count per building number will be affordable. And so what we had proposed was, I think a studio one and two town came back and I think Nathan only did a good job of identifying a one or two in a three bedroom. I checked around with Amherst community connections with SCB housing with wayfinders and they said, I said, you know, because this is our first foray into three bedroom. They said, yep, three bedroom. If you want to do a three bedroom, that'll be fine. So one of your conditions is a one, a two and a three bedroom affordable unit. The one bedroom will likely be in this building, but I would like the discretion that all about all the one bedrooms are about the same size. I think it's like 604 to 609 square feet. So there's not a tremendous amount of difference between the two. So it will either be in this building or this building, potentially this building right here and the two bedroom is on the first floor and that's also the accessible unit here. And you'll see we've got those parking spaces right outside and that kind of checks off that one of the other questions is which one's accessible. So this first floor here is going to be fully accessible. That's the two bedroom. And then the three bedroom is also in this building. It's the only three bedroom we have on site. But we think that, you know, with the one, two and the three, that we're going to get a good mix and there's a need for each of those. So we feel comfortable, you know, providing those. And I think as far as the responses to the questions and really what we've done since the last meeting, that's probably a good encapsulation. Great. Thank you, Mr. Riddie. Are there questions from the board? Mr. Maxfield. Yeah, I'm sorry. Do we decide which ones the affordable units were going to be? Which sizes they were? I was asking for some discretion just because I don't know what the HCD is going to want. And what I was, if you're talking about sizes of the, maybe I'll back up and say, if you want to choose one and two and three, I was thinking within the ones, which of those two units, because that two bedroom is going to be that entire flat and it's going to be fully accessible as well. There is only one three bedroom. So that's the one. And then for the one bedroom unit, the only difference is I think five square feet. And I just don't know which of the two locations would be better. And that's why I just frankly just don't know. Okay, but it was going to be the one bedrooms, two of the one bedrooms are going to be the affordable. No, there's going to be one one bedroom, one two bedroom, and a one three bedroom. So each of those there will be, hopefully I haven't confused you with my language. No, no, that makes sense. Yeah, I'm not. Yeah, I don't know which specific ones either. One bedroom, a two bedroom, and a three bedroom out of this will be affordable units. Correct. Got it. Thank you. Thank you. I believe Craig Meadows has raised his hand. Mr Meadows. Yeah, I just wanted to clarify a couple of things. I we discussed last time the the possibility of putting in a and I had the opportunity to call the state and I'm sorry, which department it is, Maureen, I think I transmitted that but when I called them, they a lot of money available. Yes, you're eager to get it out. Yeah, you know, and I and I should have brought it up. Mr Meadows, thank you for reminding me and I had talked about this with Maureen about providing an EV charging station and I think that's going to be a condition which I saw. And to your point, yes, I had I had emailed them and they sent back and said, yes, we have we have money. And I said, well, we haven't got our permit yet. And they said, well, supply right after. So we it's like, I mean, we'll have we're fine with that condition of having that EV charging station. So it's not just going to be doing the conduit for it, it's going to be doing it. So thank you for the suggestion. It did something that's probably in some regards, I think I'll notice that the requirement now for five percent, five percent total parking spaces has heard parking for any hybrid zero low low committing vehicles providing minimum parking spaces for electric charging stations. Mr Meadows, we're we're getting about every other word right now. But let me try it again. Maybe shut off your video. Maybe that will help speed your internet. Yeah, because we can't see your your handsome face. Let me put you stop your video. Try that. Mr Meadows, are you there? Video back on to make sure that we didn't lose him, Maureen, if you could. Hey, here he is again. Mr Meadows, can you hear us? Perhaps you could call in. I could email you the call in information if that's better. It looks like he has earbuds. Maybe that's he's trying to figure that out. I'll go ahead and email you the phone number to call in if that's helpful. Can you give us a thumbs up if you hear that? You know, there's a way that you can message him using a white text message directly. I don't see that option here with the. Yeah, we our IT department has taken that away. Yeah, too much texting during meetings. Now, just because of, you know, in case inappropriate, unfortunately, we don't want any inappropriate behavior happening, as maybe you've seen in news reports at various new meetings. Well, perhaps if Craig Meadows connection can be restored, he can speak up, but perhaps we should just move along and we'll check back in with him shortly. Yeah, send him that email and then we'll get, we'll make sure that we get the chance to ask his questions about EV. Mr Reedy, did you include one EV recharging station? Yeah, we haven't put it, what I talked to Maureen about was instead of having our engineer add it to the plan before the hearing, we would just accept the condition of adding one EV charging station to the plan prior to receipt of a building permit. And I think that's that's fine by us. So we'll reserve the right for Mr Meadows to come back and talk about that at any point that he comes back in. So I had one question. I know you've, you and I had discussed last time the possibility of, you know, a set aside for a limit on the number of students. We decided everybody decided that that probably wasn't a good idea. The town council had recommended, but we not take that. So we had talked about in your response on to the staff's questions, you really said we need to take a look at the management narrative that gives us some direction as to what you'd like to, how you want to manage this. And you have agreed to a demographic annual report, which was something that we talked about, which hadn't been done before. I've gone through your management summary, and I had some language that I think is additive and not restrictive. And I'd like to share that with you to take a look at that. Just if I can, Maureen, can I share my screen? Sure. All right. The language I have would be highlighted in blue. So I'm going to share my screen. And I'd like, I wonder if this is something that you would add to your manager. This is something you can add to your management plan. It's just in blue. I've taken out the other more precise and risk and kind of language that would compel you or require you to do that. I think that's fine. I think that's fine. I have no problem with that. That's good. Thank you. So we'll put that in, so you'll put that in the management plan. Yeah, that's great. Okay. If you could send that to Maureen, just so I could just pirate it from there? Absolutely. That'll be mailed over. Absolutely. Good. Well, I think we've made some progress on what was a sticky subject. I would prefer that we had more more definite and public commitment to fewer students, but I understand the restrictions, I understand the litigation committee that you have, and I understand the town, and that's just where we are. And I think you guys have done a good job in getting as far as we can towards this. And so I'm happy with that result. I think we've moved forward. Other questions about the new, any new changes from before from the board members? Yes, Mr. Meadows. I think I'm back. Yes, you are. Sorry, I apologize, but it's not always the best of communications down here. Maybe if I was not in the mountains, that'd be better, but I couldn't tell you. I did ask about the hybrid. I was reading something from the code, about 5% of parking spaces set aside. I don't know if you heard that or not. Parts of it? I understood where you were going. And I guess my response would be if it's required as part of the code, then I think that we would have to comply. Apparently it is now. Let me see if I can get to it. It's in 974 mass reg 3.04. 975. Say that one more time. 974. 974. Exactly. 3.04 it sounds like. So I don't have any knowledge of it, but if that's a regulation that we've got to follow, then that's a regulation that we've got to follow. I may be misreading it, but it certainly looks like that's a regulation. It also includes something about bicycles in here, but that's a little bit different. I think I'm pretty sure you've got secure parking, secure space for bicycles on site. So if I remember correctly, that's all covered. Thank you. Okay. And thank you for putting the holly bushes in there. Didn't have to be holly specifically, but I think that's a great choice. I'm partial to holly. So I told Andy, I said, Andy, if we're going to do it, let's just do some holly. Great. So I think we've dealt with the vegetation. We've dealt with the EV and a hybrid parking. We've dealt with management plan, language, any other questions from members? If not, I'd like to go to public comment. And if I could encourage the public to, if you have spoken on this in the past and you don't have anything to speak directly to the changes, I'd ask you if you don't need to speak, you could defer and we could use this time for people who have either not spoken on the project or who have spoken before and want to speak to the changes proposed since the first meeting. So do we have members of the public who wish to speak? If so, I will start a timer for about three minutes and then you can speak. But first, please give us your name and your address for the record. Maureen, do we have people raising their hand? Yeah. So if you would like to speak, please use the raise your hand feature. And it doesn't look like anyone has any public comments to provide. Everybody, just a minute. If there's no public comments, this is one last opportunity for the board to ask questions of the applicant before we go and begin our deliberation on conditions and findings. All right, we're going to move to the conditions and findings section of the meeting. In the past, we've voted on moving into this part and we're not going to, we do not have been informed. We do not have to have a separate vote to move into the comments, the deliberation portion of the board meeting. The public hearing portion will remain open. So if we need to have a public comment or comment from the applicant, we can seek it. But this is really a time for the board to discuss how they feel about this and make decisions about how they feel about this application. So I think my goal would be first to have a general comment from board members about the feelings of this application. Then I'd like to go through conditions, look at those, and then I think those are important because that findings are, in my case, are always contingent upon the conditions. And then we will vote on the conditions, the findings, and the approval all in one motion at the end. And if anybody has a separate issue, we will deal with a condition or a finding, we'll deal with that separate way and a separate vote. So first off is general feelings about the application. I'm, I think this is my feelings that this is, was a project that I had a skeptical up to begin with. I have come to the conclusion that this is, could be a benefit to, it's well put together and it could benefit the neighborhood. I think that the management has shown to be a good management in the past. So I trust that and I like the fact that they're willing to, on an annual basis, not only report disturbances and noisy parties and other kinds of violations, but also work with us on making sure that this is a mix that is compatible with the neighborhood. This is a overwhelmingly single, it's an overwhelmingly residential neighborhood. Most of the homes are owner occupied, not all of them. There are lots of students that are living in many owner occupied rental units or duplexes, but it's a sensitive community and I want to make sure this neighborhood is not adversely affected by development and I think we've gone a long ways to ensuring that and we're doing that through conditions in this case. So I'm feeling pretty comfortable about this as long as these conditions that we have outlined are met. I'd like to hear from other people before we go through the process. I personally think this is, go ahead Mr. Meadows. Sorry, I was just going to say I think it's a very thoughtful and well put together project and will be a benefit to the community. Its placement is such that it is not going to detract at all from what the community in that location needs. Ms. Parks, you had your hand up. I was going to say I don't have any objection other than I think their rents in Amherst in general are too high and continue to be too high and there is a lot of comment about how there are less families in Amherst and I'm pretty sure there's less families in Amherst and for these good kids because the housing is not affordable here. And I think, and just to add one thing, I think having affordable units close to downtown and especially a three-bedroom and a two-bedroom do provide the ability for families to live in affordable units and not perhaps stay in our schools, which is something we really hope for. Mr. Gilbert, any comment? Yeah, just like to add a quick one, you know, I think the applicants done a really successful job here integrating a lot of public comment, you know, even design. Echoing what Mr. Meadows said, I think this is a thoughtful approach, you know, some sort of, you know, wise design, wise architecture. I think landscaping is, you know, quite sound and, you know, I see this being quite a benefit to that corner. You know, all things considered, you know, appreciated with respect to, again, the incorporation of public comments and concerns to this process. Okay. Oh, Mr. Maxfield. Yeah, I'll just add on. Yeah, I think at this point I'm definitely in support of this project. Three more affordable units, including a three-bedroom and a two-bedroom. Obviously, not going to solve any of the problems here in Amherst, but will certainly help the people who do end up living in those. I think this will be a great place for a great place for some folks to end up in the, I think the location is good. I think what's going in that location is good. And ultimately, I think, yeah, Mr. Roberts is somebody who does have a good reputation of doing things like this in the past that I certainly don't think this is going to be the project that derails it. So I agree with you, Mr. Chair. I think with the conditions we're going to be putting on here, I think I'm definitely in favor of this project. That's great. Well, I'd like to move then to conditions. And as you know from the project application report, the draft project application report, it's long. We have, I think, 70 conditions. So the way I want to do this, so it makes the most sense, is go by group. And in order for the public to be informed, I'm going to try to summarize each of the conditions. And if it's, and some of them I'll read if they're short, but I'm not going to go through and read verbatim each of the conditions allowed. It's available in the project application report. So the first is project is first group of conditions of project use. And so if anybody has a, before I start, if anybody has an objection to one of these conditions or wants to amend it, we will deal with it at the time we now let's deal with it now as we move forward. But I think that we should, I think we can probably go through all of these without much in the way of amendment. So project use is the first group. And this is pretty much standard language that the project has to be built and maintained according to projects filed with the town. This is pretty much boilerplate. The second condition, I want to make sure that this is the correct number of units, 22 units, 53 bedrooms. And the breakout is the same for studios for one bedroom, five two bedroom, one, three, and eight fours. That's correct. A new condition is that any future habitable space is proposed in any building basements, in the basements of any of these buildings, the applicant shall return to the zoning board of appeals at a public hearing for review and approval. That emerged because of concerns about the basements were probably big enough to have people living in them, but they weren't designated as a living space. I think that came up from one of the board members. The building should not exceed a maximum of two stories. And a total height, we need a number of feet here. We have two Xs. Yeah. So if I could, Mr. Chair, so each, they're each different based on where that location is in your plan. So the type A, the type B, the type C units all have the midpoints called out on them. So as long as we construct substantially in accordance with the plans, then that will bear itself out. So I don't know that you need to put a total of X number because like type A is going to be 30 feet, six inches along fearing street, 24 feet, six inches along sunset, et cetera. So I think maybe referencing the plans might be better here. I think that's a good idea, Maureen. Why don't we just reference the, instead of putting the double Xs there, let's reference the plans in condition one. Does that make sense? Okay. The units shall be registered and intermediate according to the rental bylaw. This permit shall expire upon change of ownership. No more than four unrelated individuals shall occupy each two-bedroom unit, each two-bedroom unit, each three-bedroom unit or four-bedroom unit. Okay. And then you have to update your lease. So even in, that's the town limits are four per unit anyway. So two-bedroom, three-bedroom, and four-bedroom units are all four unrelated individuals. No more than two unrelated individuals shall occupy each studio or one-bedroom unit. And then the applicant acknowledges that they have to update their lease to do that. Okay. I see an acknowledgement from them, Mr. Reedy. The street numbers for both dwellings shall be clearly marked in reflective signage. The next is on marketing and lease agreements. Lease shall be a minimum of 12 months. Twelve units shall be rented by unit, not by bed. Short-term rental of any residential units shall be in accordance of all local regulations. Lease shall specifically prohibit trespassing onto adjacent properties and any substantial modifications to the lease agreement which may impact tenant oversight as determined by the building commissioner, specifically including minor updates such pricing, date modification, clerical errors or language updates, excluding, not including, excluding minor updates required by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or other government entities shall require the applicant to return to the zoning board of appeals at a public meeting. Affordable units is a long, a large number. There's 11 different conditions. All of these are pretty much required for the subsidized housing programs in the state and the Department of DHCD. I don't want to diminish how important they are, but I don't think there will be very much choice in any of these conditions, which for the most part deal with the process of selecting tenants and the process of selecting units. So unless anybody has particular questions on any of these conditions, I'm going to you may wish to, if I may, you may wish to just review, I know we already discussed it, but the inclusion of condition 17 as indicated and then where it says 17C, I think the one affordable three bedroom unit is in building three. Correct. And then four, and I have these at 16, but if this is now 16, okay. 16A, I would just ask, you can do one of two things because all one bedroom units are either in building five or building six. And I just don't know which building this affordable unit is going to be in. So you can either say one affordable one bedroom unit, semicolon, or you can say one affordable one bedroom unit in building number five or building number six. It's going to do the exact same thing. And I'm just saying, we just, I don't know which one So let's go with or number six. That makes sense. The second one fully bedroom three and the affordable three bedroom is bedroom six is a unit six or building six, right? Building three. That's building three. Building three. All right. Yeah, the two are in building three. All right. Thank you. We'll amend it that way. The rest of it, this is really procedural. So I'm not going to go through all of those in order to save time. The next is building exterior and site improvements. A lot of these are deal with things that we always have to impose on project of the size. The town engineer and building commissioner shall inspect the construction and entry driveway and all onsite paved areas for conformance with town sanders. Utilities shall be underground. The applicants shall provide ad built plans showing building locations, etc. All exterior lighting shall be designed and installed so as to be shielded or downcast and to avoid light trespass onto adjacent properties. So lighting fixtures will comply with our rules and regulations. The building shall meet local required energy efficiency codes and regulation of stretch energy code. In addition, low flow plumbing fixtures shall be installed throughout. Any temporary certificates of occupancy shall be approved through the building commissioner. The building commissioner may impose 30 requirements to guarantee completion of the work before issuing a temporary occupancy permit, including for landscaping or top coat paving or other required items that the building commissioner terms may be provided. All utility work and work within the public right of way shall be conducted following regulations and permits from the town of Amherst. Digital CAD plans shall be required for final as built plans for the DPW. These plans shall depict all property lines, easements and utilities, etc. Construction permits and associated fee shall be required by DPW to start construction and they are listed. The final certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any building shall not be issued for any building or any unit until the final top coat of paving for all drivers in access areas, sidewalks and berms have been completed. Landscaping on the plan of record has been installed and a complete as built plans have been submitted to the building commissioner and the town engineer. Questions on that? Amenities. The entire project site and building shall be smoke-free non-smoking to the extent allowed by law. The applicant shall provide a minimum of one electric vehicle EV charging station on the premises for use of tenants at 164 and 174. The building commissioner may administratively approve any minor changes to the parking layout needed to accommodate the placement and installation of any electrical vehicle charging stations on the premises. And Mr. Meadows, I don't think we need to add anything to meet the if they're required to do do something additional under under law. I don't think we need to impose a condition requiring them to do what they're already required to do. Are you cool with that? Certainly. Great. Okay. The management plan. Move-ins occur between eight and seven. One. Number two, all snowplod within the parking area shall promptly be removed from the site as part of the clearing process. So you don't have in many places we have snow berms in place to repark snow. Snow has to be removed from this one. All trash pickup deliveries and operation of construction and maintenance machinery and landscaping equipment shall be deducted between eight and a.m. and seven p.m. The project shall comply and be managed in accordance with all the management plan. Alterations to the plan shall be approved by the zoning board of appeals at a public meeting. If the property or business operations are sold, the new owner shall meet with the zoning board of appeals at a public meeting to review the management plan and to determine if it is still applicable and decide whether or not to hold a public hearing to review and approve the new management plan. That's consistent with what we've done with other non-residential owners, owner of property in the last year and a half. As prescribed under the approved management summary and described by the applicant during the public hearing, additional tenant management and approved lease, pertinent provisions of the lease, which if violated constitute a breach of lease. The following steps notices shall be followed by the applicant if and when a violation occurs. First notice, the applicant shall contact the tenant and the lease units informing them that such pertinent provisions of the lease is in violation constituting a breach. Second notice, if the violation of the lease is not ceased, the applicant shall conduct contact the Amherst police department informing them of the said violations of the request in Amherst police department representative assist in the education and outreach efforts to help change conditions on the premises. Third notice, if said violation of the lease have not ceased, the applicant shall submit a written warning to the tenants of the lease unit informing them that the said notice serves as their final warning and that such violations shall cease immediately. And the fourth notice, if said violations of the lease have not ceased, the applicant shall submit a written notice to the tenants of the lease unit informing them that the lease has been terminated and such pertinent provisions of the lease are in violation and they have seven days to vacate the premises. The applicant shall log in. Yep. I was just going to say my only comment might be because as I'm reading this and says these shall be followed, I would just want the ability to accelerate the process if necessary, right? I wouldn't want a tenant to say, well wait, your condition says you've got to give me four opportunities because you never know just what a tenant may do. So I would always want to, you know, so you could always just say, you know, unless the owner, however, the applicant determines that, you know, they should move to the fourth notice or something like that, right? And I think Maureen can probably embody that. I just wouldn't want to be required to go through all four steps in certain circumstances if it's best just to go right to that fourth one. Yeah, I'm just, it's more restrictive than what you're you're saying, but I just, I just don't want to, because lower time on Massachusetts is something. I'm, yeah, I'm just trying to figure out how this differs from what's in the lease. I think we always under the under the lease, we always have the opportunity to go to the tenant and say, no warnings, this is it, you know, you set your unit on fire or whatever it is, we can evict them right away. What I'm, this says the following action steps notice shall be followed by the applicant. So I, that's the only concern to me is a tenant, a wise tenant looking and saying, no, no, no, you've agreed to go through these four steps. I think this was raised not in order for tenants, but I don't think this is raised as a matter of tenant protection, additional protection. No, I agree. This is not why that was raised. I think the governing document should be the notice, the lease, and which would give you, you know, something is dangerous or a dangerous activity on the part of a tenant, the landlord should be able to remove him immediately, him or her immediately, if it's a dangerous dangerous thing. Okay, I'm fine with that then. As long as that's the understanding, we don't have to go through this, then no problem here. Maureen, what is that consistent with what we've talked about in the past or the shell language is? Yeah, let's think on it. Can we loop back to 45 after we finish? And perhaps either if Dave or Rob gets back in, we can talk about it. So we'll circle 45, but I think the goal here is not to provide more difficult, it's not for tenant protection that's provided in the lease and understate law. 46, the applicant shall log and maintain all complaints filed with the property owner, the applicant management company, onsite manager, property manager, and or town of Amherst. So this is the login of the complaints filed. There's an annual renewal of the upon the annual renewal of the rental registration, the applicant shall submit to the building commissioner and an update complaints and violation log report with the Amherst inspection services documenting filed complaints and violations as well as actions taken as defined under this condition and condition 45. Additionally, an update complaint violation log report shall be made available upon request to the Amherst inspection services. 48 upon annual review renewal of the Amherst residential rental registration, the applicant shall submit to the building commissioner and up to date tenant demographic report that specifically includes a number of students residing in the premise, a number of units occupied by students. For purposes of this condition, a student shall be defined as a person regardless of age, attending or about to attend as an undergraduate, a college or university, or who are on semester, winter, or summer break from undergraduate studies at college or university. With the note, the caveat that we're going to return to 45, let's move on. Parking access, parking shelves occur only on improved services at standard. There's 42 on-site parking places. I think that's the correct, now the correct number. The parking management plan shall be followed. 26 of the parking places are going to be designated as on the ground. 17 of them are compact spaces and shall be designated by clearly visible signs. All visitor parking spaces shall be designated by the three ADA compliant parking stalls shall be designated and clearly marked on the ground with signage. And residential tenants shall be giving parking stickers that are visibly displayed on each vehicle. Landscaping and signage, the applicant shall replace the 25 emerald green arborvite located along the eastern property with hollies. I don't, if this is in your landscaping plan, we don't need to do this anymore, right? Okay. All right, so we can take that out and because you have to comply with your landscaping plan and the landscaping plan has changed. All right. Landscaping shall be maintained by the property owner in accordance with the management plan. Any plantings that die shall be replaced during a reasonable timeframe as the weather and season permits with like plant species and shall be planted with the size of the original caliper size at the time of replacement planting. The applicant shall make reasonable efforts to use natural herbicides and non-toxic chemicals, giving advance warning to tenants and shall, the public shall be provided notice regarding application of toxic treatment to any common area used by tenants or the public. All mature trees found within the project areas, except those shown on the approved plan, shall be removed. To be removed shall remain and shall be remained, be maintained as to provide a visual screening from the adjacent properties. Any existing mature tree within the property site that dies shall be removed and replaced with like species with a minimum height of 10 feet and a caliper diameter of two and one half inches to maintain screening. The applicant shall return to the ZV8 a public meeting for review and approval of any permanent signage and enter the approved temporary sign plan. Stormwater and drainage prior to starting any work site, the issuing of building permit, they provide the building commissioner with these are standard stormwater pollution prevention plans and a list of written procedures that outlines the specific operation and maintenance of all measures for stormwater drainage facilities. Construction prior to issuance of any building permit, a pre-construction meeting shall be scheduled with the applicant, the contractor, the town engineer, etc. This is standard practice. A written construction safety management plan will be provided. The approved construction logistics plan shall be provided at the pre-construction meeting and shall cover the following items. They don't have to be delineated here. The approved construction logistics plan shall be subject to the following conditions. There should be no exterior construction activity including fueling of vehicles on the project site before 7 or after 7 a.m. or after 7 p.m. Monday through Saturday. There should be no construction on the project site on the following legal holidays. New Year's Memorial of July 4th, Labor Thanksgiving and Christmas. The applicant agrees that the hours of operation shall be enforceable by the Amherst Police Department and or inspection services. Parking for contractors shall be restricted to the site. No parking on the street. Hammering or blasting or hamming of rock is a 24-hour notice. Project site's fenced. Appropriate measures shall take place to control dust. Physical barriers shall be installed for tree protection. Tires shall be washed before vehicles exit the site. Location of every project-related stone water disposal area shall be protected. All catch basins shall be cleaned out at the end of construction. And no stumps, demolition material or other construction material will be buried at the project site. The applicant has to provide the name, address and business number of the project manager. The applicant and the engineer of record during their development construction phase shall visit the construction site for all necessary as built inspection. Reports the building commissioner and town engineer. The special permit shall expire within two years of the date that it is filed with the town clerk unless it has been both recorded in the registry of deeds and substantial construction has commenced. That's standard language. The construction shall be completed within 24 months of the date of the issuance of the building permit. If more time is needed, the applicant shall come before the zoning board of appeals at a public meeting for review and approval. So you've got 24 months to get this done after the permit, okay? And no slope created by filling materials shall be finished to create an excess of a natural angle of repose of the materials. All filled areas which are not built within one year shall upon completion of the operation. Be covered with not less than four inches of loam brought to finish grade and ceded mulch in a satisfactory manner and all materials removed from the project site shall be properly disposed of in an upland area. Those are the conditions, 79 of them because we removed one that I think are fine. Anybody have any problems with any of those conditions? Maureen? So I have a couple others to add which would be updating the management plan based on the wording that Steve provided earlier. And in that the applicant shall update the site plan to include signage for the compact parking spaces with a detail or a stock photo of what they would look like. And that the lease shall be updated to address conditions seven and eight which had to do with the amount of tenants that may occupy each of the units by bedroom count. And then if we wanted to get back to condition 45, hold on a second, 45 we were discussing, so 45 that got into that sort of laundry list of first notice, second notice, third and fourth notice if there was a breach of the lease. So that condition was and as it says was based on the description provided by the applicant during the May 26 public hearing. And the Building Commissioner and I worked on the creation of this condition. And the Building Commissioner believes that it is important to keep the word shall, you know, if it becomes a May, it's there's really no, you know, use of the condition. And so that's really the teeth of that condition is that that usage of the word shall. So the Building Commissioner recommends that the board still consider that that word. And he also recommends that the board add the following for serious violations, more aggressive enforcement actions may be taken. We have no problem with the shall all my only point was like nothing here in shall require us to give all of those notices. That was the only point right we just and I think you're taking care of it by saying if it's something more egregious, because I just don't like I said want to turn it back and saying, Oh, hey, you didn't give us our four notices. So yeah, I think what what Ms. Pollack has suggested is totally fine. We're fine with that. All right, with that amendment, I think we're all good with 45. And with the board like to entertain adding a condition to update the lease, we said relative to condition seven and eight. That was about the bedroom count about the amount of tenants per unit for each bedroom count. And how about updating the lease as it pertains to condition 45? How would you see that one going? That that's starting to get us into that other territory. Like, so we have a lease that says here's our expected behavior. If you breach it, we can evict you. And then this is kind of like precisely why I was saying, I don't want to have to give them four notices. And then in the condition you say, at max, here's what you do, applicant. And if you don't do this, then you're in breach of your pick a number, you know, of your project, which is a big issue. So to me, I would keep it out of the lease. If there is another update to the lease, it probably is in concert with the parking plan. So that studios and in ones and twos, all only have a certain number of parking spaces. And threes and fours have a certain number of parking spaces. That that would be the only other and that's per our parking management plan. But I don't know that we add those four notices into the lease, because I think that subverts what we were trying to do. Do you currently have steps outlined in the lease for this? Just say if you violated, it's our, at least now you've violated, it's had our question. Help me with massive, it helped me with Massachusetts law. Is there is what is the Massachusetts law? There's no like number of strikes. So we have default. So if somebody's in violation of the lease, they technically be in default. And what we would, depending on how serious or not serious that default is, then we want to leave it to the applicant, the management company to say, okay, they've been really, really good. They've made a mistake. Let's give them that first notice. And if they do it again, then let's let's look to evict them then. And the lease is probably a little bit harsher than that is just to say, if you're in default, we have the ability to evict you. And so that's why I don't want to put those four notices in the lease, because I actually think it like lessens the teeth of the lease. And so as far as the town's concerned, you've got the lease saying one thing, and then you've got this, and if, you know, you can only give them so many chances, Barry, and if they continue to violate it, then, you know, you might lose your perp. Yeah. Maureen, on this one, I'm inclined not to want to put additional restraints on the applicant in removing tenants, as long as we can't violate state law because if you did, they have an action against them. And so I don't want to, I don't want, we're not doing anything to reduce tenant rights, but putting this in the lease reduces their ability to take action quickly if they need be. With the caveat that we have added a serious, you know, for serious actions as an exemption to this, I think we've, I think we've solved the problem. But I think we create a problem when we put it in the lease. Let's perhaps, I don't know, you have any further thoughts or Dave, or if Rob does, he can explain it, but I'm not sure I understand why we'd want to put this in the lease at this proper time. If he's going to be on, if Rob wants to be on later tonight and talk about it, we'll reopen the, we'll certainly reopen it. How's that for resolution for the time being? Sure. I mean, it is part of, it will be part of the approved documents, such as like the additional tenant management plan, and I believe the management summary. So that will be a condition of the, of the permit. So at minimum that that will, you know, that will be reflective in those documents. And of course, in the permit here itself. In permit. Okay. And seven and eight, what has to be, you need to update the lease on in terms of seven and eight. So more than, no, no more than four unrelated individuals, because she'll occupy each two-bedroom unit, three-bedroom unit, or four-bedroom, and no more than two in, in studios or one-bedrooms. Yeah. And that'll just be unit specific, right? So when there's a one-bedroom, then that lease will have a provision in it that says two, no more than two unrelated individuals. Three-bedroom will have a lease that says no more than four unrelated individuals. So it's just, it's going to be unit specific. Is there any concern about that from the staff or the board? It seems to be reasonable, as long as you update the lease. Okay. Any other questions on conditions? All right. Okay. So assuming that those conditions are going to be approved in our, I think we need to, we need to make certain findings based on the fact that those conditions will be approved. Those findings begin in section, in article three. And I'm going to run through the, each of the findings. I'm going to try to summarize to the best of my ability those findings. And if anybody has questions about it, please don't hesitate to interrupt me. Or if there's a clarification, you need a clarification. We will go ahead and attempt to provide that. So 3.01. The development or operation on a single lot of more than one dwelling or more than one of the principal uses described in section 3.3 is expressly prohibited, except where the principal uses are clearly complementary to each other, or where they are otherwise provided by this bylaw. We need to determine whether the two proposed residential uses are complementary to each other. And I believe that the four units of onsite, the, all three of the, well, I guess all six of the buildings, but the two types of buildings are indeed complementary with each other as they're both residential buildings. 3.3211, non-owner-occupied duplex. For a non-owner-occupied duplex, one or both dwelling units are rented and neither unit serves as the principal residence of one or more of the owners. No dwelling unit under this use category may be occupied by a total of more than four unrelated persons. The applicant proposes three non-owner-occupied duplexes, building one, two, and four. And no more than four unrelated persons are allowed to reside in each unit. The applicant proposes ongoing services of a professional, qualified management company. I think they've met the requirements of 3.3211. 3.323 apartment. Decided a lot upon which one or more apartment buildings are proposed shall be located close to heavily traveled street or streets, close to businesses, commercial or educational districts, in an area already developed for multi-family use. We have no more than three or 24 units, dimensional regulations, and no more than 50% of the total units shall be of one size. The proposed apartment buildings are located less than one mile to the downtown Amherst general business district and limited district, stone zoning districts. The University of Massachusetts Amherst campus is close by, across the street, and the educational zoning district directly abuts the projects to the north and west property line. The surrounding neighborhood to the project site has a diverse mix of housing types, varying densities from single-family uses to multifamily uses. It seems to me that the applicant meets the requirement that the apartment buildings are heavily traveled street, close to business center area developed for multifamily use. Article 5, accessory units. This deals with filling of land. I'm not going to go through all the specificities of the land filling, but what this requires is certain measures are taken by the applicant and the applicant is not seeking to a variance or a waiver from any of these, and the town engineer has approved it. I think we can find that the applicant has met the requirements of section 5.10 with the approval of the town engineer and with the plans that they have promised to work to abide by. Article 6 is dimensional regulations. The one place where they do have a technical violation is in the fence height. The applicant proposes a 6-foot-high 180-foot linear modular block retaining wall along the front property of Clearing Street. The enclosed site plan indicates the front setback of a said retaining wall. Its closest point is 5.8 feet. The front back within the zoning district is 15 feet. Therefore, the applicant requests a section 6.29 modification as it pertains to section 624 relating to the proposed 6-foot-high retaining wall located in the front setback on Clearing Street. That's that area that runs up along Clearing Street across from where the famous Arbor Vities were and now the holly is going to be. And I think that's just a technical violation. We can give a waiver from that requirement. Article 7 is parking. The requirements for parking, excuse me, generally require two parking spaces per unit. And you don't have the two, I don't think you have the two parking spaces per unit. I know you don't have the two parking spaces per unit. You've got a parking plan proposing the driveways. You've got paving requirements. You've met that. You've met the slope requirements. You've met the setback from the building requirements. You're going to meet the requirements for designating, marking and delineating the parking spaces. You have 17 of the 42 parking spaces, our compact spaces. We have a condition on signage for parking spaces that will help to meet the requirements of this section. The existing drive along Clearing Street is 15 feet wide at the property line. It's located 50 feet from Clearing Sunset Avenue. The applicant proposes to maintain the drive wide at 27 feet in order to accommodate a two-way entrance and as well as emergency vehicles. They request a waiver, a waiver to request exceed the maximum width allowed for a two-way entrance drive allowed at 24 feet. This is quite frankly needed so that the, for ease of access as well as emergency vehicles. We'll be granting a waiver request from section 6.106. Landscape standards. I think you've met all the landscape standards. Screening will deal with that in 10.38. Inclusionary zoning. The applicant proposes 22 units, a minimum of three affordable units. One, I guess we have to change this here. One one bedroom, one two bedroom and one three bedroom. So that has to be updated in the, so I think that didn't include the three bedroom unit, the project application report. Okay. So I think we've met the requirements for the inclusionary zoning. And now we're moved to section 10.38, those conditions of which we are more familiar. This proposal is suitably located in a neighborhood which is proposed and or in the total town is deemed appropriate by the special planning authority. I think it's the judgment of the board that this project has been designed to fit into the residential context of the neighborhood. 10.382, 10.383, 10.385 and 10.387. Not constituted a nuisance through the air, water pollution, dust, vibration, lights or visually offensive structures or site features. It doesn't create water pollution. Doesn't create a unreasonable levels of noise or light. Residential buildings are conforming to the neighborhood or are good looking. We have dark sky compliance, on-cast lighting and it's appropriately screened. It's not a half the traffic impact statement says it is not, will not be a burden on the neighborhood. The proposal eliminates a curb cut on Sunset Avenue so have two full access curbs with the introduction of a sidewalk on the Westley side of Sunset Avenue. I don't use that I'm confused about this. Just one cut because we got rid of the Sunset Avenue cut, right? All right, so just one full access cut. All right, so I think we've met the requirements of 10.383, 385 and 387. 10.384 adequate facilities provided for proper operation of the proposed use. The management plan adequately deals with the building identifies areas for storage of waste and recycling. Appropriate facilities have been and will continue to be provided according to the management plan. And the applicant has a track record of great property management. 10.386, the proposal ensures that it is in conformance with parking signs and regulations. I think we've met that, especially with the conditions that we've imposed on parking. 10.387, the proposal provides convenience, safe vehicular travel within the site and adjacent streets. It is safe. We find it is safe, convenient vehicular and pedestrian traffic within the area. And the traffic impact statement submitted by the Santac Corporation. It's a nominal impact upon overall areas, overall traffic in the area. 10.388, the proposal ensures adequate space for off-street loading and loading of goods and services. There's adequate space. 389, proposal provides adequate methods of disposal, pursuit, et cetera. The management plan I think deals successfully with that. 10.390, the proposal ensures protection from flood hazards in section 3.28, 3.228. It's not located in the flood zone, but there's a construction logistics plan that deals with this with the storm water management plan. The town engineer confirms that the storm water planning meets their needs. 10.391, the proposal protects to the extent feasible, unique or important historic features. I don't know that there's any natural resources or historic features that needed to be protection, but the two pre-existing 1950 homes are going to be relocated and received a certificate of appropriateness from the historic district. 10.392, the proposal provides adequate landscaping, et cetera. Lots of landscaping here. We've reviewed that extensively. 400 shrubs, 1,000 square feet of conservation, 79 trees, that's appropriately landscaped. 10.393, the proposal provides protection from adjacent properties by minimizing intrusion of lighting, et cetera. We've got a full dervoteric plan. We've got downcast, dark sky, compliant lighting, and there exists screening for adjacent properties. 10.394, the proposal avoids the feasible impact on steep slopes. This is not applicable. 10.395, the proposal does not create this harmony with respect to the terrain, use, scale, and architecture of the existing buildings in the vicinity. Looking at the architecture of the homes, they fit very nicely within the Lincoln sense that historic district, and they have reviewed, the local historic district has reviewed the proposed architecture and the applicant has adjusted the architecture to their comments. 10.396, the proposal provides screening for storage areas, loading docks, there's appropriate storage for dumpsters, et cetera. Proposal of 10.397, adequate recreational facilities, they've added recreational facilities, both on property and for bicycles and other areas recreational activities. 10.398, the proposal is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this bylaw and the goals of the master plan. It is indeed in harmony with the general purpose. The goals listed in the project narrative, the proposal additionally is consistent with the goals and objectives of the master plan. The proposal furthers the goal the master plan objectives that set forth in H1, 2, 3, 6, T2, and LU1. Additionally, the project acknowledges and seeks further Amherst transportation plans, ideas of non-auto oriented development due to sitting on the project, a vision of bike racks, proximity of PVTA and the bike path. And in addition, I would say that the willingness of the applicant to report to the town on the demographics, as well as their willingness to maintain the compatibility in the neighborhood speaks to the meeting of local needs and the master plan as well. So I find my recommendation is that with based on contingent upon the conditions that we have discussed, we can make the findings required under our bylaw in order to approve this project and barring anything on 45, which we have not been able to get further further discussion from or any information from Rob anymore on number 45. If not, okay, Waring, then I'm prepared to entertain discussion on that motion and on the approval and here a motion to so approve it. And if so, the motion I would like to hear we can debate that motion is to move to close the public hearing and to approve or deny the special permit to allow the construction of three apartment buildings and three non-owner occupied duplex buildings with a total of 22 residential units, including three affordable units on an approximate 2.04 acre property under sections 3.01, 3.211, 3.323, 5.10, 6.24, 6.297, 7.104, 7.106, 7.9, 8.5, 10.38, 15.1, and 15.16 of the zoning regulations. Located at 164.174, Sunset Avenue, map 11C parcels 9 and 299, general residents, RG, and neighborhood residents are in zoning district with conditions. So will somebody make that motion? Ms. Pollock. You may want to specify whether this motion is to approve the special permit. It's either one or the other. So it doesn't sound like you're entertaining to deny it, but that is the option to approve or deny. So you might want to pick one. Oh, I thought I said approve. Okay. I will restate the first sentence and I'm not going to go through the rest of it. I make a motion to close the public hearing and to approve the special permit. Okay. So I read the old thing of like, you search your name here. I read both approve and deny. Yeah. People have done that before. Okay. Is there somebody to move that motion? Mr. Maxfield. Is there a second? Is there a second? Ms. Parks. Is there any discussion on the motion? If not, the vote occurs on the motion. This is a roll call vote and it requires four people to approve the motion. Chair votes aye. Ms. Parks. Aye. Mr. Maxfield. Aye. Mr. Meadows. You're muted. You're muted, Mr. Meadows. Aye. Thank you. Mr. Gilbert. Aye. Motion carries. Motion's approved by unanimous vote. Congratulations. Thank you very much. Thanks for all the work. We really appreciate it. And I want to congratulate the members. This was a lot of work. Thank you very much for all your work on this one. Thank you very much. Good luck. All right. Does anybody need to take a break real quickly before we enter the next matter? I'm just going to have to get my paperwork right before we move on. I'll be back in like 30 seconds if you need to run a restroom. All right. Everybody, why don't we all take a couple of minutes and we'll start on the second application. We're back. I guess we can start the next item on the agenda. The next item on the next order of business is ZBA FY 2022-16 and ZBA FY 2022-15. Killer Inn Properties LLC represented by Valley Property Management requesting a special permit to allow a non-owner occupied duplex and to request a special permit to distinguish the previously approved ZBA FY 1992-52 special permit under sections 3.3211, 10.33, and 10.38 of the zoning bylaw located at 80 Pine Street, map 5A, parcel 86, neighborhood residents RN zoning districts. Are there any disclosures? If not, I'd like to summarize the site visit on Tuesday, I think it was. We walked the site yesterday. We walked the site, met the property manager, walked the property, observed the parking area, looked at the building from the outside, the portion that was going to be demolished, proposed to be demolished. We observed the barn that was proposed to be demolished and where there's going to be some natural plantings to reclaim the area after the barn is demolished with wild blueberries. We observed the, we walked around the house and observed the siding. We asked a question about whether the siding was going to be replaced and the clapboards were going to be replaced and the representative said yes. We entered the house. The current three-bedroom unit was unoccupied and we viewed that. We went upstairs and viewed the bedroom and the downstairs and then we went into the one-bedroom unit to the side which is currently occupied, including the portion of that building, that unit that's going to be incorporated into the four-bedroom duplex and a new duplex is being built next to it. That was about it in terms of describing the site visit. Is there any questions? And Tammy, Ms. Parks, you were there earlier than us. Did you have anything to add beyond that from your site visit? I did look at how the house was situated or the yard next to the river which is just behind the property. I think that was pretty much it. That summarizes our site visit. I want to go through current submissions. Submissions include application, a management plan, an additional photos, a project description, sample parking permit, and a sample lease, details and specifics for exterior light fixtures, site plans including plan of land signed by Timothy the Armstrong dated April 20th, 2022, sheet L1, existing conditions dated April 20th, 2022, sheet L2, a site plan dated April 20th, lighting photometric plan dated April 20th, as well as a set of building plans all dated April 19th going from sheet A1 to sheet A6. ZBA FY 2022 applicant submissions application and the previously approved ZBA special permit from 1992-52. Maureen, was there anything beyond this, beyond the project application, that's not on the project application report that you received from the applicant? Or is there anything else that we need to receive that we're anticipating? I don't, I think that is it but if the applicant, the applicant and I had sort of a back and forth of a slight confusion of submissions so if in now or during the tonight's public hearing if the applicant notices something that may be missing he can indicate and present it. All right so planning staff submissions include property map, an aerial map, a topography map, a zoning map, and project application report dated June 23rd. The applicant also has a waiver request from the sign plan and lastly we did have one public comment that we did receive which I mistakenly referred to in the previous comment of previous application from Mr. T. Ressie maybe? Yeah, Dick T. Ressie and his wife, Dick T. Ressie and his wife that came in today that both that asked questions mostly was asking questions of Maureen but if you haven't. But then he he did ask questions and I responded to explain it and then he stated at 253 that him and his wife have no objections to the two proposals we live next door to 72 Pine Street and although we have never met the current owners during the past several years the occupants of the house have been courteous quiet respectful and obtrusive great neighbors they exhibit the New England tradition of respect for privacy. So that's the only public comment we've received so far. Correct. Okay so Mr. St. William you would identify yourself for the record and present you're there for the representing the applicant correct? You need to unmute or there you go. Thank you. Yes I am here to represent the applicant. Yep. Can we have your name? My name is Alan C. Healyer of the Valley Property Management. Our address is 35 University Drive in Amherst. Great. One other thing that I want to do before we give you the floor here is lately we've been which I think is really helpful. We've been getting complaint history reports. The town staff has looked at rental property complaint history or sports and I think that's helpful for us in making our decisions on some of these special applicants special permits which include rental housing. In this case there's been no no complaints filed since 2018 when the current owner took over the property previous to that there were several in 2017 in 2016 and 2015 but there's been none since the current owner has owned it in 2018. All right Mr. St. O'Lara go ahead and make your presentation. Thank you very much Mr. Chair, Board Members. Maureen I appreciate your time on this Mr. Woskiewicz. Just wanted to introduce myself briefly in case anyone's unfamiliar. I've been a Property Manager since 2006 and I've worked with this applicant since October of 2019 so we have a good working relationship and enjoy the same with the town. The present condition of the property as was mentioned and is in the application report is a duplex. It's a three bedroom unit in the front and a one bedroom unit to the rear and and under the current regulations we could have up to six residents so four in the front and two in the rear by square footage prescriptions under the health and building code. What we're proposing is to increase that by two tenants up to eight tenants via four bed four bed on either side of the duplex. With that being explained I'd like to jump into the site plan and just review the proposed changes so let me get that brought up here and see if I can share it. All right so site plan was prepared by Berkshire design group and the current conditions include the house which in the front southerly section is two stories the rear is a single story and a wood frame barn with a patio to the west of that. There is sufficient parking on site already we are not proposing any changes to the parking area moving to the demolition plan what we are proposing to do and this was I'll note was approved or was not opposed I should say by the historical commission which has reviewed this at a public meeting would be to remove the barn and remove the single story appendage off the north side of the house which would then make way for the addition which would be a Cape Cod style story and a half would offer two levels of living space in a very similar footprint a little bit broader and the area where the barn was located will be restored with you know bring soils up to existing grade on either side of it plant it with grass wildlife mix and also blueberry bushes this was also approved by the conservation commission and lastly the lighting is all dark sky and downcast and does not trespass on the neighbors there will be three proposed light fixtures the larger light fixture which is type one in our submission in the cut sheets will illuminate the parking area to the east and then there are two type two light fixtures which are the smaller variety with a smaller light pattern which will illuminate off the south facade of the existing structure the parking area and walkway to the south and another type two light fixture which will be located adjacent to the entrance of unit B which will illuminate the walkway approaching both units the primary entrance to unit A is to the north side here and as such to the east side of the addition so all areas of approach and parking will be properly lighted and screened from the neighbors and downcast the other thing that I will show you is in terms of the architectural plans and just to illustrate the visual impact from the public view and that is best shown by this south elevation here all of this area is the existing facade of the building there is a small section approximately two feet across that would be exposed to the the southerly viewer which is the public way but it is screened from the public view by existing established trees and bushes so everything we're doing to the north side of the house is is not visible with the exception of this small area to the west which is in my opinion screened away from public view I believe that covers our proposal at a high-level overview I would be happy to answer any questions from the board to clarify any of this or if I've omitted any fundamental information happy to submit that um Mr. Hilar I understand that currently there are there are four units with three in one building in one unit in the other building that's going to be demolished so you have and you're proposing to have eight units at the end of this four and the first building and I think what might mean bedrooms bedroom I mean bedroom two units four bedrooms excuse me that's right two units four bedrooms so for a total of of of eight of eight bedrooms is that correct that is gone from four to eight that would go from four to eight bedrooms that is correct all right um secondly when was the when was the conservation commission I know you're within the 200-foot perennial stream and I think you mentioned that the conservation commission approved the the the planner gave it a no no problem did that occur in April or did that occur more recently uh let me find that I thought you said there was something last night that you went to a meeting of one of the that was the historical commission that was the historic commission did not express any opposition to the demolition okay so you've met the you previously had met the requirements of the conservation commission that's correct okay um one of the items we looked at and that you commented on at the site visit was the um the condition of the siding and the clapboards they could they were um they needed some work a lot of them were were bad and you were going to replace those is that still the intention of the applicant to replace the siding when once the work has begun yes the the intention is to uh reside both the existing building and the proposed building will be done via vinyl siding clapboard style four inch you know exposure in a consistent color most likely white although we haven't discussed with the owner you know color choices but yes it will be one consistent siding in in good condition once the project is completed and would you be a would you be opposed to a condition that said that you had to have completed siding within two years of construction of the new project new property no i don't think we would know okay all right i think that'd be a good condition it would certainly add to the attractiveness of the house versus what is there today um are there other questions from board members i guess i would have one more question you're asking us to extinguish an old um 1992 special permit um and issue a new special permit which is you know can you give us your reason for asking for that rather than just amending the the existing special permit sure i'd be happy to uh the the way this came about uh i originally reached out to mr westkevich to ask him what our options are uh in expanding this property and the answer was that because the current special permit has a condition that requires that there are no exterior changes and we are proposing exterior changes and i believe i could be wrong but i believe that the uh the uh options within the zoning bylaw had changed from 1992 to present such that uh non-owner occupied duplexes were allowed uh i believe that the the way it was explained to me was that the the path to permit uh of most simplicity was to uh file under the non-owner occupied duplex um and then when we did submit that application uh miss pollock explained to me that we would need to just go through the uh the procedure of requesting that the old special permit be extinguished in order for the new special permit to be issued and approved got it mr westevich or miss pollock do you have any comment on that i do recall that conversation but i have not really participated in that discussion since that discussion i think it might have been more with uh miss pollock and mr mora um yeah so under the special permit um from 1992-52 i believe there was a condition that said there shall be no exterior changes to the structure um and so uh the applicant is proposing to demolish a portion of the existing house as well as uh the detached barn in the rear of the property and uh so that's one factor um that 1992 special permit was to was the approval of a single family home to convert to convert a single family home uh to allow a second unit so uh so there would be a total of two units which is there presently so that's under the converted dwelling section because of the uh a because of that condition that says there shall be no exterior changes to the structure and b because of under the converted dwelling section under the zoning bylaw standard five there is um language that limits the amount of demo demolishing of an existing structure and adding an addition and so uh the applicant with you know speaking with staff felt that it was sort of a cleaner process um and i don't he would not been allowed to amend the converted dwelling special permit because of standard five and because of that condition so there would be no permit pathway for amending that special permit and so in the case that there is no pathway under the converted dwelling to for amendment or for or for new construction the the zoning bylaw allows for an applicant to propose a non-owner occupied duplex as a as another use cat classification and so that that is what the applicant is doing so they're they're going to declassify the use type there from a converted dwelling of the two existing home two two existing units to a new use classification which is a non-owner occupied duplex in order for him uh for the applicant to do that you know the board needs to make their findings to approve that special permit for the non-owner occupied duplex um and then contingent on that the applicant would is asking that the board grant a special permit to extinguish that 1992 special permit so that would be um cease and void and so the only uh if tonight's special um duplex uh proposal is granted that would be the only special permit that is valid thank you that's particularly helpful because i i've not been on a panel that extinguished a special permit so i now understand why um are there questions from members of the board to the applicant mr meadows again maybe this was uh it just happened that i was reading some of the regs this morning maybe uh mr wiskevitz could uh elaborate on 974 mass reg 3.04 again indicated a number of things that are required um as far as uh both space for bicycles and also providing a minimum of 5% of total parking spaces with hybrid vehicle plug-in chargers and providing 5% of total parking spaces as preferred parking for hybrid zero low emission vehicles i i don't see that as part of this application am i misreading that well i will i mean uh mr st. heler could point it out the applicant does propose a bike rack adjacent to the parking area and along the walk walkway as indicated in the previous public hearing um you know if there are um state or local or federal you know regulations that need to be followed of course the applicant would need to you know that would be an automatic requirement um and so you know i'm not um dav wiskevitz and and the building commissioner can certainly look into that particular um building code um that you're referencing um and it um you know tomorrow um to uh to confirm that that it would be indeed a requirement but i i don't believe that the board needs to make a condition under this special permit you know if the code makes it has a requirement then the code has a requirement and that would be captured under the building permit um approval process so i don't think you need to it's just that i don't see it in the plan it it requires a covered and and lockable space and that is not made provisioned for here no there's we don't see it's not in the site line is what you're saying we're just for my own clarity is mr meadows is this something you're referring to as a section of the building code the audio cut out i'm sorry uh oh am i off no you're going again okay uh 974 mass regulation 3.04 i'm unfamiliar with that regulation and i'm thinking it may apply to projects of a much larger scale it doesn't have didn't seem to have a limit of the size or a minimum size uh as far as my reading was concerned that's why i'm asking for mr wiskevitz to take a look at it and see because it would seem as though it's applicable for almost everything that we look at yeah i'll gladly take a look at that tomorrow i don't have it in front of me and i'd like to know for sure for the next time of course as well mr thank you that's actually one more time so i can also research it sure or can you send an email to maureen with the the site uh cited and then she can pass it on to mr singler so i guess in terms of this question um i don't know if we should we can talk about the stirring conditions but if it's it's acquired by state law or by state regulation i don't know that we need to impose it at this time but we need to know about it so that it's we expect it in future drawings and future site plans and mr wiskevitz will give us up to date on it um and keep us informed on what we need to do yeah and and i would like to add that you know your your boiler plate condition number one and i can jump to that um one second it's uh i guess i'll read some of it uh the you know that gets into the project shall be built maintained and managed according to the approved plans and application package any changes shall be rude by the building commissioner to determine if submission to the zba is necessary the changes may be reviewed and are approved by the zba at a public meeting or the changes are significant enough to require a formal modification of the permit and or condition and or condition and so you know sort of not to say worst-case scenario but like you know if you know dave wiskevitz tomorrow reads the code and you know suddenly alan needs to do a b and c to accommodate uh accommodate for hybrid vehicles and they're which would uh you know theoretically maybe um change the layout of the parking area he would have to submit that uh you know he would need to speak to you know the building commissioner and the planning department of what changes would need to be um provided on that site plan and you know if they're minor enough changes the building commissioner you know may um determine that they're minor enough and so it could be a administrative approval or if you know the parking layout changes if if if there were changes needed um and they're significant enough it would come back to the zba for review and approval at a public meeting so that condition your boiler play condition sort of protects um you know any changes to the layout of the parking area or amenities provided mr santa lair can you bring up the um the floor plan of unit a is that now visible but yeah would you have a do you have a floor plan yeah yeah so this is the proposed floor plan uh which i can zoom in on a bit so that it's more legible uh first floor two bedrooms kitchen living room bathroom second four two bedrooms and a second bathroom okay master bedroom go back to the first so in the back there's a a room designated a dining room that has a door located on it here so we you have four bedrooms and a dining room and with a door into the one right you have three more bedrooms after this and if this dining room potentially could be used as a bedroom if there's a door there because if the door is not there the dining room is the room labeled dining room is less likely to be used as a bedroom for an effective fifth bedroom i think if i'm reading this correctly would um would you be willing to take that door out so that we're not having this potential for a fifth bedroom in the four bedroom unit yeah i don't i don't see any issue with that okay thank you we can make that a condition um another question i had that was identified by moraine and so i appreciate this moraine is is it is it identified in the management plan as to who's supposed to be responsible for snow and ice and so have you identified a tenant or is it going to be a a company that takes care of it yeah thank you for that question i did have a chance to review the project application report uh that the confusion lies in the fact that our lease our sample lease uh applies to uh a number of properties that we manage and in those terms and conditions under tenant and landlord responsibilities are updated per the property specifics so in this case it would in fact be the landlord's responsibility for snow and ice removal okay so um that would be the condition of the lease at the properties yes that would be for the property but it's not in the lease that the lease that you submitted would be if that's not clear so perhaps we just have a a quick condition that clarifies that the lease for this property has a um has the landlord responsible for snow and ice removal happy to do that okay i would add that the lease shall be updated to indicate that it's at the responsibility of the um lease or owner landlord yep okay i'm just writing this down and and dining room door um on your lighting plan for the um lighting fixture type as proposed over the unit b's door entrance along the east building wall also identified by our sharp-eyed staff um can you pull up the the lighting plan thanks for pointing that out uh miss pollock the uh the question is this this light here adjacent to the entrance to the proposed unit b uh what what type is that and uh it is properly shown on the photometric to be type two it's just not labeled as such so it will in fact be the type l2 from the lighting cut sheets provided okay and you'll update the uh the plan to do that i'm happy to do that all right so we'll have that also an updated lighting plan miss pollock you identified an issue regarding the amount of uh small parking signs provided can you describe the concern that you are the question you wanted to raise with that oh yeah um it um it had indicated that that i was a little confused um whether signage oh sorry i'm i'm i'm doing two things at the same time um so i believe the application said that parking spaces shall be designated to each specific unit and will be marked by small signs in front of each space i.e reserve for unit one and then also all um tenants would have like a parking sticker um you know the building commissioner and i uh questioned whether um is it redundant or sort of a visual eyesore to have eight individual small signs um to say you know reserve for unit one a versus reserve for unit b and uh we're uh suggesting that you know you could just have one you know one or two signs that say uh reserve for tenants of this property all uh all other vehicles will be towed um the applicant isn't proposing any guest parking spaces um just so just uh you know reduce the amount of signs on the property um was sort of our suggestion it's just another that we have no issue with that uh in the application i apologize if the language was uh confusing but in the application we would only uh install signs if if the board so requested so we're happy to have fewer signs that has worked well in other properties that we manage we will include the parking plan distribute that to the occupants so they know where they should be parking and that has worked well on other properties so we're happy to have be void of any signs or all signs i do think that the resident a single resident only sign could certainly be appropriate but we are not asking for any additional signage uh anything beyond what the board would feel to be appropriate so i think what's a bare minimum here is that it's a resident parking only you don't have you only have eight spaces um and if you want if you wanted to have to delineate it from eight unit a and b that's fine i guess what i would say is that unless a board member has a strong feeling about this submit a um a narrative of a parking plan to the building commissioner and just work with he and moraine on what makes the most sense for that i mean i think you both have the same goal i don't see a need for us to try to mediate that we can be handled by a conversation and an email exchange between the commissioner and you sure does anybody have a problem with that any board member a problem with that i think that would work out well okay that's the extent of my questions um any other board member questions yes um i'm just hoping that that you can improve the uh the address signage on the road um right now it's very hard to tell uh the number of that property yeah i i second i had a hard time finding it too so i i hate to be a um an ambulance on a dark night so when you're dealing with the parking sign um conversation with the building commissioner present to him also um a mock-up of a sign for the address of the street sure i i think that could certainly even be accomplished by uh you know four inch tall lettering on either side of the mailbox i believe the fire department requirements are four inch tall lettering and we'd be happy to you know comply with that both on the mailbox at the edge of the road and also at the facade of the structure all right any other questions or comments from board members anything from the staff can you anything more moraine you got what you need good okay um if there's no other questions board members we should open it up to public comments or any do we have you Mr. St. Hilaire you can uh you can close off your your uh sharing and we have um uh john mclaughlin mclaughlin sorry i might be mispronouncing your name if you could say your name and your address um yes this is attorney john mclaughlin i'm at the green miles lipton in downtown north hampton i can't be seen is that um is that intended i it is yep okay fine fine you don't need to see me i'm ugly so um so so um i have to apologize i was retained today uh by the direct next store butters my clients karman rollon and roberto alejandro and they own 84 pine street which is the property to the east um as you look at the property it would be to the right of the on the plans um their longtime residents of this neighborhood they built their home in the 1990s um and they see this uh district um and the street as having mostly owner occupied homes um there are few multifamily and many of the multifamily are themselves owner occupied um they've had a problem with this um property as it exists um under the applicant and i believe if you look at the prior owner if you look at the deed into the um into this um current applicant i believe the deed into him is from the principle of the uh llc that owns it now so it was sometime an internal transfer so this been this property has been under the same beneficial owner for years um so complaints even if they go back are essentially coming back to the same person um the my client has complained multiple times three or four times about noisy parties um at this location um now just today i went to look on online in the planning department and i found a document called complaints filed with town of amherst on properties owned by a terrain properties llc prepared by the planning department staff dated october 21 2021 um it shows an enormous amount of complaints on properties that are owned and managed by these by the applicant in the same management company um it looks like um they were 14 properties owned as of if if the planning department's records are accurate we're 14 properties owned um in eight um of um in 11 of them have complaints in eight of the 11 have uh noise complaints with arrests and one of them has six noise complaints one single property and i'm sure that these records are understated because my client has complained three or four times and his when you look at the record for this property it says there's no complaints so i believe what could be part of the confusion is that amherst does have a particularly um unique registration um apparatus for registering um rental properties and making complaints through there so it may be that um those are the only complaints that are showing up i just want to make it clear that there are many many more complaints out there than are showing up but even if you look at only the complaints referenced these are an enormous number of complaints um for any one property owner uh i'm a landlord in north hampton been renting to students for years i haven't had a single complaint against any of my buildings this is 11 out of 14 eight of them with enormous numbers one with six noise complaints and there's arrests so um looking at i think the real big problem that i see is looking at the lease and i understand um the applicant spoke when said that this lease is just a sample i think we need to see what the real lease would look like because on the guest references provisions in the lease it's very different than what they said in the application um they say they can have 20 people there um but the application says they can have 16 or eight 16 people there so that's got to be clarified and in the application does say that the lease says that they could be subject to um subject to eviction it's got to be stronger i mean the plans that they've been doing for years simply have not been working and if in you have two provisions of your special permit 10.8 10.383 and 10.385 that specifically talk about a noise in the neighborhood and um i'm not saying this can't be fixed but the the language in the lease also talks about how it's subject to eviction on a complaint to the landlord or the agent i think many many people are not complaining to the landlords or the agents and they're clearly not going through the administrative procedures that are set forth in the bylaws of amers they're calling the cops and those aren't all coming through if well if they aren't we know they're not coming through because my client is called three times and you just said it says that there's no complaints and he would testify there was so mr. McLaughlin can you i didn't i didn't impose the time of it on you um because i thought you was only one but can you kind of summarize it and summarize your comments okay five minutes here oh okay um um well the biggest problem is um the noise provisions the guest provisions and that they're fact that that the um there's no condition in your proposed condition they would force them to actually take action against tenants who are violating it they're just subject to eviction and that's not working the other issue is the parking let me just speak about parking real quickly um the there's eight spaces there which i questioned because in 1992 permanent said there should only be four spaces there so and two of them are built within the 20 foot setback so they better justify that maybe through um not conforming rights i don't know how but they're going to need more parking otherwise there's going to be an enormous amount of on-street parking which will be severely detrimental to the neighbors already my clients see you know five six seven people parking there now with only four bedrooms you put eight bedrooms in there that whole streets going to be filled with guests many times and um just the the plan that they have now is not going to work you can't approve the provisions under the uh special permit criteria because this looking at this the record from your department this is a horrible landlord he's had huge problems 11 out of 14 one with six sound complaints and arrests this is gotta do something better i'm not saying they can't do it but they have to do it much better we have to thank you mr. McLaughlin thank you all right are there any other public comments we've got a couple here yep we have uh Killigan O'Connell Mr. Mr. Ms. O'Connell can you hear me yep can please identify yourself um Killigan O'Connell i'm the owner of that property um and i just want to say that uh first of all um i strongly disagree with the prior um uh respondents uh complaints tally and i have switched uh property managers two and a half years ago because we were having some issues with properties if you look at what has happened since that time our complaint tally has gone down dramatically allen has been very much on top of issues like that because that is a serious concern of mine i also live in this area and run a separate business here so it is something that is a very major concern of mine i do not want to be known as a a slum landlord which is a name that i know gets uh bandied around that is very very uh major concern of mine and i have met one or two of the neighbors they may not recall me but i do some of the landscaping myself i'm a gardener so i've gone out and done some property manager management on that particular property a number of times i think it was to the left of the property that i met the people they may not recall me i may not always be memorable but certainly i have not heard of any of these types of complaints i've they've not been forwarded to be by allen and not even by my prior property manager on this particular property and as to having a property with six complaints that is something that is particularly new for me to hear and i tend to be very aware of what's going on i just wanted to say that in my rebuttal thank you mr kamal um are there any other public comments uh there's mr alejandro okay if you could sit reberto um should state your name and your address yeah my name is roberto alejandro i live at 84 pine street uh i am glad that we had this opportunity to at least address the the zoning board and i am glad that i i heard the owner of the property i haven't had the opportunity to meet for the property management this is just an addition uh to the portfolio of 14 properties uh they plan to build a duplex meaning more spaces more tenants presumably more income and taxes for my wife and i at 84 pine street this is our only property this is our home we bought the land in 1994 and we built a brand new house when the community or the area was more quiet i talk on the assumption that the regulations and procedures that you are representing defending and enforcing concerning construction of new units those regulations are meant to to to establish a balance to balance a new construction and the quality of life of existing owners taxpayers and neighbors and in this case i am sure that there will be more noise more traffic and it is not possible to say what was said about the prior project on the agenda that it will be of benefit to the community because as recently as last year i was seeing probably seven vehicles in an area that today i learned is designed for four vehicles but i understand necessities of more housing i i myself i am a professor at the university of Massachusetts i have been here in Amherst in 1989 i love this community it is just that by increasing the area the living area of this property i don't know frankly how to interpret that and i don't know whether the permission if granted and all the signs apparently point in question mean for my wife and i that another message that we should probably join the movement and sell the house and transform our house into a rental property thank you thank you mr. Alejandro um comes to pan i see your hand is up could state your name and your address uh pan 229 amity street go ahead miss pan you are on mute you should be able to speak that we can't hear you if you are speaking oh i am speaking okay can can you can hear me now yep we can hear you okay so i'll start again that i i want to applaud the planning board for starting to keep records of complaints on housing and i remember that building superintendent rob morris said to a previous um builder that he wanted copies of the complaints that he had received that there's an effort now to keep tabs on problem buildings because we know that there will be buildings that will rent to students and if they're properly managed that can be done without destroying neighborhoods but if it's not properly done um and if records aren't kept and if truth isn't told then it'll result in what you've just heard people saying i can't live like this i can't live with nothing but cars and noise next door i thought this was a family neighborhood i'm i'm hoping that the effort to keep records on the town part to really make them accurate and to use them when necessary will continue thank you thank you miss pan um any other it looks like uh attorney mclaughlin has raised his hands again all right well um mr mclaughlin uh we you know we normally do three minutes we get in your six is there something new that you want to discuss and if so can you keep it to less than three minutes i am pressing um can you hear me yep okay thank you yeah you heard my request and my if it's something that you haven't already spoken to go ahead but please keep it to about three minutes yes it's just uh actually a point of order i've given you the proof of what i have said i've now sent an email of your records these are planning department records showing the numbers of complaints on the applicants property as of october of 2021 it's a five page document your records um i'm fortunate with a pdf and i have highlighted sections of it so i'm not stating that the highlighted section uh is your records but um i asked the board to at least consider these records and see if there is something that could be done with the management plan other than just to prove it again and add more uh violations to the pages of records violations they have um i would ask that they consider this and we have another hearing to consider this again i hope you don't close the hearing tonight thank you thank you mr maglal all right i see no other uh comments from the hands up from the public um our procedure is to allow the applicant to respond to the public comments um mr saint hilarity you wish to respond to the comments you heard so you'd like comments to us and not to them i would like to respond mr chair thank you uh one thing that i would like to clarify uh when the the comment was made about the the number of occupants currently under the laws and regulations both health and building code we're allowed to have six residents at the property four in the front two in the rear uh we're only asking to increase that by two so we're going from six residents state residents um i'd also like to point out uh as professional property managers that we receive an email from officer laramy every monday morning and uh it outlines the noise complaints townwide and we review those reports every monday and if there are any complaints against our properties we do take action on those we are a professional management company i think that the attorney mcgloughlin kind of painted us in a bad light i believe that if you look at the volume of properties we manage it is statistically consistent with the uh resident body townwide i don't think that we are doing a particularly poor job as compared to other owners while there may be a higher number of complaints he referenced the number of complaints across our company or across uh killerine's ownership that that is uh consisted with you know the number of properties that we're handling i don't think that it's exemplary of you know poor management stuff i'd also like to point out that the butter immediately to the west has a completely opposite viewpoint uh they sent in a written comment says that we've been great neighbors and that they've got no complaints and that um you know they're they're happy to have us as a new england style neighbor um i lastly would just like to add that this is the first time i've heard from the abutter to the to the right to the east uh if there were complaints they were never brought to our attention uh our contact information is readily available through the rental registration program uh we are also uh regularly contacted if there is an issue by the police department if we have an issue to resolve uh officer larry's role is to be the neighborhood outreach and kind of moderate between property owners and other residents in the town and as to the comment of this being kind of a buccalic family neighborhood i would like to point out that this is a main artery to north amherst to lever it to parts of shootsbury and there are in fact multiple properties up and down pine street that are multifamily non-owner occupied you know i can go into specifics we did provide that with the application but this is not kind of a white picket fence single family only neighborhood it is a mixture of um both owner occupied and non-owner occupied uh housing uh lastly uh you know the the abutter to the east mentioned that he built this house in 1994 and thought that it was a nice family neighborhood i would like to point out that this property has been a duplex approved by the town since 1992 so the use of the duplex predates his occupancy uh as in a butter and i believe that covers the points i would like to cover marine do we have copies of um the lease yes it was it was provided to you um electronically electronically i just wanted to add on the subject of the lease uh it sounds like there was a claim made that our lease is inconsistent i did pull that up while we were hearing the public comment and on page three uh section l excuse me section m it refers the limit on gatherings to the guest policy and i believe the guest policy does spell out very clearly um what our restrictions are and those were even reviewed in the project application report to be appropriate but i say something please wait for the chair to call on you mr allah hendro is it something that you um that you have not spoken to before in your previous comment yeah it is just a brief reaction to what the gentleman said about our community he's not enabled here and i would like to say something about that yep um do within three minutes please yeah in 1992 the house was occupied by the owner and he her son and her mother that was the the occupation rate at the moment it was a vocolic community in 1992-1994 that is not unfortunately the plans that some developers have for a pine street i can count between seven and nine properties that are owner-occupied and i live in the area and probably there are more some of the houses have in-laws apartment but the owner is there and he is responsible for the condo that of whatever happens in the premises and last i don't want to have problems with students i prefer to call the police and just to make a complaint not to go through the administrative procedures than now i learn are in place in in amherst thank you mr allah hendro um if there's no other uh comments we're going to close off public comments um and i'd like to open it up to the board to discuss what we um the general feeling about this application and then we can move to the conditions and findings if we're feel ready to or if we need for additional information we can respect request that mr meadows i think they saw you raise your hand yeah i have a little confusion in the sense that it was stated that the property is uh available for six um what six bedrooms or six spaces i'm not exactly certain and they're asking for an additional four uh and at the moment it has four in the front one in the back am i correct one in the back and three in the front right so to repeat there's two units currently on the property the unit a which is the front unit has three bedrooms and unit b which is in the rear is a one bedroom unit and uh the applicant is proposing to modify and expand these two dwelling units and so both dwelling units would be four bedrooms each so there would be a total of eight bedrooms as as opposed to the existing bed total bedroom um would be what what three and one is four four sorry yeah all right well i i'm i'm i'm not satisfied with the uh plot plan that we've had we have indicating the parking spaces the allocation of parking spaces um it it's a little blurry as far as i'm concerned and vague and if the regulation that i was stating is imposed i'd like to know where and and how that's going to be imposed i'd also like to see how the bicycle racks are going to be placed the storage is going to be placed it seems as though this application is not very well put together and i'm also uh i'm also inclined to listen to the abutters quite a bit i would like to um myself i'd like to see the the least specific for the properties proposed and i think this the least is a sample lease or that has to be adjusted so i'd like to see the specific lease for the property um and i i know we have what we have online it i don't see it mori and i i was it i i'm looking on the space right now the website and i don't see i see the stuff for 15 uh special under um the zba fy 2022-16 the application packet um that okay you could be right um let me i'm just but i think it i yeah this is probably something in the best possible situation here would be to give us a little more time to review the the lease review the parking we could um and other if we have other questions we could give them to the applicant and get questions answered uh and i also like the clarification it seems to me that the complaint report that we had showed a um um a difference between when it was managed by valley management by mr. saint hilarious firm and somebody who managed it before and i'm confused as to the um the complaint history there but i'd like to also clear that up um in case unless you can clear that up right now um i think that requires some some clarity in my point from my point of view but so those are two two issues that i think are out there um we're gonna get in just a second mr. saint earlier i want to catch up see if other board members have comments or questions is parks and mr. Gilbert or mr. maxfield uh particularly i'm just echoing what mr. men who's in stated previously thank you mr. Gilbert miss parks um i i guess i would like some clarification on the parking so is it is the parking for four cars i think it's for eight cars okay two three yeah eight cars so there'd be four four parking spaces per unit so one parking space per bedroom okay i guess i just i don't i didn't see that anywhere mr. maxfield right um yeah i was gonna say i uh i mean i think definitely gonna want a little bit of time to review some of the uh the complaints uh to to look at what has been said here tonight to actually see if i can review some of this material so i i definitely don't think i'm ready to make a decision on this one tonight um i i don't know if it's something the board could or should suggest alas you know your thoughts on this mr. chair i just know in the previous application that we had dealt with earlier today um i know uh mr. roberts had spoken directly to residents outside of cba meetings to try to come to a consensus before bringing something to us i don't know if we'd want to make a any sort of suggestion about the butter property management maybe trying to see what these issues are and then reaching some sort of consensus or if that's something that we would want to do in a meeting i know that it it creates um trying to work these things out in this format can be a little bit difficult where everyone has to direct their their comments to the chair in a three-minute format um maybe that's that's something that where i'm saying i don't i don't want to make a decision on this tonight maybe the rest of the board feels differently but if that gives them two weeks to maybe say get a chance to get in touch with each other talk about that and see if there is something that can be resolved that when it comes back to us hey these are conditions we would like to see and then make all of our um could make it a little bit easier on everybody here i don't know if that's something you you would recommend mr. judger if you think that's a bad idea you know i it's not something i'd recommend that we um facilitate but i think just your comment um is enough to to inform the applicant that is probably a good idea to reach out but i don't think that's a i don't think we have a forum for doing that outside of the public meetings but i think your comment is is probably a wise one and something that would make sense and we've seen work in other other situations so thank you for that um mr. meadows if you want to do you have another comment i thought i saw you raise your hand or might have just the other comment was i i i know given the distance that i am at i i did not get a comprehensive package and uh and and everything came in today so there was not enough time to study it in any depth and uh i certainly would need considerably more time to study yeah the pack a package yeah i i think we should i agree with that and i think that we should um try to pull a whole package together marine get it in paper to us early next as early as possible and think about doing this in two weeks if we can put it on the next agenda i don't want to duly delay this the consideration of this one way or the other but uh what's as soon as what's the quickest we can have it given notice requirements well we would be uh i i i would recommend that the board continue this public caring um to a date and time certain yeah and so the next available time would be at the july 14th meeting thursday july 14th yeah and that meeting is at six o'clock okay and i so that we can satisfy notice requirements and all that at that time okay and then the other thing i would do is is i thought the way in which we handled some of these issues in um the previous application where the the um management company the owner of the applicant agreed to provide certain information back to the town and recording violations and maybe a template for what we could would be good something good to study in the in future cases i think it worked out pretty well for the prior applicant and i think it helped us so i'd encourage i'd like to ask mr santa larry to look to um i guess it would be condition and you can share this with the moraine condition um 47 and 46 and 47 which talk about reporting back on an annual basis and making available to the building commissioner uh complaint histories so that would be helpful to take a look at that mr santa larry and that would be something that might be helpful because it gives us um more information something valuable for the town to have and it also is a is a a record that's can be accessed on a yearly annual basis to evaluate problems for the town so i think it'd be good if you'd look at that but i'm in a position also like the brother board members that i'm not prepared to prove it yet um so i'd like to i'd like to have the least specific for this property i'd like to see some of the parking more did the lineated um i think the um else of the the estate hybrid or the mr meadows point for the i think that should be answered and i think we could probably do that by the 14th of of july and we could consider this at that point um but mr santa larry you had um some you want to make some responses to the public comment and maybe what we said and then i think the board should should move one way or the other go ahead i would thank you for the opportunity um mr meadows mentioned that he didn't see anything uh that addressed bicycle storage and trash storage which i would like to clarify because it is on our site plan that we provided uh so i'll share my screen for that now just to clarify that and i'd also like to take this opportunity to clarify the parking so on the site plan you'll see a call out here and i'll admit it is way off to the right but if you follow that call out that the bike rack is shown here to the east of the existing property and this is something that we have seen on prior special permit requests and of course have included that to satisfy that also you'll see the trash and recycling bins called out and for clarity this is sheet l2 on the provided site plan so the trash and recycling bins there'll be four small 96 gallon poly rolling carts there will not be a dumpster this has proven to be appropriate across our management portfolio for properties of this size and they are hidden from public view in the elbow of the property here uh as for the parking um we are showing you know four spaces on the easterly side of the parking area four spaces on the westerly side of the parking area they are dimensions this this plan was put together by a surveyor a massachusetts licensed surveyor and it was stamped so i'm a little unclear on what additional clarification is being requested of the parking other than the site survey which is showing you know the eight existing spaces four to the west four to the east with the dimensions uh as surveyed and uh just to clarify uh i believe the uh mr mcgloughlin attorney mcgloughlin made the statement that the the current owner extends prior to 2018 that is incorrect this owner has only owned it since 2018 they were different and this isn't just a matter of legal entities he had no ownership of this property prior to 2018 and the complaints that were researched by staff were there were no complaints after he took ownership so i don't believe there's any complaints on the property if attorney mcgloughlin has differing information certainly we can take a look at that but any complaints on the property that predate this owner don't seem to be germane to this proposal in my opinion and uh just to clarify also mr meadow seemed to have some confusion on the configuration of the property and what i had pointed out was unit a legally we can have four occupants and unit b we can legally have two occupants so that's a total of six occupants and yes the the building count the bedroom count is increasing but the occupant count is only going up by two and if the if the neighbor concern is more people more noise more cars it's only increasing by 25 so looking at the number of bedrooms uh kind of paint some more bleak picture but the reality is the number of occupants is what's going to have any particular impact on the property okay all right thank you mr sandler any further comments from the board if not i'm i'm ready to we're approaching nine o'clock and i'm ready to entertain a motion that we continue this matter until six o'clock on june 14th or july 14th um and we take it up at that point um mr chair it looks like uh the property owner we're again connell would like to we're we're uh we're beyond that now we're we're in a motion to proceed uh we have a motion before us that motion is to um continue this until june july 14th at six o'clock at our next meeting do i have a second moved second uh any discussion if not it's a roll call vote chair votes aye miss parks hi mr maxfield hi mr meadows hi mr gilbert hi great uh we now have that matter is settled or moving this we're continuing it until the next meeting the next order of business is public comment on any matter not before us tonight so any matter except for the two applications we had on the uh the docket for tonight so if you do wish to comment please raise your hand um keep your comments to three minutes i see none the next order of business is uh any unfinished business or anything that did not come up before um that amongst board members i don't see anything oh miss paul um yeah so actually and i forgot to bring this up to you steve but i brought it up at the last meeting um so the playing department um would like to uh um change the legal ad fee currently it's 75 dollars and so for each public hearing um under state regulations a legal ad needs to be placed in the daily hampshire cassette twice two weeks before the public hearing date in one week prior to the meeting date um the legal ads are so much higher than 75 dollars um and so the playing department um really needs to increase those fees the planning board recently approved their legal ads to go up to i believe 300 dollars um and so the planning department would like to mimic the planning board's uh fee increase and um under the zba rules and regulations um it's it states that you know that the the zba needs to if any regulate if any um changes are made to the rules and regulations that the that the zba needs to approve those and that would need to be done at a public hearing so we're going to um ask at the zba hold a public hearing to review changing the legal ad fees as well as reviewing the rules and regulations in general um to see if there is any other changes that um we may find i recently find a couple um um confusing sentences that i personally will recommend um but um i just wanted to make that aware to you all that we would like to add that to a uh a future meeting agenda great and i guess when you do um yeah there are other town boards and committees that require public notice like the planning board and um zba the conservation commission also um under mgl chapter 40a uh their chapter might be different from the com com but uh under state regulations the conservation commission also needs to provide legal ads um so we just fill it in when we do have this meeting fill us on what the other situations are with the other if we're doing this across the board or whatever yeah let us know we don't want to be outliers but um certainly subsidizing uh notice for development as a it's costly and it is yeah we should be getting some serious thought yeah and it's not unique to amherst every community is is is kind of grappling with with legal ads and sort of the whole structure of how um noticing um noticing these legal ads um they have under uh state law they need to be done in a printed newspaper opposed to online and so that's where they get you you can't do it on tiktok no thank god all right just think with that kim Kardashian does public notices for zba or whatever i can't imagine anyway thank you marine we'll put it on the next if you're prepared we can do it for this the 14th um yeah and then lastly what other items do we have coming up we do um we actually there i can't remember the exact proposal but there is another special permit application for 485 pine street and it might be for a non-owner occupied duplex or something similar to that i can't exactly remember at the top of my head um but that is going to be scheduled for July 14th okay well that's going to be scheduled for July 14th maybe a um a map of the area and the type of houses for 485 pine street and along pine street might be helpful so we know what the uses are and we can compare that as opposed to just assertions from both the applicant as well as neighbors maybe we could have the a map that shows us exactly what's going on all right all that's good anything else from the members if not i'd like just wanted to mention i'm sending you an email marine um next the next meeting's good the 28th i'm going to be away um without access to internet so i know the July not available on July 28th all right cool um all right thank you for letting me know and and yeah so actually folks if you could take a look at your sort of hopefully summer vacation schedule um let me know if if if any of these meeting dates don't work again the zba meets the second fourth thursday of each month yep looks like things are picking up miss parks um i'll be in new hamster on the 14th but i can attend the meeting but if i can get the materials uh earlier that would be great okay yeah that's good now yeah yeah enforce the seven-day rule marine on the applicants i mean be be strict on it because it really makes a difference on for all of us it makes a huge difference all right thank you so much everybody have a great week i have a great two weeks and we'll talk to you on the 14th thank you thank you most thank you most to adjourn is coming there's second second uh and you discussed there is no discussion on this motion so um chair votes aye miss parks aye mr maxfield aye mr meadows hi mr gilbert hi it's unanimous and it's nine nine oh one pretty good timing all right guys motion passed we adjourned see y'all later thank y'all thank you