[Music] Okay. Okay. Mr. Marshall, let's see. You are the co-host of this meeting. I see 636. You have a full board in the house tonight. The attendees are coming in. I think you're good to go. All right. Thank you, Pam.
You're welcome. Welcome to the Emers Planning Board meeting of July 16, 2025. My name is Doug Marshall and as chair of the Ammeris Planning Board, I'm calling this meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. This meeting is being recorded and is
available live stream via Amoris Media. Minutes are being taken. pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021, extended by chapter two of the acts of 2023 and further extended by chapter two of the acts of 2025.
This planning board meeting will be conducted via remote means using the Zoom platform. The Zoom meeting link is available on the meeting agenda posted on the town website's calendar listing for this meeting or go to the planning board web page and click on the most
recent agenda where the Zoom link is listed at the top of the page. No in-person attendance of the public is permitted. However, every effort will be made to ensure the public can access the meeting in real time via technological means. In the event public access is
disrupted for reasons of economic hardship or despite best efforts, we will post an audio or video recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting on the town's website. Board members, I will take a
roll call. When I call your name, unmute yourself, answer affirmatively, and return to mute. Bruce I'm here. Fred Hartwell, I am here. Jesse Major, present.
I Doug Marshall, I'm present. Angus McClody. Present. Do you say your last name, Lloyd, or loud? Loud. Loud. Thank you. Johanna Newman, I'm here. Chair Smith
present. Thank you all. Board members, if technical issues arise and the discussion needs to pause, it will be noted in the minutes. Please use the raise hand function to ask question or make a comment and I will call on you to
speak. After speaking, remember to remmute yourself to the general public. The general public comment item is reserved for public comment regarding items not on tonight's agenda. Please be aware the
board will not respond to comments during general public comment period. Public comment may also be heard at other times during the meeting when deemed appropriate by the planning board chair. Please indicate you wish to make a comment by clicking the raise hand
button when public comment is solicited. If you have joined the Zoom meeting using a telephone, please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing star9 on your phone. When called on, please identify yourself by stating your full name and address and put yourself back
into mute when finished speaking. Residents can express their views for up to three minutes or at the discretion of the planning board chair. If a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds their allotted time, their participation may be disconnected from
the meeting. All right. Uh I'm now seeing the time is 6:38. We'll go right into our first item on the agenda, which is approval of minutes from our last meetings. Uh we have the May 1st meetings from this year
available for approval tonight. Um, Jara and Angus, I think you are allowed to vote on these. Um, but I realized you weren't part of the meeting, so you may wish to abstain. Bruce, I see your hand.
Uh, Doug, I'm just noticing I think that Amist Media is not with us, and they usually are. Is there is is something unusual going on or what's the story? Yeah, they I'm I'm actually in communication with them, Bruce. They had a power outage and
they're working furiously to get up and going, so it may be just a few minutes um more, but yes, I'm aware that they're not here right at this moment. I've let them know that we started. They had told us to go
ahead and get started without them. All right. And Doug, if I may, I just want to say these minutes are actually from 2024. They are not from 2025. Oh gosh. Yeah. So, let let me just
Thank you for pointing that out. You're welcome. Um just in brief as you know Chris Breastup has made the final move out of her office and in doing so a lot of um things got sorted through and sifted and um I have a couple of these
sets of minutes that either one of us had done a portion thereof but the other never got their other portion done. So you will see probably another I think there's two more sets that are like this. So, all right. Yeah.
Well, then I probably ought to ask, how close to up to date are we with this year's meeting minutes? Um, I'm working on a set from June 4th, but there are two March sets that I
haven't even had a chance to start yet. So, somehow I skipped over, not March, May. Somehow I skipped over May and started a June set. So hopefully I'll get them up to speed quickly.
Okay. Well, you know, we had a problem a couple years ago. I do. Um and Nate, you know, we might want to think about whether we can skip a meeting here or there just to give Pam a little more
opportunity to catch up. And I realize with Chris no longer here, uh, Pam, I assume you're doing the almost all the work on the minutes. Yes. Yes, I am.
Okay. Well, um, so we've definitely been in a transition. I mean, I always strive to get one set in the packet. Um, and we definitely have been in a transition. Hopefully, we won't stay here long. Okay. Well, u I appreciate all your work
and Oh, thank you. We'll try to help you uh get caught up whatever we can do. So, but we do need to keep track of that because, you know, we we could get some public uh complaint.
Bruce, your hand is up again. I just uh move acceptance of the meeting of the minutes. I I read them and I now I know why it was hard for me to remember what was going on, but I do remember the meeting and I and they they frankly didn't seem to be super
consequential. Um, so I mean the the the meetings were I I think we we we Anyway, they were pretty straightforward. So I move acceptance as presented. Okay. Thank you. Johanna,
second the motion. All right. Uh, anybody want to talk about these minutes anymore? All right, we'll go right into our vote. Um, starting with you, Bruce. I'm an I.
Thank you, Fred. I'm an I. All right. Um, Angus, I abstain. All right. and Jesse. I will also abstain as I was not there. All right. I All right. Johanna
I All right. And uh Jara All right. And I'm an I as well. That's four in favor and three abstensions. I believe that's four is adequate for us to approve the minutes. So
the minutes are approved and we'll move on. All right, time is 6:43. We will go now to public comment. So, if you are a member of the public and you want to make a comment about some topic that
does not appear later on this agenda. Uh, now is the time to raise your hand. This is also the time I usually read the names of the public members that I can see on the Zoom participants list so
that everybody knows who's in the room. Uh so we have 10 attendees starting with Brad Hutchinson head startup Hilda Greenbomb, Jonathan Salivan, Ken Rosenthal,
Maria Copeki, Michael Leinsky, uh the first name Mitch, Rob Mora, and Tom Reed. So that is the members of the public. Uh I don't yet see any hands of members who want to make a comment at this point. So
I'll make one last plea and otherwise we will move on. Okay, we will move on. Time now is 6:44 at least on my computer. Uh we'll start we'll start with item three of the agenda which is a public hearing
advertised for 6:35. So we are past that time. SPR 2025-10 with the town of Ammerst. I'm sorry. Uh Pam, your hand is up. Yeah. I just want to mention to you that Ammerst Media is not quite with us yet.
I've just reached out to let them know that we're ready to start a public hearing. I don't know if you want to take something out of order before moving on to a public. So, uh, so no one is is recording this at the moment. Is that right?
Well, it's not being live streamed. We are record Wh. Let's see what was They are live. Okay. So, Ammerst Media just showed up on the screen. Yep. They've just join. They were just able to join. I just wanted to make sure we didn't go through with a with a public hearing without them. Okay.
All right. So, you think we're good to go? I do. All right. So, resuming uh SPR 2025-10, town of Ammerst is the applicant. Location is 1046 Southeast Street at the Mson Memorial Library. This is continued
from June 4th and June 18th of this year. request site plan review approval to construct an accessible walkway and ramp with railings and modifications to the southern entrance porch and other site work including drainage
improvements and landscaping under section 3.334 of the zoning bylaw located in the RN and ARP overlay zoning districts uh map 20D and parcel 49. All right, Nate. Uh, I think I'm going
to let you be the kickoff here. Sure. Thanks. Hi everyone. Nate Mallaloy, a planner with the town. I'll walk through this. If there's any questions, feel free to ask. So, the um, you know, we continue the hearing uh, in part to allow um, town staff to look at
it and for the commission for persons with disabilities. It was formerly known as the disability access advisory committee. So, um, Rob Moore, the building commissioner, presented plans to them. they had uh supported it in the past. We had we we had applied for a grant from the state for this project
and so we applied two years in a row. Um and so they had seen this but they weren't I guess I think the question was you know they hadn't seen it you know the the final plan and so we just wanted to make sure they reviewed it. Uh they supported it. They didn't have any questions or comments or recommend any
changes. Um I will say that the town didn't move forward with the grant application. Uh it was the project was supposed to be completed by June 30th and we we didn't have time so we actually reapplied again. Uh we met with the state officials and they I I don't
know I want to say they I don't want to say they recommended that but that's they said what we should do. So uh you know we're going through the site plan review. The work still needs to be done. The town has funding in the capital plan to do maybe some of it maybe not all of it but you know at least we'd have the site plan and permitting done and it
would allow us to apply for other funding. uh in the future. I will share my screen just to show the the the plan if this is visible for everyone.
There was uh there are questions. Here's the existing building in in dark gray. There's a courtyard here existing walkways. And the idea was to come off the a south entrance and create a landing with a a a sloped
walkway, a ramp, and then an acade walkway. And the question was, could it could the walkway be curved around some existing plantings and allow for perhaps say a more graceful uh turn here and then connect in front? And so that's what we've done. Um, you know, I I
there wasn't, you know, we we try to keep it. There's existing trees in the front here and trees here. So, we really didn't want to swing it out too much or bring the whole thing out. So, we didn't change much in terms of uh the, you know, coming off the building. It's really, you know, from this point on,
there's some, you know, some curb to the walkway and that's really all that happened since the hearing was continued. So that's it, Nate. That's it. Yeah. Yeah. We we, you know, staff went on the site again, made sure we wouldn't be raising this too much in
terms of elongating the the ramp or, you know, we worked really hard just because there is um a tree a few trees down here and there is a a little bit of grade. It doesn't look like it, but there's enough that if you know this were to come out a little bit more and this had a wider turn, you know, there's, you know, it
ends up being, you know, inches. It could be six inches, eight inches, whatever it is, but there's enough grade that, you know, becomes a bigger project in terms of getting the slopes right and and earth and, you know, top soil brought in. So, we we minimize that by just having this this curve right here. And it allows for a planting bed. So,
the roodendron here in the corner can remain. And it also allows for some other other things to be planted. All right. Um, Johanna, has this plan now been approved or reviewed and signed off on by the
disabil disability advisory committee or is it still under review by then? Oh, no. They they reviewed it uh earlier this month and they, you know, they didn't have any comments on it. They thought it looked fine, so they got it.
All right. Uh Bruce, um given that I was part of the uh the reculserant bunch that um wanted this plan to be developed this way rather than the way it was previously with the
right angle turn that obliterated the roaded end. Um this seems to be fine with me. Uh, I think it's exactly what I was um suggesting that the town um might
choose to do. Uh, as far as I can tell. Um, just a minute. My door has been knocked on. Mary Isabelle. Um, uh, there seems to be back back with you all again. Sorry about that. there seems
to be no change other than the uh arcing of the uh uh walkway around the tree. So, and and that seemed to be the only thing that was an issue. So, I guess um except for the fact that we've got Jera
and Angus joining us um whom I assume have seen the recordings on this but possibly I don't know. Um but if if we I don't feel a need to discuss this any further because the singular adjustment
has been made. Uh everything else was fine. I would move to approve with the uh blah blah blah. Other comments, Bruce, before we're ready for a motion. Yeah. Okay. Well, I just wanted your guidance on that because as far as I'm concerned, it's good. I'm good to go.
Okay. Uh Fred, uh yeah, I want to commend town staff on this. This is also what uh I I wanted to see. And uh I would also point out that
we did get a public comment uh from a person with mobility issues uh and um who uh was critical of the the direct right angle in terms of uh making
that work with a wheelchair and this plainly does work in that way. So I think this uh checks all the boxes. All right. Thank you, Fred. Nate, I'm going to ask you to remind me. I asked I
asked last time uh about why this needed to have a ramp at 8.3% and why it couldn't be a sloped walkway that's, you know, 4 and a half%. Um, you know, I just find that the when
you don't have to have a ramp with guard rails and you can use the grade, it's just much more graceful. Right. Yeah. When when we met with the um designer review board and others commented that um whether or not there
was a a ramp or a sloped walkway, they would still want railings or something to offer assistance. And so, you know, it would seem odd to double the length of this instead have double the railings or guard rails. Um, so there was a desire for railings even
if it's not a required. Yes. Yeah. Just knowing that, you know, even if it's not required, you know, going down a sloped walkway, uh, you know, there was some comments saying that, you know, it'd be nice to still have that, right? some, you know, folks still need assistance and so, uh, you
know, trying to have as short of a walkway reduces material costs and, you know, gets you to grade faster. So, that was the decision to be made. Okay. Thank you. All right. Um,
members of the public, is there anyone who would like to comment on this proposal? Okay, I do not see any hands raised from the public. Board members, are there any further any further discussion on this proposal or
are we ready to vote? Nate, I do have draft findings and conditions I can share if we want to walk through those. Actually, that'd be good. Yeah, Johanna, I see you have your hand raised. I think I jumped. Yeah.
I don't know if we want to talk ask about this now. I have a I guess a process question. So given that like the town will only pursue this if we resecure grant funding for it. Is that correct? And if if that is correct,
then I presume if we were to approve this project now, then it would just kind of like be in the can and once the grant is secured, staff could just pull the trigger on the project and wouldn't need additional or you know what's the statute of limitations of our approval
etc. Right. So yeah, I mean as you know, one of the conditions, right, it says that this expires after two years when it's filed. And that's so we we'd have two years from the date of approval for this plan to be in place and acted on. And so, right, it really it helps the town
be ready for when funding becomes available, whether that's, you know, grant funding or capital funding. It allow it it puts us in a good position. Uh, and now we actually have, you know, we did bid it. Actually, we put it out there. bids were a little high. So, we adjusted our grant application. With
these plans, we have better estimates in terms of material costs and what it actually looks like. So, I think we're in a much better place to move forward with this, you know, when funding is available. Okay. [Music] All right. We have a uh findings and
conditions. Nate, do you want to lead us through that or do you want one of us to read it? No, I can do that if there's no other comments. Uh, it's a simple finding uh that the board finds the project complies with the relevant criteria of section 11.24 of the zoning bylaw. We
often do this with, you know, some smaller projects. There are waiverss in the application. Uh, so, you know, we sometimes we require various plans as part of a site plan review. So we asked for these things to be waved. A landscape plan, a lighting plan, soil
erosion sign plan, traffic impact statement, uh a survey, construction logistics, hazardous and uh uh pollution and hazardous materials plan and a site management plan. And that's, you know, would this be signed as an accessible
path, an accessible entrance to the building? It would. So there would be signs saying that it's an accessible walkway. Uh and then you know as part of the project just to reiterate there will be
you know door openers too from you know a few doors in the library. One would be those the double set of doors on the south entrance. And so there'd be a push button activator uh and the doors would work. They are double doors and so they're not wide enough individually to serve as an accessible entrance. they're
not, you know, they're not wide enough. So, both doors would open. There's a few conditions. We could always modify these. So, condition one, the project shall be built substantially in accordance with the plans, site plan, and elevation submitted to the planning board with a date of June 5th and
approved on July 16th. Substantial changes to the project or substantial changes to any approved site plan shall be submitted to the planning board for its review and approval prior to the the work taking place. The purpose of the submitt shall be for the planning board to determine or to
approve the change or determine if the changes are dimminimous or significant enough to require modification of the site plan review approval. Condition three, the site plan approval shall expire within two years of the date of uh filing with the town clerk
unless it has been recorded um unless it has been recorded at the registry of deeds and substantial construction or use has commenced within the two-year period. So if you start acting on the permit more than just, you know, putting some dirt there, the permit is active. Um all work associated with the project
shall be completed within 24 months from the date of issuance of the building permit. If more time is needed, the applicant shall come before the planning board at a public meeting to review a construction completion schedule and request approval of a time extension. And so those are the conditions.
All right. Uh I'm going to follow up with one question which I hadn't really noticed on the plan, but you mentioned the the doors that are being accessed. You're saying the two both leaves of that are less than 36 inches wide,
right? And um so there's no plan to replace those with unequal leaves with one being 36. No, they're you know they're older doors. There's they're historic doors. And so uh and then also just the to
replace one or both, you know, to replace any one of them to make them wider is really replacing both. And so yeah, yeah, the idea is to keep them there and Rob's fine with that. Uh he's the one who uh developed the plan. So okay, is
all right. That's that's not my usual experience. Usually when I have an accessible entrance that's got leaves that are too narrow, we end up uh replacing them with unequal leaves and one being 36 in wide. I assume the other the main door to the building is
wide enough and meets ADA. So yeah. So what I was going to say is all the other doors in the library, most of them that were putting uh activators on are all double doors. So you know it the decision was made to have all the um push button activators on a few sets of
doors rather than replace all of the doors just to be consistent. So Okay. All right. All right. Does anybody Bruce um I think I'd move uh that we uh grant
that they requested uh site plan approval with the uh binding as stated with the nine waiverss as stated and with the four conditions as stated and close the hearing and close the public hearing. Thank you.
All right. Thank you, Jesse. I will second that. All right. Uh board members, any other discussion? All right. We will go ahead
through the vote to approve the site plan review for this project with the site this findings and conditions. Bruce, I'm an I. Fred I. Angus abstain.
Jesse I uh Johanna I Jara Dane and I'm an I as well. So we uh four in favor, three abstensions. So the motion
passes. Five in favor. I'm sorry, Pam. Five in favor. Four. Four in favor, three abstensions. Who was the third abstension? Third abstension. Yeah. I thought it was Jara, was it not?
Jar and Angus, but no, no one was. No, no. Number three. Oh, you're right. Okay. I can't read tonight. It's okay. Okay. Five. All right. All right. Thank you.
All right, the time now is 7:02. We'll go to the next public hearing which was advertised for 640. So, we have passed that time. Site plan review 2025-08
and special permit application 2025 01. Archipelago Investments LLC, Gulway, and Lannon Lane continued from May 8th, June 4th, and June 18th of 2025. Request site plan review approval under
section 3.325 of the zoning bylaw to construct a new mixeduse development with three buildings including 140 residential units, approximately 12,000 square feet of commercial space, 180 parking spaces and associated site
improvements, and request a special permit under footnote A of table three, article six of the zoning bylaw to modify the front setback beyond the maximum required, building height to exceed the maximum allowed, and the
number of floors to exceed the maximum allowed. Located in the BVC zoning district, map 25B, parcels 52 and 58. All right. Um, let's see. Nate, uh, I see your hand.
Who will be representing the applicant? Sure. Right. The um the applicant has requested a continuance without testimony. Uh that was just the other day. Um they they're still working through the conservation commission. So there is nothing new to to present to the board.
Uh I I'll recommend that the board if we would, you know, grant a continuence, it's to August 20th. Uh we have, you know, other business to take care of. uh and this gives them time to perhaps get things ready for the board. So,
all right. So, uh board members, uh when we have a continuence request of this type, we typically don't take any testimony or discuss the project much. Um so, I'd like to go right into a motion to
continue to August 20th. Uh, is there a time we should I'd say 6 6:35. 6:35. Okay. So, motion to continue to a August 20th at 6:35 p.m. Jesse,
I'll second that if that was the motion. If I if I made the motion. Okay. Yes. Was that the motion or should I make the motion? That That's fine. Okay. Pam, you can record that I made the motion and Jesse second it. Thank you. All right. We'll go right into the vote
for that. Starting with you, Bruce. I Fred I uh Angus I abstain Jesse I Roana
I uh Jara I abain abstain and I'm an I as well. So at this time I I know that there are five approved and two abstensions. So all right so we will
move right on. Johanna, I have a question. If a project is kind of you know yeah being continued from hearing to hearing and we have new board members come on in the process of that.
What are the criteria for them being able to potentially ultimately vote on the project and engage in the interim votes? All right, Nate, you want to review that? Right. Because the project uh application was the hearing was open
before they joined the board before their term started. Uh you know, members aren't able to vote. So, uh, even if you know, even if it had been continued without testimony because it was open before their a member's term started, they're not eligible to vote. So, we've
confirmed that with our legal counsel. All right. So, I probably shouldn't have asked for their vote at all. No, I think that's fine. The abstension is fine. The abstension is fine. Okay. But when we get to the final final vote, we will there will just be five of us
that can vote, right? Okay, Bruce. Um, they can't vote, but I assume they can ask questions. That's my understanding as well. Okay, thank you. And Johanna,
and then how does that relate to quorum and how many people we need to vote to approve the special permit? Yeah. So you know there's only five members that are able to vote and so you know for any so you know there still can
be a quorum of members but then you know what's the quantum of vote. So uh you know there's four votes are needed for a site plan review and five votes are needed for a special permit. So to clarify the five voting members on the board on the project would
essentially have to have unanimity on the site plan review or on the on the special permit. Right. Okay. Thank you, Grace. Um, since we've continued this to the 20th of August, and since August is a
holiday period, and since we're in a tight squeeze, as we've just discussed, we would need at least four of us here to be able to make a decision, perhaps we should make sure that I can confirm that I'll be here in on the 20th of August. Pam had uh you know asked members for
their attendance and so the 20th seemed like it worked for everyone. Okay. Yeah. And and Bruce, there's actually no guarantee that Archipelago will be ready for us to actually vote on this on the 20th. They
just, you know, they may ask for another continuation or it may come back. They may be ready for us to vote, but we may not be ready to vote. So, okay. We'll see where it goes. Yeah. Okay.
Time now 7:08. The third public hearing advertised for 6:45. So, that time has elapsed. Site plan review 2025-11. Udrive AMD LLC
5 University Drive request site plan review approval to modify previous site plan review approval SPR 2024-11 and applicable applicable conditions for a mixeduse building to allow a sixth floor and an increase in the building
height to 70 ft to allow for an increase of 30 dwelling units under section 17 University Drive overlay district of the zoning bylaw map 13B parcels 18 27 28
and 54 in the BL RD and UDOD zoning district. All right. So this is a new public hearing on a project that most of us saw multiple times last year. Uh Tom Rei is
here representing the applicant. Welcome Tom. Hi Mr. Chair, good to see you. Good to see everyone. Welcome to the new members. So, do you have a presentation for us? Of course I do. Uh, so for the record, Tom Rey, attorney with Bacon Wilson out
of Ammerst here on behalf of you drive AMD uh in its request for a modification of the site plan approval that was approved I want to say in March of this year. Uh with me, Jonathan Salvon, architect from Cune Riddle, and Barry
Roberts, the the developer. Um Tom, if I could interrupt you a moment, Pam. Yes, I'm seeing John Armstrong on the panel. And I don't think he's part of Tom's.
I don't think he is either. There we go. Thank you. All right. that and and I I do see Barry. Welcome, Barry. And Jonathan. Okay. Thank you, Tom. You may proceed. Great. Uh thanks a lot. And so I mean,
thanks to the board uh and its support for and and proposal of the University Drive Overlay District. Um as you may recall, this was a fivestory building. I think uh everyone uh planning board, zoning board of appeals was was
supportive of it. I I I think without stepping out of line, um the the planning board used this as a little bit of an example of what uh maybe the overlay district should allow. And so originally we didn't think we
could do six stories. Uh but Barry went back and and had a conversation with um his steel provider um because of the type of build that this will be. And it turned out that frankly as a result of
the sixstory with the additional density, he can actually build a six-story building. And so gladly we're back in front of you uh for that really the sixth story and the additional height uh which we're availing ourselves of the the overlay district to do. Um
I'll I'll show you an image on the screen in a moment uh of the building if you've probably already looked at it. Uh all we've really done or all Jonathan really has done is insert uh a floor into kind of the middle of the building, right? So the first floor is the same,
the top floor is the same, and then you had those middle floors, he just inserted an additional floor into that space. Um everything else, site plan, uh building footprint, curb cut locations, number of parking spaces, lighting,
landscaping, storm water, etc. all the same as what you approved. And so really what we're asking for is the additional sixth story to be able to go up to 70 ft. Um this is a passive uh house
project and so I think Jonathan and Barry are getting into it a little bit more and that's why we're asking for the full 70 ft to be able to fit kind of I'll call it all the nuances of that passive house design. Um and and with
that we would get 102 units up from 78. It'd be 290 beds up from 225. That also increases the number of affordable units up to 12 from from 9. Um and you know we think it's a really
good opportunity for this additional story, additional housing uh for a really good project. So, like I said, you you've probably seen it already, but I will show it just for the for the public.
So, here you have it. This is from the uh easterly side, kind of the northeasterly side of the building. Same as you saw before, you know, step back is the same as it was before, about 4 feet. I think what what Jonathan has done really well is kind of continued
the the uh maybe fenestrations of the building to to make it seem less massive. We've got the canopies down here over the entrances to the first story. We've got the the brick different facads. We still
have uh in this area that um open space, you know, the seat wall. uh the the town actually Barry was able to talk with the director uh the superintendent of the director of public works or the department of public works the the town
shifted northerly the roadway so that it wouldn't impact this wall or anything with this site. So we're we're very thankful for that. It still has the multi- the 10 foot wide multi-purpose path. It has the street trees proposed
landscaping etc. We've got screening uh still along the rooftop mechanicals. As an aside, we're hopeful that we're not going to do rooftop mechanicals. We're going to try to get them within the units. Uh but it's something that we're still investigating.
Um and then we've still got those outdoor areas um for some of the units. I'll scroll down. Same thing. This is from the roundabout. So, northeast of the site. Again, you get the six
stories. This one is from the south. Uh looking southwest. Here we've got one uh on Amity Street. This is the screening same as before for the uh electric bank. The electric meter bank is tucked behind this landscaping.
And then there's a fence there as well. And then this is internal to the site. What it would look like if you were on the southwest side looking northeast kind of northnortheast. Again, some some ground shots of what that uh front area would look like.
Again, canopy, street trees, seating area. This is that inner elbow, if you will. Uh seating area, some bike storage. there's additional bike storage internal to the space and I I think we conceive
it as bike and probably electric scooter storage because that's what you're seeing uh all over the place. Um and as a practical matter I think we you know we can fit a 40 to 60 uh bikes in that
space but as a practical matter there are two elevators in this building. I'd suspect that folks are going to be bringing their bicycles or scooters up to their room with them because the rooms are of a size where you could fit kind of quite easily that uh bike or
scooter. So, we've got that another rendering from the interior of the space just kind of fit and finish and and view. Then I'll just show you the the first floor floor plan. Um, we've got space
here that we're talking to a certain tenant. Space here we're talking to a tenant. And here we're talking to a couple of different tenants for this space. This may end up getting divided or it may stay. It's about 3,000 square ft. This is uh a little over 7,000 ft²
and this is 2,000 ft. We also have the EV uh installations marked and then we have the pre-wiring spaces marked. There was a request that Nate astutely pointed out and so Jonathan updated it um to include the the pre-spaces.
Uh these are all the compact spaces over here. There's 24 of them. You really want to do it in the long run just because you you actually that's where you're going to gain it because the compact are a little shorter, 16 ft instead of 18 ft. Um and a little
narrower by a foot. So it's 8 by 16 instead of 9 by 18. These are the same. We haven't made any changes and again we haven't made any exterior changes to the site. It really is, you know, and I use the word sandwiching, you know, you just put that extra uh floor into the
building. The rest of the floors um layout stays the same. A mixtures of studios, ones, twos, threes, and fours. Um and decently sized rooms, same as as
before. I'll go to the elevation. This is just rooftop mechanicals. If we do have to put them on the roof, we would be screening them. And this is what that aerial would look like. And then you can see right here, it would be a solid metal uh panel similar to what the
siding is. Um as you can see it from this angle and over here. So that's that's really the uh proposal. Um, we're requesting a change to, I think it's six conditions as outlined in
my cover letter. Uh, and they're really just a function of updating the the plans to include the approval date hopefully this evening. Um, up to a maximum of 102 units up to six stories and 70 ft. Uh, 12 affordable units
instead of nine. and then the breakdown of the affordable units as provided uh there including um two of them at 60% AMI and the balance at 80% AMI. I think I've covered it uh as far as
we're concerned, but obviously we're happy to answer any questions you have. All right. Um Tom, if I could ask you again, um I noticed in the development application report it stated that the
five-story project had 78 units. Yes. And it said that we're now adding 30, which gives me 108, not 102. Let me double check the math. I'm that that could have been my my error as well.
Okay. Yeah. Yeah. I think it is. What is the right number? I think it's 78 to 102. So, I think it's I think it's the 24 units. Okay. So, 102 units and you said 290 beds, correct?
Okay, great. Um, I guess uh typically on on a on a project like this or a process like this, we would have a site a site uh visit report. Um, we did schedule a site
visit yesterday afternoon. Um, three of us showed up. Um, me, Jara, and Angus. Um, we didn't actually walk around the site. We talked talked about it with Nate and
um Jara and Angus. Is there anything you'd like to say about your experience of being on the site yesterday? Um we had a little discussion about where the front edge of the building would be in relationship to University Drive, but other than that, I wouldn't
add anything else. Looks like no. Okay. So, we've we've checked the box for our site visit report. Um, board members, do we have questions for the applicant? Jesse,
thanks for the update. Um, I think this came up in the original discussion. Uh, now that there's even more occupants, I'm wondering about um bike racks, bike storage. I see there is a bike room, but still outside, at least on the drawings,
it's pretty minimal outside. I don't know. I'd love to wouldn't change my vote, but I'd love to see more encouragement and favorable bike storage outside as well. We can certainly do that. No problem.
All right. Um, Angus, I know you had a question about a couple of the drawings yesterday that I I'm I'm not going to take your take that comment from you. Sure. Yeah. I just I noticed that although the floor plans generally seem
the same except for the sixth floor, um, the actual size of the units varies from floor to floor. And I was wondering if someone can talk about why or what I'm seeing here in terms of the square footage differences.
This is the labeled square footage of the units. Um Jonathan or Yeah, I'll turn it over to Jonathan. I'm I'll give you a little heads up, but I'm going to turn it over to you to um answer.
You know, I I'm not sure the you know, the design of the units themselves is evolving a little bit as we are working our way through the the passive house um requirements and how we're going to handle the mechanical systems. It may be
that there are some subtle differences in the layout of some mechanical closets um from floor to floor. Um I would expect them to be pretty tight. Um but these these are really kind of snapshots
in time. Um and if we had begun a process on a floor below and we're kind of telegraphing those uh changes up through the building, it is possible that there is some there is some variance between them. There is also, I don't know if it's
enough to account for this, I might be. There's also a fundamental difference in the thickness of the wall as we go up. This building is is um primarily framed uh from floors 2 through six. Um and that sits on a
podium. Um and so the uh first two floors of wood construction are actually 2 by8 uh wood studs was the upper two floors um excuse me the first three floors are 2 by8s and then the upper two floors are
2 by sixes and so that'll make a subtle difference in the in the square footage um as well. All right. Um, Angus, is that a satisfactory answer? Yeah, it's fine. It it doesn't exactly taper. Um, and I mean the sizing, they
don't get smaller as they go up. So, or or bigger. There's not not really rhyme or reason. But, um, I'm hope hopefully someone else will ask about the um uh heating and cooling systems and how y'all are thinking of doing that within the units.
Well, why don't Jonathan I can ask that question. Take that right now. So, you know, till till this project, the typical approach on a um multif family uh housing project has typically been kind
of a split system um where you'll have condensers on the roof. That's what we're usually screening up there. There also be ERVs on the roof. Um and then uh kind of a a separate set piece in this in the units themselves, usually two or three of them actually um
that actually deliver the heat or the the cooled air. Um there has been a change in refrigerants and we're also bumping up against the the honestly the limits of what you can do with split systems when it comes to the distance between the condenser
that's outside and the the portion of the unit that's inside. And so we're exploring what other options there are that that we can work through in the through the passive house process that would allow
us to eliminate um the long runs uh especially with this new refrigerant which is a considered more of a fire hazard and things to be inated chases and that sort of thing. So um either way this will be an all electric
building. There won't be any fossil fuels used for either heating, cooling, reheating site. Thank you. All right. Um
Um Tom, I guess I I'm wondering since the site plan hasn't changed, but your occup occupant numbers have changed. um you know uh do you still have enough parking spaces?
I hope so. Um it's you know this is one of those and I and I think I responded to Nate this way is that uh I think Barry is is the housing demand is paramount to the housing
demand with parking. And so in an ideal world, we have one parking space per one bedroom, right? But that's just not possible for the site in order to get to make the project viable. And I think
it's at Barry's risk, but he based on his other projects believes that folks are going to look for housing even if there is not parking there. given this location proximate to a couple PVTA bus stops, Swift Way, you know, you walk down the street, you get CVS, you've got
Big Y, you've got urgent care across the street at Koolie Dick, you've got, you know, Ammeris Public House, etc. And so, you know, I think we've almost looked at I think uh Johanna asked, could you reduce the parking in one of the earlier
ones and this is almost we're getting to that, right? we've we've reduced the parking by increasing the building. And so I I think yeah, we're comfortable with it managed appropriately given the complimentary nature of the uses with the commercial on the first floor being selected. Like we're not putting a
restaurant in there because of the hours and the parking demand of a restaurant. It's going to be things like an insurance company, uh maybe a graband go spot, maybe a bank, uses like that. Um plus daytime uses.
Precisely. daytime uses. Plus, as Jesse said, you know, we do have internal bike storage. We'll add some more out outdoor storage. And then it's really just management. You know, parking management is assigning people spaces. It's you have a numbered space. You going into
it. Tenants know what parking allowances there are. You know, how many they will have for their unit. Um, and we will just assign a space because that's the way to manage it. So yeah, I I I think we have enough parking managed appropriately.
Okay. Uh I see three hands raised. We'll start with you Jesse. Thanks. Um I had felt compelled to share that know many of us many of us during the overlay discussion hope this exactly what would happen reduction in parking needs especially in these locations. But
based on something else you just said, Tom, I now feel compelled to hope you won't take that approach of limiting the commercial spaces and that they will be things that create a vibrant neighborhood type activity. So I
yeah, I again no control over that. I would really hope you would consider restaurants and things that not just those residents would visit, but that would be a draw for the rest of the town as well. Yeah. in something like a cafe. You know, when I say restaurant, I think of something that's open from 4 to 9, 4 to
10, 4 to 11. Sure. As opposed to a cafe, which might be a 7 to 11. That certainly I mean, we're we're actively in discussions with folks. And again, I'm thinking of some of the other buildings in town where there's really there's the commercial space is filled with things that don't give any
value for the town. So, I hope that's not where we end up. All right. Thanks, Jesse. And and I'll just piggy back on before we get to Jara. Um if you're that you have some bike sto bike parking, bike storage,
bike loops at the front of the building for people who are visiting the building on their bike as opposed to people who live in the building. Jara, you're next. Thank you. Um I'm curious if the
mechanicals are no longer needed, if they end up not being needed on the roof, has any consideration been given to solar panels or anything like that? Yeah. So, we've had conversations uh with uh local solar providers.
Given what's happening at the federal level, it's getting a little bit dicey. Um, we've talked about, you know, so this is a pro, just to really kind of unpack it a little bit, this is a project where each unit's going to be separately metered. So there's there's going to be a master
meter for the common areas, the light, the exterior lights, the hallway lights, etc. But each of the units is going to have their own. So to have the solar panels on the roof to provide electricity for on-site probably doesn't make the most sense. So we've talked about putting it back in the grid. We've
looked at what an interconnection would look like in that area, etc. Um, so yeah, we're thinking about it. I I think that the roof is designed in order to accept solar, right? The way that that
we're building it now is that it's being designed so that if in kind of like let us get our feet under us a little bit and then let's see what happens on the federal level, maybe in three or so years it's it's more favorably looked at and then we can put it on the building. So, yeah, we're thinking about it.
Great. Okay, that's awesome. Um, I only I ask in part because in my experience, uh, you know, utility costs are climbing and climbing and climbing for folks and if there's any way to add to, as you said, plug back into the building and
somehow reduce the cost to um, the renters, then that would be fantastic. But, uh, I'm glad to hear that that you guys have had a lot of conversations and thought about this already. All right. Thank you, Jara. Bruce, um,
as far as the parking is concerned, I share Jesse's views and, uh, and I'm basically pleased that uh, Barriers decided to take the risk uh, and back his judgment here because I think we're going to learn something from it. I
mean, I'm actually um, this is good. This is I think uh I'm very curious and I hope you're right, Barry and I know you've got various levers and so forth you can pull and you've been doing this for a while. So uh I think we're going to learn
something and and I hope what we learn is all good. Um, so with that, there was a uh I got a rather arcane question, but it's there was a letter in the packet from the Stantech from uh the uh traffic
engineer and it it talked about unit numbers and it talked about them going down and it was I I I couldn't understand what relevance it had to the project and uh so I want to know
why that letter was in there and what it means. It was just a two line a two par a short two short paragraphs, but it it seemed to me. Do you want me to pull it up? This was the one from Stantech. Yeah. January 30th of this year.
If you could see it, read it there, Doug. The the the the unit numbers are heading in the wrong direction. Yeah. And if I go ahead, if I may, I think I think Nate included it. um as a as a because it had been provided
initially and then updated with the modification. Our position is if the parking, you know, it's not necessarily occupant, it is parking that's going to drive traffic here and if the parking worked in that latest onelet uh uh sorry
shorter letter iteration uh the traffic worked for that parking, the traffic will still work with this parking because the parking has not changed. I agree. But the letter didn't say that. Uh the letter was not updated. So so long as So the letter essentially
irrelevant and it's not because I didn't understand something. Is that is that correct? That's fair. Good. Okay, we're good. All right. Thank you, Bruce. Angus, I just had a quick followup to what Jesse was talking about about parking.
Um the uh I Nate mentioned that uh there is some discussion of adding a crosswalk to University Drive um a little bit farther down from Amity Street. Um and if it's possible to to work with the town to make that happen. Um, I think
you that would be then two access points, the roundabout and a crosswalk for people to cross from the parking lot on the other side of University Drive, which I don't think has any it has a few requirements for parking close to the shopping center there, but the rest of the parking looks like it's available.
That might change over time. Um, especially if residents try to park in that lot. But at least for commercial development, um, especially at night, that parking lot would be pretty empty. Um, which would make it even easier to have a restaurant there. that would be accessible to people across the town.
We're happy to help. I mean, we as as Nate knows, we wrote a letter of support and I think we're probably um pretty helpful in getting the roundabout funding because of this project uh coming in. I mean, Nate did a terrific
job. We were happy just to supplement. If there's anything we can do to help get the crosswalk, we're more than happy to do that. All right. Thank you, Angus. Uh, Bruce, um, I heard Tom say that he was hopeful that we could, uh, approve this tonight.
Um and uh I have to say that it seems to me um that with nothing changing the the the the essential question before the board is are any of the provisions or
conditions and things that we approved at the last plan um do does the additional number of units cross any thresholds that we might uh choose to modify? by a condition or so forth. And I've been
and so with that question in mind was how I read all of this material uh prior to the meeting. And I I have to say I couldn't see anything that uh seemed to me to trigger the uh a change in what we
what you've provided. For example, you've you've got a management plan. there's a there's a there's a uh an on-site manager. Um I there's certain number of hours that the person's there. I mean all of that and so I went through
I thought well no that's probably good and the and so forth. So I looked at the development application report Nate and I uh and the various issues to consider and I considered as best I could those issues from what I know and I couldn't see anything that from my point of view
was triggering uh a sense that the additional unit count was going to tip us over. Um so I guess my question of the board is there was two questions I have. point is do others do the rest of us share
that view? And if we do um and we were to try and approve this tonight, typically we have uh um drafted uh proposed findings and well conditions and so forth. And we'd have to if we were to
approve that tonight, we'd have to generate any additional questions on the fly, which 25 years ago when Fred and I were asked on the board, we routinely everybody board meeting for years, we would generate the conditions as we were in the meeting and we would approve it
and we would move forward. Uh that's not been my experience in my second time around for the past three years. We've had far more staff support for this. Um so the the question is would we feel comfortable um trying to adopt any other
any any any fluctuating conditions like Jesse's bicycle number for example um on the fly or maybe we could ask Nate to do it in the 5m minute break at 8:00 or 750 or something like that. But I would like to get this sorted out tonight because
as I said, I don't see that this project, this additional floor has pushed us out of any of what we've previously um determined as being uh reasonable for the project.
Thank you, Bruce. Um, I guess I would just say I I would hope we can go through the development application report before we uh conclude certainly. Uh, Nate raised a number of questions in that. So,
um, I think we should at least review those. Nate, I see your hand. Jerry, I also have a word document with draft findings and conditions. You know, it it it uses the ones Tom referenced in his his cover letter. And then there are
a few others um you know that could be added. I think it would be important to clarify you know uh I just the previous decision to me didn't clarify the demolition and phasing and how that works and I would want to just have a condition that did that in terms of you know is you know is the incharger
building going to remain and then because then there's a a use that's happening in addition to the overlay use this mixeduse building. Uh you know there's been discussion about having a certain amount of commercial parking or non-residential parking for uh and you know in the narrative it mentioned there
could be 29 it could be more. The board may want to have a minimum number that they assign as a condition available to the um non-residential spaces. I can share the screen I think to the public and unobstructed. So I mean it's a kind of minor and I think that was
really it. is just you know are there things from this discussion like uh the bike uh outside bike storage too that could be added but really there there's not a lot to change I agree but if there's anything else that comes up during the discussion okay
so um does anyone have anything to say before we at least breeze through the uh development application report okay all right Nate do you want
do that or do you want me to read that Nate? I can't hear you. Yeah, I I'm sharing the dome application report now if that's visible for everyone. Yeah, we can start at the beginning. You know, there were so this is a modification to
a previous site plan review. So, you know, uh, anything that's updated in terms of the plans or conditions are in effect as are the previous plans and permit and conditions. Uh, you know, the it's using the overlay. So, the variance essentially is um, you know, it's moot.
Uh, they do have one on the property. The overlay replaces it. They meet all the dimensional standards and conditions for the overlay. So, they are at 70 ft. uh they you know I I worked I asked Tom about that so that's been confirmed they
meet all the setbacks uh they're well under the lot and building coverages uh you know at the site visit we had one for new members we've asked a few questions that were there um in terms of zoning bylaw waivers that were already granted as part of the
previous permit so there's no you know waivers asked today so those are still applicable related to parking requirements and then the size of the sign. So that sitting wall could be potentially considered a sign the whole thing because it has raised lettering on it. But those waiverss were already
granted. Um you know changes to the exist to the previous conditions as Tom mentioned. So you know new dates for the plans, number of units, bedroom sizes, building height. Uh so that can be something to
building architecture. You have been dropping a little bit Nate. Oh yeah. Yeah. So, you know, it's funny. I I've had connectivity issue. I've lost twice. So, I don't know, Doug, if you want to walk through it. Um, if I'm frozen now, I don't know. No, you're good. We can hear you. It was
only a couple of seconds. All right. Uh, so the building architecture, it hasn't changed much. They've added a sixth floor. You know, there is variation in the facade treatment, stepbacks, and um, you know, and punchouts, and there's the canopy between the first and second floor. Uh
the overlay does require you know some sufficient variation in facade. They uh it asked for a step back on the top floor. I think we've determined what the screening material will be. And so um you know one question here was what would the outer you know the railings or
system be on the deck space. So what what does that look like on the top floor? So, I don't know if there's any, you know, if the board has any questions about that or the step back on the top floor, but those are some questions asked in the report. Yeah. Is everyone comfortable with what
they've proposed? Okay. I'm seeing heads shake yes and no hands to raise objections. So the unit mix and type there is a you know five studios which is new 81bedrooms 31 twobedrooms 17
threebedrooms and 41 fourbedroom units for a total of 290 beds. So there is a you know a mix of unit sizes. I I don't have any questions related to that unless there's some by the board. I don't see any hands.
Right. inclusionary zoning. As Tom mentioned, we we gained two affordable units, two more than what was approved previously. Uh so two studios at 80% AMI, four onebedroom units. Uh this is the you know uh what would be recommended. Three two-bedroom units and
of that one would be at 60% AMI. So, deeper affordability and two at 80% AMI and then three three-bedroom units, one at 60% and two at 80%. So, if I can Bruce Bruce has his hand up.
Uh, so Nate, this would be essentially one of the conditions, right? As I'm listening, I'm I guess the motion is going to be uh the move to modify the previously approved SPR as
follows and uh or with the uh it's probably would be as follows, right? And then there would be a list of things which we might ordinarily call conditions but would actually be stipulations, right? Or it'd be a modification of the of the permit. So you know this I think
this is or this is condition say 56 or 59 in the previous permit. So it' be you know modifying this condition number with these new new new um unit counts. Okay. Got it. All right. Moving down to number five.
There are no special permits um for the you know in the overlay. Uh there's no demolition issues. The landscape plan hasn't changed. I think they presented something that was you know worked on with the conservation commission and the and then approved by the board previously. Um there were you know the
overlay does require some open space and if the board has any questions about that uh you know there's the multi-use path there are plazas on the front and back of the building. Um so I don't know if there's any questions about the land. Yeah. Does anyone have any concern with that? I know we had a fair amount of discussion about open space when we were
working on the overlay. All right, Bruce. Uh there's also the green space that runs down into the uh into the wetland area which is not going to be built upon. Uh we're not going to park on it, but it it is open space and it is
usable. I I understand it's going to be mowed. Is that correct? Yes. Yeah. And I think that the site and I gave Nate the details and I forget them off the top of my head. I think it's like a 5.2 2 acre site and we're there's like 3.1 acres which are
untouched. So it's it's essentially two acres of the whole site that are actually being developed. So there's a significant amount of open space. Um some of it is usable, some of it is not. I'm happy with that.
All right. We lost your improvements and furnishings. there was a condition any details will be brought back to the board. Um, you know, that hasn't changed, right? Uh, you know, I just, you know, I think we discussed the bike storage, so that was
something in the report. Um, and just, you know, confirming that the site plan hadn't changed and the applicant has said that tonight already. So, no changes to the lighting plan. I guess one question was that you know how would the upper decks be illuminated and is
you know is there something to consider there uh you know whether it's you know I don't I don't know if it's required by building code but you know are there will there be wall sconces or under railing lighting or is that something the board wants to consider just knowing that they're you know higher units and you know do we want to have something
about any lighting up there? Tom, would you expect there to be any lighting that illuminates the building? I mean, in my mind's eye, I'd love to see up lighting for the whole building, but I don't think that's in the cards. So,
um I don't know. I think I mean, I'm no designer, but I think maybe some wall sconces or something up on the those balconies, you know, some sort of external light so that there's some light out there. I don't think it's something that we would look to
um you know have it shine anywhere but on those decks that are out there. Well, I think at the at the corner there at the roundabout that and that facade is probably something you might want to want to light. I maybe
n maybe maybe is is this getting at whether the when on the sixth floor units when they have an outdoor deck is there a light say over the door that goes out onto the deck right and how much light were they anticipating that those you know how
much would that be illuminated? Yeah. So, you can use the deck at night and not be stumbling around in the dark, right? I think that would be the extent of it. Okay, Bruce. Yeah, I think we discussed this last time when the deck was at the fifth
floor rather than the sixth floor, but uh but but maybe it was just my assumption that the building code requires an exterior light when you have an exterior door. So that I would think that our normal condition that has downcast lighting would have applied but
uh I assume that a minimal amount of lighting would be uh provided and it would be provided could apply by code. Yeah. As required by the code. Okay. All right. Nate. Sure. Uh yeah. Sign plan there's really
no changes. I think this was a just a issues to consider was something that was there previously. Um and it you know there's a condition to that effect. So I don't have anything there. Um site management plan you know uh
there was a narrative that can be you know incorporated into it. Uh I think you know if the two consider two issues were you know ask about uh kind of parking use if you wanted to and parking demand uh and then the hours and
availability of the on-site manager if that has changed or would change with the change in plans and number of units. Tom, any comment on that? Uh as far as the on-site manager hasn't changed. Still part of the plan. I mean somebody will be responsive to this
building. It'll be a living on-site manager and somebody be responsive to the building if that on-site manager is at the doctor's office or something. So, we've got that covered. Um, and then just as far as parking goes, I guess we
would just ask for flexibility and discretion to uh respond to tenants whether they be commercial or residential. So instead of putting a minimum, you Nate had mentioned maybe a minimum for commercial kind of let us
try to make the site work the way we envision it working. And so I think with that just comes some flexibility. Understood. Uh sure. So parking and circulation it you know recaps the number of spaces kind of issues to consider would be how you know how are the spaces assigned or
numbered for the tenants. Um and then I you know I just wasn't sure about confirming the number of compact spaces but I heard it was 24. So that it had been 24. I just wanted to make sure that's hadn't changed. Uh, so I think you know some of it would be Tom you mentioned that the spaces would be
assigned and I don't you know I don't know if then the if there's actually a physical numbering system that's painted on the ground or if there's some kind of signs that are installed but painted on the ground physical um physical number system painted on the
ground so that there's a a a badge and a number because with 160 parking spaces you need to keep track of who's not supposed especially proximity to the university you have to keep track of who's there who's supposed to be there and who's there but in the
wrong space so that's the way we'll handle it. Do you do you expect to have the spaces uh for for the for the residents um included in the lease or would they be a separate
uh charge? I think right now the idea is to include them in the lease. Okay. So you so you'll figure that out at least to begin with upfront. You've got it. Exactly. And then it's well we don't need a space. Can we get a break on rent? You know that's tenants
look at it a different way where some landlords will say okay here's your base rent. Pay additional for parking. Tenants may say well I'm already paying for parking as part of this. What if I don't have parking? Can I get a break? So I think you know I'll step back and talk about maybe overall. I think Barry's looking to take the building
down in in August. He's pushed it a little bit. Uh he's finishing up the Ammerst College site and so I think Pleasantries comes down in August. Uh the delivery of this is probably August of 2027. You know, we had at the with
the last one thought we could do it in a year. uh not with these this many units and this sort of construction, it's become clear that we're really looking at probably hopefully a temporary certificate of occupancy for kind of the majority of the building. And I'm just
going to share my screen uh quickly if I could. Nate, can I just steal it from you? Um so it's probably so the Uncharter building and I uh have an aerial but I'll just talk through here. or the uncharter building. If if this part of
the building was not here, 2535 University Drive would be there. Uh we are designing this building structurally uh from the steel on up in a way where we can end the building about here maybe a little further maybe it's here so as
to not impact in charter because in charter is going to be one of the occupants and what one of the things we did was with the existing building we went to them and said hey do you want to come over and charter is taking us up on that offer so we are leaving them there until
Barry maybe it's March April, maybe maybe a little bit further. Um, and then they'll fill this space right here once they're so we'll we'll finish to I think here hopefully get a temporary certificate of occupancy
having charter move in over a few days and then take their building down and then uh build the rest of this building. So, it's, you know, let's say 95% and then the last 5% if not 97 and and
three. Um, but that's the plan at this point. Okay, Bruce. Oh dear. Uh, I forgot what I was going to ask. Sorry, I was I was wrapped up. I'll think of it again.
Okay, Nate. uh traffic impact uh hasn't changed. You know, Tom confirmed number of parking spaces and that really drives kind of the demand. No change to storm water. Uh you know, there is an order of conditions on this property from the conservation commission that would guide
that and the erosion control plan. Uh nothing with the utilities. uh you I think they've done a you know they're they're on the roof or they're screened at the corner as Tom mentioned near on Amity Street work within the right of way you know there is a roundabout proposed for this
intersection it's been shifted a little bit to reduce the impact to this property the town's uh working on that with UMass we have a mass works grant and then as the plans show the idea is to have a bus pulloff south of the curb cut to this property that was on the
previous plans that hasn't changed it was modified near the end of the hearing, but it was approved as part of the previous site plan. And that hasn't changed either. As Angus mentioned, I said at the site visit, uh there's been discussions about, well, if there's a bus stop there, would we need a crosswalk at some point? You know,
that's kind of the extent of that conversation, but it's something that is, you know, has been mentioned. Um, depending on, you know, how it gets used and what happens after it's all built. Uh, the construction logistics plan had been submitted. I think you know we might want to just talk about how as Tom
mentioned what the um you know phasing oh we lost Nate is really like in terms of you know how that works with a charter in the building there was an ANR plan that the uh has been recorded so the lots have been combined that was a condition and
then there's a private agreement between properties this is a carryover from the previous permit I just wanted to highlight it um about you know sharing parking at 40 University Drive and there was a condition uh in the in the in the
site in the 2024 site plan to ask for an updated agreement or if that's necessary at all and so that could be something that's discussed here Tom. Yeah, that's it's uh unfortunately Ammeris Public House is not so busy
where it's necessary. I don't know that they've ever availed themselves of it. So, it's just a matter of I I think um as Nate notes in the condition, we have to go in front of the ZBA at a public meeting. And so, we're just talking to the restaurant operators. Barry owns the land. So,
we're just talking to the restaurant operators about who's actually going through that process. So, I suspect that'll be done in the next six months, if that. Does that agreement have an expiration date or it's perpetual?
Yeah, I think it was bad either bad or good lawyering depends how you look at it. Uh I don't think it has an expiration date. Yeah, I don't Yeah, I don't think it does either. And then uh you know the fire department has reviewed this and you know they'll be a part of the conversations as it goes through construction logistics and
town engineer didn't have many other any comments new comments in conservation commission. There's no changes so their approval isn't changed. you know, the addition of the floor doesn't change anything that would was already approved by them. So, Nate, on the construction logistics,
I guess I'm not clear on you know, unless unless the construction logistic had some sort of external effect and uh you know, it was a nuisance for Butters or something like that. Other
than that, I don't know what do we care about the logistics and the the phasing. Well, I think it's important just knowing like how you know how the site will be fenced, you know, how the entire building is accessed and then you know if for uh the building department
inspection services, how do they issue permits? So there's going to be one occupancy permit m you know that's in operation for a building that's not issued for the new building. I I think it's just managing that um and just having an understanding what's happen.
Is that something that this board needs to be a aware of or is it really between Rob and the the builder? Uh, I mean, I think it's good for the board to be aware of it and if you'd want to have it as a condition, I I was going to just look at what the previous
permit said in terms of phasing or the construction logistics, but okay. You know, just to make sure that say there's no inconsistent land uses or permits happening. You know, the overlay does allow, you know, um, you know, different building types and uses occurring on the same property. So, it's
just to make sure that, you know, all that is still consistent. Okay. Angus just have a question about Tom's response to one of Nate's questions about the um facade and the setback. Um
so uh Tom you wrote that uh so Nate asked the sixth floor needs to be stepped back from the street facing facade. please describe how the standard is met. And he wrote, "We have stepped the top floor back four feet from the main facade line and elected to step back portions of the facade below to
align with the upper step back in order to enhance the modulation of the facade and reduce the apparent massing of the building. Um, looking at the design uh uh the presentation set, I don't the the
building looks perfectly vertical. So, I guess I'm wondering what what you mean by I understand the setback for the sixth floor, but what you mean by the kind of modulation of the setbacks moving up. Uh I sound like an architect, don't I?
So, if you if you look here, you know, you've got the canopy which extrudes a little bit beyond, you know, this piece, this piece, this piece here, this piece here, this piece here, this piece here. Um, and so the the stepbacks, you know,
occur in this area, in this area, in this area, and in this area. And so then if you if you look, that's the same step back that you're actually getting on that sixth story flush kind of all the way down. So you get the modulations here where you've got the you know the
building is actually you know 24 feet from unpopulite and then you get another four feet back where you get you know the bulks of the building you know looked at inversely you got a 28ft building with some bumpouts if you want to look at it in a different way but that's what I tried to say.
Gotcha. Thank you for the clarification. All right. Um I will ask the the attendees the from the public are there any comments on this project from from you all? Uh please raise your hands. I see one
already. Uh Pam, let's bring over Hilda Greenbomb. And Hilda, you can remind us of your street address. And you have three minutes. I live at 298 Montigue Road in North Emer and my question is a
broader planning question. I take University Drive rather often and it's one of the worst streets especially coming off the UMass portion which is an evacular condition and has the modern
multipath along the sides etc as does this building. So my broader question is what are the plans from University Drive and and will that be um resurfaced along with the um Rotary at the corner? And
then what about that? I had heard somewhere back that you the multi-purpose path um on the west side of University Drive just let's see south of this building was going to be eliminated. So I'm
asking what the impact of the the new construction both both the roadway and the and the rotary etc around this building what will be the the result and how how will the post office and the CVS
um let's see the drug drug window what do you call it the pharmacy access but drivethru there how's that going to be affected in in the shorter run. Okay. Thank you, Hilda. Sort of seems like the package is going
on there and I haven't heard anything about what the plans uh for the rest of that street, which you can't drive on without driving half in the wrong lane to get around the potholes. Yeah, the um the hope would be to
Whoops, Nate, you dropped out. Resurface University Drive finished. So, am I Why don't you start that sentence again, Nate? You dropped out. Oh, sorry. Yeah. So, the plan would be to resurface University Drive uh after the roundabout is completed. So, um that
was part of our grant application. Uh you know, there are material costs, but that's still something we're looking at doing. The access road on the west side, you know, as the overlay, if it gets built out, the hope would be that that gets converted to the multi-use path. So, nothing's changing south of this
project site. So, access to, you know, the bike exchange, the pizza shop, uh, post office, none of that's changing at this point. It would only change if there's a project proposed. And then, you know, town staff would work with the applicant to see what would happen. But,
you know, we're always envisioning access to those to those sites if needed. And so, you know, there is there is a provision that you may need to petition town council property owners to get a curb cut. We don't see that as a big barrier. Uh that was envisioned at a
time when they thought University Drive was going to be kind of a limited access highway and almost like a main entrance right up to UMass back in the 60s, but that's not really the case. So we don't see in the future if there needs to be a different curb cut to support a different project and elimination of a
curb cut and changing that western access road to be, you know, a deal breaker or something we would want to work with to achieve kind of the visions of the overlay and having two multi-use paths on both sides of the road. Thank you.
All right. Thank you, Hilda. Any other members of the public want to ask a question, make a comment? All right, I don't see any hands. So, the time is 8:07 and we usually take a break of about five minutes around this
time. This seems like a good time to do that. So, uh please mute and turn off your camera and turn them back on when you return. We'll come back around 12 minutes after 8. Thank you.
Pam, I think we're done with the timer for the moment. Sorry about that. Not a problem. So Nate, you said you had uh drafted some findings and conditions.
Yeah, I can share my screen. That's all right. Well, let's give Fred one more minute and then move on. I I I think while we're waiting, Jonathan, I'd like to ask you a question. Um, kind of looking at the elevations, I
feel like six stories is about as far as I would want to take that party. Agree. You know, seven would be too too much. You'd need I I would agree.
Yeah. Are you comfortable with six? I'm certain I'm comfortable with six. So I This project has had a little bit of, you know, time for us. We've worked on it for a while now. Um, and we have looked at sixtory versions in the past
when the first overlay kind of narrative or iteration of of a possible overlay came out. And so was I looked at it both at both sort of sizes and I felt comfortable at that point. We agree with you when you get to seven stories you're
you're not just sort of a high you are high-rise and it's it becomes a different aesthetic. your the the design kind of change. Yeah. All right, Fred has joined us. We're all
back. And um Nate, why don't we go into the findings and conditions you've drafted. I I didn't see any more hands of from the public, so I'll assume we can move on. Am I sharing? Well, am I sharing? Maybe that I have had a few documents up.
Maybe I'm sharing the wrong one. Now, now you have the Mson library. Yeah. All right. Let me uh let me do a new share. Well, we were seeing two Word documents,
but the one on top was for Mson. There you go. This is correct. All right. So, there's a draft binding. It's It's a longer one. Yeah. And then draft conditions. Would you like me to read and we can go
through that? Well, I guess we we often do that. Um, how many pages of this are is there? Uh, it's really uh I guess it's you know, these are new conditions I was proposing some based on tonight's conversation. So, it's a
little over a page. [Music] You know, the conditions are really uh just uh taking what Tom had said. So changing you know six conditions of the original permit uh they don't it doesn't add much to it.
Yeah. Okay. So under the just the finding I guess the key finding is that the board finds that the project meets the requirements of article 17 University Drive overlay district because the project complies with the dimensional standards provides
non-residential space in excess of the minimum amount and has satisfied the open space standards parking justification and design guidelines. Right. So, um, board members, as we go through this, if you have objections to
what is written or or comments or suggestions for changes, please raise your hand. So, um, Nate, that that's that finding seems adequate to me.
All right. All right. And then we'll go down to the draft conditions. So you know to amend the the conditions from the SPR 2024-11. So condition one you know uh essentially it remains the same except for the dates
right so um you know development shall be sub built substantially in accordance with the plan submitted to the planning board and approved on by of March 19th 2025 and then revised and approved by the planning board on July 16 2025.
So these kinds of things I mean the should we be saying that these new conditions supersede those found in the original you know they're not in addition they're
is it obvious to everybody else or is it what is it worth saying that these new conditions replace the you know the following conditions shall be amended shall be it says amended So I think that's sufficient for me. That's sufficient. Okay. All right.
Go ahead. All right. Condition two. Uh same thing. Just the development shall be managed in substantially in accordance with the management plan submitted to the board and approved on March 19th and then revised and approved by the planning board on July 16th, 2025.
Condition 18. The total number of drawing units to be constructed at the project site shall be limited to a maximum of 102 units. One studio um I think shouldn't it be a colon after
units? I think it's five studio one bath. Sorry. Um, I think I cut out what, Doug? Well, you know, I hate turning into a grammar grammatical.
Anyway, after units, it should probably be a colon rather. Yeah. No. Yeah. Yeah. And then it lists units. Five studio, one bath. 8 onebedroom, one bath. 31 twobedroom, one bath. 17 threebedroom,
two bath. And 41 fourbedroom, two bath. Okay. Condition 19. The building shall not exceed a maximum of six stories and a total of 70 ft in height measured from the average finish grade on the street side of the building to the highest point of the flat roof excluding any
parapet or other rooftop equipment as outlined in section 6.7 of the zoning bylaw 6.17. So, you know, this was a condition really what's changed on these conditions right now is just, you know, the stories and heat and the height and feet. The rest is kind of
just repeated. [Music] Uh same with condition 56. Uh so, you know, according to article 15 inclusionary zoning of the zoning bylaw, at least 12% of the dwelling units, so 12 units shall be in and shall be and
shall remain affordable in perpetuity. According to article 15, 10 units shall be marketed to eligible households whose annual income may not exceed 80% of the area median income adjusted for household size as determined by the United States Department of Housing and
Urban Development. Additionally, two units shall be marketed to eligible households whose annual income may not exceed 60% AMI adjusted per household size. And these are the affordable units. Yep. You can scroll up.
I thought I saw a hand raised, but um I do not at the moment. Condition 59, the affordable units shall include and so it lists them two studios at 80%. This is what was taken from the development application report and the application. Four one-bedroom units at
80%, three two-bedroom units, one at 60% AMI, and two at 80% AMI. And then three three-bedroom units, one at 60% AMI and two at 80% AMI. So that meets the inclusionary zone. So why are there no forbidden
and possible new conditions? There weren't originally. Uh okay. And there had been a discussion about that. I mean, we could, you know, some of it is that uh sometimes what we've heard that it's hard to fill a fourbedroom unit and then a three-bedroom unit, you know, the way
it's worked is in terms of number of beds, you could still have, you know, like three to five or six occupants actually of a three-bedroom unit, depending on, you know, how many say adults and then and then um dependent. So, you still can have a range of household sizes in a three-bedroom unit.
All right, Bruce. That was my memory of the discussion as well, but I raised my hand uh because we're about to hit the new conditions. And Nate, I would strongly recommend that we number these new conditions
starting uh at with the number that's next in line from the old set of conditions. And do you want me to find or can you quickly find out what that we don't need to do that right now? But but these should be numbered because
otherwise you you can't refer to a bullet in a in a in a in a do in a memo. Yeah, it would be condition 72 and I can get that started. Okay. Um Yeah. Okay. We'll just I'll have them numbered for now and then we can
Yes. new condition 72. Y uh you know again this is for board discussion. These are things that you know are taken from the development application report or comments the latter ones from tonight. Nothing shall
restrict or reduce public access to the multi-use path that runs along the east side of the property along University Drive. Um, you know, the overlay requires that there be a multi-use path and it's be open to the public, but a condition could just reinforce that. Uh, the
multi-use path shall be maintained at a minimum width of 10 feet without any obstructions such as furniture or signs. Uh, Nate, Bruce, you still have your hand up. Okay. It's was a legacy.
All right. Um, changes to the AR Uh, where'd you go? Such as overhanging canopies. You've broke out. Am I Am I here again? It's funny. I I think I've had bad internet today at home is what I've heard.
Am I here? Yes, you are here. You did break up. Why don't you start number three again? Sure. Yeah. Changes to the architecture such as but not limited to material changes, window sizes and patterns, overhanging canopies or variations in
the plane shall be reviewed by the board at a public meeting to determine whether conditions of the permit are being complied with and whether any modification of the site plan review is necessary. uh that just kind of speaks to the design guidelines from the overlay and you know if it's you know we kind of have a condition to that effect
anyways but I just wanted to see if there's something specific to some of the design guidelines from the overlay if that's the board if the board would like that. This is changes from the design that we have has been submitted tonight. Right. Right. Yeah. Right. From anything that's
been approved. Right. Right. So they'd have to come back. So yes, Bruce. Yes. I think this is reasonable. I mean the the applicant is coming back and asking something within the framework of a new or an extension of the bylaw and
this is what this bylaw says. So um I think this is a good one because this is the first outing. I remember when we did the years and years ago the first outing on the uh farmland protection overlay and uh it was trying to basically get
stuff like this back to us so that we could get get feedback essentially. So I think this is a good uh this is a good condition and I think Nate's worded it well and it may be that you know Jonathan and and Barry will simply talk
to uh Nate and it may be dimminimous but I think from the from the fact that we've taken so much trouble to get this bylaw and it and it's going to head on down University Drive I I would like the applicant to be obligated to help us uh understand what
we've uh put into law by doing this uh by by by exceeding to this condition. All right, Angus, could I make a request that we um maybe either add or change change the language
to changes to the architecture and design? Uh the bylaw explicitly uses the word design and um I think adding design to this would would make it clearer what we're asking about and what we're referring to in the bylaws.
And I guess I would just have one request and I don't know if it's uh first line we do talk to Nate or or Rob, but you know sometimes when we go to procure materials they may not be the exact color of what we presented to you.
And so you know just a matter of whether it's we go to Nate and say, "Hey Nate, instead of this red brick, it's a little bit lighter of a shade of red brick. I don't know if you want to build in slight variations or if the mechanism is to go to Nate first and then if it rises to the level he pushes us to you. Either
one's fine. I just I'm just thinking practically here. Yep. Well, I think we were expecting anything that this applied to things that were not considered dimminimous. Okay, Bruce. Yes, I agree. I think uh uh Tom the
answer to that that your question is that the intent of this condition is to uh keep track of the way in which we as a board and the town ultimately the council uh voted to create this uh
overlay bylaw. And so we want to just make sure that our language is working. And so it it's clearly brick colors and things like that are not relevant, but uh changes that speak to the structure
of the bylaw or the wording of a bylaw and so forth that uh that's where we might want to talk to you. Perfect. Thanks, Nick. Sure. And then you know four, five and
six which would be you know different numbers if if if approved you know one is do we want to clarify any demolition phasing? Um and so that was just something we put in there. Doug, you had asked if that's necessary. Um,
you know, we do call I mean, if this was a if this were a property that was surrounded by residential abutters, you know, I I might I feel differently about it, but given where it's at and the lack of any, you know, anybody who's
likely to object, I I'm not sure I'm all that worried about it. Jesse, yeah, I I agree. given that they're the tenants moving into the space that's obviously it's in everyone's both of their interest to make it work. So I don't think we need those details.
Yeah. And if it falls apart and and charter goes elsewhere, you know, I wish them luck and I wish you luck in finding tenants. So Nate, I'm not sure I need I don't
need that. Yeah. Jesse, is that a legacy hand? Well, I I was gonna on the next point also, but I can wait. Go ahead. Go ahead. Uh I also similarly don't feel the need to have the parking use and management
completely laid out because again, it's in their interest to make it work. So, I'm not concerned about that. All right. Uh how do others feel? Bruce gave a thumbs up. Angus nodded. Yes.
I mean, do we want a condition that they reference available parking and lease agreements or anything like that or or is that getting too detailed? Well, Nate, one thing I I guess comes to mind, you know, how we had uh what's his name from from the project on
Main Street comes. Yeah. After 18 months and tell us how's it working? I think that would actually be a good idea. I agree with the same reason as it was number three. Come back 18 months after the project
has opened, you know, and and it's you've got tenants and um talk to us about how it's working. Yeah. I thought did we did Yeah. I'm looking at the pre the previous permit. I don't think we actually put it
in. Did we? I don't think we actually had that. Um yeah. Um yeah, we do have it. Uh so the applicant shall return to the planning board at a public meeting within one year after the final certificate of occupancy and
present information about parking usage and demand, including adequacy of parking for non-residential spaces. Um the board may ask the applicant to come back again. So, okay. Tom, do you think uh a year is
long enough? Are you likely to have all your tenants in there by then? 18 months, I think, would be better just in case, you know, as I'm thinking about it, two things. One, if we lease up in August, and then that last section in
December, uh final CO in December, it gives us like a a a flush through the system. So, we'll be able to see, okay, what worked, what didn't work, what have we changed, and we can kind of give you a we've had one year under our belt. Here's here's
how it's worked. Here's how it hasn't worked. And here's what we're doing different. Uh here's what you should suggest others do. And, you know, kind of frankly, we're always talking with the town anyways. You know, we're talking to Nate or Rob. And so, you know, if there are ever questions, ask.
Like, that's, you know, that's who we are. So, uh, but yeah, 18 months, I think, would be better. So, if we want to amend whatever condition that was, Nate, and just change it to be, you know, whatever the existing condition was, change it to be 18 months instead of a year. I think
that'd be terrific. Yeah, it's condition 16 and so we can just change to 18 months. Great. Yeah, I think that makes sense. Yeah. All right.
And then there was, you know, a comment about bike storage. And so I don't, you know, I didn't, other than just having additional bike storage, do we need to have any any condition about that, you know, additional exterior bike storage? Jonathan counted. We've got 15 bike loops outside. Um,
is that enough? Is that not? I mean, Jesse, you tell us. We're happy to put extra. We're trying to find that balance. Obviously, I I couldn't tell you what the right number is. The picture just looked like it was four. That seemed little. I do appreciate Doug's comment about some in the front though about people visiting. So, you know,
we can do that for sure. Yeah. So, maybe I mean do you have any in the front now? Yes, there's I think we're showing five in the front. Um and the others were in the rear, but we could easily add some more.
Sure. Great. Well, maybe when you come back in 18 months, you can talk to us about bike bike use, too. Yeah, that sounds like a great plan. Yeah, there's some right here in the front. You get right here if you see it. Hard to see.
Oh, good. Oh, got it. Yeah, I didn't pick up on those. For the record, I had forgotten we had had split them. Yeah, that's great. Yeah. Okay, good. Okay. All right. So,
so any condition there or probably I think we're going to let that slide and we maybe try to remember to talk about bikes in 18 months also. I mean if you want to put that in that amendment
just to help remind us condition 16. Yeah. If you want to add Yeah. Talk about parking and bike. Yeah. Storage or something. Yeah. Parking usage in demand, adequacy, parking and
bike storage. Bike usage and storage. That's good. All right. All right. So, sounds like we have findings, we have conditions. Um, we're going to want to close the
hearing. Um, we're going to need some motions. And I know Bruce is probably all ready to go. Bruce, I am. Uh, but Jesse, why don't you move? Oh,
I could I could share my screen again if that's okay. No, I I'll do it. Uh well, I was going to say move to modify the previously approved SPR um with the uh um with the the findings and uh
amended and additional conditions as uh presented and discussed and close the hearing and close the public hearing. Thank you, Doug. I always need help with that. Uh Nate and Pam, did we cover
everything? I think so. I believe that you did. Yes. Okay. All right. And it sounds like you've got enough documentation to put it in the minutes and the other papers that will be
uh filed. So, okay, Jesse, I'll second the motion. Thank you. All right. Um, we'll go ahead and vote. I guess I'll give the public one more chance. I'm not going to wait too long, but anything
anybody wants to say from the public other than thank you for staying with us. Okay. Uh we'll go ahead through the vote and um why don't we start uh this time with Jesse.
I approve. Johanna I Jira. I'm sorry. Say that again. Hi. Hi. Okay. Thank you Bruce. Hi. Fred.
Hi. Uh Angus. I and I'm an I as well. That's seven in favor. We are unanimous. Thank you very much as always.
Thank you. Okay, time is 8:38. Moving on with our agenda. Uh, next item is the general housing discussion, continued discussion regarding a potential overlay for
existing apartment complexes. Um, Nate, do you want to introduce this or I think it seems like we may want to give a little bit of a explanation for Angus and Jara. Sure. Yeah, I don't have much to share.
The housing subcommittee is meeting next week and this would be discussed. Uh so for the members of the public and and new planning board members, you know, after the university drive overlay, uh before that was um decided, there was discussions about where else in town could there be, you know, infill or new
development. North Ammerst is something the board is looking at. Um north of UMass up to Meadow Street. So, there's an area where there's already multi-unit development and looking at having an overlay district there to allow, you know, a pretty big densification of
units. This was recommended in the 2015 there's existing density and how you know can you increase it. Uh so really it's trying to provide an opportunity for for you know redevelopment of those existing uh
areas. uh we've been looking at, you know, what's the right number in terms of height, units, kind of site design, and how kind of how prescriptive would the overlay be. So, we've kind of modeled it after the U drive overlay, and we started to work on kind of a template of language. Uh, and kind of,
you know, we're trying to get some maps going and figure out how that would actually look on the ground. Yeah. Nate, do you think you could maybe send or or Pam, you could send some of the materials that were provided at one of the previous
uh meetings to Angus and Jara just to give them the kind bring them up to speed. Um this is this we were mostly talking about the area with the with like Puffton Village and Presidential and
Brandy Wine. Um and uh I think that was the majority of the developments all on the west side of North Pleasant Street. Um from essentially from Presidential
North to Meadow Street, right? Um, so and then we had talked about allowing more density and higher buildings as you go from North Pleasant Street toward the west toward 116.
Uh, the grade drops off a little bit as you go west. So, we thought we could increase the height of the buildings without too much visual impact if we did that. But, uh, yeah, if you guys could send
some of the materials over to them. Sure. Or just maybe just an email saying which packet it was in. Uh, that way we don't have to kill any trees along the way. Uh, Bruce and then Jesse and then Angus. Um, you said most of what I was going to
say, Doug. I was just going to for Jeron Angus's point of view just give a a couple of high level observations and I'll add a couple more to what you said. uh we've discussed uh and when I say we've discussed this is uh I'm speaking
both of the housing subcommittee and the board but most of the discussion on this matter so far has been done at housing subcommittee discussions and the four involved are myself Fred led by Jesse uh
Karen was a member of that group she will probably continue to attend but not as a member of the planning board. Um the uh I think that we see this more
specifically as an opportunity to create housing for students more so than than perhaps the University Drive. Uh although you can tell from the amount of four bedroomedroom units that Barry's got in that property that we might
expect there might be um more there might be quite a few students living there but again it's close to the university so it's not something that we would be uh uh anti antithetical to but the the uh the notion that's driving me
particularly on this project and I say this as as the sole member of the uh board actually from North Amist and probably will be the the member of the board who gets pillaried most immediately by my neighbors if things
aren't uh exactly the way folks wanted which of course they never are. But still, you know, folks will have clear interests. But the it seems that the opportunity to create uh an an inordinate amount of housing opportunity
for students in this these locations is uh something that we have been discussing and considering with a view perhaps to taking some of the load off the downtown area which typically now is taking a lot of student loads and they're doing it in housing that we
would like to see stay as housing for uh um full-time residents. people that don't come and go like that and therefore inevitably destabilize residential neighborliness. So that's number one. Number two is uh these are a
few very large lots and most of them are in a single ownership. So it's an unusual opportunity for uh us to solve our a good slash of our housing problem uh in this area. It's close to the
university. The single big big parcels um mostly not all sing single owner and um and they are kind of nestled and and bracketed by um
116. So there's there's not as much of an impact on the local neighborhood as it might be if they were on the other side of the road. So those are the basic considerations. And I think what's going to frustrate the neighborhood most will be the anticipated uh traffic impact of
this. Um oh, one more thing. Um we've been advised that uh we that a three-fold increase in density is the kind of a threshold. Um that is what you what one should
expect would be enough to shift an owner who's got a quite nicely functioning housing business where tenants and everything is in order to shake the the that enough to get them to tear it all down and build something else. You can't
just offer them a small amount of increased density. a three-fold density is is what we consider and and and and that can be done. And at the scale we're talking about, that would generate a really significant number of of uh
affordable housing units, potentially another 100 or 150, I think, something like that. Anyway, a lot of additional affordable housing. And so then we've been discussing well the bylaw currently asks for the affordable housing to be
suffused within the uh the development. I mean that's more or less what Barry Roberts is being asked to do with his building. Uh we don't think I should say I don't think and I think my opinion is shared by others that when you've got
such a large slice of affordable housing it's been created it's it's a kind of a village scale thing. And so we we think we want to think differently about how the uh the uh the the inclusionary housing is dealt with within this and
and we think that the wording of the overlay should address that. So those are a couple more um things that have taken quite a lot of time in discussion. All right, I'm done. Thank you. Yeah, seeing
thanks. It's uh not a lot to add to what Bruce said. I was going to bring up a slightly different point for the board to consider um which is over the past month I've just by happens met a couple of people who live ab budding or very close to this area we're talking about
and I know it's come up a few times how we can solicit public opinion or have a hearing or different things. I don't think we're quite there ready yet with our details, but I'd encourage us to try and get there soon enough sooner than
later to have some kind of public format for discussion because there's clearly are are you finding that people don't feel they can come to our meetings and make comments? No, but uh I think it's the right way to
proceed. I I mean I think it's the again I don't know what all the mechanisms that the board and the town has to contact Butters and neighborhoods to say we're considering this kind of thing. We want your feedback. I would just like us to do that.
So more of a publicity. Yeah. Yeah. Like here here's roughly what we're thinking. Tell us your concerns. Tell us you're in favor. Whatever. I mean again I can imagine different formats to do that. I don't know what we're allowed to do. I don't know what has been done in the past that's worked,
right, Nate? Um, you know, are there different strategies that that have been used in the past beyond what we're currently doing? Yeah, I mean, with the University Drive, we you know, typically for zoning changes, you don't we don't mail every
Butter. I mean, it could be townwide, right? If it affects that. So, it's not a requirement. I think in this area, it could be publicity. It could be, you know, we call whe whether we call it a public meeting or a public forum. Uh we could try to do an online comment form as well. So I think there's a few things
we could do. Um you know, we are getting to the point where we have some um you know, language on paper. We might have some maps and some things. And so I I could see by September we'd be ready, you know, uh to have you know, have the public comment on it. I think we'd have
some more concrete information that they could respond to. So we'd be able to frame the overlay and have some ideas of what it, you know, what building heights or kind of areas of, you know, concentration could look like for buildings. And so, yeah, I think that is
something we could do. It is a it is a, you know, and maybe we try to have it in North Ammeris at some place outside of town hall or some other location. I It's always tricky, but um figure something out. Yeah. We would we actually have a board
meeting up at the the library up there? I'm not even sure that's big enough. You know, we might get if if we got a hundred people, it'd be too small. Oh, just go ahead. So, part part of what got me thinking more about it was was
one conversation was with an ab butter or potential butter. Another was someone who lived across the street in the neighborhood, you know, who wouldn't be in a butter, who wouldn't get that kind of notification. And so I agree what Bruce said. The main concern is about traffic patterns most likely and that doesn't affect just the butters and
that's why I think it'd be wise for us to have the larger conversation if possible. Okay, great Angus. Yeah, I was just going to say for Pam, I I I looked back over the uh I think it
was the June 18th meeting was when y'all talked about this and Bruce uh presented some documents maybe or at least there were documents that Bru Bruce had prepared around the Puffton Village Apartments that were really helpful. I don't know if there are additional discussions around this from previous
meetings, but I know that was at least one set and it was really helpful to get a sense of what y'all are thinking of with this additional um overlay district. Jesse, I see your hand. Thanks. Um yeah, Angus, actually all the subcommittee meetings are also recorded.
They're not Nate, are they yet through the town website? Yeah, they're the on YouTube. They are online through the town's uh YouTube channel, I think. I don't know if I've linked them from the subcommittee web page, but they are there as a separate uh fi, you know, set
of recordings. And the the other thing I can probably figure out which meetings were most relevant and let you know. Um, and of course, I was going to mention this later, but I'd definitely encourage you both to come join the subcommittee if you're interested.
Details later in that report. All right, Bruce. Um up at this end of town there's the District 1 Neighborhood Association and uh uh and um a month or two ago uh
Kathy Shane asked me um because she was she and Larry were here having dinner whether uh I which really kind of means ask or someone would come to her six she
she reports uh she and and the other district one counselor have meetings once twice a year and there'll be one in September or sometime shortly and she was asking me whether we could uh make some uh presentation about what's being
thought about. So the uh the opportunity is to one opportunity is to do it through the district 1 neighborhood association and that would be in the library. Um, and you're right, it might not be big enough, but uh, overflow crowds are great. Uh,
that's when you know you need to do something more or actually when you've been successful. I mean, we've always tried to get over cloak clouds and we never do. So, I would put it in the library and and and and uh see if we can't get more people than we can fit in
the room. All right, Jesse. I think that's a great idea, Bruce. If if the board is up for that some fraction of us, I will say I've done that twice over the past year for different groups for different reasons.
Not not really as a board representative and didn't quite come to tarn and pitchforks, but it was, you know, it might not be a successful encounter, but yes, I think it's worth doing for sure. So, you're saying we need to pick a room with a second exit behind?
Yes, exactly. Uh Jar um I think that meeting with uh and presenting to the neighborhood association is a great idea. I would though encourage us to reach out to other people um because
those the members who are of probably active in the neighborhood association may not be representative of the people who would probably be living in those apartments. Um, and so I think, you know, we wouldn't want to say we wouldn't want to just ask the neighborhood association what their
opinions are on the overlay district. We'd want to get the input of a variety of other residents, um, current and future as well. [Music] All right. So, maybe we'll just say
there's more to come on that conversation. Um, Jesse, it sounded like the housing subcommittee does plan to meet before our next planning board meeting. Correct. Um, right now we're scheduled
for Wednesday 23rd at 11:30 a.m. 11:30 to 1:00 p.m. Um, I know that's midday. The current committee is able to do that. Uh, certainly if there's interest from others to join, we can rearrange schedules and have it in the evenings.
Okay. All right. Uh, time is 8:55. Uh, next item on our agenda is old business. Uh, topics not reasonably anticipated 48 hours in advance. Pam, uh, Nate, do we have any such topics?
I don't. No, I don't either. All right. Um, new business. um PVPC our annual assessment with the PVPC. Yeah,
Nate, there was something in our packet. Yeah, we looked previously when this was brought to the board. I think it was just an acknowledgement that, you know, we're part of the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission jurisdiction. So they're the regional planning agency and
they they assess towns based on uh population and so they you know we just it was actually to the assessor um showing what Amoris would you know and other I don't know if it included all the towns what kind of what the fee structure is.
So, I had one question about that and uh it's that Oh, actually, never mind. I see that I I for a minute I thought ours was the highest, but Springfield is higher than us and Westfield. So,
and Chap Yeah. All right. Yeah. Well, we're getting up there. We're one of the larger towns in the area. We are. Okay. So, I assume this appropriation or this this these dues are come out of the town
budget and um that that's not a problem for this year's budget. Right. It's actually I think through the assessor's office and so there's really I think it's there's nothing for us to do with it. Okay,
Bruce. Uh we might uh be mindful. I don't know whether it is it's making but that 39,000 is uh takes the full load of the UMass student body. Um if if we look at
the number of people who actually live in town, we're about 12 or 13,000. So uh we're paying for uh a lot of folks who live at the university or or come
here uh who don't spend all of their year here. I think it's nothing we can do much about, I don't suppose, but it's it's um it's something that we should bear in mind. All right. Okay.
Any other new business topics? Not anticipated? Nothing from Pam. Nothing from Nate. No. All right. Um, form a ANR subdivision applications.
Anything? No. Nope. Any upcoming ZBA applications we might want to get a preview of? Not at this time. All right. Upcoming SP, SPR, SUB applications.
Uh, not yet. Gee, is it going to be is it going to be a quiet summer? No. There's, you know, we we've been talking to to different property owners and folks and they, you know, they'll probably come. They're just they're so preliminary, it's not worth mentioning,
you know, it could be a month or more before they even submit an application. So, okay. All right. All right. Um, time, just for the record, is 8:58. Planning board committee and liaison reports. Bruce, anything for PVPC?
Nothing. Jesse, anything more for housing subcommittee? Uh, yeah, a couple quick things. Uh, mostly for Jera and Angus and then some procedural questions. Um, so we started this subcommittee or I think I was encouraged to start the subcommittee
about a year ago. uh came out of a sense of a little sense of urgency to try and make some movement or the housing stock in Ammerst largely with this main motivation to help relieve the pressure on the
neighborhoods from the students looking for housing nearby the university. Um, so we've mostly focused on trying to get things the board is largely in favor of in closer to ready shape to move on the town council or wherever things need to
go next. I think we've been somewhat successful at that. Um, so that's the that's the purpose and the goal and how we've been operating. Um, it was four of us including Karen who's no longer on the board. So now there are three of us officially on the subcommittee. And this
gets to my question. Uh I guess for Nate or Doug, maybe you know the planning board approved four of us as the committee. Are we now by default a committee of three? And is
that okay? Do we need to officially make that official? Um I'm fine. I think it's actually better if we leave it as three because we've had issues getting quorum to meet with four. So with three, we're only a quorum of two. So that should be easier for scheduling. Um the other
comment for everyone else who would like to join is of course you should join and we operate as more of a discussion than a formal committee. Um unless one of you is really dying to be an official member. I'm fine with that too. We'll just have to work on schedules and try and do that a little more efficiently
maybe than we have done in the past. Um so maybe one of you can answer my question first. Are we okay to operate as a committee of three by default since Karen is not here? Yeah, I think all three members would have to be in attendance really. It's still then a quorum out of four just because that was the vote. We could
always amend it, but well I think that I think that's easy. Um and Nate um at some point in the next I don't know six weeks let's say we're going to vote on new on new officers and
um at that time we can vote you know the new members for this iteration of the board uh who are on the committee. Yeah, as part of the staff report at the end of the agenda, I was going to recommend right either in August or early
September voting, you know, officers. So that's chair, vice chair, clerk, uh, you know, there's board and committee reps and subcommittees. So I think for the next month, I think it's fine, Jesse. And if we wanted to change in six weeks, we could. It Sorry, it's fine, but we need all three
of us to have a meeting. And if that's true, I would ask the board to vote that we're just a committee of three. in case one of us can't make it. That would mean we'd have to cancel the meeting. Yeah. Um I know I know we have too many meetings
scheduled. We all three of us said we could be there, but life is life. So Jess does make the motion. Okay. I move that the planning board uh appoint the subcommittee members as just three people which is Bruce Fred
Hartwell, and myself, Jesse Major. Jar. Well, I I had a question. Um although I guess I second I second Jesse's motion. Well, okay. Now we've got a second. What's your question?
My question is um uh Jesse when you were saying like you know joining the meetings versus being an official member would we be joining as like a just a a jeriff a resident of Ammerst or would I be a panelist and
just like a non- voting member? You would be a non- voting member but the way we've run the meetings is not like you're in the participant room and you raise your hand. We we've basically run it as a conversation and unless the meeting gets too big, that's how we would plan to continue. So,
okay. So, I mean I Jar I'm all in favor for you to be an official member if you'd like to be. I wasn't trying to discourage that. No, I Well, I mean I'm I'm very interested. I just am cautious of overcommitting myself. Absolutely. Absolutely.
Well, we'll you'll get a second chance because we when we do our voting later, we can revisit the question. I will say I have not been a member. I went to one meeting uh a couple months ago when we were starting to talk about the North Ammeris
overlay and you know it's really it is it is purely a conversation. I didn't feel like any secondass person uh except that I was it was the first time I was in that conversation. Great.
All right. Um, that's it for housing sub subcommittee. Can we vote on a motion? Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Okay, so we got the motion, we got the second. Uh, any more conversation, Johanna? Nope.
I thought we gave it a second still. My bad. Okay, so we got a third. All right. Um, now we will go through that vote and this time we'll just start with Bruce again. Hi. And Fred.
Hi. And Jesse or Angus rather. Hi. And Jesse. Hi. And Johanna. Hi. And Jara. Hi.
And I'm an I as well. That's unanimous. We have a newly constituted housing subcommittee. Thank you. All right. And DRB with Karen having left the
board, uh, we will need to vote a new representative to the design review board. Um, for Jara and Angus, uh, we are sort of statutoily required to vote a member to participate
with the design review board. Um, and they I I think they have an infrequent schedule of meetings depending on if there's something they need to talk about. Um, they deal with a lot of signage downtown.
Um, and they also review other projects downtown with uh more of a architectural design conversation than I mean that's kind of more where they focus their discussion.
we have a broader conversation. Their uh recommendations are just that they are not binding. Um so that may be another area of interest for you guys um to to to choose to
participate. Um Nate, anything you would add to that? No, you know, I was going to also mention um in addition to, you know, voting uh annually for officers, there's this uh CPA committee and other board and committee liaison.
Well, we keep losing Nate. So, be of that committee. Yeah. Um so, we we do need a CPA rep possibly for this coming season in addition to in addition to the design review board. So, those are things just to consider and if you have questions,
you can always ask staff or another board member. But, um I you know, uh Angus and and Jara came in for orientation. We did mention that uh described those two other you know, the designer reboard and CPA committee. I think you know it's a conversation we could put on the agenda in August for
the board. Right. And I was on the CPA committee for at least one maybe two years. Um, it's a it's a feel-good committee because they give away money uh to worthy town initiatives. Um,
and um, it it mostly meets through the through the fall. Um, so the sooner we can get that person appointed, the more they can be part of the process for that group. All right. Um,
now we're up to report of chair. Um, I guess my only uh report or my only thing I was going to mention was I wanted I want to publicly thank Karen for her service on the board. I'm sorry she
isn't listening at the moment. Um, I think a couple of us reached out by email to her and thanked her, but uh, you know, uh, it's always hard to have transitions, but, uh, she seemed to enjoy her time on the board and she
seems to be still, uh, happy to participate in other parts of town life. So, uh, welcome Jara and Angus and thank you, Karen. All right. Uh Nate, anything from staff?
Uh yeah, a few things. I would recommend not having a July 30. Oh, yeah. July 30th meeting. 30th meeting. All right. Uh anybody? No. July 30th meeting. We will be meeting August 6th and
there'll be a public hearing for the zoning amendments for inclusionary zoning and accessory dwelling units. So, we meet the following week anyways. Uh, and then, you know, we'll meet on August 20th. So, um, you know, um, Doug may be gone, Johanna, uh, on July 30th,
and I think just, you know, we don't necessarily have any business on August 6. We could also talk about the North Amoris overlay after the public hearing. So, we have, you know, we have, I think we have the ability to not miss a beat if we don't meet on July 30th. Jesse,
uh, just for the record, I'll be away the six. I'll I can try and make it, but unlikely. Not sure it matters, but Okay. If you have any comments on Sorry. Uh, if you have any comments on, you know, the zoning amendments, Jesse, just you
can always email staff. Jar. Um, thank you. And I I apologize if these don't need to be asked here, but uh do we know if Angus and I are going to be able to vote on those issues on August 6
on the zoning amendments? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. And then do we have the date um selected for when we will have our board selections? I had made a note to myself that maybe August 20th would be the meeting where
we'd have an agenda item to discuss, you know, it doesn't have we don't have to take a vote that night, but it would be an agenda item to discuss, you know, officers and committee representatives or leaison and then maybe the vote actually doesn't happen till September, but at least we have that conversation.
Great. Okay, that sounds that sounds great. Okay, thank you. Um yeah, I don't have um I was going to mention that you know the housing production plan the board uh voted for it. It goes to town council uh I think
next week. So I I think I'll be there uh for that. And then if it you know if it moves forward I would recommend uh the housing production or the um housing trust and planning board maybe having um some part of a combined meeting to talk about the plan and how we divide
responsibilities or strategies or just understand how each want to approach approach it. Yeah I think you've dropped out Nate. Yeah. Yeah. So I was thinking I've spoken with Greg Rashane the planner who staffs the trust and we were thinking maybe in
October it would be a good time for the trust and planning board to have you know a combined meeting at least for some point you know it could just be an hour one evening uh to talk about the housing production plan and how we want to approach its strategies and his action steps.
Okay. Uh I don't have anything else this evening. All right. Anyone else have anything before we adjourn? All right, time is 911 and
thank you all. Thanks everyone. Thank you. Good night. You Thanks, Pam. Oh, you're so welcome. We'll see you soon. All right. Good night. Yeah, you too. Bye. Bye. Pause.
Stop recording.