 Today is Wednesday, May 29th, and this is the Amherst Planning Board 7 p.m. And we're going to start the meeting The first thing on the agenda. We have approval of minutes, and I do believe we have one set of minutes from May 15th They were in our packet are there any Comments or does someone want to make a motion to approve? Okay, there's far anyone second that great Any discussion any issues changes? Everyone looks good. Okay, so we'll vote are ready to approve the minutes raise your hand if you approve If you that's unanimous, so we're good Okay, so the next thing on the agenda we have Appearance of Attorney Bob Ritchie member of the bylaw review committee And he's going to speak to us about the proposed changes to the zoning bylaw to bring it into conformance With the Amherst home rule Charter Welcome Yeah Hold it I don't want to repeat anything you've already Heard or know about it It'd almost be preferable if you just ask any questions, but the gist of it is that the Charter has charged the committee that I chair to review the bylaws the old bylaws and Look at them with a critical eye to see how they adjust well to the form of our new form of governance So there were two committees I chaired the last committee the first committee which Sees to exist when the new committee came in and now we're a committee of five three members of our council on the committee so we have elizabeth brewer Evan Ross and Pat DeAngelo's So we've been meeting our charge Includes the general bylaws and the zoning bylaws But obviously our attention has been significantly drawn to the general bylaws which is where most of our hard work is taking place but the charge is also includes the zoning bylaws and The first committee did what it thought was an adequate job to form them in such a way that the council could enact them as the zoning laws of The of the town under its new form of government there were relatively few changes So the first committee made that recommendation to the council elect and then to the council The council chose not to act quickly on the theory that it would rather take its time since urgency was not of That importance and they could take their time reviewing it and so instead of quickly going into the legislative process to enact them They deferred the matter until the second committee to review the bylaws had a chance to work The first committee Produced a document that the planning board Had reviewed and reported To the council it had a life span of 90 days that came and went Precipitating the necessity of doing it once again. So this is a redo of what the board did before With virtually no changes. It's exactly the same so the the timeline dictated by the Statutes and the charter is that the planning board will hold a public hearing on the proposed zoning change Which is something you're all familiar with this is all hat to you It's a 14-day notice To successive weeks prior to a public hearing of the planning board that is mandated by General law chapter 48 section 5 You know that this is the same same old same old that you've done all the time So we're going to have a planning board hearing on your stand schedule for the 5th of June And that would be occasion where you do it once again have the hearing public comment and then make the a report with recommendations to the council Once the council get to report with recommendations it can proceed to the next phase of them Which is To have the proposed changes read at two successive meetings of the council followed by the the actual enactment of the of the new bylaw So what you have is basically a repeal of the old and an adoption of the new You have seen summaries of the changes there relatively few Unlike the general bylaws the zoning bylaws has evolved into a a well integrated reasonably well planned Document the general bylaws by comparison There are no resemblance to the general so we really needed to do a lot of work on that We make some recommendations at the end of the Report that my committee made that how we might in the future Want to make the zoning bylaw that we're about to enact better and to have it be work Sort of integrally with the general bylaws. So we have a coordinated code for the town both general and zoning We have some recommendations about how you may wish to label and number and title the components of the zoning bylaw, but that's That's for future work You know the my committee will probably wrap up its business and that would be just Grist for the mill for both the planning board and the council going forward and So I think that probably sums it up unless you have any questions of specifically general I can I can answer for you Are there any What what you might think of as substantive changes that you're proposing other than simply Substituting a town council for select board and things of that sort. Yeah, that first level wash is to delete references to select board and and insert the town Manager the council and in some instances the Board of Licensing Commission. So the personality swap was the first wash that the next the next collection of Changes would be relating to numbering sequences that had been identified as a problem which we sought an opportunity to fix a few things That are sort of organizational rather than substantive I don't think there's any substance It's all low order stuff and they're all summarized in the report that we made to the to the council In three or four pages it summarizes what those changes are I Can I can reduce them to a single page if you'd like me to just run through them boy Have we received that summary? Oh? That's really hard This time around I gave you the full Bylaw with the changes marked in red. I sent it to you right email I'm happy to make copies of the paper copy if anybody would like that for next week You did receive the report that mr. Ritchie is talking about For last December. I didn't think of giving you that report tonight But I can certainly put it in your packets for next for next Wednesday. Would you like that? I would yes It's not really exciting reading, but there are so few changes that I think you can do it rather quickly Maybe the best way to acquaint yourself with what was done is to take a look at the report of the by-law committee to the council because they're Enumerated and it summarized there the the changes in in article 3 mainly changed the method of Appointments to conform to the charter in article 7 there was some Suggested changes that emanated from this board to fix the numeration of sections There was a change of non-conforming temporary signs Allocated to the town manager an article 10 dealt with the appointment of alternate members and members of the board and One one section aggregated provisions relating to marijuana Into a single coordinated clump of provisions rather than being sprinkled around and that's pretty much it As I say there are no substantive changes It was thought best to establish a baseline document for the changes that This body has thought about doing But before the changes that you are working on really go forward It'd be good to have a new baseline document that conforms to the charter that you could then modify in the ways that you're Currently contemplating doing with future changes to the by-law So Chris first just want to ask you so you're gonna include the three page summary in our packet Yeah, okay, and this it's the same as what we got in December. Yeah, yeah Chris I Can also include the minutes of the December 12th meeting so you'll know who was there That would be useful to me yes And if any questions occur to you during the twilight hours when you can't read Go to sleep let Chris know when she can talk to me and I'll try to provide answers to you before your meeting on the fifth I have one other question What What authority are we operating under at the moment? Since the current by-law refers to things that no longer exist are we still operating under the current by-law? it's a very good question and The authors of our charter took careful attention to that and there was a provision both in state law and Reflected in the charter that the by-laws of the town of Amherst that we've known and loved for many years continue in full force and effect With the obvious changes to be understood to have been made So if there were a necessity to enforce a by-law in which the select board was supposed to do something We would now assign that depending on whether it was a legislative or an executive function to either the council or the town manager So those Changes would automatically kick in In fact the town of Framingham a number of years ago has undergone through what we've done and they still have the old They they're surviving. It's a survival strategy there, but not well. We're doing it right We're going to create that new baseline document early in the game But all is not lost. It's a very good question because we can live with the old by-law, but it's clunky We always have to ask how do we change it? To read consistent with with the law and we'll eliminate that question Once we once the council and acts the new one so You know in for all practical purposes this body should continue to operate under the existing well under the 2017 revision of the by-law until such time as the council passes a new by-law Yeah, the charter and I think article 10 addresses that the provisions of the Existing code of general by-laws and so on about continuing full force in effect until a new by-law is revised adopted repealed, you know until that process goes on There was a switch over point and that point is when the council acts up until that point the old by-law Continues in full force in effect and from that point then the new document will kick in Okay Chris One more thing. I just wanted to make sure everybody knows that there was a by-law that was Published and it's online. It is dated November of 2018 and it includes all of the By-law amendments that were adopted through the spring of 2018 we didn't publish a lot of these because we knew we were going to be changing so so quickly But if anyone does want a hard copy of this by-law Happy to give it to you and I also wanted to ask who besides mr. Dvert whistle would like a copy of the red-lined By-law that you're going to be considering next week or is the electronic version sufficient Okay, any other questions for mr. Ritchie Thank you for coming. I'll see you next on the 5th. What's that? We'd be here on the 5th. Oh, yeah I'll be here as I say if any questions arise In the meantime and we stay in touch with the the town attorney on all of this although. I am an attorney I am not in this case. I have no attorney-client relation with you I'm just one of the work of bees along with you to that have volunteered to help the town out through this process so we we do touch bases with Joel Barden Lauren Goldberg as circumstances Require make sure we're on the right my opinion doesn't matter is there there's does We want to be right. Well, thank you for your hard work Chris I Just wanted to make one more suggestion. I think it would be really helpful next week We may have an audience because we have advertised this as a public hearing and there may be some people who are just Catching on to what's going on So if mr. Richie would give the synopsis that he gave in the beginning of this meeting I think that would be helpful for everybody to understand what's what's being done here. I think that's an excellent idea Okay, I'll be here. Thank you So the next item Public hearing site plan review SPR 2019-04 Amherst community television Amherst media corner of Gray Street and Main Street. This is public hearing continued from March 20th 2019 and there's a request to continue again to push this meeting to in July So Chris do you have anything to intro? Yeah, I recommend that you continue this meeting to July 17th, which is a Wednesday at 705 Okay, and I will mention that in your packet. We got a letter from the Zengineer requesting that they push this meeting back to July And Chris has told me that we need to approve this So first off does anyone have any issues or questions about this? Okay, we're all good Anyone want to make a motion to continuous? Yeah, I move we continue the hearing until July. What was the 17th? 17th And party seconds. Thank you Is there anything else we need to do with this? Okay, that rolls along great. Oh We have to vote great. That's right. I'll raise your hand if you approve and It's unanimous Thanks Next public hearing planning board rules and regulations PBR dash 1 dash 19 planning board rules and regulations planning board and this is continued also from March 20th 2019 To review and update and amend the planning board rules and regulations to bring them into conformance with the Amherst home Rule Charter as adopted March 27th 2018 So we have some stuff in our packet for this For Chris we got a couple of emails from mr. Bard on His comments on this and then is that the set? Yeah, and we How about could you give because that can you give a summary of the fees one? That was the new one the the one dated May 24th So Joel Bard is our attorney our town attorney. He's an attorney with Copeland and Paige and I asked him to review the changes that were proposed for the planning board rules and regulations and he had two comments one had to do with What we call? Well, let's see. What do we call it? We call it third-party review and We are the planning board is able to Require funds to be deposited from an applicant to pay for a Review of some aspect of an application that they're not comfortable with in other words if it's an engineering Issue having to do with stormwater management or a traffic issue You don't quite believe what's in the traffic report or something like that. You can have The applicant put money in escrow to pay for a review by an engineer who is competent to review the material and so what We had had in our in our rules and regs said that when When there's a dispute about the amount of money that's going to be put in escrow or the for the Individual firm that's going to be hired to do the work that the dispute would be Adjudicated by I believe it was the select board in the past. Is that correct? Yes, it was the select board and so I Had thought it should be the town manager because the town manager is acting as a an executive But Joel Bard thought that it should be the town council Because they are they can act as a quasi judicial body and the town manager really can't act as a quasi judicial body so in his opinion that duty of adjudicating the appeal of Who is going to do the third party review and what the fee is would go to the town council so I'd like you to Think about whether you would like to approve that and then do you want me to go into the other? Suggestion that he made or okay, so the other suggestion has to do with voting and What he said was that? We had a discussion last time about site plan review decisions and whether they should be a majority or a two-thirds vote and So in mr. Bard's opinion, it could be either a majority or a two-thirds vote But many cities and towns do Just go with the majority vote and he suggested some simple language as opposed to the kind of convoluted language that we had previously And the simple language is the concurring vote of at least four Members of the board shall be required for any decision on a site plan application So that would be for your consideration However at a previous meeting mr. Stutzman had suggested that you merely refer to the zoning by-law for For the method in which some as I plan review would be approved and I'm trying to find the page where that is Applicable here. I think it's towards the end Page 104 There it is it's on page 14 Mr. Stutzman had suggested that you say That the first site plan review that the vote of the planning board on a site plan review application shall be as stated in the zoning by-law article 11 section 11 point two five and that uses the old language and Eventually you will probably propose to town council that that language be changed But for right now it remains as it is it remains that it's either two-thirds or Minimum of five So you need to choose whether you're going to go with mr Mr. Bards Suggested language That you have in your email or whether you're going to merely refer to the zoning by-law and put this Decision off to the future Could you read how it says in the zoning by-law? And I think Michael is that 106 you said yes, it's page 106 11 250 So in the zoning by-law it says for a planning board decision on a site plan review the Concurring vote of at least two-thirds but not fewer than five of the members of the board Participating in voting shall be required for any decision on a site plan application Abstaining members being considered not to be voting not to be voting So that's what it says. This is based on a membership of nine That's what the assumption is here, but we haven't changed anything of substance in the by-law So So that language remains as it is in the zoning by-law Does anyone have any? Well, maybe we should just break it into the two How about we deal with the first one the the consulting third-party funds and We'll talk about that and then we'll move to this the second one So does anyone have any questions or issues with the first or the change? dated May 24th that email from Mr. Bard about About the third-party funds and changing it from town manager to town council No, that's eminently sensible. Excellent. Okay, so now we'll go back to this other the voting What are people's thoughts on either going with what mr. Bard is suggesting the simple language or just do the refer to the zoning? By-laws and hope that it gets changed at some point Well, my thought would be to use mr. Studsman's language from last time referring to the existing zoning by-law and Personally hope that it's not changed But it seems to me that it's an issue that we can postpone just to such a time when we can have a Perhaps a more substantive discussion about Value of a two-thirds majority vote for such an important issue as a site plan review Yeah, I prefer to stay with mr. Studsman's Proposal right now because I think it's just safer. I would rather stay with mr. Studsman's suggestion for the moment Jack I Like but Joel Barn actually did it. Does this it's just simple You got to have for whether you have you know, you got to have your quorum, but it's just gonna be for Anyway, slice it sort of thing and I was wondering what you thought Chris I think that the four is consistent with the spirit of the by-law and the research that we did in the spring that most cities and towns do use a majority and since the Planning board has shrunk from nine members to seven members that makes sense to me to shrink the number of voting People who need to vote in favor of something from five to four because that's Essentially a majority of seven. So to me four makes sense Maria The question I have is so does that for me if like tonight there's five people or have to vote Yes, and if there's four people, that's not quorum. We wouldn't have a meeting. No, that's still it is So we have to be a hundred percent So for us to go with mr. Bards, it means either, you know, I have four out of five I don't can't do them, but for this or a hundred percent for down to four or five planning board members Which to me sounds a little extreme So I think that I mean I'd prefer the word majority But if it's too much to sort of rewrite and have another version sticking with the two-thirds until we can get it sort of fully fleshed out I Prefer not to have The four from mr. Bards, but then two-thirds also feels too high That's my thing Chris So I agree that this discussion may well be postponed to a time when you're actually looking at the zoning by-law and Looking at changing it. So I think it's reasonable to leave mr. Stutzman's suggestion in place for now so Looking to make it clear. So with the way that it would be with the zoning by-law How would it work, you know? If there were say six or five people The zoning by-law requires five people to vote in favor of something So if it was like tonight all five would have to That's correct. Yes. So the keeping it the way it is is more extreme. It goes against the usual practice in Massachusetts Like some of the research we had done it we realized places like Northampton And Cambridge and Sturbridge and lots of other towns They not only do just the majority instead of the two-thirds, but they also do what have just members present So if like tonight it would just be three people So we're already being very conservative here in Amherst by doing If it if it was just a majority of because it's of the total council So it has to be a minimum of four and we're going to very ultra conservative leaving it the way it is You know, I would be for going with the professional recommendation of mr. Bard because it sets a tone from us that You know, it's a nice balance. It's not is the you know is Looser is what generally happens in other towns of Massachusetts yet. It's not treating it like a site plan review I mean a special permit which The problem is that SPR is is basically by right and pushing it up into the 70 percentiles And sometimes a hundred percent of members attending. I think is extreme So I'm you know Chris So there's one sort of Practical issue which is if you change the rules and regs tonight to be for to go with mr. Bard suggestion Then you can't really use that because the zoning by-law hasn't changed yet So that's why mr. Stutzman recommended his version which is you put language in your the document that you can control and then refer to the other document that needs to be changed and Then you would have an opportunity to make a recommendation to town council about changing the zoning by-law So I think that's a clean way to do it So but when could we anticipate that happening? You know that the town council will get to Be receptive to hearing our Proposed changes to the zoning by-law. I don't know what the town council's priorities are and Whether this would rise to the higher level of a priority to be voted on sooner rather than later I don't really know. I mean they have a list of things that they're eager to tackle and So I couldn't guarantee that this would be handled anytime soon Unless you really pushed it which you could of course push it you could Make a recommendation to change the zoning by-law for that specific item Along with the other smaller things that you're currently talking about so That would be really up to you, but my sense is the town council. Well, and yes, and that if you did that They would have to follow a schedule to get to voting on your petition your so by Ruzel If we went with mr. Bard suggestion that would send a message to town council that this is important to us And we want it to be looked at Because we're going to be looking at the zoning by-law anyways for lots of different things But you're saying if if we don't push it it could be more than a year It could be a long long time longer than how long some people even be on this board Yes So I think it's challenging to The town council right now to think about changing zoning by-laws because they don't really understand how it all works And they need to you know have more familiarity with the by-law before they launch into changing it So I'm not sure that if you proposed something like that They would immediately understand what it was you were proposing and you know jump on board to approve it They might just say let's leave it the way it is So I think there's a lot. There's a lot going on so the the easiest route would be take mr. Stutzman's language and Go with that and wait until a future date to change the by-law wait or wait and Try to engage the council to take this on as a higher priority You could engage the council to take it on as a higher priority. Yes Any other thoughts from board members? Yes, Michael Yes, I want to Speak a little bit about this notion of Site plan review being a a by-right Operation It's it's very clear from the zoning by-law on page 106 11 2501 that denial of the site plan based on a determination a Insufficient insufficient information or be that the project does not meet the requirements section 11-2 is One of the options that the board that the planning board has in dealing with a site plan review It can be denied and we keep talking about this being a by-right Operation and that's not really true. I'm not a lawyer and but I'm just trying to read this by-law and understand exactly What it says and it seems to me that it's absolute absolutely Incontrovertible that it is this body's right to deny a site plan review So that puts it for me into the category of a significant decision at the same level of special projects about special permit and I am Fully convinced that those two operations should be parallel that they should have the same kind of voting requirements the same kind of procedures and they should be Paralleled in the the various documents that we refer to the the rules and regulations of the Zoning Board of Appeals Specify exactly how voting should take place. I think the rules and regulations of this body should specify Exactly how the regulations should take place. I think the notion of referring To the zoning zoning by-law as a stopgap is appropriate and I think you should approve mr. Setsman's Proposal from last time But I really think that we need to carefully evaluate At this point what? that denial of site plan based on determination actually means and no longer take for granted the Opinions of mr. Tucker who whose ideas have been referred to us on several occasions About this issue in the last several years as gospel. They are not mr. Bard says that a four eight a Two-thirds majority is Reasonable is legal. He didn't say reasonable. He didn't use those words, but he said it is permissible under the statute the fact that more Municipalities choose a majority vote than a two-thirds major than a two-thirds vote is a fact I think But it's not necessarily the determining fact and I think we need to be very careful about this and I know well I think that I'm Maybe in a majority in a minority on this position But I would like to have a fuller discussion of this at such a time when we're not bound by the need to Fix the the issue relative to the Newtown Council's needs to have Bylaws in place that are Referred to the town council properly which is basically what this what we're trying to do with this document, so in short I think we should approve the notion that The zoning that our by law our rules and regulations should on this issue refer to the zoning by law and Take up the issue of what the zoning by law should be at a later time I just want to Clear up a few things when we look at our zoning by-law you have to remember where it came from it came from decades and decades of slight changes and new thinking and new changes evolving and part of ours has have been changed or fixed in a long time and Site plan review is basically a by-right You know mr. The history got from miss bestra Some of it is his his interpretation and mr. Bard gave us his But if you look at recent history in the state of Massachusetts in the last two years both Democrats in the house have proposed bills and the Republican governor mr. Baker has Proposed two bills very similar that is trying to make it statewide that site plan review would be a simple majority because it hinders Restrictions that are not very often not legal and what happens is this is when planning boards get sued and There are legal cases that we have one of them is Osberg versus stir town of Sturbridge where it It was found too restrictive and it actually what came out of that was that it should be a simple majority of Only members present planning board members present at the time So actually even if we go with what mr. Bard is saying it's still much more conservative than what is been has evolved through lawsuits and and and our own Let's state legislature is trying to fix Which I anticipate in the next few years. They will get it fixed and then you know It it will be fixed here But anyway, so the key part to remember here is even mr. Bards is Conservative in the fact that it says you have to use the whole count of seven as the majority Meaning for and not what the industry standard for the state is pushing and evolving to which would be a simple majority of members present Which could be as low as three if we only had four members at a quorum So anyways times are changing things are changing We do have old bylaws and and I hope either now or later They will be looked at and and you know, it'll be more about just The numbers of voting but we're looking at it holistically on trying to control and encourage the development We want namers and yet still control, you know The basics what you can but by right is a tricky situation Just I'm gonna go with Jack I was gonna say there's often members that will abstain Or recuse themselves and that further makes it I think more in line with this two-thirds by by virtual two-thirds When we're missing one of our members because you know, they have they have one of those basic things where they have to sit out but So I Think the four is a is a reasonable number in it and it you remove if there's someone with a conflict of interest and I just think it you end up with a virtual two-thirds very easily Do the dynamics of the board? Just a technicality question Is it even possible that we have this discussion when they're full house instead of just the five of us Could we could we have this discussion when all of us like in a meeting there? Almost all of our it's only one person because the other person will be here and Yeah, so you want David here when we talk about this I mean I I don't I don't have any particular Request for anyone in particular. I just think that there are meetings in which there is more of us present There's only one other member as of in a month So mr. Stutzman isn't here today, but he could be here on June 5th So so you could post on this discussion to June 5th, and then you would have mr. Levenstein and mr. Stutzman here, so all seven of you would be here on what date Okay, and would fit that in with that Could I ask for mr. Bard to actually he never addresses the part about? His thinking on whether it should be based on the full board number of seven or the industry practice of members and of Who are there above quorum quorum above? Yeah? It took me about a month to get this answer from him and he's on vacation this week, so I Don't think I could get the answer by June 5th I'd appreciate if you could still put it on his list then because if we Put pressure on the council, and they're willing to look at zoning on the sooner rather than the later We'll have the answer because I think that type of question is going to come up If you had a quorum present and you had a majority of the quorum would that be sufficient right the industry based on like Osberg versus Sturbridge, you know and all the other tech so the research we did Chris I found you know dozens of towns they just have it on members present they have it say SPR It's a simple majority of members present And I just want to hear what his thoughts are you know as if this is going to become a full You know think out and redo you know for the council whatever it's gonna we should have that information Yeah, Michael um Osberg didn't decide this case It said Osberg says without deciding whether in municipality without statutory authority may impose voting requirements It said without deciding they did not decide that you know you're missing how the law works So what happened is that happened and then in the history of the next five years fallout, you know lawyers use a case to Because other lawsuits were happening. So what happened is by? 2005 a massive slew of Massachusetts towns and cities have Adopted the this actual one line that says simple majority of members present And if you Google that if you actually take that quote and Google it Dozens of towns will come up that have just implemented what came out of this lawsuit the lawsuit itself didn't create the wording of what Legislatures use for their site plan review. That's right. So we don't refer to the lawsuit as precedent What's precedent was? Presidential is the fact that various towns have taken the action to create certain voting requirements Specific voting requirements. Well, they're my laws. So we go to What are those classes we take in Worcester at Holy Cross? Citizen planner training collaborative. Okay, so they're a huge, you know, I assume that nonprofit But they, you know, are a free guidance to municipalities in Massachusetts and they have a handbook and if you go to their SPR They actually have that same line is what they recommend to all towns and cities to use as their voting for site plan review So it no it's not about one case or multiple cases or how many but over the last 25 years this has evolved to be the standard line that Municipalities use and all I'm saying is that is even You know what even if we went with what mr. Bard says today that is still far more conservative and restricting than what? You know the average norm is for towns right now for voting with their SPR. That's all I'm saying Anyone else have any comments? I am you know, we can postpone this to June 5th if people are up for that We could do a little more research a little more thought I think that would be helpful for everybody I just suggested that and the spirit that it will really genuinely help me also make up my mind Yeah, excellent all the members. So I think it would be really helpful to agree a bit more time No, I think it's something that we should think about because I think it's important in some ways We could just you know default to the Incorrect language of the zoning by-law, but you know, this is an opportunity We could send a message to the town council to along with that We feel that it's a priority that we want them to work with us to help improve and clean up our zoning by-law So much do we have to make a oh Maria go ahead just real quick The zoning so many had three amendments that we've been drafting sort of reports on and this was one of the three So we were pushing it as a priority, you know the marijuana buffers Supplemental dwelling units and this issue we thought might be nice ways to have them step into how Zoning amendments are made. So I don't know if we're still pushing this one Equally with the other two since we also have the attorney working on it simultaneously But we were trying to push, you know, some of these into their Sort of attention to periphery, but I'm not sure the sort of traction we're getting on this So that's correct that the zoning subcommittee was pushing that and they were saying that these are three amendments that they wanted to bring up Early before town council. I had forgotten that so yes, this would be included in those Great, so maybe that can be on the agenda for the zoning subcommittee also for next week. Great Do we have to make a motion to yes, this is a public hearing so someone needs to move to Continue it to June 5th Sorry Great any discussion Or you already vote, okay, so So raise your hand if you're in favor for that great all in favor unanimous great All right, so then we have Planning and zoning report zoning subcommittee report Nothing to report So Chris do we have any old business I don't think so and do we have any new business? The only new business really is to discuss when people are available this summer and I got a little panic today when I was realizing how many members would be on vacation or Whatever so I think I'll send an email out tomorrow and you can all respond to it and tell me when you're going to be here There there are currently six meetings scheduled for the summer one of them is July 3rd Which is right before July 4th. So that's you know, you can decide whether you want to have a meeting that night or not I'm sort of planning around that but if it turns out that you do have a meeting. I'll Put that together So Chris, what do you think of a doodle poll and you could list all the upcoming dates through the summer and then Yeah, I'm sure Pam can help me with that. Yeah, it's I Would even be willing to come in and help you But I think that would make it easier than everybody trying to like write down dates Great So so we're on to form a and our subdivision applications We have two a and ours tonight one is something that you might be familiar with it's on Redgate Lane and Jonathan clate has gone back and forth between whether he wants to Have a flag lot next to him or not and he's currently decided not to have a flag lot next to him And so he wants to combine the flag lot that he carved off earlier, perhaps a year or so ago Combine it with his property and I'm going to pass along a Map that miss field Created for us and you can see what the existing condition is it shows two lots one outlined in yellow That is Mr. Clay's house lot and the other one is outlined in blue that is an existing flag lot And the idea is to combine these two lots Yeah And where was the flag lot made No, when was it wasn't that long It was made in the last Yeah, okay Not have it be developed and he carved it off as a flag lot and it went through a special permit process with the zoning word of Appeals and then there were issues with that. So I think that in the end you decided The advice here to sign this Does he have to pay a fee Is one of these changes Yes Yeah, really Upcoming oh was there another one. Oh So the second one is a little more complicated. It's property down on West Street. That's currently owned by Barry Roberts and he has a riding arena down there. It's down near Camel Hassan's barn Which used to be a furniture store and is now a tax shop So we have Three parcels outlined on this locust plan There's a yellow parcel that is a flag lot and then there are two blue parcels one Has a house on it and the other one has a house and a couple of barns on it and and he wants to reconfigure these Strangely enough the way the properties exist now And I don't know how they got this way, but the way they exist now to property lines go through a major riding arena So that's not allowed. You can't have property lines going through a building The building has to be set back from the property lines So I'm going to pass this around and you can see it and then I'll bring around the the proposal for the new Property lines Chris, what's the zoning on this? What is the zoning on this area? Do you know? The zoning on Barry Roberts property is RO residential outlining. Okay. Thank you A garage here with a house Really So Chris what what might have happened that the building ended up Across the property lines like that. I don't know It's unusual because he would have had to get a building permit to put the building there So I don't know how someone didn't catch that when the building permit was Issued so it's just one of those things that slipped through the cracks, but he's making amends now So that's Upcoming ZBA applications Sadler field can address the field Sadler can adjust that So I think we've been through all of these before but Cooley Dickinson healthcare wants to put a driveway on North Hampton Road or route 9 Just east of the intersection with University Drive So they went to the zoning board of appeals and said that they thought it was a de minimis change And the zoning board of appeals said there are too many issues with regard to this We'd like you to submit a special permit application. So they are going to do that. They're going to submit a special permit application There's a project on Fearing Street where someone is converting a garage to living space I think I've told you about that before and that did go before the zoning board of appeals last week And I think it was approved The Project on Bay Road you signed an A and R plan to separate out a flag lot And it was a very complicated flag lot. It was a few weeks ago that you signed it In the end the applicant has decided to withdraw the application They were submitting a special permit application for a flag lot to the zoning board, but it just got too complicated So they decided to withdraw that And then reporting on some things that the zoning board did act on already they approved Hickory Ridge the Hickory Ridge golf course to have the solar arrays and now the town is trying to Get CPAC money to purchase of a big portion of that property And then the herbology group, which is a group that wants to be able to sell medical and recreational marijuana in the Property that's currently occupied by rafters They're going through their special permit process and they have to come back to the planning board with further information about their parking And how they're going to fence off some areas upcoming SPP SPR sub applications So I'm expecting a dog park application to come in tomorrow And that would be the town of Amherst applying to Instruct a dog park using money from the Stanton Foundation And the dog park is going to be built on old Belcher town road It's on the old landfill site, and it's right next to the road and It's a small area that's going to be fenced and I think it I think it will be a nice addition to the town, but you'll have to decide When you say small like is it a half acre? Like, you know, I don't have the description here do people walk their dog? Yes, people can walk their dogs So there's a Large dog and a small dog portion to it. So I think it's Acre and a half total so the small dog obviously I think it's Somewhere between a quarter and a half acre and the other the for the large dogs is an acre And there's a special gate system to where the dogs don't get tangled up and because that's like the most That's where problems occur in the entryway. So and the Berkshire engineering Has done like a dozen of these designs and take a different stand and they We've been working hand-in-hand with them and so it's there's a lot of proven unknown concepts and and Parking is is an issue there because there's not It's there's no parking available on the road other than just, you know It would be parallel so there that's going to be a change but it has water And It's on a landfill So it's kind of restricted in terms of what they're going to do But what they're going to do is bring in a lot of fill and so the cover will not be impacted there So that couldn't be compliant with the existing solid waste closure permit. That's that's there Excellent to know. Thank you. And that that is pretty sizable. So the dogs have enough room to oh, yeah run and Planning board committee and liaison reports PVPC Yeah, we just have that dinner meeting which is described in the minutes Thursday, June 13th. I plan on going Our community preservation at committee Michael No real report, but the There seems to be some pushback on the issue of on the single room occupants single room occupancy project from Valley CDC on Northampton Road. There was a large meeting last night Which I did not go to but apparently according to the paper. There's some some neighbor Negative reaction to that. So that project is somewhat Unhulled in spite of the fact that it was the most important project that CP AC Was voted on was strongly in favor of it So remains to be seen what will happen there Thank you Oh, yeah, so The town council recognizes that there is a man of consternation that has erupted or arisen. I should say that's a better word They're planning to host a meeting on the 18th on June 18th I think it's in the bank center, and I think it's at six o'clock. I can't I will send you the information about that but it's an effort to have Valley CDC and the neighbors come come together and Talk about the project talk about what the concerns are and talk about the details of the project and and see You know just a conversation about it and and see if they can come together on some of these things So you might want to attend I'll send you a flyer about that Hmm Agricultural Commission parry are you still in limbo land? Yeah, okay Design review board Michael. We have not had the meeting since our last planning board meeting And Greg's not here, so I don't know if Chris the Amherst Municipal Affordable Housing Trust if you knew anything I Don't I can't give a report. Okay Thanks, and Well zoning subcommittee Maria there was eat next week nothing for you tack and downtown parking working group the consultant Nelson I guard continues to work on a draft of their report Before I go to report of the chair. I just we didn't do public Comment earlier because we didn't have any public but there is I Nothing to great. Okay report of chair. I have nothing to report report of staff Um, I do not have anything to report, but I look forward to working with you all for the next year And I'm so happy that you're here Well, uh a German. I mean, yep. Good dawn