Good evening everybody. Uh this is Amoris Conservation Commission. Today is uh August 27th, 2025 and it's uh 7:03 p.m. Uh we'll uh we've got uh five scheduled
um hearings for today. And uh just to be advised, I'll make this as an announcement a couple of times, but uh hearings number one and two uh for um
CISA on behalf of Friends of Improved Drainage uh and for uh Town of Amoris Public Works. I'll tell you a little more about them in a in a couple minutes. uh will need to be postponed. Um
and uh toward the end of our meeting today, we'll also uh have a reorganization of the commission where we'll vote for a new uh chairman and vice chair. Um,
with that, uh, is there any word on, um, on the status of, uh, on on the dry spell or anything? Do we have a >> The state of Massachusetts has not yet
declared a drought. Um, there are other entities that have, um, but the state of Mass has not yet. >> Okay. All right. Okay. Well, I uh well, with that then uh we'll pass uh pass the word over to
Dave Zc for a director's report. >> Sure. Thanks, Andre. Appreciate it. Won't take but a few minutes. Um just a couple of things to update the uh the commission on and any members of the public who might be listening. Um let's see. First off, some of the mod modest
improvements we're doing up at U Mount Pollock. Uh that work is underway. If anybody is in the neighborhood, please go check it out. We're, as I said, we're doing a very small um expansion of the parking area up there really to help
with uh turning uh radi up there. It's very hard, as you know, to to back in and out of there, that small parking lot. So, we're just uh doing a little uh paving up there and then we're doing a very short ADA um lookout, an overlook
there so that people with uh disabilities can actually get up on the mountain a little bit. So, um check that out. It should most of the work um on those two features, the parking and the trail should be done by the weekend and
then we'll be coming in with with our staff. Brad and uh Anthony will be doing a a nice little guardrail, wooden guardrail around the parking area and we'll be installing a kiosk in the next week or 10 days. So, uh nice little modest improvements up there to make it
more accessible and easier to turn around up there in that very small parking lot. And we'll be uh we'll actually be lining the parking lot for the first time so people know kind of how to park and where to park. So, that's a fun little project. Um, a
project that, uh, the town is working with the regional schools on that you permitted was the track and field is the track and field. And so, uh, if you haven't been by the the high school, uh, please take a swing by. The the new track is really taking shape. I I was
part of a team updating the regional school committee last night uh, with our project manager, Bob Parent, and we are on budget and on schedule. So, um really um a nifty project for athletes and uh parents and the community moving
forward. So, again, there we're looking at a completion date probably in early November. Um the weather has been great for construction. Um uh not great for other other things, but it has been a good six or eight weeks of of good con
dry construction weather. Um Aaron participated uh with the Kestro Trust in a in a um a small uh chwater chestnut pole over at Plumbrook Pond. We have a a small number of plants there. We discovered a couple of years ago in the
pond next to the gestal office that the town owns. So Aaron and her son, I believe, both participated in that yesterday. I was not able to go and Brad had a conflict. But uh they went out in kayaks and pulled I think from Aaron's
report about two uh garbage bags full of water chestnut chestnuts including their uh the seed pod. So it's nice to keep a keep a handle on that and make sure that uh invasive does not take over the pond over there. And then moving uh over to
Hickory Ridge, we're still working on the trails there. Um we have put the bridge replacement out to bid. Uh that is the bridge that'll kind of connect. These are the the town trails. Uh we put the bridge out to bid connecting the
south side of the uh Fort River with the north the trails on the north. So we're expecting bids back on that very soon. And then we've been trying a little um uh interesting weed control uh method over there along the trail because of course when you do these crushed stone
trails, weeds uh and invasives uh have a way of of working their way onto the trail. So we're actually using a small kind of back backpack torch and a water pack. and Brad and Anthony have been
walking the sides of the trail and basically uh just burning back the uh you know six or eight inches of the weed growth onto the crush stone trails. So uh it's kind of an experiment to see how that works. We've also been trying
vinegar and salt and dishwashing detergent and uh you know a little Dawn and seeing if we can burn back some of the weeds along the trail that way. um and trying some techniques obviously to not use uh uh uh herbicides. So, which
we don't do. So, um couple of updates from around town. That's all I have for today. >> Well, thanks Dave. >> There's lots more happening, but I know you have a full agenda. >> All right, great. Thanks. Um
with that, uh we still have a little bit of time here uh before our first uh hearing is scheduled. Um uh so we can go into land use applications. Uh Erin, >> so um we don't have any land use
applications for consideration tonight, but we did get a new application for the um Puffers Pond Chili Plunge, which will be on at the next meeting on September 10th. and um just needing to do a little staff um check in on that before uh
bringing that to the commission, but look out for that one on September 10th. >> All right, sounds good. >> Andre, I'm sorry if I could. I forgot one one quick update if if I had a moment. And that is on Puffer's Pond. So, uh, just with all the great weather
we've been having, we're fortunate enough here we are in, uh, the last week of testing, we typically test from Memorial Day to Labor Day weekend, and we had, uh, excellent results again. Again, probably due to the fact that we haven't had much rain, but um, we have
only, I think, had one week in the summer when both beaches at Buffers failed. So, um, here we are at the end of the testing season. We we have a full a full season of test results, including
results looking upstream at some of the tributaries of the the main stem of the Kushman and its tributaries. So, we'll be getting together with our small group of faculty from UMass and staff and uh really having a a summer of data,
granted a dry summer, at least the the latter part of the summer. Um and we'll take a look at that and see if we can come come to some conclusions looking ahead to see if we can get a handle on this E.coli issue at Puffers. But again, um Puffers is open and we hope people
enjoy it and we'll see how the temperatures go uh throughout September. >> That's great. Kind of a a rare summer that uh that we get uh so much time in, right? >> Good. Good. That's good news.
Um well, it's uh pretty close to 7:15. We still have 3 minutes left. Um, anyone who's waiting for uh the RDA on um the CISA, the community involved
sustaining agric sustaining agriculture uh at the uh Miller River and uh uh the what's the name of the um Miller Rivers tributary? Uh,
>> it's an unnamed tributary, uh, Andre, but it's, uh, it's off of Meadow Street. So, it's the Meadow Street RDA. >> Okay. So, that RDA, uh, will not be heard today. We had an issue with the, uh, Hampshire Gazette where they didn't
um, uh, make the announcement for this uh, for this hearing um, as they were requested. And the same with the next uh the next hearing at 7:20, which is a NOI, a notice of intent for the Ammerst
DPW at um at Mill Lane um just above Mil Lane on West Street, uh just south of uh Mil Lane on West Street. So, those are both uh uh going to be pushed on to the next
meeting on the 10th of um uh September. Is that correct, Aaron? >> Yes. >> So, um if we would like to uh let's see talk about certificates of compliance or the
uh uh or the informal uh discussion on uh 174 AMD Street. We can go ahead with that. Your choice, Aaron. >> Great. Yeah, that would be wonderful if we could do the the informal discussion because I see um
everybody's here for that and um it I can pull them in. Andre, >> yeah, let's do that. >> Okay. Okay. >> If uh if you are here for this informal
discussion um at 174 AMD Street, raise your hand if you haven't been seen already, if you haven't been pulled in. Linda Slaky, I guess pulled in. There we go. There's Bucky. Someone else, Linda Slaky, uh, raised
her hand. Is she with you? There we go. So, >> do you want me to just give a quick intro to the discussion? So, and then allow them to present or how do you want to >> That sounds good. Welcome uh uh Bucky,
Linda, and I'm not sure >> Bruce. >> Bruce. Um go ahead, Erin. Yeah, please do. So, um, several months ago, I met with Bruce, um, to go to discuss a a
potential project, and, um, there was enough sort of nuance with the with the project that I thought it would be a good idea for, um, for him to come up with some plan alternatives to present to the commission. So, that's why they're here this evening. Um, so that's
basically just a quick intro, but um, I did meet with them previously in person to get a sense of the project and I felt like the commission needed to give um, give them guidance before they filed an application. >> Okay,
Bruce. Uh, or who is going to uh, introduce your >> I think uh, it probably shouldn't be me. Uh, Linda is the uh the the person who is essentially Mrs. or Ms. ACLT.
I'm a retired architect and have uh volunteered my time for through the duration of the project and Bucky recently has been uh asked to uh um provide uh services as a site and civil engineer. Um Buckyy's somewhat familiar.
We've had a couple of conversations. hasn't actually been formally uh engaged yet. We have uh issues with CPTG funding and so forth that uh has to be resolved before we can confidently do that. But we have a good relationship and Bucky is
supportive of this process. But I think under the circumstances I probably should um introduce and then uh others Bucky and Brenda can add anything that I miss. But we don't want to take a lot of your time. So, I'm uh ready to give a
short introduction that shows where the project is, what we're trying to achieve, and the uh three or four ways in which we think we could do it and their implications on a small wetland that has been determined to exist there. >> Um could I share a screen? Is that
possible? Or would you? >> You should be able to share, Bruce. >> Looks like I can. Well, just let me get this out of the way. Can you see that? >> Yes, we we can see it >> that is visible
>> way for you to maximize the screen that you have. Um, >> I will maximize it. Uh I I think if I do it any more than that it'll become unclear particularly with the vertically oriented uh
>> Okay. >> Okay. So um this is a project uh uh on 174 Amity Street which you can see at the top just uh center of town is to the right, Lincoln Avenue to the left. Uh
north is up. The purple square is essentially the bounds of the site. Uh the the gray building is a very large uh wonderful old Victorian building which the owners uh have declared that they will uh convey to the Ammeris Community
Land Trust at approximately half its uh uh market value um in uh return for it being committed to affordable housing for the town. It's uh uh we've determined that we can get three units of affordable three three dwelling units
of substantial three-bedroom dwelling units in there. Um the uh the site adjacent as you can see on the uh to the to the right here particularly the the the pink building which is a dentist
office now and it has a substantial amount of uh pavement around and what the story of how that happened but the fact is that there's a fair amount of runoff that runs down and across this lower corner of 174.
So that I think in combination with the fact that this site has been rented for many decades and no one has really paid too much attention to the maintenance of the landscape back here and the accumulation of leaves against a a wire fence here has impeded the flow and it
appears that uh uh that is the the wetland as a result as a consequence. Um the uh these are some images all from uh Amity Street looking south towards the house. There we have the big white
Victorian house to the uh this side here is the area on the eastern side of the house uh which is substantially uh um forested and so forth. Um, if we look a
little further down, you can see there's a large driveway going in that supports this house, which is, as I said, has been rented for many years. There are about 11 people living in there. Oh, I don't know, maybe not that many. And then a little further back towards town, you can see the there's the house.
There's the the fared section to the east. And this is that uh building which has uh so much pavement and so forth. This is the rear of the house. Uh the land here is the vestage of that large
amount of pavement that I mentioned. Here is this vegetated area. You can see this fence. On the other side of this fence is the neighbors lawn which is quite nicely mowed right up to the fence. And here is our um our declared wetland area.
It's rather small. Um and uh but it's there. Um this is uh which you've previously seen or at least Aaron has three 1 2 3 four U descriptions of uh
development options that we are considering or that we might consider and I won't dwell on it other than to do it diagrammatically. So, when we first saw the site, it seemed that it was quite substantial and we could uh um put
a um a duplex, but we thought that we would put it in in the back area. Initially, we thought we would put it somewhere out here, but then the arrival of the wetland uh obviously constrained that, but the thought was initially that it belonged to the rear. there was some
concern that the uh the front here uh that the neighborhood might prefer to see development toward the rear. So that's was the initial thought uh whether or not the the uh this unit here exists as an ADU uh that as you probably
know the the state particularly and the town and every town in the state is wrestling with how to understand uh its ADU uh uh bylaws if it has any uh because there is now a a protected use ADU up to 900 ft and you
can build it. I mean um without as a matter of right. Um so that was the first option. This is the slightly enlarged parking area that already exists. The existing extent of it is shown in brown and it it could be biggerized slightly to have a 10 car
parking spaces. Um this I should say is the extent of the wetland. Uh it's it's not a survey. I I did it as best I could myself. We have a ser we have a survey being prepared at the moment. But uh I
uh these eight flags were placed by Ward Smith whose resource wetland report I think you have and I did my best to locate them and it's more or less in that area there. Um
uh option number two um they they they we we concentrate on duplexes because um we can as uh by site plan review uh from the planning board
um are allowed to u place a duplex on the site or at least the bylaw enables that. It doesn't enable us to put a single um dwelling unit. I mean a single second additional primary use but we can uh put
a duplex um and then again potentially an ADU as of right these days. This is the 50ft buffer. This is the 100T buffer from this leading edge of the wetland. Um 1 2 3 four units in the existing
converted dwelling. We have a driveway coming in here. Um, and a couple of parking areas. Um, this uh uh this unit, this this option
um I think uh doesn't have the ADU. It it was prepared on the assumption that we might want to have four parking areas, four parking spaces here. So the duplex has been pushed uh further toward the wetland area outside the 50ft buffer
but inside the 100t buffer. And then finally there's a um I suppose we might say from a wetlands protection act point of view a fully compliant um development that has simply a single uh ADU
um in outside the 100t buffer. This means that we get the uh we we we lose a lot of provincial affordable housing. Uh well, we use two we lose uh two units of uh with this scheme here. I should say
too that uh down here there's a substantial growth of notweed, which one might imagine could best be managed by mowing it. Um but uh um it's it's certainly there and uh one uh would
expect that this invasive particularly this particular invasive is something that we would want to deal with um because no is not very nice. Um that is the uh um extent of what we've u
prepared. Um um Bucky might like to make some comments based on his particular uh professional um perspective on this. I have I have not strayed into that particular area concentrating only on
what we as a as a as a as a provider of affordable housing in town trying to achieve on this site. >> Well, thank you. Um would you mind uh going uh briefly through these uh three
or these options and tell us how many units each option uh has? These are all two bedrooms. You uh or are the are they allowed? Uh yes, I should say this is a a two uh two bedroomedroom uh sorry a
two-story 3bedroom duplex with a single unit a singlestory one-bedroom uh unit attached. So a three-bedroom unit attached to a single bedroomedroom unit and this would be a
it may be a a two-bedroom unit uh as a uh as a as an ADU. the uh when we were doing this the ADU uh was was unrolling or unraveling or or roll being rolled out but I think uh it's it's become
apparent that a 900 uh square foot uh ADU can be built as of right and that probably would be a twobedroom. So let's say twobedroom, one bedroom, 3bedroom and then each of these is three bedrooms.
And then in this case it's the same uh uh although at this point we we could probably um as we are straying in we could probably make uh this a two a duplex with uh each with two bedroom each with
three bedrooms and two stories. There's probably enough room to do that. um as we as if we were to um take more space in this eastern side. And the same would apply here without
the duplex, without the ADU in the back corner. And this one is, as I said, it probably is simply a two-bedroom ADU, one one only uh small dwelling unit. >> Okay. Uh if uh let's see if Bucky has
something else to add. Um go ahead, Bucky. Uh we we're kind of running out of time here and uh I'd like to uh open the floor to uh >> to some of the commissioners to see what kind of questions and suggestions they've got. >> Absolutely. I know if I were scheduled
for a meeting tonight, I'd want to get right to it. Um thank you. And you know, for the record, my name is Bucky Sparkle. I'm a civil engineer and um definitely do some wetlands work in the town of Ammerst. Um Bruce really did describe the situation overall pretty well. Um, this is one of those
situations where uh had the property owner uh not allowed vegetation, dead vegetation pushed by the water coming off of that dentist office, there's a lot of uncontrolled runoff uh that has basically built a little bit of organic
dam along the bottom of the it's um a picket fence in the back. Uh it's kind of a beatup fence. It's been there a long time. Uh and I'm bet Bruce is going for that picture. I I fully recognize of course that you know how a wetland came into existence is is generally not a
concern for the commission. Um but you know I I do cringe a little bit in how this one ended up um because it affects especially because Ammerst has normally a very stringent buffer 100 foot buffer around an isolated wetland. it does have
a substantial impact on what is generally you know a a relatively urban area quite close to downtown. Um it's and it is you know quite restrictive. So you know if we are and the abutters would all be required then to you know
follow that 100 foot offset that would normally be a affiliated uh it really does lock down what what can and can't be done with a whole bunch of property downtown. Uh, I also know that the commission has the ability to
um adjust offsets. I typically imagine you might extend them, but I don't know if there's any way to reconsider uh moving in within a 100 foot buffer um because that's that's really sort of the make it or break it line. If if we can't
get closer um in the disturbance and in the new um building, I don't know that the affordable housing project can move forward uh at this point. So, you know, that's my two cents that this is, you know, if they had paid
attention, the water would have just kept going downhill because it's a downhill slope. >> Y So, you're Yeah. So essentially your uh your point is that this is a uh human created uh wetland after the um after
the business uh put their parking lot up up above and things got stopped uh from flowing. Right. The water stop. >> Yes. >> Yes. Yeah. I think that fence is what caused the wetland in conjunction with the uncontrolled runoff from the abuter. >> All right. Thank you, Bucky. And Andrea,
I think the other point to summary point is that uh the public good is being served by affordable housing on this parcel and we'd like to do as much of it as we can. >> All right, got that too. Bruce, >> shall I stop staring stop sharing my screen at this point? >> Um, sure. Uh, Bruce, is your last name
called? >> It is. Yes, Bruce Colam. >> I'm uh, for the record a citizen of a resident of North Ammers. >> All righty. And uh are you with uh friends of improved drainage?
>> Am I what? Sorry. >> With friends of uh I'm sorry, who are you? Uh >> I I'm I'm a I'm a I'm a a volunteer participant uh supporter of the Amst community land trust um and have been for a while. This is not the first
project I've been involved with them. I have a high >> regard. I also have a rather deep and lengthy association with Habitat. They do a lot of housing building for them as well. >> Well, thank thanks, Bruce. We just uh we we wanted to make sure to get that on uh
on the minutes. You just got your last name and all that. Correct. >> Uh any of the uh any questions from the uh commissioners? I mean, what you're asking obviously is to come into the 100 foot buffer and uh on one of the your
examples there, I think you had it coming into the 50 foot. Is that correct? Yes, I think it's the 100 foot buffer that we would like to be able to transgress with the uh a two a duplex on the eastern side.
>> Okay. Thank you, Jason. >> Is this I assume this is being is this considered a redevelopment project or how would we look at it? And Aaron, I think maybe that's a question for you. Yeah, I mean I think
it it would be a redevelopment considering that there's already development on the lot. It's not an undeveloped lot. Um so it would be converting an existing um development to um adjust it to make it larger.
>> And this is not Bruce the um the this is not um subdividing the lot, right? Building the duplex and everything. This is remaining as one parcel. >> That's correct. Yes. This what we've uh shown is uh permissible
um through the current zoning bylaw. >> And would the town have to purchase the land? >> No. Well, the the No. The the the intent is that the Ambus Community Land Trust would be the developer. Uh the way uh
the land trust develops is that they develop the land and they sell it. Uh this would probably be a condominium structure that would be sold to we hope five uh separate parties. Um and there would be deed restrictions on it and it
would be uh creating affordable housing that would go into the town register >> most likely. It depends. I mean the fun the funding sources being what they are that would probably be what would happen but we're creating affordable housing here.
>> So it would be for ownership not for >> uh Linda if I'm wrong about that you should correct me. I think you're muted, >> Linda. We can't hear you right now, but if you hit the mute button there, uh you'll you'll come across
>> community land trust would own the land in perpetuity and the and the parcel the homes would be owner occupied. That's a condition of uh living in an Amoris community land trust home. So, if the family's plans change and they want to
live elsewhere, they would have to sell it on to a family that intended to live there. So the proposal is to have owner occupied residents that are affordable and can go on the town affordable housing inventory
>> and if they permanent ownership of the land >> and if they sell it then they have to sell it to somebody who qualifies for affordable housing based on income. I'm assuming >> that's right. the the land the
relationship between the land trust and the homeowner is governed by a document called a a ground lease and it specifies the requirement for owner occupancy and it also records the price at which that
family purchased the home and then its price when they sell it on uh can rise no faster than the area median income. So if it was affordable to an 80% AMI family, it will be affordable 20 years from now to an 80% AMI family regardless
of what the market has done. >> Thanks, Linda. >> Fundamental community land trust model like a good good model too, Bruce. Uh, and also, uh, I think we're going to spend another five more or so minutes on
this, Aaron, on time. We're kind of getting backed up, aren't we? >> Yeah, we should probably um try to give them some guidance in terms of where the commission feels about the given um, options so that they know how to move forward.
>> Thank you, Erin. >> I'm not sure I'm going to be helpful in that regard, but I am going to take us back to our jurisdiction, the wetland. So there's a part of me that doesn't care how the wetland came to be given how many wetlands have been lost and our
job is to try to get some more back if we possibly can. On the other hand, what happens down the road if something happens to the parcel next door that caused it in the first place and the runoff goes somewhere else or it's better maintained and all of a sudden
that place dries up um and it's no longer a wetland. So then we put in place something that is not appropriate, but we don't know what the down the road is. So I'm I'm not being helpful here, just imagining our conundrum uh given
the situation. >> Thanks, Bruce. Yeah, I wonder if there's something that we can just kind of do with that. Um but uh I'm I'm just going to say right out as far as the 100 foot buffer and giving the uh I'd like to
take a look at it. Um, but I think there's possibility. I mean, I I see where there's room for room to uh allow exceptions uh especially for affordable housing, but uh I'm one one of um however many
uh commissioners uh we have at the time. Right now there's five. So Rachel, >> thanks. Um thank and thanks for this model. It's like I've heard of it in other communities. It's really cool that Amoris has this also. So, thank you for
for promoting this. Um, looking at the plans and the and the buffer zone. Um, and also thinking about our storm water bylaw, I think another limiting factor for the development of this parcel may be the fact that you are looking at over
four units for development. Um, and then you're going to need to balance pre and post flows. So, how that integrates with the buffer zone will get pretty complicated quickly. Um, if you're doing anything subsurface, you need to be 20 feet away from a basement. Um, if you're
doing, um, and if it's subsurface and you don't have a basement, you need to be 10t away from a building. So, um, looking at the plans that are presented, that might be another constraint to consider. Um,
and I wonder if, you know, you're talking if a if a triplex might be an option also if you're trying to maximize housing and density um in your in your redevelopment. But you'd have to keep in mind all those all those other factors.
>> Understood. That's why Buckyy's here. >> And Jason. >> Yeah. I have a question and then I'm going to give my kind of opinion. Uh, if those wetlands were not on the lot, would you be
trying would you be able to and trying to build more units? >> I don't think so. Um uh we did have a meeting with Nate Mallaloy and Rob Mara
pre identification of the wetlands and looked at the how we could maximize the lot because frankly we would like to put uh as much affordable housing as we can reasonably manage in here. uh my architectural skills have got something to do with be able to site buildings so that spaces and places work well or well
Rachel's pointed out that uh once we get over five or five to five we've got storm water management issues that could uh be the most important rule of the roost. So I think we probably would be imagining that uh six would be the
maximum that we could uh achieve and that we could uh do it by uh a duplex which is uh SPR by the planning board. So it's uh it's it's it's something that we are allowed to do. It can be conditioned by the board and the the uh
the uh ADU uh would be as as of right. So there would be it would be from a permitting point of view I mean let's say from a land use uh zoning related permitting point of view um theoretically fairly somewhat
straightforward as far as these things are concerned. Of course, there's all sorts of design challenges we'd have to make sure. And uh frankly, initially, we thought that keeping away from the front would be good because we thought that the uh the town might have a historic uh
uh concern for maintaining the streetscape. But the reason I had those photographs at the beginning was to show that the streetscape at that point is actually rather um un uh there's not a lot there. I think we could do we could actually improve it by putting some by
doing a nice building that looked like it was uh an extension of the existing house. I think we would solve solve it that way. So I think the answer Jason is that we would uh not not not be trying to do more than six units on that site
and frankly I think under the circumstances of the wetland if we were able to do a duplex within the uh 100 but outside the 50ft buffer that would probably as much as at this point we would imagine that we should try and achieve.
>> Okay. All right. My opinion on this is that uh I do somewhat care about how these wetlands were formed seeing as how they were formed from runoff from a neighboring lot that you know I don't think should have been
I think it should have been controlled. I don't know how they get away with putting a parking lot in there. And we're seeing that more and more. And I think we're going to see that more and more as we just have no we have very few buildable lots in in the town and we're going to just continually see these
these problematic lots come up. Um, I would I would absolutely be in favor of um working with with you all to find a way to uh impact the wetlands, impact
the buffer um to a larger extent. And I think that we could potentially work as uh in some sort of either inloo fee for impacts and uh for mitigation elsewhere and what I would call
uh potentially higher value wetlands. Uh this is an isolated wetland in the middle of downtown that I can't imagine has a whole lot of um well, I'll just leave it at that. It's it's an isolated wetland in the middle of the town. So, I'm in I'm in favor of
working with them. As far as the very specifics, I can't give you any specifics right now, but I'm in favor of trying to find a way to make this project work. >> Thanks, Jason. And just so you all know, I know Buck's familiar with this. A lot of times what we'll do is look for some
kind of uh mitigation to occur in order to make up for the damage to the wetland and so on. Well, we can get to that uh at some other point. I think we're ready to wrap up for now and and move on. Dave. >> Yeah, thanks Andre. I don't want to
belabor this or prolong it. Um I just wanted to kind of put out there that um I I I just want to encourage the commission to really stay focused on the bylaw, the regulations. Um, honestly,
I'm not sure the type of housing matters at all. Uh, it shouldn't really matter to the commission, in my opinion, what kind of housing this is. Any any developer should uh be able to propose something like this. So, I'm just I'm
just struggling a little bit with uh being consistent with your your bylaw. And I guess I would I guess I wrote down is this redevelopment? And I think that's where the commission needs to focus and I'm happy to have Aaron chime
in, but is this redevelopment of an existing lot? Then I think you're you're um you know, you're you're you're in that lane, that proper lane, but you know, we've had a number of other proposals come in looking to have impacts in that 100 foot buffer. And so
I just want to make sure that the commission remains consistent with with your thinking and your discussions and your your votes. So that was all. Thank you. >> Thanks Dave. Yep. I think uh I you know
I think uh that we yeah I think we are doing that but I can I think it also is important to to to see what the value of that wetland is as well when we're considering um when we're considering uh giving exemptions.
So yeah, I totally get what you're saying, Dave. And we will stay to uh stay with the wetlands. Bruce, you're you're muted. Sorry. Add a little clarification to my view. I I'm open to the working something out in
between 100 and 50, but I I want us to be very strict about the 50 foot buffet. I'm totally and I think that that you're going to find most of us are there. Bruce, thank you for your clarification. >> Well, uh I hope that kind of gives you a
little bit of an idea um where we're all uh standing and coming from. And >> thank you all. It does. It tells me that it's worth spending time engaging Bucky and trying to make
something good happen in town. Great. Well, good luck and uh we'll see you when you bring it back. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Uh all right. Um our next uh hearing is a notice of
intent uh of zero number zero West Bay Road and Zero West Street. Um let's see. GZA Environmental uh on behalf of Archipelago Investments LLC in Hampshire College for proposed mixeduse
residential development at 0 West Bay Road, map 25B, lots 52 and uh 0 West Street, map 25B, lot 58. Um if you could please uh raise your hand
um if you haven't been included here. Uh, raise your hand. Attendees to be Kyle is in. Anyone else? Kyle. Kyle, I've asked I've uh brought you in if you don't mind uh letting us know if
if you're alone or with anyone else. >> Good evening. I'm alone. >> You're alone. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, let me see. As of last the last meeting, um you were going to
be providing us some information. Is that right, Carl? Kyle? >> Uh yes, we actually submitted uh a couple items, uh an invasive study, this PDC study, and and another item. And I wanted to
um um talk about our project and where it stands tonight. >> Please do. You got five. >> You'll have five minutes. Um and after that uh um our conservation
agent will have another five and then uh the public too and then the um commissioners will get a chance as well. >> Sounds great. You mind if I share my screen? >> Please do. Thanks. All right. Can everybody see that?
>> Uh, just a quick couple slides. Again, we've submitted the invasive species study and uh uh what we'd like to talk about today is just um where the project stands and how we could potentially move this project
forward. Um, as you know, we were before you last and talked about uh the 20% uh provision of the wetland bylaw and uh wanted to just discuss that a little bit with you today. Um I think where we stand the project um with uh as it
stands is in a uh a spot where um we're hopeful that we can work with the conservation commission to come up with a solution that allows us to to build some housing in this very important site. Um this is just a a real quick slide. This is uh the what made the
notch the notch. So this is Ammer Southern Sunderland trolley connected with the Holio Street Railway up in 1902. So, uh, when that came down the notch on our side, it went right past the Bay Road fruit stand, um, which, um, obviously Atkins was 1887, so it had
been there for 15 years growing apples. Um, so since the 70s, Atkins Corner has been designated as a future village center. And the current zone is uh, BVC. BBC is the second densest zone in down
in Ammerst. and it looks for a um mix of retail, commercial office, and housing of moderate to high density. It's been a business own for a long time. Uh when the the bylaw uh when it was changed in 22, there were uh nine meetings that went into that. Uh in one of those
meetings, this buffer zone was discussed. The buffer zone language that we talked to you last about was cribbed uh copy pasted from Northampton, which we understand very clearly. Uh however, as we discussed, there is no exemptions uh zoning exemptions in Ammerst as there
are in Northampton. So the buffer zone language in Northampton and the buffer zone language in Ammerst are effectively identical. Um and they provide for a 100 foot buffer, which as as the commission understands is the most restrictive buffer in the valley. Um uh Northampton,
however, uh when they put this bylaw in action, they had exemptions for zoning. Those exemptions were to encourage infill development and particularly housing. Um, and so they exempted their central business district, their general business, the highway business, neighborhood business. Um, and they
>> Yep. >> You have five minutes. Uh, why don't you concentrate on your Ammerst uh issues, >> please? >> If I could just finish my five minutes, I'd greatly appreciate. I'm just trying to get to a point. This is the last two slides here. Andre, go ahead. >> So, Ammerst has no zone exemptions. Um,
Northampton has exempted a large portion of their land mass. Um, so these are the business districts they've exempted. Um, Ammerst has no exemptions. So, um, what we would like to ask the commission is to consider revising their
bylaw to exempt the business districts in Ammerst from their performance standards just as Northampton has done. And we're asking that of the commission in order to support housing production. And we're asking the zoning districts to
be exempted to be the uh BGBL comm. They are less than 2% of the total land mass of Ammeris. They are the districts that Amoris has allowed for housing in all of its zoning uh discussions. and um uh exempting these districts would allow
for uh Amoris a chance to try to meet the housing production goals that they've been discussing and and and need for the future. So, um with that, um um we have talked with Hampshire College extensively. We've talked to the town of
Ammerst. Uh we understand where this project stands. Um uh and we think that the bylaw as it currently stands does not allow for the business district to support housing as it needs to uh going forward. So um uh we would like to ask
the commission to repeat myself to consider a revision to the bylaw to exempt the business district from the performance standards that were put in place in 2022 to uh uh mirror what has uh happened in Northampton.
Okay. Are you done? >> I'm done. >> Okay. So, you're uh what your uh purpose for today is to ask us to uh reconsider the bylaw. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> As it relates to one provision, one
exemption, it's one sentence. It's just to exempt the business districts as it is one sentence in the Northampton bylaw. And what what exemption would that be? That it's not considered that it's not at all um under the bylaw. Is that what you're saying? Is that what you're >> uh I would defer to the commission on
that. I would defer to Northampton on that. I think that they defer back to the state regs. Um if there's an exemption. >> Okay. Thank you, Kyle. >> Thank you. Yeah, Bruce, go ahead.
>> I just wanted to ask uh Aaron and Dave, what would be the process for such a a consideration? >> Yeah, and Dave, uh you guys have the floor for five minutes or whatever.
>> So, uh um I'll yield to Dave, but I would like the opportunity to address uh Kyle's comment particularly on the development of the bylaw at some point. >> Go ahead, Dave. >> Yeah. No, I'm curious, Aaron, if Andre, if we could maybe go back and forth with
Aaron. Um, I I'd be curious what Aaron would suggest for a process, but clearly this wasn't on the agenda tonight. Kyle is proposing something to you in the context of of what he's been talking to the commission about for some months. I think you would at at the very least
need to or excuse me could put this on a future agenda so that it's posted properly and you could spend, you know, a period of time at one of your future meetings talking about uh what what the implications of this would be. Um Aaron,
could you just kind of take it from there? The commission would discuss it. They could then uh decide to take no action. they could decide to change and there would be a process to hold a public hearing, etc., etc. But Erin,
could you kind of walk us through what that might look like hypothetically? >> Well, I mean, I I think we've been talking about making some updates to our our bylaw for some time u our bylaw regulations actually. Um, and and I have a list of updates that need to be made,
but I do think like just quite frankly, it's it's sort of like the equivalent of spot zoning to talk about it in this context. Like we're talking about a specific site. Let's let's um modify our bylaw based on one site. And I feel a little uncomfortable with that, like the
legality of that. and I would want to get some um I don't know some legal opinion about how we pursue that relative to this specific site. Um just to to address Kyle's comment, when we
were developing the bylaw, we did look at the full context of the Northampton um uh bylaw and how it's written. And and one of the reasons that we didn't adopt that section was because looking at the geography of the zoning in
Ammerst and Northampton, they're very different. Um there's a concentrated sort of central business district in Northampton that's very urbanized and that um provision was exempted in those very um uh
re redevelopment predevelopment areas where it was like a very high urbanized area and in Ammerst that's not the case and so we're talking about basically exempting areas that have never been developed and areas that have high groundwater levels, areas that have
extensive wetlands. And so it's not an applesto apples comparison to just adopt something that another town did. We we very much were thoughtful about the sections that we um applied to the bylaw at the time and we had discussed
I think at length during the bylaw discussions whether or not to include zoning. And I think, you know, Dave and I have talked about this offline that I think we need to have broader conversations of more inclusive conversations between zoning and
planning and conservation when we determine these zoning districts to make sure that we're looking at doing some um due diligence in terms of where groundwater is located, where these large wetland complexes are. So just to
put in context, we're not um creating a potentially unsustainable situation by putting high density development in a high groundwater area where we don't have the capacity for storm water or water management. Um so these this is
this is just contextually why you know we arrived at these decisions. But I don't think that any of this precludes Kyle the the site that Kyle's here for tonight to be developed. I think it's a very developable site. I think with some
careful consideration, this is a project that we could easily develop and make happen. Um I don't I don't necessarily think we need to revise the bylaw in order to to proceed with a development here. I think it would just be a little bit of back and forth and potentially
considering mitigation, potentially considering some, you know, inloo fees and potentially being creative about how we proceed with um permitting it. But I guess I'm just I think we need to have a broader conversation um and potentially
offline and also just um yeah, >> my only final comment, Andrea, and I'll turn it back over to you. Um, I am curious what if Kyle were given another minute or two, what he could tell us
about his current thinking about the project project he's proposed given the 50 and 100 foot requirements for buffer. But I will say I I do think um Erin and I could talk with uh our planning staff
and and zoning staff um because I think um I think we could benefit from a more integrated look at where the town wants development concentrated. Uh and honestly in the last couple of months there have been a number of proposals
that have come before the commission in highly developed areas. Um, one of them just moments ago, another one, the University Drive, u the, u uh, Kulie Dickinson Hospital project, etc. There's
been a number of them in these very well significantly developed areas that have been challenging to permit. Um, and so I think it's it's worth a look with our planning staff. Um, I just can't promise how quickly that could be could
be done and brought back to the commission. So, I think we could commit to talking with our planning and zoning staff. I am curious where Kyle is right now in his thinking with this project. And I'll stop. >> Yeah. Well, yeah. It kind of seems
though that as uh that what uh what the Northampton model does is it puts uh it puts some of the um some of the buffer uh zone uh
requirements uh if you would or determination. Yeah. It puts that in the hands of uh zoning and not in the hands of uh conservation. Um because then it's the zoning that
determines uh whether a buffer is to be uh uh adhered to or not. Am I right? >> I I I don't want to go into too much detail tonight because it's not on the agenda, but I think this is this is the
conversation that we could have in the future. We could even have planning staff come to one of your meetings and talk about how these things can mesh well together. I think ultimately what we're talking about is um and Kyle has illustrated this is there really is not
very much land in Ammerst left to develop. We want to encourage concentrated development. We want to encourage development that takes advantage of height, takes advantage of bus routes uh uh uh and transportation
and water and sewer. We want development to go where development already has happened and we're running into some challenges with that, I'll just say broadly. So, I think it's worth a conversation to to look at that and maybe have the planning staff come in
and talk to us about it. Yeah, >> we we'd commit to that if that was something the commission was interested in at a future meeting. And I'll stop there. >> Thanks, Dave. Kyle, can you uh uh please briefly just answer uh Dave's question.
>> Does that uh Andre, I just need to tell you I need to step away from this meeting for a minute and I'll be right back. >> Thanks, Alex. We'll see you in a little bit. Okay, Kyle. >> Uh thanks. Yes. Um, so just real quick, uh, to Erin's point, I appreciate the
conversations that were had about zoning in the past. I've obviously looked at at those conversations. Um, I know there's a difference between Ammerst and Northampton. Northampton's a market town. Ammeris is the college town up on the hill. Um, but we're both in a situation where we're looking to build
housing in very limited areas. And, uh, it just so happens that this is this is not spot zoning. Um, this what we're seeking is not just changing it on this site. we're changing it for all of the business districts. So, we think that that at less than 2% of the total land
mass of Amorest is not a uh a big ask as it relates to the places that are close to transit, close to services um and can form a an armature for future, you know, housing development. So, as our project
currently stands, um it's gotten kind of splintered into two separate projects. Um, we last showed you the approach to try to curve a building on on the excuse me, on the Landon side, on the Gould side. Um, and we're trying to fit some
semblance of a building on the Gould side as it relates to parking and the 30% retail and the affordable housing um, and uh, storm water locations and all that stuff. And as I've said to folks we've talked to about this
project, uh this and and to Aaron's point, um as a developer who develops for uh professionally, this is a very hard site to develop. So I appreciate the desire to try to find some a project that works here. We've gone through 35
schemes to try to find a project that works and we're having a very hard time doing that. So, we don't currently have a project to bring to you to discuss that. We feel comfortable uh that we could finance and we could build. Um
which is why we're asking um for the business districts to be exempted from uh this performance standard. >> Okay. And so uh as far as the project itself um let's uh you know since we do
kind of it seems like we have two different things going on you know one one is the project and the other is is your ask of today for us to change the bylaw as far as the project is concerned where do you where where are we going
with that right now? I think I would uh barring additional conversations, I'd like to ask for a continuence. Okay. >> And figure out procedurally what next steps might be. >> Would you like it until uh the uh what is it the 10th of um September or the
one after that? Because I think we're going to need to have some discussion at some point. Uh >> the one after that sounds fine. >> Yeah. Erin, are we good with uh getting uh getting Archipelago on the schedule for the 24th?
Yes. Um, so if if uh Kyle would prefer the 24th, we can do um a continuation to September 24th at 7:20 p.m. >> I could do that. And Erin, I would defer to you if you thought the 10th was a
better date. I would also That's also >> 10th is a monster already. >> That's fine. >> All right. Well, thanks. And I'm going to uh call on the uh public as well. We haven't given them a a chance to talk even
though we really haven't had a lot of discussion on the project itself. Um we'll keep it uh we'll keep it to two minutes a piece. Um at the beginning, please state your uh uh name and address
and preferred pronouns. And we'll start with Carol McNary. Hello, Carol. Your hands up. You're in. And >> okay. >> Um,
go ahead. >> Being a member of the public and making a comment is always um an exercise in fast thinking because each time there's something new.
Um, but I do have two thoughts. number one in terms of this being a business district, a high density business district. Um, there's one other business, Atkins, currently. And the
business that Archipelago seems to think would be most likely to take a want be interested in this site would be daycare. And by the way, there's been no study saying that daycare is a um that there's
a real need for daycare in this area. And the other thing I I think is that um this is the reason why people who live here are are alarmed about the height and the
density and the impact on traffic is it has this has not been a high density business zone. And um to say that the site is close to transit and to other businesses um I I
don't think that's the case. Um and um you know it it surprises me that if if if you know there are rules in place, there are
bylaws in place and then a at this late after all these hearings that have been held to say, "Oh, well, let's change the rules." Uh, I think there needs to be some really more substantial reasons for making a big change like that because
that will have not just this one project but have consequences for all future projects that come before the conservation commission. It's not a small thing obviously. Thank you. >> Thank you, Carol. We appreciate your
time. Um, we've got uh Maria Kapiki uh coming in. Um, let's see. You're on. >> Thank you. Maria Kapiki, 65 Country Corners Road. She her. Um, this is the
eighth time this has been on the Concom agenda. Archipelago is completely nonresponsive to what you have asked. You have asked repeatedly for them to show you a plan that complied with the wetlands bylaw without
variance. That has not happened. There is no indication that that is going to happen. Um what you're here for is because he's asking for a variance. I mean that's what you should be doing,
right? Um this feels like parenting, right? Like but mom, I want a pony. You can't have a pony. A pony doesn't make sense, but I really want to have that pony. And we just cycle back and through this time and again. This site can be
developed. Kyle himself when asked by I can't remember which one of you, well, could you do it if it was smaller? He said, yes. Could you do it for 67 units? Yes. This is a developable developable site
just not at the very large size that archipelago wants to do. So please, the job here for the conservation commission is not to wander off into changing bylaws in the middle
of something, you know, with with apply the bylaws. You're going to give them the variance. You're not going to give them the variance. I don't think he should give them the variance and I think he should hold them to the bylaw. And I don't see the point of going on and on and
continuing and continuing when there's no evidence that that's going to happen. Please, this is this is kind of ludicrous at this point. Thank you.
>> Thanks, Maria. Katie, you're up. You'll need to unmute. >> Thank you. Uh Katie Nton, 340 Spencer Drive. Uh she her. I agree with Maria and Carol. Um this is a developable developable site. Uh the fact that
Archipelago can't develop it the way they want to does not mean that the rules need to be changed. It means that what is the development plan needs to be changed. Uh not only have they failed to do that, they've also ignored things like the fact that the traffic study is
flawed, they've ignored facts like I as far as I can tell there's no no plan for storm water. Uh they've ignored things like the de the Massachusetts D says that removing the arsenic soil is not advisable and in fact probably dangerous. So, there are a lot of things
that they've been asked about that they have been non-responsive to and and their their attitude seems to be if they keep asking long enough, eventually they'll wear you down. And now they're not only asking long enough, they're asking you to change the rules to make them to to make their project feasible.
Um, and as I would, as my colleagues have said, it's not that we're against development. We want village center development. We don't want center of Ammeris development. We don't need a four-story apartment building. What we want is something that's more livable, that's more in scale, that has actual
retail in it. I I'm not quite clear how I why daycare counts as retail. That's not my idea of retail, but I mean I I'm not the zoning commission either, so it could be retail. I just think he's continuing to to try to force a
round peg into a square hole. And and I think if we could come up with a square peg, it would be a lot better for everybody. Thank you. Thanks, Katy. Paul Jurus, we've added you in. >> Uh, thank you, commissioners. I'm Paul
Jurus. Um, I'm at 22 Macintosh Drive and you know, I've been following this from the very beginning and it's kind of astounding to me all of the promises that archipelago has made uh almost in exchange for being given this variant so
that they can basically build what they want. I mean, anything from solving mass migration problems in the Northeast Carter to providing, you know, solving all of the single family home shortages in Massachusetts. I mean, it's all kind
of like horse trading. They'll do this for us if we just overlook the bylaws. If we just turn away and let them do what they want. And the problem is they've been very fast and loose with the details. And as we've known, we they've been asked to provide some
detail about how far they would potentially encroach into the wetlands into the buffer. And either they are unable to do that or they're unwilling to do that, but they're looking for basically cart blanch to expand the way
they want to expand. And the issue around the daycare is very interesting and very clever because the parking requirements for this space do not involve specific number of parking spaces. Just parking that is appropriate
for the space. If they claim they're putting a daycare center in there, they don't have to account for retail customers arriving to as they would for Atkins, for example, to go use that facility. They don't have much staff, so
they don't really have to make parking available if it's a daycare setting. But what if it's not a daycare center? What if they can't get a daycare um person company in there as I suspect they won't because you already have one
across the street at Hampshire College across from the Carl and there's one on Pomeoy. So, if they can't get a daycare tenant in there now, they're going to need more parking spaces in order to accommodate a full-on retail facility
business, in which case they're going to really blow into the buffer space. So, what they're asking for is an accommodation without providing any detail. And that gives us no opportunity to look and see, well, how much is this
going to impact And I think the only way to prevent them from doing that is to stick to the bylaw, not change the bylaw so that they're able to accomplish it, but to make them adhere to the bylaw and hold them to that so that we can control the growth.
>> Thank you, Paul. >> All right, we have uh one last uh person so far here. It's Jan. Jan, you're on. If you can uh go ahead and unmute yourself. >> Okay. Yes. Um I'm deeply sympathetic to
a certain extent to to archipelago. They are trying to maximize their uh future income by having a development that will will have good returns. On the other hand, we are concerned with how our town
is developing. When I saw in in recent hurricanes and other events, how other um towns and and and municipalities have not developed
satisfactory water tables and and and bylaws to prevent things from happening. um we could we could look like some of those other Asheville and other kinds of of of of communities that have been
inundated when they might have had better better bylaws. So I think we really need to set sit down and say to Archipelago, why is it that you need this? Why don't you scale down your
development? and they will honestly say, "Well, that won't yield us the profit that we want." Well, so be it. I'm sorry to say, but so be it. >> Thank you, Jan. >> Uh, address and last name,
>> Jan. >> Janet Shaven, 337 Spencer Drive. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Bruce. Um, I see Christine Conlin. Christine, you're on.
Welcome and thanks for uh >> um this is Christine Conlin, 33 Autumn Lane. I just want to more or less piggyback on to what Katie Nton spoke about because she said exactly what I wanted to say to you. So,
thank you for taking my time. Thank you. Thank you, Christine. And I think well, Jan just put her hand back up. Jan, if you have something else to say, uh, you can go ahead.
No. Okay. Well, um so I think uh in the future we'll need we'll be needing to uh we'll we'll want to talk to um I think it would be good for us to have that conversation uh Dave
and Aaron with um with the zoning uh folks at some point. Um, and then Kyle uh will be looking for uh to actually, you know, we'll look to have a conversation and
then uh talk to you on the 24th. Do we have a time for that, Erin? >> Yes, it would be at uh 7:20 p.m. >> Okay. Alex has a question. I think I was out of the room when it
was time for commissioners to uh say something. Is that true? >> Yes. >> Could I say something? >> You may. >> Okay. Um at the end of this, I'm going to ask Aaron if there's a way we can conclude
this this proceeding perhaps due to lack of compliance with what we've asked. We've asked several times and granted several continuances for them to bring us a plan that doesn't violate the buffers.
>> Excuse me, Alex. Um, we've already uh agreed that we're going to let them uh that we're going to hear them again on the 24th. Just an FYI. Go ahead. >> Yeah, I wasn't part of that agreement.
um I was out of the room and I didn't get a chance to speak before somebody made that conclusion. So with regard to changing the rules, I don't agree with that to to amend the rules for a project. If we agreed to
amend the rules, then conceivably archipelago will be asking for a continuence until we conclude that process, which may be a year. And um I as a volunteer employee of the town
um uh value my volunteer time and I'm not going to agree uh that that to me is unreasonable to ask us to continue with a project that can't bring to us what they what
we've asked. If they do not have a project, somebody else will develop the site. That's I think that's plain. It's a developable site. With regard to toxic soil, that subject keeps up coming up. We had a project on UMass that was
formally an orchard. We didn't bring up toxic soil there. I don't know why we would talk about it here. That would be um arbitrary, maybe breaching on capriccious. And so um I just have not talked about
toxic soil anymore. So I'm asking procedurally is there some way we can conclude with archipelago if they cannot bring us a plan of development without violating any of
the buffers then they don't have a project. Apparently they haven't been able to do it. And I would like to see if there's a way that we can economize our time by not continually entertaining uh archipelago
uh during this meeting if they can't produce what we're asking for. Thank you for letting me speak. >> You're welcome. Alex, you were asking a question of uh of Aaron. Is that correct? >> Aaron or Dave? But it's a procedural question. I don't know what the answer
is. >> So, I mean, my suggestion on this would be if if Alex, what you're suggesting is um that you uh are not in favor of a continuence. I think you have to give
the applicant some opportunity to um address your comments and come back within a reasonable period of time. So my suggestion would be that you say um by the I think we've discussed the 24th of September. By the 24th of
September, the commission would like to see uh a plan submitted that complies with X Y and Z. And when that um if that plan is not submitted by that date, then the commission would then um render a decision at that time uh based on the
information that is currently um been submitted on the project. So that would be what I would recommend because and and we would have to put something in writing to the applicant that outlines what our expectation is for that submission. Um because for us to deny,
for example, tonight to say, "Well, we're just going to deny the project because they didn't submit." We haven't said what our expectations are clearly and when we expect those um expectations to be completed by. Um, so I think it would
be very important for us to articulate that and give the applicant an opportunity to um come back within a set period of time. >> I'm Can I speak here? >> Uh, if that's what we need to do, then I
would suggest we do it. Um I think we we have already asked them maybe four or five times to come forward with a plan that doesn't violate the buffers and so far they have not done it. So they've had I'll be conservative three
opportunities, three continuences. I think it's more than that. But if we need to give them one more and be very specific what the consequences are for not bringing forward a plan um that doesn't violate the buffers,
then I'm all for it. And what I'm not interested in is is is increasing my volunteer time on the commission for something that's not going anywhere. Thank you. not going anywhere in terms of what
we've asked for is what I'm talking about. >> Um, thank you very much for letting me speak. >> Okay. Well, I think um you know I think uh that if you had been
here before, we might not have agreed on a September 24th date, Alex. But I think right now that's what we're going to have. Uh unless we uh don't, you know, unless we have a motion and
don't get it backed. But um right now we've got two things. We have uh one they want us to they're asking us to reconsider uh or to consider changing the uh uh the bylaws and we don't need an answer today. Um so that's not
something that we need to be uh riding on right now. And then the second thing which is what we were here uh for for from the beginning uh which is the actual hearing and uh whether or not um you know there what we do with it with
this NOI and we're going to address that on the 24th. Um and uh and we would like some uh all the answers uh Kyle uh to the questions that we've had if if you want to continue with if if the only thing that you're
looking for if you're not going to change anything. You it it sounded kind of like that, but you need to let us know so or it would be good for you to let us know so we can make a decision. But it but then you're
also asking for the uh the regs change, the bylaws change. So anyway, with that, we're looking for a motion uh to continue the public hearing for DP number 089-0752 to September 24th at
Aaron, what time again? >> Uh 7:20 p.m. >> 7:20 p.m. >> Yeah. Chair. >> Yeah. Just for the record, I duly noted you that I was leaving the meeting and that I would return.
>> Yep. And we couldn't wait for you, but I I get you. I I understand. >> But it would have been a courtesy to hold off a decision until I returned. I wasn't gone very long. >> The decision is right now when we're going when we're uh putting a motion
out, Alex. So, if we have a motion, >> I'll move to continue the public hearing for D number 089-0752 to September 24th, 2025 at 7:20 p.m. >> Second.
>> That's Jason uh with a motion. Bruce with a second. Bruce, >> hi >> Jason. >> Hi >> Alex. >> When in this process can we amend the motion or offer an amendment?
>> We're we have a motion that's active right now. So you vote for it or not? >> As far as I know. Dave, do you know anything uh different? I I I guess I would tend to agree with you, Andre, that it's it's either you're
voting in favor of the motion or against the motion, Alex. Um >> I would just wanted to qualify the motion, but maybe I can do that afterwards. >> Sure. >> So, I will abstain. >> Okay. Uh and Rachel,
>> hi. >> And I'm an I. So, Kyle, we'll see you on the 24th. >> Thank you for your time. I appreciate it. >> Thank you. Um, and uh, and Alex, you go ahead with your statement that you want
to make. >> Yeah, Dave had his hand up for me before me. >> It's okay. Um, you can go. So I I don't know if it was clear in what was decided that there will be a consequence if
Aripelago does not bring to us a plan that doesn't violate the buffers. And I I didn't hear that. All I heard was a continuation that we will talk about um our rules and so on and so forth. So, it's not clear
to me what's being continued and what the consequence whether or not there are consequences if he doesn't deliver a plan to us that we've asked for four or five times. >> What kind of consequences are you talking about? >> Concluding the project, our concluding
our hearing. I >> I think that's the hope that we have for the 24th. >> Okay. I'm sorry. I just didn't I didn't hear the words. Okay. Yeah. I mean, I would call that a result. I mean, I I was cur I was
wondering if you're asking about consequences for not bringing information. The thing is that if we need to be clear like uh Aaron said with what we're asking them to bring to us and I don't think that I'm not ready to
be clear right now with what we want them to bring to us especially if now we're about to discuss uh have some other discussions behind the lines but but on um on the 24th we would hope that we can uh come up with a decision.
Can we have a raise of hands on how people feel about amending the rules for this project? >> Yeah, sure. I uh raise your hand if uh you believe that we should amend the rules. >> I want to be clear, we're not, it's my
understanding, we're not talking about amending rules for this project. We're talking about amending rules in general. Uh we're talking about amending rules in general because this project has requested it. If you want I mean uh it's
kind of a it's not a very straight not a straight answer Jason but they're the ones who have asked us to uh to amend it so that their project can fit in. I mean, they would have. So,
you I have a hard time seeing seeing one without the other, but it's semantics. Jason, for me, Dave, you've been very patient. Sorry about that. >> Yeah, I I just want to be clear with
with kind of what I said before and and I think it goes to Jason's point here. Jason's uh comment is I'm I I don't I did not want to suggest that this was the appropriate time to look
townwide in the middle of a ongoing continued hearing for this project. And I don't I I can't commit to, you know, any kind of expedited review of the bylaw with the planning department,
anything like that. I am happy at your um urging, if you will. Uh that's kind of what I'm hearing. Dave, could you and Aaron sit down with the planning staff and have a conversation and we could report back to you? But I want to just
be clear to you all and to Kyle and to the public. Uh these two in my mind are related but separate uh processes. So, we are not suggesting we're going to come back to you in one meeting or even by the 24th. Uh, that is
a much longer conversation and with a lot more input. So, I just want to be clear to the commission and also to the public. Did not want anyone to get that impression. We'll have that conversation as we often do about zoning and and other other matters, planning matters,
uh, master plan related things and zoning and wetlands are part of that. So, we'll we'll do that. But I think these are on separate tracks and and separate timelines as well. >> Yeah. A little dose of reality there that uh we're not gonna have a we're not
going to have a a brand new happy Northampton bylaw. >> No, never. I I cannot promise that. and and so we will talk with the new chair, whoever is elected, uh after this meeting, and we will work on a meeting
in the future where it might be good for staff to come back perhaps with a planning staff member to to talk with you, but that's for a future meeting. Thanks. >> Sounds good. Thank you, Dave. Bruce, >> they're completely separate problems.
>> Thanks, All right. Um, with that, we're moving on to our next uh next hearing. It's the >> It's the fourth hearing. uh NOI uh notice of intent tie and bond
on behalf of Kulie Dickinson Hospital for after the-act permission to conduct vegetation removal and long-term invasive species management in the BVA and buffer zone at 170 University Drive map 13D lot 9 and 49.
And who do we have here today? if you don't mind raising your hands for this. >> Look like looks like we don't have anyone here. Is that correct? We're we're asking for a continuence. >> That's correct, Andre. Yes.
>> Okay. So, uh then we're looking for a move to continue the public hearing for 170 University Drive to September 10th, 2025 at 7:40 p.m. >> So moved. Jason with a motion.
>> A second. >> Rachel with a second. Uh Rachel. >> Hi. >> Jason. >> Hi. >> Alex, Alex, you're >> I >> thank you. >> It is me say so moved or second. So I'm
sorry I was on >> No problem. Alex Bruce, you're you're muted, too. Bruce still can't hear you. Thumbs up for an I. Thumbs down for a All right. Alex is an I with a thumbs up. I mean
Alex. Bruce and Andre is an I as well. Next uh next hearing is uh hearing number five. It's another notice of intent. Berkshire Design Group on behalf of CIBA LLC for the development of two
existing residential lots including a proposed two family home at 10 parking space uh porest paver parking lot ADA compliant entrances in associated grading and utility work at 807 and 825 Main Street. Map 15A lots 51
and 52. And here I see Jeff Squire who we just brought in um and Andy Fulmer who's in now as well.
And you'll have uh you're going to have five minutes uh uh presentation by the applicant, five for staff comment, five minutes for public comment or two minutes a piece, and five minutes for uh conservation commissioners. if you don't mind uh
giving your full name and uh who you're uh who you're with, please. Um when you when you speak, who's going to be talking on behalf of uh uh who's going to be presenting on uh uh is it Andy or
uh Jeff? >> So that would be me. Yeah, I don't understand why I can't share, but yeah. Anyway, um Jeff Squire from the Burkshere Design Group here on behalf of uh CIA Development. Um talking about the
parcels at um 807 815 uh Main Street. Um >> do you want to share? >> Uh if I can. There were a couple of updates and just some responses to conservation commission questions. Erin, I'm having a hard time holding his share
spot, but uh do you >> I think it's because maybe we did allow to talk rather than add as a panelist. So, I'm going to remove permission to talk and then read him as a panelist and he should be able to present. >> All right. >> Got him. >> Great.
Oh, I don't see him. There we go. Go ahead. Uh Jeff, how how you doing there? Can you uh can you present now? Yeah, you can. You can share your
screen. >> Jeff, we can't hear you, but uh but your screen's uh totally visible. >> Okay. Sorry. Apologies. Yeah, there we go. Um hopefully all systems are go. So this was just in response to some of the questions that came back from the um
from Aaron and Conservation Commission um with respect to the the original application. So just real quickly application had been signed. We provided provided a signed application um stamped plans
um details. We did include um an updated set that showed uh what those proposed erosion control barriers were. Um third mar uh third party monitoring we did note that in the plans. Um I can talk
through some of the resource area impacts but that was an updated plan that we did provide um to the commission. um number of trees removed. There's a total of four trees that are proposed to be removed between the two properties
between 807 um and and 8:15. Um tracking pad was just an error that was that's now shown on the plans. Uh snow storage. Snow storage is for all practical purposes. It's going to be plowed to the back of the lot. Um we've
got some barriers there to you know ensure that um you know vehicles and and impacts don't encroach any further than what they are. But the reality is for for and we could look at the plans u for somebody pulling into the site to plow
snow. The you know the the the plow will drop and plow snow to the back of the lot. And so there are there is some space back there for for some limited snow storage. Um, so we can we can look at that and talk at that about that in more detail, but at least that's what
we're showing at the moment. Um, riverfront area. Um, the Ward Smith had gone out there and did a delineation. Um, couldn't find any presence of a perennial stream. There is uh, you know,
acknowledgement of that on the USGS map. Um but I it's it seems to be a culverted um you know drainage system or something but it was looking at all the properties adjacent. It didn't appear that there was any riverfront that would impact
this property. So I don't know whether Aaron has any more to to offer to that but that you know at least was we we didn't find anything and and our wetlands consultant didn't find anything either that would would at least impact this site. Um and then we also provided
an operation and maintenance plan for the for the project which included um maintenance of um oop sorry um maintenance of the parking area as well
as um as well as the port uh the gutters and roof roof drains to ensure that those um those are cleaned at least annually or twice annually is what we're suggesting um and that that uh be part of the
maintenance plan for the for the development. >> Okay. Have um and then as far as the 50 foot uh uh no work buffer area, um have you done anything
to sign it or to uh designate it in a sense? So, there's a number of boulders along the edge of the existing parking lot. Now, um we're proposing to relocate those and add, you know, what's necessary, as you can see here in the in
the lower image, to to delineate that that edge of disturbance um behind the units. So, those will become permanent markers in addition to some additional, you know, vegetation planting along that edge as it drops off to the wetlands um
to the south. But that would be, you know, pretty a pretty good demarcation of that of that limit of disturbance. >> Okay. Well, great. Thank you, Jeff. Um, did uh are you is Andy going to speak at all?
Are you guys uh have you done your presentation? It looks like you've answered our questions that we had asked initially. We'll give uh Erin a chance, but if you have uh Andy's hands up, so I'll ask uh ask him to come in. Go ahead, Andy. Uh, no. Actually, Jeff is
uh Jeff's our representative for this meeting, so we're all set. >> Thank you. >> Um, all right. Uh, Bruce uh in uh let's see >> who who is Lorenzo and the uh the
address. >> Lorenzo. >> Hi there. Lorenzo is here last time. from uh Andy who just spoke business partner and uh Jeff is representing us. So the owner owner of the property >> Lorenzo, what's your last name? >> Maluso.
>> Maluso. >> All right. Thank you. >> If my hand was up, I didn't mean to. I apologize. >> No issues. Thank you. Um okay. and Erin. Uh, now would you mind
uh uh filling us in on uh on the town's perspective? Uh looks like they've they've done what they needed to and I I see that they've got a 50 uh they're going to be marking their 50 foot uh buffer. >> Yeah. So, um I think they addressed the
questions adequately. The the uh the riverfront um comment was a typo. It was supposed to be the property is not in Riverfront, but somehow the not didn't get into my comments. Um, I did look at that and it's it there is a riverfront area there, but it's like two properties
over. So, it's just shifted and the line was in uh it it didn't accurately represent where the river is. Um, so that's fine. Um, I did run calculations based on the um data that Jeff provided on the plan in terms of the existing and
proposed alteration and the proposed mitigation area. Um, and I included those numbers in my report. It looks like for lot 807 they're um well under the 20%. For um lot 815 they're at 21.5%
but they also have a 12.5% um mitigation area for that lot. Um, I guess my sort of closing comment because we don't always think of mitigation as a onetoone is that um, if the applicant and I and I drafted an order of conditions as well for tonight for
approval. Um, is just that I'd like to rather than just including the planting areas as the mitigation, I'd like to include the planting areas in addition to the 50-foot no work area. um and include um the the bounding can be around the proposed plantings if the
applicant prefers, but signage to be around um the mitigation the planting mitigation areas as well as the 50oot no touch. And if if they do that, I think that the balance of mitigation on the site for future um
uh mitigation area will will balance out um what's been proposed in terms of the overall impact, >> right? Thanks, Aaron. Um, we'll go to the uh public. Are there any uh comments from the public? Uh, if you do make a
comment, we'll want your uh we'll need your name um preferred pronouns and address, please. Going one for public comments. Going two. No public comments. Anybody from the uh from the commission uh have
questions? I think it's pretty pretty straightforward. Jeff, um uh you have no problems with uh with going ahead and delineating the 50 foot buffer as uh as Aaron mentioned? >> No, not at all.
>> Well, uh we have uh we have uh some order of conditions and I guess we're looking for a motion to close the public hearing and issue an order of conditions. the motion that's right there. >> I will uh move to close the public hearing and issue order of conditions
for D number 089-0760 pursuant to wetlands protection town of Ammerst general bylaw article 3.31 and regulations and the wetlands protection act with boilerplate conditions under both the wetlands protection act and town of Ammerst general bylaw with noted
special conditions as drafted. Jason with a uh with a motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Bruce with a second. >> Bruce. >> Hi, >> Jason.
>> I >> Alex. >> Hi. >> Um and I'm an eye. Rachel has recused. >> Great. Thank you everyone. >> Thanks to you folks. Uh >> thank you
and >> Jeff and Lorenzo have a >> Yeah, thank you. >> Bye. >> Good luck with the project. >> Um that concludes the um the hearings. >> Andre, could I before we leave hearings,
could I just make one quick um plug, >> please? um for I just wanted to make sure it was clear um because I'm not sure we announced the times for the first and second hearings um where the Daily Hampshire Gazette publication didn't go through as submitted um that
the the first hearing will be um rescheduled to September 10th at 7:20 and the second hearing will be rescheduled to September 10th at 7:25. I just wanted to make sure that was on the record with the exact time. >> Thanks, Aaron.
Okay. Well, um, with that, uh, we are opening the floor to, uh, we're going to be talking about the conservation commission reorgan reorganization, unless we want to talk about the, uh, uh, certificate of compliance first.
Don't matter me. >> Um, >> I would ask that we do the certificate of compliance first. >> All right. Um >> so just a quick um piece of information on this. Uh there is a subdivision
called the Ammerst Hills in um in the town of Ammerst that was uh developed back in the early 2000s about well over 20 years ago now. And um when the subdivision was recorded and also an amendment to the subdivision, it was
recorded on every single parcel in the subdivision, including parcels that were not um subject to wetland protection act or the local bylaw. Um lots that were completely within Upland. And the um lot in question, which is not 19 Hawthorne,
is one of those lots that is completely outside of Concom jurisdiction. So, this is really um an administrative approval to issue a complete certificate of compliance um because it was never um never really applicable to our jurisdiction anyways. Um so, it'd be
under both the original order and the amended order of conditions. >> All right. So, we have uh we do have a motion uh there. I will move to grant the administrative approval of the complete certificate of compliance for both the original order
and amended order of conditions DP number 089-432. >> Second. >> Before we vote, we need to ask since there's a motion, we need to ask if there's a member of the public who wants to speak about it.
>> Yes. Is there a me member of the public who would like to talk about 19 Hawthorne Road? >> Thank you. >> Thanks to you. >> Okay, there are uh we see no members of the public. Um
so Jason, do you still continue with your motion? >> Yes. >> And Alex, you second it still? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So Jason uh with a motion, Alex with a second. Alex >> I
>> Jason >> I >> Rachel >> hi. >> Bruce, >> hi. >> Okay. Uh we're uh we've uh lost our last uh chairperson and uh we are now um
going to reorganize with vote on a new uh chair and new vice chair. So with this uh we're opening the floor to uh nominations uh and limited to just a
name and no explanation or discussion. After each nomination, the member nominated indicates if they accept the nomination with a yes or a no. When there are no further nominations,
each nominee will make a brief statement and then we can have a discussion of the members without the nominees and then there'll be a call uh a call roll for a vote.
I have a process question. So, is a um the vote dependent on having a majority of the people here in the meeting or the number of seats?
>> Any motion that passes this commission has to be a majority of the full board. So, um, it would need to be four members voting in favor. >> I have a procedural question. >> Oh, go ahead. Sorry,
>> I when I read what uh Aaron put in the PowerPoint, she didn't mention the vice chair and the description here is for electing a chair. Do I assume that we just after we elect a chair, we just turn around
and do the same thing, the same process for the vice chair? It seems like a dumb question, but I thought I'd ask. >> Yes. >> Valid question. >> Thank you. All right. Um, so, uh, we're looking for
nominations then if we have no other questions about procedure. I do have a procedure question. How are we going to exclude the nominees? Are we going to ask them to leave the meeting and then or Erin, are you going to kick them out and bring them back in?
>> Um, I mean, I think it's a little less formal than that. I think they just wouldn't participate in the discussion. But Dave, if you feel differently, please say so. >> I don't think the nominees need to leave the meeting. I think they
>> they in the meeting. I've watched a number of these with the town council and I think it's following uh Aaron got the same advice from Athena O'Keefe O'Keefe who is the clerk to the council and a expert on these procedural matters.
>> Okay. I don't imagine that the uh nominees would leave because they they're going to vote too, right? >> Excuse me. >> We have no other questions then. Uh let's go. Uh if anybody has any nominate Oh, Bruce.
>> Analy Andre. >> I'll accept. Thank you, Bruce. Any other nominations? >> Go ahead, Alex. >> Nominate Bruce. >> Any other nominations? Bruce, do you
accept? >> Yes. Okay, so far we have two people nominated. All right. Uh I uh with that I guess we'll
we'll make make a brief statement. Um well for me I'll make a brief statement. Um, I I've been the vice chair for uh two two and a half years. Um, and I would like an opportunity to uh to
be the chair uh to be able to uh help out with that as well. Um, I'm going to make a couple more. I'm going to bring it a couple steps further. I would like to uh be limited if I do get
voted I'd be like to be limited to 6 months um because I think it would be good for other folks to get a chance to uh uh to uh get the chair's position. uh two years of uh being in the vice chair
I think has uh um brought that through and uh um yeah and I think uh that there would like to see a lot more communication uh between the chair and vice chair or at least uh them copied on uh
communications with uh with the town. But uh that's I would I would love to do it and I'll give it my best if I get a chance. >> Well, given that description, I'm going to withdraw my nomination and encourage
people people to follow Andre's idea of rotating periodically. [Music] I I think I'm gonna have to step out of the jail because I hate you be a part of this if I'm gonna be uh
so um would somebody else mind taking the reigns here while I'm >> given that some you're muted muted and you lost your video. I'm gonna let the three of you talk about it. I'm gonna step
>> um >> Sorry, Rachel. What was that? >> We need four. >> We need four to vote. >> Okay. >> Um I will I agree with Andre and Bruce's the notion that there should be a
rotating. I think that's a good practice. I think that's healthy. Yeah. >> And I'm ready to vote. >> And what about vice chair? Is that a separate >> I think we just do this again. >> Okay. Okay.
>> You just you first do the the chair and then do that vote and folks can vote for themselves as well. So Andre casts the vote. Bruce casts the vote and then when that's concluded
uh Andre can ask for or any whoever the chair is can ask for nominations from the floor or vice chair. Great. >> Is everybody ready to vote? >> I think so. And then the duration, if we
wanted to formalize um a chair position and rotation, is that something we would do informally or we'd formalize that, you know, that if for a three-year appointment, know your maximum term or is that is it
better just to be informal about it? Uh since we're not talking about the uh the chair the act who the chair and all that is I think we can uh take a a full vote on that uh afterward but that's yeah
>> I will say it's normally a year. I I I'm not aware that chairs rotate every six months. You could do that and that could be part of the motion of somebody nominating one or the other for a six-month term as chair. I think I
think that would suffice at which time the commission could simply hold another vote and somebody else could step up. [Music] >> All right. Um, does do one of you folks
want to conduct the uh vote or I could just go ahead and do it. It doesn't matter. >> Erin, why don't you conduct the vote? Yeah, sometimes staff does that. I know Athena does that. So, >> okay, we'll start we'll start the vote then. Uh, Bruce, who do you vote for? >> Andre,
>> Alex, >> I move that uh Andre be chair for six months. >> Okay. Rachel, >> I vote for Andre. Jason, >> I vote for Andre. >> Thank you.
>> I vote for myself. Alex, I think Yeah, I think I think you're move for me for six months. Um I think we should do them separately. Just move for me and then we'll uh we'll we'll we'll vote for the six-month uh thing if you
>> So I'll vote for Andre. Okay. >> Thanks. So that's uh one to five votes for Andre as the chair. Thank you everybody for your confidence um for giving me a chance
uh looking for uh nominations for uh vice uh chair. >> I vote I nominate Rachel. I don't accept. >> I'm too new. I'm still learning the ropes. I'll take the notes.
>> Oh, don't promise that. That's bad news. >> Okay. >> Aaron has a plan. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Um, I'll nominate Bruce. >> Yeah, I nominate Bruce. >> I will also nominate Bruce.
Bruce, >> I I accept your nomination. >> Any other nominations? >> Let's go to a vote. Uh, well, Bruce, would you like to make a You may made a statement. >> Um, I'm interested in learning about the
the work as the vice chair. >> Thanks, Bruce. I think Bruce would be a great uh uh great chair or vice chair. Um so I'm looking forward to uh to working
with him on it. Any other any comments? >> Let's move. >> Yeah, I just have a procedural question. Um um who are the nominees? >> We only have one nominee right now. It's
Bruce. So Rachel didn't accept. >> No. >> Okay. Sorry I missed that. I didn't hear it. >> No problem. So any other if we unless we have any other comments, we're going to move to vote. >> Jason, who do you vote for for vice?
>> Bruce. >> Alex. >> Bruce. >> Rachel. >> Bruce. >> I'll vote for Bruce. And who do you vote for, Bruce? >> I'm gonna abstain. of stains. >> Okay,
>> but I'll do it anyway. You You win by the narrowest of margins. >> Yep. >> Good. Good grief. >> Congrats. >> All right. >> All right. And uh so now um
I would like to move to make uh make the at least uh this current appointment um of a chair and vice chair to make it uh a six-month appointment unless you folks think uh a little more time. I just think six months is enough so that we
can rotate and we can all get a chance uh to to become uh the chair at some point, learn a little bit and uh work uh collaboratively like so I would look for 6 months and um I would look for
communications between um the town and the uh chair to be copied to the vice at all times. But uh I'm going to I'm going to move to uh uh to have the uh chair uh personship
um and vice chairpersonship uh last six months. >> I'll second then. >> Great. Uh I suppose maybe I'm sorry guys, I can't make that motion because I'm the chair. >> All right, I'll make the motion and
someone else can check in. I'll second it. >> All right, that's Bruce with a motion. Rachel, uh, second. Rachel, >> hi. >> Bruce, >> hi. >> Jason, >> I So, six month
>> six month appointment. Um, Dave and Erin, when you uh uh write to me, when you email me, just copy uh Bruce please. All right. Well, I think we're done. And is there is there anything um
I'm looking for any uh last uh public comments? There any other topics not recently uh not reasonably anticipated 48 hours before? I just I'll just add really quickly that
um the monitoring reports were not totally complete this um for this meeting and that was because I uh had attempted to be out um last week for a little time. Um so I I was able to get in the ones that I could get in but I
got like a flurry uh in the last two days right before this meeting. So any um uh monitoring reports that were not in your packet this week will be included in uh the next round of packets. >> Thanks Aaron. Bruce,
>> as an informal reminder, next year we have to have only one meeting in July and one meeting in August to make sure that Aaron can actually take a vacation. Thank you.
>> That's a good ticket. So, is that a motion? >> No, it's a reminder to to make sure that it happens when the time comes. >> Can we make a motion to to state that right now that we will only >> I put those constraints in her way. I just want to indicate that we should do
it. >> No, I don't want to make a motion about that. make a motion that Aaron has to take. >> Well, that's between her and Dave, but let's try. >> Good. Good thinking. Um, Alex,
>> yeah, Erin was nice enough to do up her report >> for us all >> and but a couple of meetings ago, we told her that um we thought that it was nice that she did it, but that it took up too much of her time. And I'm curious
why she continues to put it together. >> I can tell you that. Um Dave, uh that's that's a that's kind of a work relationship between Dave and uh Aaron and I think Dave has asked her to continue to make them. I think you missed that in the
last >> um I found it actually very helpful especially with the colors because it showed what had already come before. it showed the most important thing and I think as long as it doesn't take too much extra time it's actually a good intermediate in between place. Um that
was helpful to me to to see kind of what was coming. So thank you >> Andre if I could I know we want to end this meeting but yeah Erin and I have talked and and I encouraged her to maybe shorten it up a little bit and it could be bulleted in places but it it does
provide a a kind of a nice record. I don't want it to be ownorous, overly burdensome on her. So, I think we can we can work with the chair and the vice chair over the next couple of months to hone it a little bit, tighten it up, and she does a wonderful job, of course, but
I don't want it to become over overly burdensome. But I do think it is helpful for the public and also the commissioners and for me, frankly, to be able to jump right to ah that's already been done. This is what we're expecting. And as always, Erin's work is is top-notch. So,
I'd have to agree with you, Dave. I found it quite helpful as well. I mean, we have >> going into a meeting or or recounting. And I will say with regard to next summer, Bruce, if all goes according to what's been discussed, you will be chair
next summer and you can really determine uh well, you may be chair next summer. >> Uh if you ascend from vice chair to chair, uh you can really say we're only going to have one meeting in in this month or that month. Well, that's a long time from now.
>> Six months. >> I move we adjourn. >> Thank you. >> Second. >> Thank you too. Uh with a motion to adjourn. Jason second. Jason >> I. >> Alex >> I
>> Rachel >> I >> and I'm an I. Folks, thanks a lot. >> All right. >> Thanks. Congratulations Andre and Bruce. Oh boy.