 The meeting of the planning board April 3rd, 2019 in order, we have minutes and we, am I correct in remembering that we cannot vote on them because we don't have a forum of those who were present during that discussion. So we will defer voting on the minutes until the next meeting. The second item is the public comment period. Are there members of the public who wish to make general comments? I guess not. The third item is planning zoning. Is there a zoning subcommittee report? No, we did not meet today, so don't. Okay, so there's no report there and there obviously is no comment about the zoning subcommittee report and are there other planning and zoning issues that anybody want to raise? Apparently not. So we'll move on to all business. We have signing decisions. There is one decision we can sign and the other members of the board who were present for that voting can come to the office and sign them at a later date. So the next item of all business is SPRC 2018-10, the Applebrook cluster subdivision. We are not in a position to have a vote on this issue tonight, but Mr. Rudy, I understand wishes to present some information. Sure. So I'll turn it over to Russ Wilson to walk you through what those changes are. So lot five is almost under contract. It's in the back part of the site and I think what Russ will do is, as you recall, this had been going on for a while. There are some requirements for design for these as a cluster subdivision. So there are some requirements for design and I think those, the design will be changing slightly. Oh, the design has a lot of, no, the building. Very little change. Perfect. This is the lot and essentially all we've done is to lift the house and the reason that this is the house, this is the master bedroom, which used to be over here, drive-by used to be over there and they want to be closer to the woods, more secluded from the neighborhood to another house right here. And this is what this will look like as you're driving up the road. Essentially the volume. Why don't you use this microphone so that. We're basically building the same house at the same time. And so we've already constructed. That's another house that's already built. Yes. It's right over here across the street. Can you talk about the specific lot numbers so we know where we are? So this is, we're talking about what? Yes. And the one across the street is this one. Yeah. Okay. This is this house existing. All right. So there's no change in the lot size. Okay. Are there any questions? Any questions from the board? No. Any comments from the public? Okay. So we will continue the discussion of this until our next meeting, Chris. April 17th. April 17th. Nice job. Okay. Yes. Do we want to explain to people why that is the case? Okay. We need to continue this because we do not have a full quorum for voting on this question, which requires a two-thirds majority or five members of the planning board. We only have four tonight. And at the next meeting, we will have the full contingent and we will, or at least enough of the contingent to continue a vote on this question. The same statement applies to our next item of all business. That's PR 2018-11, University Drive, 70 University Drive. We will have to continue this hearing as well until the next meeting. And again, Mr. He wishes to present some additional information about this. Oh, well, look at that. Yeah, if possible, please. So this is the 70 University Drive mixed-use housing 36 apartments, one office space. We had, you probably have in your packet, so we were approved with a little bit more pizzazz, but those colors are not available in the quantity that we need them. And so we're going to be back on the 17th to ask for approval under, I think it's condition number seven, giving this substantial and accepting the revised colors as we have presented. There may be some tweaking in between now and then again because we're consistently working with the architects to, you know, we have, let's see if I can find, talked about something like that. We've talked about something like that. Ultimately, I think it's going to be this one, which is a little different than what you have because that was LP smart siding. This is eco siding, which is a different manufacturer. So as we started to get into the nuts and bolts of this process, it was really just material availability and the timing of it all. So in addition to the color change, there's two other changes. So there was also no black trimmed windows. And so as a result, we went with the white trimmed windows and also white trim on the building or maybe a few more changes. There was right in this area here, there was an additional bump out, but that's a stairwell. And so that bump out for cost more than anything. And I think just what space it was actually, what practical space it was actually providing has been eliminated. And then these are windows. They were going to be sliders. Let's see if I can zoom in a little bit. They were going to be sliders. If you look at the original with a gate in front of it, but that's gone away and now they're just very large windows. So if you've got any thoughts, comments, questions, I'm more than happy to answer them. As you can probably see, if you drive by, Western Builders is really blazing along with what they're looking to do out there. So we just wanted to get this in front of you as soon as possible. Plus, Lance from Western has been bugging Barry to decide on the materials outside. They were fine with what we had originally. They just don't have. So kind of the nature of the beast, if you will. Any questions? So I guess the question for me would be if we came back to this same plan in a couple of weeks, is there any huge issue with what we're presenting? I don't think there's any huge issue that I see. I wonder about the change in the bump-outs that you're talking about. That reduces the square footage to some extent? Minimally, yes. Right here you'll see that there is, this is a stairwell. It's actually, so if you drive by the site, you'll see that it's enclosed in the cinder block. And so the decision by higher ups than me thought that that bump-out in the stairwell didn't make any sense because of the framing that, this is panelized construction. And so then the framing that would have been required to get this bump-out here without any meaningful or appreciable space. Here you're talking, I think, bedrooms. So there's actually, you're gaining square footage for the units themselves with these bump-outs, which is obviously something that the developer wanted to do. But if you put it here, I think it was just, do you do a window sill that's bigger? How does it go out? So I think it posed more problems than it potentially solved. I do think it lacks a little bit aesthetically, not having it there. I liked it there, but... So that area remains a stairwell? It does. It has always been a stairwell. And the landing of the stairwell above the window is where the windows are, above the doors, where the windows are on both floors. Correct. And those windows are not operable? I do not know. I will find out. Yeah. In the previously... This is on, I think. Yeah. In the previously approved scheme, the base is also a different color. And that usually makes a huge difference to how the building is kind of situated. And I'm talking about... Yeah. Yeah. And I just wonder, like this beyond just the color matter, this kind of... I mean, this is more of a subjective comment anyway, but it's really kind of grounded the ground floor in a much better way than the rest. So that having gone away entirely, just wondered if I'm dealing with personalities that are... We've talked about the two color versus the three color. I think why I say this is probably going to be what it's going to be is because these aren't terrific to, I think, the developer's eye necessarily. But maybe taking a look at this to just have this piece here be that one color and then have this and the bump outs and here be kind of the same pattern that was here, but to use the colors available to see if that's a potential solution for you. Yeah. And that's an intermediary scheme, the one that you're showing right now between what was approved and... Yeah. This is one that Jonathan Sullivan put together today. Based on the colors that they had because like I said, we saw that one and it's probably going to be fine 10 years from now, 20 years from now, 30 years from now, 40 years from now, but it doesn't jump out at you necessarily and this one was also, I think, okay. It felt a little bit disjointed with the reds kind of sticking out here. So I think your comment's a good one and that was part of the reason why I said I want to come tonight and talk because this board always has some pretty good thoughts and comments. I mean, if I can just finish. I just think that composition of me, that scheme somewhat kind of does a better job at articulating the ground floor and making it accessible and legible and then highlighting the extruded volumes and then allowing us to read the rest of the building better. So take it with a grain of salt, but... More than that, certainly. It's all kind of cosmetic stuff in my mind. So I don't really have anything to comment about but I do agree that the party, that this original scheme did break up the mass a lot more but it's so subjective. I feel like what you're bringing is, yeah, it's like a few railings are gone and some windows have shifted. I mean that shifted changed from sliders to windows so it's pretty much the same project in essence. Thank you. Well, I would agree with Pari about the stronger visual sense if there's one color at the ground floor making a kind of base for the building. It also seems to lower it visually which I think is a good thing. So if there's any possibility of moving in that direction with the architect and the owner, I would certainly appreciate that. I really appreciate the feedback. It's exactly what I wanted to hear. So I'm going to say the planning board said. Okay, thank you very much. See you in a few weeks. Thank you. Are there any other comments about this? I don't think so. Okay, we will continue this for two weeks. Are there any topics not reasonably anticipated? 48 hours before the meeting. No topics. Okay, then we'll move on to new business and there is no new business specified but are there topics reasonably anticipated here as well? No topics. Okay, moving right along. Are there any form A and R subdivision applications? Yes, we do have a form A and I'll describe it to you in words first. What it is, it's the Applebrook subdivision and it's eight lots and open space and you'll remember that there's a private row that goes into it. What they're doing is they're moving some of the lot lines to make the lots more sympathetic with the buildings. They're now out on the site building, they've got two buildings going and they're planning seriously for the other buildings and now that they're seeing the buildings on the site, they're realizing that they should really move some of the lot lines. So I will bring the drawing around and show you where they've moved them. It's really lots one through six where they've moved the lot lines, seven and eight they have not. I did a pretty thorough examination of what they were doing in terms of lot area, whether it contained the building circle, frontage and also whether it's a buildable lot. According to our bylaw, you have to have either 90% of the lot area or 20,000 square feet in contiguous upland area. So initially I did that analysis and it turned out that a couple of the lots didn't meet those requirements. So they went back and changed them and now they do meet the requirements and so I'm pretty confident that this is a reasonably good plan. So I'd like you to look at it and then if you would authorize the chair of the board to sign this when he has an opportunity to come into the office. Okay, thank you. I'll pass along this drawing that Pam prepared and it shows the lots that are changing in turquoise and also yellow. The front line is yellow and the others are turquoise. So the only change in here is the yellow outlined lot. Okay. Is there any indication as to what the original lines were? So here's lot one where the existing houses and the original lot line I believe was there and they're shifting it up to here. The original lot line for lot two was here and they're shifting it up slightly to there. This is open space here. For lot three, they've made lot three wider. They've moved the lot line from here to there and from here to there. This makes lot four a little narrower but still within the parameters that are allowed. Lot five isn't really changed and lot six changes slightly by that line. The dashed line was the original line and the dark line is the proposed line and these two lots seven and eight don't change at all. Okay, we should have a motion to entertain the chair and approve this proposal. I'll make a motion to approve performing as presented in our 2019 dash seven as presented. Second. Moved and seconded that this be approved. All in favor. Thank you. And Mr. Stutzman can sign that when he is able to. Any upcoming ZBA applications? So we finally received the plan or proposed revised plan for Aspen Heights, the Emerson Motel down on North Hampton Road. They are proposing a two story building rather than a three or four story building which they'd previously proposed and they're proposing, I think, 88 units instead of 115. The site plan is essentially the same. The parking is the same. They've decided to keep the number of parking spaces because they want to make sure that their tenants don't park on Greenleaf's Drive and they also want to have enough parking spaces for guests. So I guess the question for you is would you like to see this before it goes to the zoning board of appeals? If they could come to you, if you would like to see it. What is the board's preference about this? I personally would like to see it. I guess we probably should take a look at it at some point. Okay. Is that it for the ZBA? I think so. Unless Field Sadler can think of anything else. Okay. Any upcoming SPP, SPR sub-applications? We have not received any. People are always coming in to talk to us about things. Okay. All right. Planning Board Committee and Liaison Reports. We have nothing from the PVPC since are there two representatives that are not here unless someone else has something to say about that. About the Community Preservation Act Committee, that committee is now meeting intensively for the last three and the next two weeks. It has tentatively approved of applications which it will then forward to the Town Council. The tentative support has been expressed so far for the Valley CDC enhanced SRO on Route 9 for $500,000. And it has approved tentatively $200,000 for the purchase of the Hickory Ridge Open Space and $116,000 for the Amherst Community Connections rental subsidy program and $50,000 for the West Cemetery headstone restoration program. There is some interest in and we have some discussion still to be had on four other major projects. Well, three other major projects, one divided into two sections. The first of those is the Zala property acquisition, which is a piece of property in North Amherst which will connect to existing town-owned properties and will be basically an open space acquisition. The Keith Haskins property in North Amherst along the Cushman Brook, which is for which strong interest has been expressed. This is a $238,000 purchase. The Zala property is a $188,000 purchase. There's also been strong interest in the East Street School Amherst Municipal Housing Trust proposal, which has been divided into two sections. A $40,000 consultant appropriation for developing the project and a $400,000 appropriation to support the work when it gets to pass the consultant and design stage. So those are the major items on the CPAC's agenda for now. If the board has any particular, since I'm a representative of the board to that organization, it would be appropriate, I think, if the board has any interest in any of those four projects which are under discussion, as I mentioned, that would be useful for me to know about that so that I could convey the board's feelings about those particular issues. If not, otherwise we can go on with the discussion as it will continue in CPAC. Anybody have anything they want to say about any of those issues? Is the East Street project the affordable housing project? Yes. And it's by Julie Bard, I forget her name, the consultant who's been hired to study or is this a different study? I believe that's the study, yes. Oh, okay. Other questions? Yes. I think, did Ms. Chow ask about the consultant for the East Street project? Yes. Because that consultant was actually Cune Riddle. So Ms. Chow may be remembering Karen Sonneberg who was hired as the housing consultant for housing production, if I'm understanding correctly. Thank you. Other questions? Okay, Agricultural Commission. They have not met. There's an upcoming meeting which I will not be able to attend next week, but there will be another one in May that I will be attending and hopefully reporting back at that point. Okay. Has your nomination been finalized? No. Not yet. Chris? I think there was a little bit of a mix-up with the email that I sent to the town manager's office in December. And so they intend to act on it very, very soon. The town manager will be bringing Perry's name to the appropriate people to vote on it soon. Okay. Thank you. Design review board. Again, there we have been meeting occasionally and approving some signage issues on particularly on Pleasant Street and also signed off on the new door for the Jones Library, which replaces the old one, which is essentially in disrepair. Amherst Municipal Housing Trust. Mr. Stutzman is not here. Zoning subcommittee. We have already heard from UTAC. Mr. Stutzman and Ms. Gray-Mullen are not here. Downtown parking working group. Ms. Gray-Mullen is not here. And there is no report of the chair since I am just filling in. Is there a report of the staff? Yes. I'd like to make sure that you know about the important form that's happening tomorrow night on smart growth and zoning for affordable housing. It's happening at the Crocker Farm School at seven o'clock. I think it's going to be in what they call their cafeteria. And we're going to have representatives from the state come out and describe what smart growth zoning is and talk about 40 art districts and how they work in other cities and towns. And it's an opportunity for people to learn about this new form of zoning and how it might potentially be useful for Amherst. Good. That sounds like a very interesting and useful meeting. Is there anything else? I guess we will stand in adjournment. Thank you very much.