Alrighty. Hello everyone. Uh, welcome to the subcommittee, housing and zoning subcommittee of the Ammerst Planning Board. It is Thursday, September 25th. It is 11:33 a.m.
Uh, we will start with just a roll call attendance. Just go around the Zoom room. Um, Fred Hartwell is here. Angus Mloud present. I, Jesse Major am present. And Bruce
is not present. All right, let me just find the agenda. I think we're going to hopefully talk about Oh, announcements. Anyone have announcements? I don't have anything. Nate, you have anything for us? Uh, I do not. Okay. Anything from YouTube?
Great. Um, we're hoping to approve some minutes or at least discuss some minutes. Um, Angus and Fred, have you had time to look at them at all? Actually, Angus, you weren't here. So, Nate, that means he can't vote on them,
right? Yeah, I think they're good. Okay. Is that Is that accurate, Nate? He could. But I mean, sometimes people uh abstain or they they don't. But I mean, because technically then we had four,
but now we're only two if Angus cannot vote. So why you tell us what to do? I think if Fred thinks they're good and um you know, like I said, I think we can always post them and change them at in the future if people feel like they're you know, something's a miss, but Okay. So So and we should vote on
approving them or we should just Yeah. Okay. All right. So, there were I think we were talking about four the first four sets that I sent around. Um, and let me just find them so we can reflect the dates appropriately.
Take a minute. There they are. Okay. So we are talking about minutes from um August 14th, July 23rd, May 14th, and April 23rd.
And so uh I will make a motion that we approve all four of those sets of minutes as they are. Second. Great. Thank you, Angus. Uh and was that a hand to make a comment, Fred? I
Okay, great. So, go around and vote. Fred is an I. Angus I. Great. I am also an I. So, those four sets of minutes can be approved. Um and I'll send around another set for our next meeting.
Excellent. Thank you. All right. Uh next up we had discussion again continuing discussion of North Ammerst and really to focus on preparing for a public meeting around this topic. Um so Nate you want to get us started?
Yeah I think the um you know at the planning board there's a a bit of discussion of trying to work on the framework document which we could do. Um I think some of it is uh you know discussing like you know I think this would just be a big public meeting public forum anyone could attend
whether it's you know in North Ammeris right I don't I you know it's it's a really odd thing to say it's only for North Ammeris residents but I think we you know we can um advertise it um you know through the town's media and different different ways. Um I just I
think the format of it will be important how we frame it. And so, you know, Bruce had some ideas. He's not here. Um, you know, not, you know, to me it's this would be a more of a listening session. Um, you know, taking the ideas down. I don't, you know, I guess the question is if if you know, plenty board members
think it's worth having like a back and forth. Sometimes to me that gets a little messy. And I, you know, I especially for the first one, it might just be good to hear everything. We can have some maps um and take notes. Yeah. uh you know I don't
you know I guess that's some of someone would be like okay what do we think like you know do we have an hour probably um you know what's a good format do we have any like guiding questions to ask um you know the overlay the framework is a few topics right like kind of like design transportation impacts or you
know do we follow that in terms of comments or do we just open up to everyone I mean I feel like you know that those I mean that's it I mean I almost feel like we if we did you know if members um gave like a 5 to 10 minute intro, which it doesn't have to be too long. And then to me, it's kind of just
opening it up for comments. I think Bruce wanted to have maybe a little bit more structure. I I don't know. I feel like at this first juncture might be okay just to pass the microphone around or have people just, you know, give everyone three minutes and see what they say. I don't I don't know. I I feel like
it's might be hard to categorize it by topic and be like, "Oh, let's only talk about transportation now because, you know, so many comments can overlap." I don't I don't know what people think, but Yep. I would I agree with most of that. I was thinking I mean I definitely agree with the making more of a listening and
less of a back and forth. Um I was imagining also maybe opening up the meeting with as we've discussed already the bigger picture planning and maybe discuss some of that first and maybe Nate that's something you want to
do or I can. it doesn't matter who really um and then maybe take some comments about big thoughts and then transition into okay now now let's talk about this North Ammerst idea okay um as a way to get get to that um I was
curious how if we've done things like this before how do materials get made available like does this public meeting get a place on the website where we can put materials or is it just at the meeting um that we can share.
Sure. Yeah, I think we could, you know, post this online um get materials up there beforehand, you know, uh whether it's through like planning board or housing, you know, the housing and zoning subcommittee page. I feel like there's a way to do that and then um you know, we can make copies
available at the at the meeting itself. So, yeah. And and how do we advertise the meeting? Is it just in like how do we do that? Mr. Chairman, I have to leave the meeting for about two minutes. Okay, just so you know. Okay, thanks Fred.
Yeah, let's do we do we need to So, we've lost quum. So, do we need to pause the meeting officially or just not vote on anything? I don't know. I'd say we can talk about this. We're not making any decisions. Um, you know, I think we could advertise
it. You know, what I would do is I'd post it as like a board meeting, too. So then anyone who subscribes to get the calendar updates would you know we can use our communications manager and put it in the news item ask for it to be published um you know online at a few places you know Ammeris Indie the
Gazette I wouldn't necessarily do a formal legal ad but you know even if it's you know if it's being held in North Ammeris you could even ask the counselors to um help I mean I feel like there's as long as there's enough lead time I think there's no problem of getting people interested it's just um yeah
and I assume it's also totally fine for us to advert. I mean, for us to just communicate with whoever we want that, oh, this is happening. Yes. Yeah. Yep. Yeah. Oh, yeah. Yeah. That's that's never a problem. I just I guess I I don't know that we that there's a date yet. Um, right. I don't I don't think so. I think
Bruce was going to talk to Kathy Shane because they already had sort of a date for something planned. Right. Right. Right. So, we can connect with Bruce. Sorry, Angus, your hands been up. Do you want to add something? Yeah. Sorry. Yeah. I mean, I was going
to say what what you just said, Jesse, um, and that you voiced, I think, in the in the planning board meeting last week that, um, I I think having starting with five to 10 minutes of planning board members kind of explaining the rationale
for all of these areas and then we've already done one and now we're moving on to another, we'll be moving on to others is kind of our strategy. Um, I think that's great. I think that's essential. Um, and then I think uh I don't know if I don't know if we need to take
questions then about the overall um plan, but I think we can I think then we could we could shift into five going into 10 minutes of explaining the North Ammerst overlay specifically and then kind of remind people I guess the remaining like 40 minutes would be questions. Um, and we could remind
people that we're, you know, this isn't just about North Amoris. This is about the overall plan, but we are, you know, this because this is the next stage. We're here in this community to hear specifically from you all as well. So, we can kind of remind them that we can take thoughts on the entire process. Um,
but to me, 40 minutes is a lot of a lot of time for questions. Um, and I but I think that's the stage we're at. I think, you know, Bruce kind of had a vision at one point of of sort of a back and forth putting maps up on the walls, having people move around. I love that
idea maybe at a later date. I think to me that's once we've heard some of these overall thoughts, we revisit the kind of overlay as we're imagining it. Then once we are ready to kind of once we've taken that all into consideration, then we could do another meeting if we wanted to
where we maybe do a bit more of um uh interactions with with the public around our proposal as opposed to just kind of getting feedback. Yeah, I think that all makes a lot of sense. Um do we I guess we don't know where it would be yet so we can think
about materials we actually want to have available. I mean, I I I do think we'd want to if we follow the sort of layout you just described, Angus, we probably first want either a projection or a big whole town
map, right? I can imagine with the areas highlighted including University Drive overlay so that we can point to them and like you said describe some briefly the big picture and then maybe that changes to the just the zoom in on North Ammerst
at least just the bold outline you know area so that then we could talk through them and yeah maybe we want to have I can imagine you know Nate either you or I doing the big picture one description and then maybe Bruce wants to take on
the north amoris specifics and and yeah I think we can make that framework available that document but I don't think we need to go through all the try and go through each point right just
more of a general description and yeah and leaving the possibilities pretty wide like we haven't decided on heights or we haven't decided on specific uses that's all what we're discussing and that's why for coming to get input, right?
Um, does does Nate do you the staff have resources to put those things together if it needs to be like a big poster board or Yep. Yeah. Is there a town projector we can borrow if it's in a room that doesn't have AV? Like, how does that work? I just don't know.
Yeah. No, I we as long as we have I think we do. We We do. I just I'd have to work with it to get it set up. Um Yeah. Yeah, I mean I'm taking notes. My thought would be we'd have you know like an agenda. I think even a a presentation like no more than 10 slides which could be projected or printed
whatever larger maps printed out and then we could have even like questions uh leading questions or framework questions. Um you know my thought with the presentation in this stuff is just to put it online, right? So if we you know right we could just have like a few slides describing like we're saying the
townwide piece you know loop in like the some things from the housing production plan. And then we have the North Ammerst piece and then we have questions and comments. And even if we just kind of set that, you know, have that outlined in ahead of time, it just will help with to me I think if people see that um what
their expectations are for the meeting. Okay. Um I just noticed there is a participant. There's a call-in listener just so you're aware. The number is 413362500. I don't know know if that's Bruce. That's not the number I have for him. Um, Nate, do you remember how someone on
the phone raises their hand? Uh, it's I think it was I always say like star nine, but I I forget exactly. Uh, I was going to ask them to if it is Bruce to raise their hand, so we can bring him over. Um, uh, oh, and Janet
Macauan just joined as well. Um, um, so I'm happy to bring them over as we have been doing in the past. Oh, the caller just left. Okay, guess they didn't like me calling them out. Uh so I do see Janet uh and unless there's
objection I will bring Janet over in case she wants to add comments just that that's the way we've been running the meeting. Any issues from the other members? Great Janet. I'm going to elevate you to a panelist and I'll explain more when you get here.
Hi Janet. Um fine if you just want to listen in. We've been running this meeting as just a conversation. So, we've been bringing in all the attendees so you can participate. Please use the hand raise function just like normal. Um, you're currently muted. Uh, I don't know if you've met Angus. Um, there's
your introduction. I think you know Fred and and myself. Angus Janet was on the planning board uh for I don't know how long before I was there. I can't you're muted. Um,
so I was on the planning board for five years and I was the caller, so I just hung up. I was I was in Hadley shopping for cat. Gotcha. It's totally fine if you'd rather just I Yeah, I'm definitely listening today. Thank you.
Okay, sure. Um, all right. So, where were we? We were talking about materials for the presentation. Sounds like we'll get that in shape. Um, Nate, sounds like you'll take the lead on that. Obviously, if we're going to put slides together, we'd probably want to include in the
introduction some of the just numbers that we've put together in various places, meaning the residents, students over students looking for housing, you know, just to give some rough big picture idea of what the problem is we're working on, right? Um,
all throughout I would have us re-emphasize really the main purpose which is to encourage and increase the number of long-term residents in neighborhoods.
that still remains the problem we're trying to solve in my mind and the prevention of more family and professional level housing being turned into student rentals because they don't come back. So, as
much as we can weave that narrative in, I think is helpful. Oh, there's Bruce. It is 11:48 and Bruce is joining. Hi, Bruce. I'm sorry. I was snoozing and I Good for you. That's great.
Uh, just to catch you up, we were mostly discussing how we imagine this first public meeting could go. Yep. And what we had sort of agreed, the four of us was uh imagining a
fiveish minute introduction on the big picture, not just North Ammerst, like all the different areas we're thinking about, starting with University Drive, explain the problem we're trying to solve, and then transitioning to more specifics about North Ammerst, but not getting into the super nitty-gritty, not
going through each point sort of on the framework. um and really taking total of 15 20 minutes for us to present ideas and then just listen to what people want to talk about rather than back and forth uh trying to respond and make everyone
happy. I have something like exactly the same thing and the same agenda for a conversation a long overdue conversation on the North Amus community farm in the same venue this Sunday. So, I
Right. You can you can preview for us how it'll go. Um, do we have a Was there an actual date for this, Bruce? Did you talk with Kathy or No, I just told Kathy called me. Um
actually she called me about the matters related to the school building elementary school building committee and a uh an issue related to the playground surfacing which is kind of serious and and needs actions and thought and so
forth. And then she segueed from that to this and I said she should talk to uh Doug and Nate. I thought this was not something that I was going to be able to be useful. I mean, in terms of scheduling and all that. I just had
talked to the chair and and to the staff person in charge. So, presumably she's done that. Um, but I don't know. Okay. So, we'll we'll wait. Maybe maybe um Nate, is it appropriate for you to reach out to her to ask about getting a date on the books just so we can start
planning? Or do you want me to do that? I mean, either way. I can say that she was thinking about uh the the the first Sunday. What is it? It would be October the 12th, I guess, is a Sunday because
that's the day after we're doing it. So, it' be October 5th or the one after. That's a holiday weekend. Might not be the best plan. Well, yes. I don't know what. So, anyway, I said probably would be better to do it after our next board meeting. I
I said I I would assume that the chair would uh um probably have an opinion like that, but I sure didn't say much else. Okay. Uh sorry, Nate, you were going to say
you want to reach out. You want me to? Yeah, I'll email Doug and I can email Kathy and just see I mean I you know you know I will say weekends are tough for me just because of family commitments. Um, you know, I guess we can have a few dates in mind. I think maybe then on October 8th, if we had
some ideas, we could discuss that with the planning board about availability, whether it's, you know, kind of early evening during the week or some other time. I mean, I would I would think that would be better also like a evening during the week. But yeah, typically I mean I think that
Kathy's thinking of this in in in in in a in the way she's thought about the various meetings that she as a counselor has had and it's always been Sunday afternoons that she thinks apparently that that's the time she can get most
people engaged. Um but uh talk to um and Nate it it may not be well I suppose it's it's probably advisable to have you there but it does seem unreasonable to expect
you to show up things like this on a weekend. Yeah, that's well what we had briefly out Bruce is that perhaps either Nate or I or combination does the big picture sort of introduction and then you could
take over and do the more North Hammer specific maybe or or I could simply facilitate the conversation or Kathy could you'll know people's names to call on them. Yes. I mean, that's the kind of thing
where it should be somebody who's familiar with the neighborhood and that's why pro and I'm quite used to facilitating complex community discussions of one sort or another. I've been doing it most of my life.
Okay. Um Okay. So, any more discussion about the meeting we should have right now? Sounds like really we just need a Seems like we're in pretty clear agreement about how we would like it to go. Uh, we just need to get a date and then we'll get a little more serious planning on that.
All right. Um, let's see. Next up, we're going to shift gears and talk about the zoning priority list. Um, so I'll be honest, I haven't really thought about it since planning board. Um maybe we just want to look at the
list together and try and slide them around and agree on some priorities. Nate, does that make sense to you? Yeah, I think there's, you know, I have 14 on the list after the planning board meeting. You know, we could add to it. I think um
you know, I was going to talk about, you know, at the planning board meeting when we were looking at areas in town, I I was hoping to get a map together, but you know, there's you like a dozen areas identified. And so I think it's maybe 13. Some are overlapping, but some of it would be, you know, uh, some of these
zoning ideas could be used in those areas and some could be different. And I, you know, I guess some, you know, the discussion is do we do we like the idea of, um, looking at a specific zoning topic that could be applied townwide or do we want to focus on a specific area and see
what strategies might work in that area? And you know, it might end up being that the approach is well then it's a zoning change that affects townwide if it depending on the district or something. But um those are kind of my ideas and I I can share my screen. Um if there's other ideas too I feel like u you know
the list to me it's I think you we have had these lists in the past and I'd like I was going to do a little bit more research and pull some older ones out even going back like 10 years and just um you know trying to consolidate uh consolidate them. I mean, for instance,
you know, um the town, you know, in Arizona bylaw, we have regulations for cannabis and they're a little outdated just given what's, you know, changed in the with the state the last so many years. And so I I know some staff have been looking at that. I don't, you know, we can add it to the list, but it's not something I'd have the this committee
necessarily work on. I think some staff are going to take the lead on that, but you know, it's something that could be coming forward. You know, um does it affect the planning board? But I mean I guess you know at some point you know where we allow the uses might um if there's ideas about that. Um but
um I was I would say don't look back too far because then you realize the same things have been discussed and not acted on forever. Angus, go ahead. Could be helpful. Yeah, I mean I was just going to say I I wonder if uh before looking at the list
um talking about maybe workflow might be a worthwhile thing and and by that I just mean which things um we might want if we might want to separate the work to stuff that the staff can work on on their own. I'm thinking like the sign
bylaw. I don't think any anyone on this uh panel well I don't know I I shouldn't I shouldn't speak for you all but I certainly don't have any any particular expertise about signs and const and constitutional law around signs. So that seems to me like something that we could ask the planning department to work on
and then propose to us a change. And then other things that it seems more like we would need to work on as a committee, as a subcommittee to bring maybe to the planning department, talk about it, bring it to the overall planning board. Um, and then things that
we're maybe working on more closely in relation to each other going back and forth. I don't know if that if that makes sense as a as a workflow, but I thought it might be worthwhile to just think about that together before we get to the actual list. Yeah, I would I would agree. Um
that's really a question for you, Nate. Yeah, I mean I think even say for instance the sign bylaw, I think it's fine if the committee was to work on it, you know, maybe that you know their uh resources through, you know, list serves or just doing, you know, searches online or contacting places and that's something the subcommittee could I mean
I'd end up doing something similar. So even like if we like the idea of cottage style development or say something like that I would I think the subcommittee could say okay we'll work on it and we'll you know try to find relevant case studies. We can contact the communities see you know how they're permitted what
the zoning say about it and then you know staff can help consolidate and synthesize information and work on things. But some of that are research can be done by members of the subcommittee. And um you know I you know yeah I mean I feel like it's I mean you know we sometimes we say there's technical fixes say for instance
like um allowing multiple principal dwellings on a property. It there's you know one section of the bylaw that talks about it and you know we could come up with some language to change that. I mean if it's we think it's that simple and then bring it here and discuss it. um um you know like a tiered approach to
apartments to me for instance I could have ideas or you know same thing members could someone could volunteer to take the lead on it or look at other communities or um you know to see how that works um you know cuz you know I for instance that's you know I guess yeah the workflow it's a good question Angus I think sometimes in the past what
had happened is the subcommittee would come up with ideas and staff would do a lot of work which is okay um but then it you know sometimes it might just take longer if it's all on staff and so I don't mind sharing sharing work with everyone here.
Yeah, Chris, um I was just thinking when Nate said maybe look back uh uh and see what uh previous uh years uh lists looked like, previous decades lists look like and you
said well don't look back too far and then I immediately looked back. Um, and I was thinking that broadly speaking, I know when Fred and I were on the planning board last, and we were both fairly consider, I mean, Fred joined shortly after I left, shortly after I
joined. And so for the bulk of my seven years, and it was one year longer than the six usually because of the uh, Bakowski property and so forth and that I was so deeply involved in that they they stayed on for another year. But those seven years
um uh in the from the mid 90s uh the the dominant concern I think I recall Fred that the the dominant concern of the town just as housing is now the dominant concern. The dominant concern
of the the of 25 years ago was or 30 years ago was um basically enabling uh um uh well it it was the professional research parks. In other words,
um identifying what uh opportunities we had to zone for kind of um high tax yield uh commercial um uh uses and so forth. And the thought
was that we could create opportunities for initiatives that was born in UMass research to locate themselves in town. And the and that thought uh I think if I recall correctly grew out of a concern
that in the decade or 15 years prior to that through the 80s the dominant concern in town was preserving open space and that we had a very active conservation uh director at that time Pete Westover and and we put quite a lot of land into
conservation and I think that concern yielded the farmland protection overlay bylaw which uh um grew out of that and then the realization that we had so much land in town that was um not
developable. We had so little zone, so little uh opportunities to develop the business professional research parks that because of all of the open space and what was dedicated to colleges and so forth and flood planes and so forth. But then we put our efforts into trying
to identify these professional research park locations and put those and then you know I don't know what the dominant concerns for um the the warts and and and so forth were but it's now moved to housing. So you can kind of track the
the the the big picture uh priorities of the planning uh initiatives in town over the past 40 years somewhat along those three lines. And that's just my spontaneous recollection of having lived
here for that period of time and having been associated with the planning board in a on on a previous occasion. So, we might want to um reflect at that level and to see and make sure there isn't some large
um issue that's waiting to be uh acknowledged um um ready to stare us in the face, but perhaps not quite yet appearing over the horizon. I don't know what that would be, but I haven't been looking or thinking about
it either. Thanks, Bruce. Uh Fred, go ahead. Yeah. Uh I agree with Bruce and um I wanted to add one thing. um uh the business about conservation and at uh
the uh I think at the planning board meeting there was some discussion around maybe easing off on some of the uh conservation uh protection on uh some of the lands that didn't particularly look like
what you normally think of as a subject for conservation and what I did not hear at that meeting and I think needs to be considered and I I in terms of technical merit I
agree with Bruce but there's a there's a problem and it's a large problem and that is um once something goes into conservation and Nate correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure of this once something goes into conservation to take
anything out of conservation requires not only the approval of the town but also a twothirds vote in both houses of the state legislature. This is governed by a specific amendment to the state constitution. So this is a really
big deal. Uh it it has happened. Uh, as I recall, the uh uh older house on the east side of Northeast Street out near the farm stand. Um, there was some
conservation land connected to that that I think managed to make it out of conservation. Uh, that's the only example I can think of. It is a really difficult process to undergo. So I I wanted to just make sure people were
aware of that. Uh thanks. Go ahead, Bruce. Um Fred, I know what you say is true of uh agricultural preservation restrictions placed on land. I don't know whether that's true of land that's
got conservation restrictions that are created u by the town. for example, the the 20 acres behind me, which is the tail of the Barkowski uh product, which is basically uh the the likely residue of any any uh
any property that's developed under the farmland protection overlay. I don't know whether it's true of the land that's held by uh Kestrel along East Pleasant Street that I was talking about the other night, but I know it's true of the APR lands.
Well, uh, Nate, you you may have a better technical grasp on this than I do, but that I I kind of recall it in reverse. So, yeah, just No. Yeah, I think that, you know, in the
last few years, the town's, you know, been a little more strategic with its open space acquisitions and conservation restrictions, but no, it is it's a pretty high bar, you know, even for town conservation land, especially for APR and other, you know, lands that are protected. And so, you know, I think
that especially say if we're looking at East Ammerst, you know, there's some properties that have a fair amount of land behind. So, you know, the there's frontage and then there's farmland behind, you know, and we've talked uh you know, in the past few years about, you know, if that were to be per say if these
properties were under consideration per conservation, like could you carve off so much of the front to allow it to be developed or to have some some opportunity there as opposed to, you know, having, you know, this conservation program take the whole property. And so, you know, I think that is important, especially as we get, you
know, um, you know, there's fewer and fewer places to develop. And so, um, you know, even up in North Amoris, there's, you know, a lot of the properties are pretty big and have open space. And so, if you're talking about conserving them is their ability to keep the frontage available. And I think that's actually
what the farmland um, um, you know, overlay does a bit. Uh, it's set back from the street. Um, you know, I think to that point, you know, and I have the master plan map in front of me on the wall and, you know, I think the town has identified village centers
for a long time in downtown to develop with density and different things. I guess sometimes what I see is that the zoning or the policies or development hasn't necessarily provided opportunities in the way that the plan might show. Um, so, you know, if we say, oh, East Ammerst is this big and we'd
like to see more infill. you know, the zoning along in East Samaroy along College Street in certain areas hasn't changed in a long time. Um could be said for other areas and so I I agree Bruce I think with your general trends and I think you know some of it is right now is um you know the housing piece is
important and so some of it would be I to me it's like well let's get people in town and then also at the same time figure out you know we're keep the zoning in place and have the opportunities to have different business developments or other things. I think um you know uh the R&D overlay has been in
place for over 10 years maybe um yeah 10 years it hasn't been used it's still in place you know maybe looking at the uses that are allowed in there needs to change so for instance you can have you know like 3D manufacturing right or 3D printing or maker space or things that
we might consider or in our bylaw might be under a classification that isn't allowed because typically it may have been like a you know um industrial use and now it's like a cleaner manufacturing and so sometimes I think even what we allow in mixeduse buildings could be updated as you know
non-residential so you know you could have you know a fab lab for instance right or some innovative workspace in a mixeduse building it's not going to create it may you know I don't think it'll create the noxious impacts or you know you know side effects that maybe we thought 20 or 30 years ago and so even
like those little changes could be really important um you know I think housing is economic development and growth And so I think it's kind of doing both. Uh you know, one of our priorities was looking at housing in the PRP possibly not not changing what's allowed there, but maybe it is also then looking
at well what other uses could we allow in the professional research parks? You know, if you know, if medical offices aren't coming here, um is there a way to incentivize it or you know, could we get smaller um workspaces or you know, shared workspaces or something? Um, and
so I don't, you know, I'd have to look and see how what we have, what we have in our zoning. Is it just the way our use classifications work isn't clear for people and they just don't know how to take advantage of it. Yeah. All good thoughts. Um, Janet. Um, hi. I,
you know, as soon as we're talking about like conservation land and, you know, space for more development, you know, my all I can think of is sprawl. And so we have a master plan to concentrate development in village centers and along you know like university drive places.
We don't need to take up any more conservation or APR land to build housing. Um and then ironically a lot of our PRP or research parks are have apartment houses in them which is one of the great conundrums of my life that we
constantly have a zoning and we constantly kind of go around it. But I I you know, if I had to vote for where um everyone should focus, and I know I'm on the on the cheap seats right here, is doing village center planning and
zoning. And so I don't think people care so much about what's in a building as long as it's not, you know, like the next um IKEA bringing in tremendous traffic, what the uses are. They really care about how it looks. And you know in East Ammerst like
I you know I've heard Chris Breastup saying you know like how can anyone explain our zoning and basically it looked like you know 30 or 40 years ago people looked at what was on the ground and said okay in you know here's a commercial building on college street and said we're going to call that comm.
And then over here we have a building that also has some apartment units in it and so we're going to call this something else. And so it's a really tiny area that has like five different zoning things and it's almost impossible for people to do anything in it. Um, and we all want it to have something to do
it. Also, it's an area that's surround not surrounded, but there's a whole section of really active farms there that weren't active 5 years ago. And I don't want to lose that farmland to another housing development. We don't need it. um there's other places to
build and we should need to protect our resource lands because we're going to need them a lot in the years to come. And so I would just say start a comprehensive planning process saying we want this you know one village center or we want village centers to look like this at this kind of height flexible
about the uses in it and then the village center stops you know it doesn't just sprawl out into neighborhoods or farmlands or conservation lands or onto the fort river. Um we have a nice community farm going on um in in you know East Ammerst. So
protect your resource lands you know which includes farmland and then just intensively do a planning process for you know you could do East Ammer East Ammeris where I live you know fix the zoning but also fix the look. People are going to care. They don't want to see probably six-story buildings. Um they
probably don't want to see a ton of parking lots but they also need a place to park or you know whatever. So, I I just think that since I've moved to Amoris, it's like we we've avoided that hard process of doing zoning that involves the community, probably outside consultants, otherwise we're going to
kill Nate. Um, you know, and just get it done, you know, and do one example and saying, "Hey, this looked really good. All the buildings that came in, they were taller, but they looked great." Um, you know, different businesses or apartment buildings or, you know, whatever could be built. um or mixeduse
buildings that actually have commercial development on the first floor instead of empty spaces, which is what we see now, you know, let's just do the work. And I I think if you got that done, you know, miracle, you know. Thanks, Janet. Um I I think I I like
that idea a lot. And I probably I would guess East Ammeris is the right place to start with that approach. Um, not that I've thought about it a whole lot, but yeah, I think that that's really good good thoughts. Um,
okay, let's circle back unless there's more general this process discussion to maybe the list, Nate, that you have. Uh, I would say one comment. I mean, I'm gonna have to go soon as Bruce Bruce gets back. I'm gonna have to go,
unfortunately. Um, I very much like the idea of trying to think broadly, are there some across the board zoning changes we could make that might facilitate some of what we're trying to accomplish. Um, yeah, and I'll I'm going
to try and spend some time looking at our bylaws to to make some sense of it. So, I I'll confess I don't spend a lot of time reading our bylaws. I don't anymore. It's it's clearly very important.
Um, okay. Nate, you want to share? Yeah. And I was also going to say, um, you know, I Dodson is, uh, coming along with their downtown design standards and, um, they're trying to get a working group meeting going, uh, to, uh, discuss the draft standards. They did a little
bit ago, but, you know, I'm hopeful that from that process, we will have things that we can then, you know, apply in different areas of town. Right. So to Janet's point, um you know, I think that if we said, okay, let's simplify zoning in East Ammerst or whatever we want to
do there, I feel like we could take some of the things that Dodson has come up with, whether it's setbacks or kind of roof design, what whatever it may be, and and have those work there. Uh and so right now, we haven't, you know, right, zoning typically gives you kind of your max build out, your building envelope,
and set some parameters. we don't have um uh but you know it hasn't looked at this the the specifics of each place right so I think sometimes what we've in the downtown for instance I feel like we we don't have the flexibility to push a building back a little bit to have a wide sidewalk in certain places and I
feel like you know that's something I'd like to make sure we have when we start planning for density in other places right like to have to me a four-story building in a 5ft sidewalk you know so it's like 5t from building to curb street curb is just not not enough space if if we say we want to have active
streetscapes and so you know right now I couldn't say that the zoning say even provides for that kind of flexibility in the village centers um and if we want to have defined first floor commercial space we don't have great standards in terms of what does that look like whether it's like you know uh window
patterns or glass to whatever ratios and you know banding above it or sign fronts or whatever. Um, so Dawson's kind of looking at all that for the downtown, but I think I'm I'm hopeful that uh they'll have things we can apply elsewhere.
And so I can share my um Sure. my screen. It is interesting, you know, if we are talking about geographic areas, then maybe some of the things on the list apply there or maybe we, you know, I think maybe it's like both, right? We look at geographically and then we use this list to
um maybe provide some ideas or priorities for staff to do. Um um Bruce, you were not here when I said that I need to go about now. Uh you'll have to take over as chair for the rest
of today. Okay. Where am I? Just a minute. Something's gone wrong. I've lost We can see you still. Yes. I I've I've got something on covering my screen which I have to get rid of which popped in and I don't even
Oh. Oh, I know what it is. It's you. You're sharing the screen. That's why I can't get rid of it. Um, Nate, can you make Bruce co-host? I don't think I can do that some reason. Do I need to be co-host in order? No, but if I leave, just as long as it doesn't cancel the meeting when I leave.
No, I'm still I'm still part of the co-hosting, so I can be I'm gonna go everyone. I will I will watch the recording so I can make the minutes and stuff. I'll see you all soon. Thanks. Bye. Okay. Um um so uh because I had to take the dog
out, I'm by myself and the dog appeared in a in a in a manner that indicated that it needed to go outside. So that's where I went. So um I'm apart from recognizing uh uh who should speak, I don't know what I'm doing. We're looking
at the list. Um it's got uh now 15 as far as I can see. Yeah, there actually 17. Um, are we asking ourselves uh how we would prioritize this or comment in a way that
might con conjoin certain items? Um, I guess the question is what do people want to say about this list? Is that is that is that appropriate? Is that am I doing my job properly here? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, I think we can add to it. We could start highlighting things if we thought staff could look at
them. You know, for instance, this is kind of apppropo. Um, you know, the limited site planner review or administrative approval for protected uses um on the mass planners list or someone just asked that this week or last week. Um, you know, and so um, you
know, that's something that staff could look into. Like I mentioned, you know, the planning board had a number of hearings in the last year or two for these uses, right? Whether it's educa, you know, certain educational or nonprofit. Uh and the idea would be to have you know um some limited you know
some criteria that if it met that it could be handled administratively. If it was a bigger project it would go to a full hearing with the planning board. And I think a number of communities now are taking that approach. And so you know is that you know if so for instance like the planning board looked at you know the conversion of a home
down in South Ammeris to a group home. And you know the planning board spent a fair amount of time talking about um the fencing and the parking. um you know we can't say no to these uses we can put reasonable conditions on them and uh so you know to me I would we can look at the previous decisions we've
had and come up with what we think are good conditions and criteria that have that are in the bylaw that the projects have to meet and then you know if they can't meet it then it goes to a hearing um or if it's you know a a big enough project um I think this is also coming about because the attorney general when they've been reviewing accessory
dwelling unit um town meeting articles they said you there's a limited ability through site planer view or or through zoning to to condition or deny protected uses. I think they've read other towns by laws and they've said, you know, even though they weren't changing, they've
had cautionary comments like, oh, it looks like here you are, you know, you have these other standards that aren't changing that you're going to apply to ADUs. You have to be really careful if you do that because it can't be used to deny the ADU. It can be used to maybe put reasonable conditions on it. And so
I think communities are becoming more aware of, you know, how they have to handle protected uses. Well, I've got a thought about how we might ask ourselves how we could organize this list, but uh before we do that, let's take Angus and then uh Brad.
Angus. Well, well, I'd be curious to hear your hear your thoughts, Bruce. I I was going to mention three things that I I think the planning department could could tackle without too heavy a lift and that's number four
m multiple principal dwellings on a property since you mentioned that earlier Nate number seven the one you were just outlining and the number 14 which I think are all pretty pretty light lifts um and not not terribly uh I
mean number four might be controversial but but not not in terms of just not in terms of the the proposal to changing the the wording. Um, and then I I was going to suggest I I'm very interested in number 12. And that's something that
that I could work on between now and the next subcommittee meeting for us to maybe think about looking at how other communities have defined um PRPs if they allow housing in them. Um, but but anyway, I' I'd love to hear your
thoughts, Bruce, before I keep going. Well, Fred, before I recognize you, I'll just say that my suggestion was very much along Angus' lines. It seems to me that we could take these 17 items and put them into two or three categories.
And one of those categories would be u uh items that are essentially uh um staff uh initi staff initiated or executed. In other words, things that are quite technical that uh and maybe ra
rather rather rather precise or rather mechanical. I don't know what the right word is, but I think we know what I'm saying. And then there are and then there's the rest of the list. And I think probably then within the rest of the list there are things that might be
broad expansive issues and things that might be more surgical interventions in the bilon. So I think we could probably divide the list further divide the list into those two and that would that would give uh a list
of 17 will be organized into three separate categories. Um but there might be other c might be another way of categorizing but I think one of the products of this meeting could be that we uh leave this meeting uh having achieved that uh uh having having so
categorized the list um I think that might be that might will make it uh easier to digest and uh and think about Fred. Uh yeah, I um what used to be on this list and for some reason it doesn't
seem to be on it now and I think it should be and that is and it's in the category of something that is kind of a no-brainer and there are examples uh Hilda has given me some examples and other bylaws
that have addressed this and that is to correct the definition of owner occupancy which is a crucial factor in the uh in a number of things in the bylaw and the definition it needs to be
modernized because so much uh of owner occupied locations now uh technically the owner who resides there is technically not the owner under the warding of the bylaw because the
ownership is passed into a Medicaid avoidance trust. So Fred, is that what you're saying somehow different from number 10? Oh, sorry, Bruce. I that's Yeah, that should go into
you know, somehow I read through the list and I completely missed it. That's on me. But yeah, that that's something that the staff I think can can uh fix come up with language that fixes fairly easily.
Okay. Uh well, in that case, um uh Nate, is this uh a document that you can reorganize? Uh I mean, I guess you could do it the way you're doing it with colors for the moment, but I think that we should come up with headings that
describe the three categories. And then I think that could be a product of the meeting that uh um Jesse reports to the next board which we've taken this list and we've discussed it. We've uh and we've
categorized it. Yeah, I think that's Yeah, we can do that. I'm just I'm highlighting as we're speaking just to you know, but yeah, I I feel like I would um have have them grouped uh say for the planning board meeting and have the board discuss it. I would think
uh let's see uh I'm looking for a big picture one here. Um change uh maybe change zoning in village center. Uh yeah. So maybe so now grab another color. Uh and we can discuss whether this is
proper or not but I just want to put the third color out there for the moment. Uh so that we can uh define agree or refine a that's too dark. Yeah, there you go. So um so then the question is what's the
difference between uh the green and the gray? To me the gray was what say the u members of the of the subcommittee would work on maybe more immediately and maybe the I don't know if that how that looks like blue to people that's maybe a more
long-term or um you know things that might take a little bit you know more research to to get forward. I I don't but yes. So is Angus does that work for you that that I think certainly the the yellow uh and whatever native if you could come up with a title that
describes the yellow categories and then I agree or it seems to me Angus are you comfortable with the idea that gray is um uh activities that uh that the the subcommittee will tackle more immediately and that the green are the
the the ones that will be deferred either because they're less immediately interesting or because they're they're bigger. Uh well, just a minute. I'll have to tell Mr. Pipeline that I No, I I can't do
that. Um so yeah, that that sounds good to me. Um you could even put um Nate, you could put my name in parenthesis after 12 that that I'll work on that and bring something to the subcommittee to to get us going next next time. Okay. Okay. Um but yeah, that makes that
makes total sense to me. The the 40 Y overlay looks like it's another green one. And um is that uh that looks like a heavy lift and certainly something that the committee subcommittee would want to be involved
in. Do we agree? Um what about cottage style apartments? Uh cottage style development. Is that part of a 40y or I mean uh we might want to we might want to put some uh uh make
these long sentences or short paragraphs you know style development colon and then a sentence an explicatory sentence. Yeah. to me creating a for a 40y it could be I I the way I think of cottage style development is you know essentially multiple units on a property
whether it's on small lots or condominiumized but you know for instance right now because we don't allow multiple principal dwellings on a property and the way we have our definitions so to me cottage style would be a development method in our bylaw
kind of like a you know OCD or something okay so it's a green and then if Um I mean for instance that's what I was thinking then if we liked the way it's written then you know could you allow it say then by site plan review in these districts or special permit in these
you know I don't I you know the housing production plan mentioned it I haven't you know looked at it closely enough to say okay how how does it work um or what you know but I think I mentioned last time that uh the review of the OSC uh development
method and make sure that it's just look at that that probably could be folded into that cottage style development uh in conjunction with a review of the OSC development method. I want to make that a gray. So that's
something the subcommittee can uh well if uh it could be that it's well let's wait until we know we've got somebody who a commitment on the committee's part to take that on because
it is a big uh well it's a it's a broad it's a broad review. It's it's not a it we're not tinkering. I guess the essence is that these green things are non-tinkering interventions or initiatives, right? And I will say that um I see
other hands up that you know, you know, we've often tried to bring like maybe one sometimes two zoning amendments forward. It could be that depending how these align maybe we would, you know, in the spring we would say okay let's try to bring three or four zoning amendments forward to the new to council. um
knowing that you know it takes time. So if we you know if we had right I and maybe that's something we can talk about uh here and then with the planning board is like okay let's set up a schedule for this uh to give some deadlines and things to move forward because you know we could
you know I think the we could take right I think we could take three of these and really work on them over the next six months and then have something that is we think is ready. Okay. Yeah. So, the gray are the things that we're working on. Um, I think I've got
Angus Fred. I'm assuming that's not a legacy hand. And and then Janet. Um, so Angus. Yeah, I could I could um not for for the next uh subcommittee meeting, but for later ones, I could take number seven,
the tiered approach to apartments, and see um maybe research some other communities and how they define um tiered approaches. I I think that's a pretty big change. Um I think it's it's maybe worthwhile, but um but I could at
least so I wouldn't want to like come up with a proposal, but maybe bring to the subcommittee some different um options to see how other communities are doing it. Okay. Well, all four of the all three of those grays are so far housing related. So that's there's a cons I guess we
might say a healthy consistency there. Fred. Yeah. Uh a question uh Nate on the cottage style. Um, I'm thinking of the uh development that's now underway
uh on uh Monagu Road and uh uh I'm there is going to be it it went to the planning board for review and it's it's very positive and there's
a a bunch of uh uh duplexes and so forth that that provide uh ownership uh dispersed ownership. Uh would that uh be an example of what you're talk if
if that whole parcel were uh populated that way? Would that be an example of the cottage style development that you're thinking of? Um I'm not I don't actually No, not necessarily.
Um, really, uh, it's funny. I'll, um, I was going to pull up a, um, I'll share my screen in a second when I find it. Um, while you're looking, Nate, I'm I'm that
was done, as we know, as a friendly 40b. And uh so that means that it doesn't fit into any of our existing available development methods. Um and uh I'm uh
and I guess it's it's it's like a a clustered subdivision. Yeah. I I guess when I think of cottage when I think of cottage style here's um if if my screen's visible um it is. So, you know, this isn't a west
conquered, but you know, this was one big property at one point with a a big home up front and then they made all these smaller individual, you know, single family home opportunities, you know, so what, you know, and and they did it next door. Um, and so it's
not, you know, it's not to me it's not like a subdivision necessarily. They could be on either a bigger lot, but you know, there's some some design standards and some, you know, you can even have some uh, you know, limitations on the size of the structures. There's some common areas, maybe central parking, but
to me, it's more of of this style. Um, say it's almost like allowing multiple ADUs on a property uh, with a little more maybe some standards and conditions there. But, you know, if someone has a different idea of what of how they want to interpret that, that's um, that's fine. That's kind of what I was
envisioning with the cottage style piece. Yes. Um, I have to go, but thank you for having me as a participant. Thank you, Janice. All right. Bye-bye. Anytime and every time. Thanks,
Angus. Yeah, I was just going to add the uh the draft housing production plan is a nice description of the cottage style development on page 123. Um, and the the key advantage there is that it instead of being Can you bring that up quickly, Nate?
The housing production plan 120 page 123. Uh, give me a second. While Nate's Sorry. I was trying I tried to see if there was a chat to drop in a link, but I I don't think we allowed chat. Um, no, we don't enable it, unfortunately.
Yeah, makes sense. But the advantage um I mean there's numerous advantages, but instead of each each individual property having to have a yard or parking, you can actually move those more communally. Um so it's it's a way of working with
space differently than I guess single family lots would normally allow. Yes. Ross Chapen, the West Coast architect in Seattle, has a very very clever, sensitive, thoughtful and uh intelligent man has uh
made these made made this look very attractive and respectable. Um I I know that in Melbourne in my city it's uh you basically got a lot where there may have been one house. This happens a lot in Melbourne um where the house will be
torn down and the uh instead of having one house with a driveway down one side it it's developed more like this with a central access and it may not be a driveway in the case of Chapen that central courtyard has got flowers and uh and all sorts of attractive landscaping
happening in it but uh that's more the scale that I uh see as the cottage style right development And that's that's really it's kind of redevelopment more than development in a sense. Yeah. I mean Fred, I think the
development on Ball Lane almost could have been an OCD. U but there was that uh the because of certain conditions in the bylaw having uh say each each unit be on their own lot. It got a little tricky. Uh and then they needed some flexibility with some
parking and other things. So, it was a, you know, comprehensive permit, but it it could have almost been designed as, you know, almost like a like a basically like a cluster subdivision, um, is what it is similar to. It's the experience, Nate, of that ball
lane development that caused me to ask my question about why did that have to be a a 40B and not an OCD? Um, can we could we look at that and and basically redesign or reddraft the OCD so that
could happen within that? That would seem to be a useful exercise actually. Oh yeah. As as a as a as a method of of examining the OCD just take the ball lane and say why can't be a why can't it work as an OCD? What would have to change? Do we
want to make those kind of changes to enable something like that that we already know we want and we already know that what we thought was a mechanism that was supposed to get it um wasn't it was too heavy a lift for it that strengthen that particular fraction of
the boil. Thank you Bruce that was the point of my question. I forgotten the ball lane identifier but yeah exactly yeah I just made notes on the list about that. I think that's a it's a good exercise.
Um, uh, it's 12. It's after 12:30. We You all have been at it for an hour and 40 minutes. I apologize for being a little late. Um, is there anything else we wanted to get to? I mean, we certainly
do. Well, first of all, do we think we've u I think if we've got time, can we take another 10 minutes and and go back to that list and just look quickly at it again and and satisfy ourselves that we can ask Nate and satisfy Nate that he
feels duly empowered to reconstitute this list into three categories and that he can give them three names. Yeah. And you know, I can go down the list so far. Um you know, even the first one is identify areas for new development. you know, we started at the planning board and maybe that's
something that um you know, the housing and zoning subcommittee continues and it's not saying um you know, that's probably a gray one, I think. Yeah. Like what happens there yet? It's just, you know, kind of set setting up a kind of a long range plan for Okay, here
are the areas we could we could look. Yeah, let's go quick. So, I I'm going to suggest that that's gray and if anybody objects, please say so. And I'm thinking the next two are are yellow. Uh, why am I stuck there?
Oops. Uh, and and uh the uh SPR the senior housing is probably a green. Yes, senior housing's, you know, it's it's, you know, something I think I see
your hand. You know, we we don't actually have a specific senior housing category and other communities have been doing it. Um, so when you when you're making your list, could you do as you've done with the number six and uh put a colon or a dash and then a following uh sentence
that uh basically describes what we what what the task is. Mhm. Uh Angus. Yeah, I was just gonna say I'm I guess I'm I'm seeing number one as
maybe similar to num the very end. Um those seem like they could be connected. Um I mean especially evaluate for density on main corridors. I think that's exactly what Jana was talking about. Um so I wonder if that could just be
moved up. And to me, that's actually a pretty those three subcategories are pretty big. Um, so I wonder if this is more that's more of a blue. Um,
I'm uh I'm good with that. You okay? I I think if I if I if I could just quickly I think the idea is that the housing and zoning subcommittee and planning board could try to identify the areas and so like we already did we you know at the last planning board meeting we identified 13 areas and maybe the idea would be to say okay here are the
three priorities and then we move on to two which is the more in-depth piece but then we know where we're focusing so um okay you know is it east amoris where we're focusing is it you know pomemoroy is it north of fearing and and you know we can then we can take the deeper dive
into okay what does it actually mean to change zoning in these areas. Okay, gotcha. Okay, that's great. Um number 13 U is this yellow one? Yeah. So I think at the last meeting
Jesse mentioned you know the planning board spends a fair amount of time reviewing things that he you know I don't want to say they're inconsequential but could they be handled with a a set of standard conditions and I I agree uh I think you know we've
tried to standardize our our product review and so you know Bruce you've asked to right in more recent projects only change the font or something right italicize conditions that aren't our standard right we have like kind of a 50 50 set standard conditions. Yeah. Um they're not part of the bylaw
necessarily. And so Jesse was kind of saying, well, is there a way to build it in? So, you know, an applicant comes in and knows that, you know, lighting needs to be downcast and certain things, you know, we typically require. Um so I, you know, to me that's something, um I don't know if
it's yellow, maybe it's gray. It's something I feel like someone could review conditions, the bylaw, and come up with, you know, a proposal in terms of how to standardize it a bit more. I'm not exactly sure how it all works but well I don't think it's at harm in having a fourth category which is just
ones that are left right which is simply we haven't agreed or had sufficient deliberation to know into which category they go. So it's not as though they're going to be a new category. It's just we're not sure which of the existing three. So leave those leave that one
white for the moment. And uh number four 15 and that's probably yellow. Is it I think you said yes. 15. Uh uh it's hard for me to see hands. No.
Okay. Um uh or it could be gray. I mean if someone wanted to pick up the mixeduse building thing and just, you know, research. Okay. How do other communities define mixeduse buildings? Um make it gray for the time being and and we'll say
we can I mean this is provisional. This is because this is what we're going to show our colleagues and and we we'll have a discussion about it and um we'll learn a lot. This the point of this is that it's provoking a an organized engagement from our our
colleagues on the board. And number 18 maybe we leave it white for now. Yes. Okay. Um, so, um, that's I think Nate, you've you've got a you can produce a product
that, uh, Jesse can bring back. Yeah, Angus, could I just could I just ask one clarifying question which is about number 13. The are when when we say SPR conditions, are these the standards and conditions
listed in the table in the zoning bylaws or is there a separate conditions thing in the in the zoning bylaws? Well, in section 11.2, two, we have our criteria we look we go through when we make findings for plan review and uh and
then we have some conditions embedded in table three and other places and I I guess you know to me my the way Jesse was asking is could we I'm not sure exactly where but somewhere in the bylaw kind of say okay well you know here's
here are the standards thing you know some of it would be looking at say the last two years of projects And what are our standard set of conditions we always write in? And then do we can we codify that somehow? I've been I'm not sure where to put it yet. I kind of want to see where it is. Well,
I think that you mean that we typically have uh 40 or 50 conditions particularly in in the construction phase and and and so forth which are extremely peruncter and uh and and essentially boilerplate
and they're the same and and it it is painful to read them all the time. Um, but it could be argued that it's not that painful and and we occasionally triggered to make a change or an addition because it gets us
thinking about things. So, I think it's a something that we need to think about. But uh golly, Fred and I remember the days when the conditions were generated on the fly by the board uh during the hearing and we didn't have the benefit of uh staff producing uh you know draft
conditions which ran to three or four pages for us to read. But essentially I think Jesse's talking about these draft conditions which we review and uh amend as necessary and then vote into the decision. And you're wondering whether
we could have something that was uh um statutory as opposed to what you might call um case law. Angus. Well, I I remember when I met with um you Nate and Rob and Pam about kind of
you know orienting me to the planning board. Y'all, y'all, as I recall, Rob was saying that that he you that the conditions are really helpful for him that that he goes into great detail with them because it's that it is the document that they've agreed to. So, as part of this also that that there's a
lot of conditions that the planning board itself isn't necessarily needing to vote on, but they're being included as part of the conditions that we are kind of, you know, looking over because the it's easier for the building commissioner to
kind of have something in a document. Am I placing that correctly? Yeah. Yeah. And I was just looking at my notes I have here. I think also Jesse was kind of saying that if you know for instance we have um you know a bunch of kind I don't want to say they're performance standards but ideas that certain things have to be met
for the conditions can staff ensure that the project meets those so when it gets to the planning board you don't we don't have to spend time talking about you know say like the landscape um say the um parking island designs you know or the screening for utilities and I I you
know I think the difficulty is that we often mention all these applicants and they think they've done that, they think they've accomplished it, but then it gets to the board and the board is like actually maybe not, right? And so I think it's really hard to say, well, can if we to me this would go in like somewhere in 11.2 if we think this is
something maybe there are like a dozen um conditions that we say have to be met. Um you know, you know, I'm not sure or you know, like if if they're met, it doesn't need a site plan review, but if they if you can't meet it, then it does. I you know, I'm not sure how we would work it in. I agree. Angus is that what
in the past we had in our decision that's why we change I changed the format just recently we used to have um essentially summaries of our meeting minutes and we'd have a you know um you know a 15-page decision and then really we'd have two pages of conditions but legally it's the conditions that are
enforceable and what we want to make sure capture everything and so you know a few attorneys over the years have said well if it's important make it a condition let's not have it be kind of like oh it's part of the you know the meeting summary or the minutes that's uh that's not helpful. Um and so we've
tried to you know learn from that and so you know that's why we have this now right this 4050 you know even like a small project will have 50 conditions. It's not necessarily that the planning board thinks it's we want to exhaust you know everything but it's like also for the inspectors for everyone who's involved in the
project after it's easy to follow. Um I know we also have a situation with the fire department where we get conditions and then typically we handle that uh administratively. We say we don't we don't fold the conditions of the fire
department into our conditions. We simply ask the board and the applicant whether all of these have been satisfied or will be satisfied. Right? So there's a there's a there's a I guess an alternative model there. And I think Jesse might be thinking of um why don't
we handle uh these conditions the way we handle the conditions essentially conditions um given us by the fire department because we we you know we've uh I guess it's me I've on one or two occasions uh
said to the fire department um can you please not just give us a list of conditions can you having reviewed the project uh tell us that these conditions have been satisfied. Um and and I suppose we we've dealt with that a
little bit, but it but it does mean that the fire department has reviewed it and they've given a bunch of conditions and then we've said to ourselves uh we've said to uh the the the applicant um you seem these 15 conditions from the fire chief uh uh do you have a problem with
meeting any of those? It allows us to ask that kind of a question and for the uh for the um uh applicant to be on record of saying uh we will they're all good. We will satisfy them all. That's possibly an argument for including the
the minutes, but they're if they're not in the decision, they're at least on the record. Um so I think that's the uh that's the kind of conversation that that I think Jesse's proposing. Yep. Yeah. Yeah, I know the fire department writes pretty technical memos.
Yeah. So, not you know, it's just like meets you know NFPA whatever code number and um you know I think it's it's right. I agree Bruce the planning board confirms and I think it's what it also does is that it's for the applicant to then work with their development team and say okay here's what we have to to
do and even if they haven't met it yet they know that's what what's coming. Um uh so it's you know I sometimes I've thought maybe we would talk to the fire department and say okay could you even just preface your mo or include a statement or two like okay
you know the project you know right is fine to move forward because you know it right it it's meeting most of these or it seems like it can I you know because I it it's hard to interpret every uh all the things the fire department writes but I'm sure Rob Mara looks at the same
list from the fire chief because he does the stated conditions in the decision and and they're bulleted and all of those bullets are things he cares about, right? Yeah. Yeah. I'm I'm happy to leave it white for the moment um because it's it's it's
in the reorganized menu. It's not going away. And we haven't asked ourselves whether there's anything else uh that should be here, but I think that can probably be uh part of the conversation that the full board uh um enjoys. And of
course, anytime we can add to this list. We don't have to this is not going to be definitive. I don't think we can add to it. We we have organized it and then we prioritize it. And I'm there say priority is going to
work along the lines that Angus just demonstrated. Um I will do number 14 is a very strong argument for putting it at the top of the priority of this. I'm going to have to go in a couple minutes.
I think we're done. Um uh I have I'm not looking at the agenda. Is there anything on the agenda that we haven't got to that we might just declare that we table? No, we had, you know, future, we had other agenda items. They're kind of just like general housing discussions. Um, I
think we're I think we've covered what we need to as time allows. Okay, I'm good with that. Uh, are we are we good? Are we done? Um hearing no objections uh I think I can simply adjourn the meeting as the prefuncter
chair. Thank you all. Thanks everyone. Thank you. Bye.