--------- here just because he's he's GNA talk to some of the PD issues I'm on Perfect all right there you are all right all right theing is started y y good afternoon everyone today is the
March 5th meeting of the joint Capital planning committee and seeing we have a quorum I'm calling the meeting to order at 4:03 and the first thing I will do since we're conducting this virtual is to call on the members of the committee to make
sure they can hear and be heard um uh Bob hegner uh present Lee Edwards present Nat lison I'm here and Bridget Hines here here and I'm expecting holla
Lord to join us um just so everyone knows of the people who will be speaking uh Kathy and Bob are both on the council Lee Edwards and Nat are on the LI are here as Library trustees and Bridget is here for the schools so um I'm turning it back over
to you Melissa having okay P us to order all right so um the agenda had a review of the the Capital Improvements list um I have um made some small edits to it um
but I I did not um put a new updated wanting the packet but the um the list is essentially the same um and we haven't changed any of the financing um I did talk about with a couple people during the regular budget
meeting some requests that maybe should have made it in here that we might um before those groups present um ad later but they were relatively nominal dollar so um when I have an update of that I'm
happy to give that to you um and then you know we have the um ammer Police Department here to talk about their requests um of which they have three um and
um and uh two in their department and one uh one request in vehicles and then um and then we have facilities here to talk about their um building and maintenance repair plan which is what
the the request is it's not for any one particular project it's for a plan that they can articulate um and I'm not sure um if if Rob and Jeremiah are uh prepared to talk about the request um uh
for the um $500,000 for additional uh bang Center Renovations or if we're going to hold that over until um the planning meeting so but I think we're ready to proceed in
your order Melissa is the police are first correct so yep so police um this first request is the vehicles let's just let's just do the vehicles first um so
um the original request did come in at um for $360,000 which is the request in the out years and this is to replace four vehicles which would keep them or catch them back up to being on track for years when those uh vehicle Replacements were
um decreased um and again unfortunately this year we did um decrease a lot of the vehicle requests that came before uh Capital planning um and so uh I I don't know who here on the um police side
wants to speak to the request of the need for the vehicles the a to the fleet that kind of thing we're relatively informal so you can just speak up if it's I'm I'm not sure whether it's Chief Ting or who wants who is taking
other vehicles sorry it was me but that was I'm mute can you hear me yes yes um so you know we are our Fleet we're trying to move towards eventually to be um to have electric vehicles however uh
unfortunately the the technology has not caught up for us to be able to have fully electric vehicles um you know in any police cruiser there are just so many components so many electrical components laptop computers and the Lighting systems and whatnot that take
up way too much uh juice for lack of a better term uh and it just cannot uh fulfill that so right now our our entire fleet is uh uh hybrid technology um and so we had estimated a fully equipped
Cruiser to be uh about $90,000 each and that's fully equipped um in the past we have requested a we we kind of had a pattern for Cruisers to replace uh the ones that are that are the oldest ones
within our Fleet we usually keep uh each vehicle to at least 100,000 miles and that could vary in terms of how long that lasts uh it's usually anywhere between three to five years depending on if it's a patrol vehicle or an
administrative vehicle or a detective vehicle uh so the usage is a little bit different um but again in the past we had this pattern where we would uh request for uh through a fouryear pattern so we would go three three three
and then four in terms of requesting for vehicles and in fiscal year 21 it was a four vehicle year we didn't receive any um in fiscal year 22 and 23 we received three vehicles in 24 we were slated for
four but we're cut down to three so we we're down five vehicle Replacements and we were trying to catch up and so that's why we are trying to request uh uh three $60,000 uh really for the next five years to try and play catchup um so
we've learned that throughout the the years that you know the vehicles that are that exceed 100,000 miles um the warranty is no longer there and it's just not worth investing more money into these vehicles they are used
247 um 365 days a year so these vehicles are um obviously very important for us to be reliable to respond to calls for service uh but they also need to be reliable to just not break down so so we can not pay as
much in repairs um so that is the the request within itself are there questions from the committee and Melissa you can probably take this down from the screen as we take questions so people can I and I
well partially I can see Hands uh Bridget um yeah I was looking through the um the spreadsheet of all the different departments and one thing that struck me is a lot of departments have vehicles that are well over a 100,000
and have rotations that are that are less so and I'm just wondering how we as a committee are making sure that we're being Equitable to between departments especially given that other departments aren't receiving any Vehicles this year
you know you don't want to give one kid the ice cream cones and not the others yeah no I certainly understand that and I think my argument for that is that you know again we are a 247 365 uh day operation so those vehicles
are constantly being used um you know without vehicles we can't respond to calls uh and I would argue that that's the only real difference between us and other uh Town departments but like the E the fire
department in the DPW those are are they both 247 operations too or maybe maybe not I don't I don't know but I'd imagine uh they are but in kind of in different capacities you know certainly um I don't know enough about I think it I think
there's differences in each Fleet so the DPW I think there's different departments where they have vehicles that are used a little bit more often than others and same thing with the fire department um I don't think their ladder trucks are being used every single day but um you know we have vehicles that
are on constant Patrol uh versus just being called out so it's a little bit different so I do want to say just on that for as far as the police I mean the fire department so um their ladder
trucks are on a rotation in um and they they do have some vehicles um that are more similar to a command vehicle of of of of of the police department you know for administrative staff to do inspections um and that kind of thing
and those requests for those um those Vehicles were pushed out um at in the fire department however their ambulance vehicles are funded through the ambulance fund and so they therefore we did not um defer those requests so all
of their requests um that are being approved um for vehicles um are coming directly from the ambulance fund and that would be the vehicle that I think is most similar to um the type of vehicle that Chief Ting and the police
department is asking for here the the vehicle that is used you know 247 on call with a staff person in it um 247 a day would be the ambulance vehicles and they do have a request for an ambulance this
year um I see councelor Lord has her hand up and I also want to make sure she's joined us that you can be heard um Council Lord um thank you chair sh um chair Shane um I just have a quick
question around data because I am absolutely sure that the APD gets notified or or does more of those after hour calls and the other departments like DPW maybe ambulance thank you for
mentioning that um Melissa so I don't know if that might be helpful in the argument to say here's how many calls we get in the after hours versus fire which is really specific ambulance
is less specific but um maybe that would be helpful to know how many after hour calls so that we could um not have confidence but also convey why this is an important to the
public thank you also I don't know if that was clear if it wasn't clear please let me know and I'll okay so I will I will say that the calls um are something that we report in the regular operating budget
we do not um report them as as they align to time of day but that is information that um is provided not in this part of the project but you know maybe I can work with um with so the only two departments that are Staffing Vehicles
247 DPW gets an emergency call but they're calling someone outside of their normal business hours for that that's a a kind of a call back sort of emergency versus a 247 operation which would be um the ambulance fire and police thank you
m n uh yes um for chief T I'm sorry if I have missed this or didn't see it but um or if you don't have the information at your fingertips even an estimate um what would you say would be the um mileage of
your four oldest or highest mileage uh police vehicle certainly over 100,000 miles I don't have the exact mileage off the top of my head um but we have we have certainly uh our oldest vehicles
are in excess of 100,000 miles and those are how many roughly I don't know unfortunately our fleet manager is not here yeah okay on vacation I wish he was here with us to give you a more exact breakdown um but
usually we have a rotation also where we have some of uh uh we try to utilize our oldest Vehicles the most that need to be replaced so certainly we have a rotation schedule as well to try and preserve the newer Vehicles as as long as possible um
but at at the same time one of the issues is once they do hit 100,000 miles the warranty expires um and it just becomes much more costly uh versus having a newer vehicle so n the vehicle list we got
from last year Melissa is working on updating that but you can at least look at how many police cars there were last year in feary there were 27 last year yeah that and that does not include parking or um Animal Control have
separate vehicles for that and I'm um let me see if I can so if I may just add you know the the portion of the vehicles that we are looking to be replaced are strictly the patrol vehicles that are being utilize 247 365 days a year we do
have vehicles in our Fleet that are not utilized as often uh certainly we have um and they're utilized for different reasons but we will hold on to those vehicles for much longer so for example we um as of last year we had a vehicle that was about 15 years old um and that
was finally replaced within our Fleet so not every single vehicle is uh is like 100% up to date a lot of them will be utilized for different purposes n is that the the explorers are
the um patrol cars Chief te that's correct so your hand still up NAD is that a okay so I see Bridget your your head is up again I think yep I yeah I was just going to say I was looking at that spreadsheet but now I realize it's from last year so there may
be new numbers in it but there were two cars with 101,000 and 10 um 104,000 and those were the the Ford Explorers and then there's um a Honda Accord at
170,000 maybe all the police cars could be R Accords because it looks like the that has a good life cycle on it yeah we wish you know um one thing I I mean I understand you run out of the the
maintenance contract but in O you know like 100,000 is still in three years that's still fairly young for a car you know for yeah I mean for for for a regular civilian car that is true and certainly I would argue with
administrative vehicles are driven more like civilian vehicles but these are hard miles that are being driven you know and certainly for example with the hybrid vehicles you know they're much heavier so uh even replacing the tires they they wear out much quicker so they
wear out about 30% quicker than a normal vehicle and again we are responding to calls so these are hard Miles when I say hard I mean these these unfortunately these vehicles get beat on uh to the extent that they are traveling at fast
speeds and stopping and starting and there's a lot of idle time um that is associated with it so they are built a little bit more robustly than your average vehicle the police interceptors are a little bit heavier duty but nevertheless those are really tough
miles that are being applied just um I had we asked this last year and I think the answer was partly it was till soon too soon to tell whether the hybrids are lasting longer than the preh hybrid cars you know that I know there's
a small battery and a larger so I can understand the tire part but does the hybrid itself last longer or do you not have enough experience yet to know that unfortunately the sample is kind of small in terms of the years uh however we have experienced a lot of issues with
the hybrids uh we kind of chock that up as as newer technology that hasn't been uh totally solidified yet so there have been a lot of uh a lot of maintenance issues more than we had expected uh so there have been some Rising costs with
our maintenance um we've expended our our maintenance um allotment much quicker than we normally have in the past year so uh yeah it has been kind of problematic thank you so there's if if people don't have
any other questions on this they have there two other requests one is a large number and one is a smaller number so I don't know which which order you want to take them in and who wants to speak to
them you want me to start with the the um the watch video system the watch card yeah sure and so um you know we do have some subject matter experts here you know we have uh the director of our it
Sean Hannon and we certainly have our other IT specialist bill Glover um and they will speak to the effect of uh our watch guard incard video system and I will just introduce uh in a nutshell what that is is that's all of our
Cruiser cameras uh that are attached to every vehicle it also uh encompasses all of our video surveillance system within the police station as well as for our interview rooms um so this system itself is about uh it's more than 20 years old
and the reason why we are putting in this request is uh the company watch guard was recently bought out by another company called Motorola and Motorola after they bought out the company they have revamped the system so the current system that we have is obsolete um so
when portions of it begin to fail there's no longer any support or replacement for that particular item um so we are asking for a total replacement of uh our entire watch card system so it can be up to dat with the latest
technology um and and again the biggest reason is there's a lack of support for it and the items are Obsolete and if you don't mind uh Sean if you don't mind jumping in Sean and Bill to kind of talk a little bit about that yeah sure I just I just had a quick coughing
fit so hopefully it it it stops we'll find out go ahead Sean sorry yeah so I don't have much to add to what Chek Ting said the um but it's it's a system that they have been using for for 20 years it's um
what records all their videos in the vehicles booking rooms interview rooms um it's one one system that does all of that for them which makes it very easy for a training perspective that for the officers and everybody else it's it's the same the same system for us to
support it it's the same system it's the same equipment that equipment um is something that when they buy a new vehicle it gets moved from vehicle to vehicle so so what's in in a one-year-old Cruiser is is still a 10
15y old piece of equipment um currently just because it rather they don't buy new every time they just move it move it from vehicle to vehicle because that's the most costeffective way of doing it um and that Hardware some of them are starting to
fail the um batteries have failed on them so the the clocks need to be reset if they get rebooted and things like that which which adds to um adds work for their fleet manager or it if if he's unavailable and then um
the software that it runs on is also Obsolete and no longer supported so as they start running into problems um the they they can't get support on it so it's really um it's pretty critical that
it gets replaced because they use they use it for um all their stops so yeah yeah operationally I'll just add that it's it's it's come to be expected that this technology is is present um they use it in their day-to-day operations
from um their their officer standpoint they use it for when they're making stops they use it uh when they're booking people um during arrest they use it during their interview process and it's a one Consolidated cohesive piece
of technology that uh has been trained on um so there's a cost to that as well that um every officer there actually knows how to use this piece of technology it's in the cars it's in the building their Court officers use it their T tips use it so operationally
it's a part of their dayto day um almost every day um if not every day if I could just add one more thing to that you know this is something that would eventually tie into um a project that we're looking into which is body warn cameras um in that particular
system we we received a a recent estimate and that's uh something that we plan on applying for a capital request down the line um it's probably an excess of uh $500,000 for body War camera for
that system and that would directly tie into uh this watch card system or this Motorola system that we are looking to purchase questions Bob's hand is up and Melissa maybe take it back down so I
don't miss any hands thank you I I did want to say that the um oute request um I did um put that like I was telling you that I hadn't updated the um the the capital um projects forecast but the
oute request is the things that are coming in now so while it's not on the draft that you guys have in your packet that oute request for um body warant cameras will be in the next iteration um along with a few other things where as we talk to departments and they talk
about their out out years um when I had submitted the draft to you guys originally we had not um concentrated on the out years but now as we're you know getting everyone online um we're addressing those out years so that you'll have a better list um I think
I'll have an updated one for next next meeting just because uh Chief Ting brought that one up and there's a couple other um projects like that that um the out years have been put in for
Bob yeah I I have two questions uh one is uh can we phase this in any way in other words are some of the cameras themselves uh you know fairly new or uh capable of of tying into the um the new
software system um and you know is or do we have to buy everything all at once secondly um how long will the system that Motorola provides be supported do you know I mean I'm I'm happy to answer
that um so I I've been with uh employed with the town for about 20 years and this uh technology has been in place for most of my career if not all my career here I'll just start there that the police department was really Forward Thinking um they were there was not too
many law enforcement agencies uh that go back that many years that have this Tech but the answer your question directly it's it can't um be done um you know piece by piece uh it's basically a rip
and replace it needs to be ripped out it's no longer under support um and there's a cost there um both in human resources when it comes to IT staff um and just trying to fix it they're just trying to find parts are not available
the software is not also under support um so there's there's really no way to fix um like the server end where the video stored without that software support and the current quote um that we have now
there's five years of support um built into that and then how much would it be then after five years well that's that's a a great question um we have the fiveyear Outlook we don't have anything beyond
that I one option is we keep it running with what we have um but it's probably not the best PA forward but I I can look into that Sean I don't know if it's on that quote but I didn't see oute after
five and just to build on Bob's is the whole system needs to be replaced after five years or parts of her start to go no no no after five years we would um likely um get pricing for both software
and warranty m maintenance and I I can look into the the quote and give you an estimate in a minute about what that would look like but answer the question we didn't have year six seven or eight in built into that quote Yeah Yeah so this this is a
one-time um you know it's a onetime thing now um they they will basically guarantee they'll support it up to five years but the expectation is that it would would live beyond that is uh what they have in a lot of the vehicles
now are 10 12 years old um so I would I would expect that it would it would continue to last for you know I think 10 years with paying for maintenance on it is is not unreason that's a great Point Sean yeah
historically it has for this so y okay thank you if I and then the whole yeah yeah I could just add you know I mean this current system that we that we have has lasted for 20 years and I would I would guess that if the company was still in business we would still
probably be able to use it if it wasn't for the fact that they folded under and sold out to Motorola Motorola made all the changes and we would probably still be using the system I see Bridget and then n my question is just about the the two
different prices I saw in um in the projection at1 5 and then here at 250 and I didn't see like if there was a quote or an invoice attached to the document so I'm wondering like what the price difference was
about the I think the the initial when we initially submitted it it was uh we had a quote for 195 and then we got a more recent quote um which bumped it up to 250,000 and then we just received
another quote today to try and confirm that and I think Sean or Bill might have that information yeah so I went through that there the quote wasn't exactly for incar cameras per se but I added it up quickly and it came up to around 225,000
um but and that was what I came when I when I totaled that quote up for the incar videos that's about where it came so it's it's very close to that $250,000 mark thank you uh n oh yes um thanks just a bigger picture
here I wasn't on the committee last year but looking at the report from last year it looked like there was a records maintenance system uh that was deferred last year and looked like it was being planned for FY 26 um now I see that's um listed under FY
27 um but just in terms of kind of priorities Chief Ting can you talk about the records man management system system and this uh video system in terms of priorities overall yeah I'm going to defer that to uh the captain young if you don't mind
stepping in and talking a little bit about that you know our records management system is uh is outdated and uh and certainly we've looked into some companies Ron thank you Chief so I think the shorter answer sir is I think the video is more important and
that was one of the reasons because of the lack of support and how that that is exposed firing I mean our current records management system is very dated um we've had it on board we took it on board in uh shortly after the beginning of the millennial so 20012 2002 it's
about 25 years old we have and again I you know the short answer is some of that support is also evaporating as well that company's been sold many many times um it at the time it was a very robust records management system um but as as
we know with technology it really starts to evaporate rather quickly um and and it's going to be it's just a matter of time um within the next couple of years when the current the current company that owns for square um will just not support this records man system at all
so I think that was Chief Ting's way last year thinking forwardly um and planning for what the future would look like um but in terms that's a very long answer my apologies for that the short answer I think the the need for the the video system is dire whereas the records
management system is on the horizon but you know we we're certainly able to continue to operate with the system we currently have yeah and I I I can second what Ron says because I'm deep into that technology as well and I Ron is right on point any other questions um and thanks
Nat because I noticed also that that we postponed it one year and it's postponed again um so it's sitting there for fy2 seven so there there's one more Melissa correct or is that it there's one more
so this is for a um inar mounted um speed radar units which I know nothing about so I turn it over to you guys so what these are these are uh built-in radar units
for specifically to gauge uh speed for Motor Vehicles and um you know I'll tell you one thing uh one of the number one complaints that we receive throughout town is traffic uh issues and certainly speed is on top of that list so we
utilize these uh incar mounted speed radar units on a daily basis and currently um the the models that we have are uh 25 years or or more they're they're just outdated and they're beginning to fail um and every single
one of them before we utilize them they have to be calibrated and and if they're not calibrated correctly then they are not useful to us um we have to be able to swear in a in a court of law that these um instruments are calibrated and
that they are accurate and that they're correct because they are gauging people's speed and we are enforcing and acting upon it and if it's inaccurate then we are really misleading uh the public and doing the public a disservice
um so we need to update our uh incar mounted speed radar unit Fleet per se um and so that's why we have uh requested for this project cost to to replace them however with that being said uh I'm sure
one of the questions would be can we replace them as we go and we certainly can uh this isn't an All or Nothing Is Not An All or Nothing type of request um you know certainly that $31,000 would be able to replace all of them all at once
we would appreciate that however uh this is something that could be peac Meed uh committee turning it back to hands Lee yeah I have a question it's more kind of General because this is
only my second year on jcpc and I feel still very new is it typical in the town not not just in ammer but in the world of Town Financing to run Municipal institu the
infrastructure for municipal institutions until they're in their death throws before they get replaced I mean that seems to be a theme that you know we're here because we're
at the end at the line and in many instances the systems we have are so old that the companies no longer exist or the only person who could repair them died or parts have to be you know fabricated
by hand so it just maybe that's just the way municipalities run and it's a statement of my ignorance but I'm sort of shocked that's all I I would say from a technology perspective we we try and
squeeze as much as much juice of out of everything as we can and it's um it's really just when we come to ask ask to replace something it's it's the end of its life and um we've we've gotten everything we can out of it and uh in no
way was in no way was my question at all critical no it's just it just I mean I just think like it's like waiting to if I were living in a house where I thought in the next
rainstorm my bedroom would be inundated I wouldn't let my roof get to that place but maybe towns just can't that's the way that's the nature of the tight budgeting process that most towns have to go through I don't know I could
just say for us from our perspective is that you know I I I concur with Sean that we try and utilize every piece of equipment till till you can't anymore uh but the the problem is is that the these items that we're requesting are essential so when they break down it
takes so long to replace them or or to allocate the funds for it that uh it becomes a detriment so that that way we try to get ahead of it uh but we do try to squeeze as much out of that tube of toothpaste that we
can thank you now I see Melissa if you can take the display down I see your hand is up and Bob hand Bob's hand is up um so I don't know what Bob was going to say but I I would say that uh not
just in municipalities here in Massachusetts but certainly the municipalities I've been here in Massachusetts and I think nationally deferred maintenance of infrastructure of all kinds is an issue and it's an issue that we're dealing with here in ammer and what happens is there's compe
meeting um needs for what is operational and um to supply the services the people the services themselves and then the infrastructure required to do that and we have a tendency um to say well this
is all we have so you know the chief said earlier today and I know that Jeremiah is going to talk about you know the buildings to to your point you know the roof is leaking we know that in several of the buildings here in Town um
and we wouldn't wait that long for ourselves but we're ex we're expected to be um careful with the uh with the taxpayer dollars and so we try our best to stretch the dollar and sometimes that
um that decision is Pennywise pound foolish but we've come to a point uh especially this year I mean it's on the front of every newspaper for every community you know what what do we prioritize and I I
think that that's you know what you're going to see through this experience um is unfortunately not uncommon but you know that's where the frustration is of you know we know better we know we need
to fund these things but it um you know one is a sacrifice of something else and there never there's never a good choice Bob and then Bridget yeah I I just wanted to say that um you know I'm I'm
72 years old and I when I was a kid we didn't have any of this technology I mean you know we are in a technology age we're in a digital age and um as much as the technology helps us dayto day it
gets Obsolete and it has to be replaced and if you look at the school um budget the the school request there's a a lot a big line in there for for technology for computers um you know the the we're giving you know I think someone
mentioned it yesterday uh that uh you know and certainly uh Sean manano mentioned it it at MMA uh that you know you used to be able to buy Tech textbooks and use them for 10 or 20 years and now you you have to buy
subscriptions and you have to renew them every year um and so you have to pay the companies it's a very different model than when I was a kid so I think we have to adjust to that um the on the flip side though the town only has so much
revenue you know and we have to manage within the revenue that we have and so that's why we have to make hard decisions about about these things and try to prioritize and try to put the money towards the things that matter the most so you know the we're asking
question questions but that doesn't mean that we're not uh sympathetic or empathetic to the situation facing the police department and the facilities and everybody in the town so anyway it it's just not easy but
we are in this sort of Technology we're in the digital age and you know there there going to be costs that we incur because of that Bridget you're muted thanks I was just going to speak
to to Le Point I like the municipal budgets are in a situation where literally the wheels are falling off my son was on a school bus that the tire fell off on on a field trip and it was on the side of the road and we closed a school building this week because the
roof collapsed and then there had to be a specious remediation and kids are at the middle schools with Chromebooks that can't be replaced but their textbook is on it so I think that's sort of the situation we are in in and my
questioning about the cars and I understand they're they're well used is that you know that they feel very very new compared to some of the lines we see in other Town departments for vehicles especially you know even the schools where we have a bus load of kids sitting
with no tire that type of thing so I just concur with what Bob upset is you know we if we could we give everybody everything you know but that's not the reality we're in funding wise Lee do you have something specific
to the request because I just we also have a whole okay I I could continue this discussion but I won't I'll just take my hand down because I think we're g about to hear about buildings so so are there any other questions the
one I the one I had that's not related to your requests is we had a a series of Resident requests some of which were traffic caling and blinking lights and I don't know whether the police department had a chance to review
those yet so I'm not putting you on the spot but when DPW comes we were going to ask them about them because we have going to have to make a recommendation so Melissa maybe it could be coordinated that we get a joint response on there
were several that were you know this a blinking light to tell you what your speed is a couple were crosswalks um so that that I think it's a police plus DPW set of issues in terms of you know what's the bigger picture yeah right and
I think one was lighting too Lighting in one was one was lighting exactly it was street street lights on Dana I think it was Dana a dark street with no street lights so so I'm I'm not asking you right now but maybe there's a way where you could
we could at least get a a joint look at these and how they um how they fit so I know we've been asking as a committee but also as a town for traffic cing crosswalks lighting you know some sort
of master plan on which streets need them the most but these came in again um from a variety of places around town so I'm not asking you right now I'm just suggesting DPW I think you have them
listed Melissa for the N March 19th so maybe there can be you know a a a part carved out of that meeting to talk specifically about that set so if I sent you those requests um a few weeks ago um
Chief and I don't know if you've had a chance to review them but um if you're not available on the same day that the DPW is if you just want to give me a response I'm happy to relay it um as to what how you guys think that fits in with your priorities for the community
you know exactly so I won't ask ask you necessarily to come back just more though you've had input into whatever um dpw's responses are yeah I mean I can I could probably answer that question right now for you I mean certainly we are on board with that
um any type of traffic calming measures um a lot of it has to do with technology you know is is something within our wheelhouse and um that's something that we support 100% uh again just to reiterate one of the the biggest
complaints that we get and I'm sure it falls on your table too Kathy is that uh and certainly with all of our other town councilors is that that traffic is an issue you know speed is an issue um th those are the number one complaints so anything that we can do uh
to try and help that effort we support that 100% thank you so I not seeing any other hand so I want to thank you all the team very much for for coming today um and also the
offer that on 31,000 it does all the cars but you could cut it down I mean 31,000 seems like such a bargain if we can do them all on the radar you know so see seeing seeing numbers that aren't in the hundreds of thousands is always terrific from my my perspective so so
thank you I'll be honest with you I mean you know and to what Bob had talked about earlier and I totally agree I mean I'm one of those people that finally got a cell phone when I was 32 years old and now you're seeing kids at 5 years old with cell phones so it's yeah quite a
change um but you know the items that we're asking for are things that that are certainly uh pertinent for our jobs uh so we we understand the state that we're in you know budget wise but uh certainly the items that we were requesting are things that are necess
necessity for us so we appreciate any input thank you well thank you very much and thank you for giving us so generously of your time so I you are all free to leave or if you want to hear Jeremiah's presentation you're free to
stay Thank you thank you see you Jeremiah yeah you're on your own yeah take care everybody thanks for everyone's time bye thank you so um I don't have anything to share as far as documentation but I know that
Jeremiah and Rob MOA have presented um some things to us internally that are you know sort of bigger picture um uh as to the the whole scope of the landscape and they've done a lot of work over the
past I'd say year to two um to get a a real um understanding of the conditions of all um Municipal owned buildings and um this um move to a oneline request allows them to take all of that
information and all of the Deferred maintenance uh to your point Le um that is here in the city and then um set priorities um based on um you know highest and greatest need um and and then being able to Pivot for an
emergency that they' hoped to stretch for one more year and then something came up and they weren't able to do that so um that's my summary of what I've heard from them and and and I'll hand it over to to the professionals welome I think your your
mic is up now can you hear me now yes wonderful yeah um I I would say if if you if you sat through these jcpc meetings with me over the the course of
the last few years you'd see some changes and one of the big uh changes was the numbers were growing uh last year we started seeing some larger numbers and that was we'll say to prepare you for what what we're
presenting now essentially uh we had put up U or put in some requests last year for 500,000 say for for roofs um in in past years we would have 200,000 or 250,000 for all
buildings interior [Music] exterior um and and this this is the sort of path that we want to take and I did put together a little presentation Kathy as how I always do that'd be great' be great and and and if
you could also speak to how what you're proposing now but how you've used the money that was allocated yes yes okay so I make you a co-host to share and and just as Jeremiah is bringing it up for
people who haven't been on jcpc what's been happening is it's started to be bundling instead of saying you know five 10,000 for this and 14 for that it's a bundle it's doesn't say which building it allows more flexibility um and my
understanding is it's now a million is what's pencil in sorry okay so here's here's my my wonderful uh piece that I always start
with our facilities department so here here's here's I I wanted to put give you you all an example of of the approach so over on the leftand side was the approach that we used to take um so as you can see we
would have very specific uh uh buckets of money for it could be smaller projects or or maybe larger projects so we have building envelope repairs $200,000 exterior maintenance at Town Hall
$35,000 interior m maintenance Town Hall 20 25 security windows and the police the police station Chiller so the some of the challenges that we would have is we would we would get into some of these
projects um and it may be a building envelope project and we we discover something or we have some cost overrun maybe the project uh changed a little bit but that $335,000
is no longer going to help us we need some additional funding if all of the other funds are spent down I re I really you it becomes a bit of a barrier uh when money is allocated just for
interior it's hard to get it reallocated for the exterior um so what we're trying to do is is over the past few years is create just larger buckets of money that we're saying this is what we're going to do
with we we still have a a system we still have a prioritization but we need these bigger buckets of money to allow us to address all of the the the issues that we see but also the ones that we don't see that
come up over over the course of the year so there again there's you know A reduced flexibility uh there's coordination challenges and operation dist disruption because because again if we're if we're only picking a little
pieces of of the building apart and and doing those repairs um it's impactful to the operations in the community that we serve um there's those potential cost overruns and and again it extends that
duration of the project so on the right hand side this is this is my two asks so the one big ask was 1 million doar for all buildings interior exterior and
accessibility this allows us to look at the the the town as a whole and say what is our priority and then address that priority in a in a in a meaningful way Ro we put roofs on on last last year
and that was 500,000 roofs are extremely expensive uh and especially when you're dealing with the size in in the different Roofing types that that we are we we we have in are
using um so 500 would be wonderful having that million dollars makes it feasible so having this larger bu bucket of money provides us more flexibility we still maintain that
systematic approach to our Capital Pro projects it reduces mobilization costs because we're looking at one big big project where we get a greater number of things done and it and it just and it eliminates some of the different
inefficiencies that that you have with starting in in uh restarting projects so um Jeremiah can you stay on that page and tell us why bangs is on the
list sure Rob are you on and would you like to speak about the bangs or if not I'll sure unless you're going to come back to it so I just we just allocated 2.8 million to Banks if it's okay we can come back to
it and and let J go through the slides what we so you're G to focus Jeremiah just on the million correct yes yeah okay okay so uh last
between last year and this year well say I'm saying calendar year um we had a fa a comprehensive facility condition and assessment done on 10 of our municipal buildings uh it include energy a audits laser scanning and
measurements this this was a very much needed Tool uh the last uh FCA that we had was from 2016 and it wasn't nearly as compreh hensive as as the one that we have now
um like like our accessibility plan that that we had done um a number of years ago this provides us with a format and a pathway to make sure that all of our buildings are are taken care of uh the
way they need to be that we aren't having a leaky roof um and and that we aren we're we're catching things before they crumble essentially so the way that we want to approach it with with this larger bucket
of money is look at the build the building envelope uh ins sight primarily roofs roof drainage um exterior facades uh e entrance and exterior doors and windows accessibility compliance
driveways sidewalks and walking paths so just kind of clicking through so you see this is what we're saying we're we're saying this is how we're going to look at it we're looking at the roof right now this is one piece and and we're we
want to we want to approach the building in in that in such a manner we're going to have a look at this roof what is it going to cost us to replace or repair if if we can you know is this is this our number one priority or is it the facade
are we looking at the masonry all that that sacrificial mortar are we looking at the windows uh you know are do we have a a leaky building that's that's uh uh not
very weather resistant um but water water seepage water damage is is one of the most devastating for for buildings and then we're going to look at everything around the building the accessibility of the building the
approach of the building how do we serve our community so that that is is how we're going to look at at it at each each of our buildings uh and that's initially from there if we've determined
that roof we're we're fairly good on roofs we're fairly good on facades maybe windows and doors and some compliance or accessibility compliance is good we'll open up those buildings and then we're going to start looking at our
sustainability goals we have insulation weatherization electrical infrastructure which will include EV charging solutions for a lot of those Fleet EV vehicles that that we've been requesting or others have been
requesting we and we have our decarbonization goals um we have our mechanical electrical and plumbing includes HVAC air conditioning systems this is a highlight this is something that we need to work towards we need to work towards our
decarbonization goals but we can't if roofs are leaking we can't if windows don't close properly and uh buildings are poorly in insulated if the if the thermal envelope
of the building is no good then then it really does us no good to to update these other items uh we're we're looking at vertical lifts and elevators the domestic water distribution and electrical services and
distribution and then if all of that's good we can start filling in so now we have say we have a project that that ended up we out of that $1 million we we spent $ 850,000 on a larger project we got a
roof done but we also know now like like other departments are are our partners over at at APD we have technology uh challenges as well it could be with fire alarm detection notification and suppression so so this is our our life
safety uh uh an emergency systems those those are are starting to meet end of life and we need to update those because they're no longer being able to be programmed or changed and don't support new they're they're no longer code comp
compliant based on new code as we make these uh changes to the building and we make these meaningful repairs to the build building it will trigger
different Code Compliance and accessibility compliance requirements so we we spend some money over here and we we make this building uh a lot better for for our for our occupants and in the community that it serves but but we also
have these other requirements that we have to take care of so um and it will trigger those those other initiatives and having that larger larger bucket of money will help support each of those
projects and the the the changes that it may uh happen once we start digging into them and so that is my fancy screen share so I'm going
to stop my screen share but I will bring up some of the projects that we have done right so so some of the the more uh notable large
projects that um the facilities uh department has uh either provided some assistance for some oversight or accomplished we have the replacement of the ammer police department roof we have replacement of the ammer police
department Chiller we have support at the the ammer uh uh high school or high schools track and field Fort River Elementary School Jones Library we have the bangs Community
Center uh renovations Kendrick Park uh restrooms um some more smaller uh projects that we provided assistance oversight are accomplished we have LED lighting upgrades at at North and
Central fire so North is almost entirely now on on LED uh fixtures so that that'll help bring those operational costs down uh envelope repairs at North fire flooring replacement
uh to help create a training center in central fire uh headhouse repairs at boltwood garage electrical service installation at Hickory Ridge we uh did some EV charging stations over at
APD um working with afd to add some charging stations over there expanded building access control and security added water bottle stations to buildings uh elevator upgrades for Code Compliance uh bridge and Trail work at
Hickory Ridge and envelope repair at the DPW building so that's that's sort of a a synopsis of of all of the the different fun projects we did questions I have one um Nat go ahead because I have one looking at last
year's list okay um yeah um thanks very much that was that sounds like a great approach to have a bucket that you can use to address you know the things that are needed the most um but I'm in my first year on this committee and I'm just thinking like how does this
actually work it would be very helpful and maybe you don't work this way but um is there a kind of a priority list so kind of the top sort of 10 things top 20 things and then you would kind of go down that list and see what you could do or how is that developed or do you not
know that um a few months before the fiscal year begins or how does that process come about we we are still working on develop and and we want to have that list uh uh to go go to so having done that facilities condition and assessment um we have really
wonderful documents uh each building is 70 80 pages long um for and that it's just a lot of information to to go through but those doc those documents are still in add draft form we are working with the company to to finalize
and and and to sort of make them more accurate before we we start distributing some of that information out there but those those are going to be our guides to creating that that that list of the
highest priority items and and our and really be our Focus um when we have the funds we can focus on those priorities I'm not seeing any other head so I'll ask my question so last year you had
$500,000 last year meaning the current the Year we're living in you had $500,000 called roof yes you said last year that in FY 26 you need another 500 and another 55 so you were looking for
555 for all of the above and you just so everyone knows he Jeremiah listed a bunch of the police Chiller those were all separate items and I'm just looking at the bundled items so the bundle has
gone from 555 to a million was what I observed and then looking in 27 28 and 29 it goes from a million to a million and a half to 2 million to 2 million to two million and Nat's question is what's
you know what's the highest priority in each of these so I I'd like to know what happened to the 500 for something called roofs because that was our first bundle without knowing which roofs n we just said here's some money for something
called roofs we didn't call it roofs and anything else so um and so the so the question I have also is do we need to go all the way up to a million if you don't have your priority lists could we be at
600,000 or 700,000 something less than a million as we start to bundle yeah can I can I answer some of that sure and I'll certainly um have Rob and Jeremiah but the number started at two um and when you get into those
assessments that they have the cost of repairing 10 to 14 buildings depending on which buildings are counting that Jeremiah has under his umbrella the the cost um alone he'll tell you of repairing the roof of this building
takes all of I think what did you guys tell me it to it would be a million dollars for half the roof yeah it's a $2 million about a $2 million replacement for just Town Hall okay you know so I'm just trying to get a sense about the last year bundle
how it was spent and then the new bundle and then my other question is related to when you say 10 buildings did it include Crocker form school did you do a laser and everything else on that elementary school we did not do Crocker that was
not a part of the the initial 10 10 buildings um we did look at Wildwood and we did look at portions of the Middle School uh as far as school buildings yeah I just
since we won't have Wildwood on I I won't talk about Wildwood you know in terms of the the school we plan to continue to have is Crocker of the three so so I'll wait for other questions on
this Bob yeah I I generally support this approach to doing uh the facility management but there is the there there is a a lack of transparency from our perspective in the
sense that we don't know exactly what you're going to do and you know we don't know that what you do I mean we without you know questioning your professional Integrity but we don't know what you're going to do and so um I'm reminded by at
a a a project I did years and years and years ago which was to projecti the cleanup of the America's nuclear weapons complex and Congress was writing a check to the Department of energy for $6.5 billion dollars a year and they said
what are we getting you know what are we buying you know for this and how long are you going to have to we have to spend it so I don't you know I'm not sure you you're obviously not prepared to say that but there is a concern here that
there's a lack of transparency and we know exactly what the money is going to be used for um and so and whether a million is is enough or a million and a half should do it I mean you know it's it's really hard to get our hands around
this without having some more documentation about what is intended to do what the priorities are etc etc so and I I realize you're not there yet but it's very hard for us to know this is
the right amount you know to prioritize um without knowing what it is we're going to get for for a million dollar a million and a half $2 million so I'm just I'm I'm not sure that there's an answer to it I mean I do
support this idea it makes sense Pro from a project perspective um but there's got to be a little bit more transparency at least from my perspective so I know understand what it is that that we're going to be
doing yeah and I would say that one of the the major priorities if not the the number one priority would be looking at the Town Town Hall's slate roof um and and that is that that $1
million may may get me half of a roof and and that's that's the re that's the reality unfortunately um I have estimate or H have estimates from one of the the local Specialists slate Specialists that said
this is a $2 million job and it's probably a $2 million job if I if I could pay $2 million for them to come over here set up staging around the entire building and take care of the entire roof for me but when I say we're we're going to mobilize this enti this
big system this big construction site for only half I'm probably going to pay about $1.3 million for that half and then when I get to the front I'm going to pay 1.5 so so my $2 million uh is really
much more than that and then then we're also where where I have to have uh engineering there's engineering and and Architectural oversight and those costs and it it it's just it it is you know
the the cost climb so quickly which means that these these um these asks um get spent so very fast Lee and Bridget and I have a followup um okay I maybe I missed
something I thought Kathy that you asked what was the $500,000 last spent on and I and I did I miss the answer I didn't hear it okay so that's my question I guess I'm just pleased that I didn't
miss it but I'd be curious thank you uh some of it is I I would just say capacity the uh I I listed off a quite a few projects and I it it is a a relatively small my my department is a
relatively small department and it's it is just about capacity um I if if I'm not working with uh engineering and Architectural to develop all of these documents it's it's Rob Dave it's
procurement uh it it's working with accounting we're we're we're doing it we're doing that all and it's to do a smaller job just to get contracted could take three months so then you look at some of these big bigger jobs when it
does require design work you it it just it just takes quite a bit of time I I have and and working on awarding a contract for a roof design for one of our um water treatment buildings and and
I would say for for Roof Systems that that has been the that was the priority uh when we first were looking at that 500 because it seemed like this is a roof that we could get done with with
that amount of money since then I started developing the the work uh the documentation um and started uh talking with designers about the Town Halls Halls
roof town hall is is another one of if if not the highest priority it's it's 1A and $500,000 gets me uh meaningful repair in
a lot of areas but it it doesn't get us what we need which would be pulling off the slate and actually getting a a a weathertight uh membrane underneath that slate and get getting slate reinstalled
on top of that so it there's been roof work but NE not necessarily um I I can't say that I have a project that I that I can present and say this is what we did with that Bridget I I can say though that to any
um capital projects are allowed to roll from year to year so if he has a project that you know maybe he couldn't get off the ground because it was he only had 500,000 and the actual cost of doing the project is you know we would you say a
million three to to do half the the town hall roof if the other million was to come along then he could get this project going um and do that half a roof then maybe because the bucket is not restrictive to roof if there's an extra
100,000 or 200,000 there might be some faucet suet fixes or you know I'm just trying to you know the things that you'll find out when you start to PE peel back the roof that are extra in in addition to the roof and that's why they're trying to do this sort of
envelope approach um so the I I looked it up the 500s the Thousand is is mostly still available but I think it's a matter of having a project that fits within 500,000 or that can be added to one of these larger buckets so that they can as the costs
rise or they prioritize things and other things come up there's there's movement and ability to to to accomplish it thank thanks Melissa that was the question answer I was looking for so Bridget so there there's 500 sitting to
be drawn on which I didn't they don't have to be spent all in the year that we allocated they don't no Bridget yeah thanks I guess I just would concur with a lot what I'm hearing is the main thing that I'm hearing from my constituents
from school committee is like hey town is building this you know brand new common town is doing x town is doing Y and yet you know the schools look like this or you know cers got leaks and the schools closed down for x or that type
of thing and I feel like having a list and making sure the prioriti are distributed in a way that's fair and that is explainable and is something that I can can share with people in a way that makes sense you know so that
you know to sort of take the temperature down and be able to be very clear with people well I fully understand the approach I think also what the approach is to priorities and how those are made
would be important it's you know it's interesting that you know Crocker Farm which the schools are saying needs replacing soon isn't even on the list and so not really a question but just that and then you said 10 buildings and
when I make a list if the if the schools are on the list great the elementary schools and if they aren't then like four of the buildings maybe aren't being used booster would be replaced like Southeast Street School South Campus DPW
and fire and so then how much is going towards each building I guess and even I know people are saying like $900,000 for a chiller or different things that maybe they're not these are the types of things that have people asking us about
the fairness of the process so Bridget I what I would what I have said in in many meetings is that uh the school department operates its own facility department and their own capital projects and they have not requested those projects and I believe that they
may too also have a capacity issue you know they just need the people together in order to do that and so they're they might uh and they will be here uh I can't remember if it's next week or the week after but that's something that you would bring to them
and you know In fairness to them they have a new facilities man so who just started so you know this is what you know that person has inherited so you know it's hard for us to defend the
priorities if the request hasn't been made and I you know from the school department you know like are you are we prioritizing town over schools well that's not in Jeremiah's or Rob's you know that's not in their area that's
These funds that they're asking for the buildings that they're responsible for are not those buildings they have their own team that for whatever decisions are made to understand really clearly and publicly the the decisions behind them
so that it's Equitable and that I can explain it it would be super absolutely but I I guess what I'm trying to say is that that's a question that we need to ask of them we can't set their priorities for them that's not our role
um to tell them what their priorities are my it's not my role to tell them what their priorities are um and the very final thing I would say is like is there some of this that is operating or is it all truly
Capital this is all truly Capital well I had a couple uh I think com that build on the questions have been asked I think our challenge would be why is it a million you know give us some
justification we we don't really have n ask for highest priority because I don't think if the schools came to us and said we want a million dollars and we'll tell you later what we're going to do with it that for Capital we and we know we know
roofs are leaking and stuff I'm just saying that we we we need some more justification if on and when I say I like the bundling idea I think we all like that um and you know why not 800,000 you know so I'm not saying go way back down then my second comment is
if you think town halls in the mix uh Community preservation act money is available for town hall because it it's a historic building and so we have a separate place we could be looking at that roof um similarly Jones years ago
Drew on some of it for slate roof repairs you know so I don't think it particularly for the Slate roofs on a historic building it all needs to come out of our our capital budget so just
trying to think of um what else and and you know uh lee asked earlier do we wait till the roof has failed you know is the town roof leaking is it you know is it you know so it's we just had work done on our slate roof we have a
1810 is or 1820 because the town's not quite sure when it was built and we just needed big pieces of it repaired they said the roof was actually in pretty good shape so just in terms of thinking through this something more to justify
it um is what I I think you're hearing the ask for the commu from the committee um some some not that once we look through each of the documents and I would also like to know what the 10 buildings were you know you don't need to tell me right now but just in terms
of giving us back what buildings you looked at um cuz I would would not think we should be putting much money into Wildwood for example you know um so I'm going to take my hand down but I I think that's just a uh for the next time or
feed it back through not that you come back but but feed something more back through Melissa for the committee um to to be considering so I think rob you were going to handle bangs sure um so there's a $500,000
request added for bangs uh this is something that was decided following uh the recent meetings where we were uh very excited to get um support for the the $2.8 million allocation for a
renovation project that is almost entirely systems related with um you know potentially a couple of alternates that could be added if uh you know we're our bids are more competitive than our cost estimates uh reflect at this time
so um you know during that process the the town manager you know mentioned a couple things he mentioned you know we were going to uh make an effort to include a fitness center for the senior uh Center and he mentioned a FY 26
request to continue supporting the building with improvements so when we talked about this uh you know what that might look like there are a number of things uh you know one th one item that we're working on right now uh you know get working to
get into design is to bring the building entirely off of fossil fuels with um you know a boiler replacement and a few pieces of the remaining pieces of the HVAC system that are not part of the project that we currently have designed um that's a
project that we would would like to couple with a decarbonization grant uh so that would be as an example would be a $500,000 grant that we would have some match to our estimates are in the8 to $900,000 range to do the full project so
that's one item and you know this all kind of goes back to Jeremiah's approach that that uh detailed to you uh on how we you know we first look at we're first looking at roofs and envelopes and then if those aren't if there is an available funding there's an available project for
whatever reason we don't get bids on a project that we put out uh through procurement that we can shift and we can go to um you know our next uh our next priority which is uh Energy Efficiency and and climate action and and
fulfilling our sustainability goals where we can uh and that's you know that's one example of it now that that Grant might not be awarded that Grant might not be available that project may not happen uh if it was funded that way so we would then want to have um other
options available and you know this is all in the kind of the spirit of let's do more for the the banks Community Center for the senior center um we certainly felt like there was support for that and an interest in that and if that is the case uh we have conceptual
design uh you know to really start to make the senior center function better uh so there would be physical improvements to the space there'd be accepting perhaps the alternates that weren't accepted in the project that we're working on now and completing that portion of it uh
there are a number of things that could be done uh we have a part of that project we have um the the facilities Department's commitment to working on part of the list of accessibility uh issues that need to be resolved we are
also seeking a variance from the state to have the kitchen remain uh as part of this process that may not be awarded and we may have to demo the kitchen or do something different there to be in compliance so we've got all these options uh you know with this with uh
the bang Center uh that you know any one or couple of those you know far exceed you know $500,000 in value so um this was I think you know phase one as we presented it a couple of weeks ago uh
moving into phase two uh which could be uh I think on our right in front of us is either going to be uh completing the HVAC system or moving into some of the improvements mostly for the senior center so questions I have several but
I'm looking to see whether others have the so having I'm just out because I've got school committee meeting right now at 5:30 but thanks all right okay did did anyone else put their hand up because I would like to call on other people before I speak I I want to
hear your questions K okay so when we when we reviewed um when bangs came to us at the council for the use of free cash um we there was a systems report that had been done by an engineering
firm and one of the things they said and then was said to us is the boiler system is in pretty good shape so what what you know not urgent in terms of a repair and the what it did Cover uh was redoing the
HVAC all the airflow um make Comfort zones fire alarm Ada so there were a lot of code upgrades to the building that were in the 2.8 it strikes me that an additional 500,000 when we're on this tit of money
that isn't a list of high priority urgent doesn't feel right on banks um and so what you what you listed Mor yes there may be another phase but it didn't occur to me it would be in the same year we're doing 2.8 um and just so people
know we spent about I think about 300,000 for the design of it you know so the 2.8 had another 300 in it of orpa money so we've had a a big adjustment so so I think I was surprised to see it on
the list is I guess what I would say because some of these are it would be nice to have and then what we were told with the boiler is if we had a whole new airflow system ready that could be integrated with a boiler that we thought
we could get grant money for the the boiler itself the decarbonization not that we would have to have seed money to get the boiler so we were comfortable saying okay there could be grant money so it feels like um this is premature I
guess is the way I would do with uh a lot of other urgent sort of more urgent Capital needs um it doesn't feel as urgent you know it's not leas is the roof leaking but it's not you know this isn't the roof leaking situation um this
is more a uh you know bangs roof isn't on the list here it's it's it's small things to make the building more userfriendly or address some UNM needs of the users but not that the building
itself is in Dire Straits um so I I guess those are my comments on this I was surprised to see it on the list and I'll I'll wait for the other comments I yeah no I I understand um you know I will say that um there's no way to know
how how long how good our boiler is I mean I think that's a you know a statement made in a report by an engineer who didn't do any type of performance testing on any equipment um we have no reason to think that it's going to fail tomorrow but we never know when it's going to fail tomorrow but
that's not really the reason but I I just wanted to say that that I wouldn't rely on that statement uh you know in that in that report we've we've um recently pressed the engineers on a number of items in the report to understand exactly what level of testing
and and performance um you know evaluation they've done and and we you know we're learning how much you know assumption is made in their work and uh when they move forward to present the the options that they did so you know
this is really a decision we we have to make you know are we are we going down this route of of decarbonization are we are we seriously going to approach this and if we are we need to design it we need to be prepared for the application to try to seek
uh funding and then be prepared to supplement it um and it kind of has to happen in that order uh you know a design for the system that we're looking at that we're getting into is you know going to be60 to 80,000 you know just to be be prepared
to seek the grant money that's available and like I said that's a $500,000 Grant we're evaluating cost estimates and no we're in the you know $8 to $900,000 range for the project so just to give you an idea you know right wrong that's our that was our approach is that you
know our next our next best thing to do in that building is to um is to finish out the HVAC system get off fossil fuels and then from there we would be moving into you know more of the nice improvements that would uh you know
better the experience for the seniors and all the users for that building uh that was simply the approach uh and and it and it seemed like a good time it's it's ideal with having a design team involved with the building it's ideal when we're opening things up in so many places and and know what's going on and
and have conceptual plans already laid out uh been working with the the departments in the building and you know have have support for some of the ideas so it was um it was a good time for us to consider that if funding uh happened
to be available and that's you know how we put it out there so Rob it when you said 6 60 to 80 so 100K would be enough for designing what the boilers what the replacement would look like yes yes in that in that okay that I just want to
make sure and just said 60 to 80 and I rounded it up to 100 but well right no I think I think we're you know we're not that high I don't think we're GNA reach 100 um I think we're 60 to 80 for design with construction Administration you know that's the those are the estimates we're talking about right now um and
we're trying to get that started with you know other sustainability money that we already have in so you know our plan was to to work on design over the next couple of months um be prepared to file an application whenever the the next round becomes available which we think
will be you know sometime mid or late year like it did last year and you know if that you know was Su a successful effort then we would have you know additional funds ready ready to go and and complement and and um you know
follow with the project that we're we would be in the middle of you know we'd be in the middle construction at that point and if I could just say if it if it wasn't um you know clear from Rob's and Jeremiah's presentation there is the sort of mobilization cost every time
that we decide to start a project over or we did a project peace meal we have to mobilize that project rip things apart to put them back together again and at some point it just costs so much more to start over and so when the building is open and we're and we're
doing things that's the most economical time to make the improvements if if they're on the horizon and you know if this is a priority for the town and it's part of you know what we're going to as a town do we want to you know do all these improvements to um a building
right now and then turn around and in five years rip half of that out in order to create the uh opportunity to do the HVAC and I'm probably overstating that but there is some um economy when do um
when you don't do a project peac mail and Melissa this is just not what we were told when we were looking at the 2.8 that was not at all the impression we were given that that we you know we were actually ma another counselor asked you know if we do all this design are we
ready for the boiler and the answer was yes it we'll all be ready to link up you know that so we weren't being told that we're going to rip everything up and they're going to have to rip it up again so and we're not sorry we're not saying that no I mean I I think generally what Melissa is saying you know exists in a
project but not this one you know what the the bangs project as design that we asked and received funding for does everything let's just think about it everything outside of the Boiler Room throughout the building that that's the project that's designed and going to be
built this next step takes care of everything in the boiler room and Equipment that'll be connected to it outside you know that's you know there is a very clean separation there wouldn't be tearing anything open and my comment about it's an ideal time to look
at these other projects is because we have exposure we have the ability to do the the the investigation and really look for the best solution while things are opened up while we have design teams available at our disposal that's that's
the the uh efficient part of the pro a project like this it isn't so much on the construction side it's in the design and the planning side side uh and that's you know that's what we were looking at um but certainly what we said in the original presentation is true there you
know the there is no re you know reconstructing that would be needed for any of the projects that were considering for the bank center oh I I just dominated that but I Bob Bob was there for the original
presentation to um we're both on finance so we heard a longer and we had documents so so any other you know I I jumped right in but in a non I would say a non-supportive way but with a
smile so any other questions on this and you know this is partly you know I think my concern is partly the Optics of it with with the struggle we've got on the operating budget side that we've argued that 10.5 is absolutely essential for
Capital and then when things come in that seems like it's less urgent that argument doesn't seem to hold as well or you know in terms of funds are tied everywhere so I just it's it's also in that
context and I think I'm just seeing whether we we might have lost we might have lost Bridget yeah she had to go for um school committee meeting at 5:30 yeah so I I have a a you know so I think I think we've done those two things so I just
have a few other comments to make that are more future looking on the next meetings that are coming up um um Melissa has put together agendas for the 12th the 19th and the 26th which from
what I can see will cover most of the projects we're seeing on that list so what I would suggest or request of everyone is there is a line item that you have questions on already just seeing what it is you know when you're looking in the past if you can send them
to me and I'll group them so I can get them to meel Melissa and then she can be asking people to be prepared for these questions when when we come to it you know so whether it's on the schools or the DPW or the other pieces of it when
you look through it you know so we didn't have enough time to do that for Jeremiah and and Rob Mo this time but it's easier for people to answer questions if they know if they can anticipate they're going to have them um so that that's just a request and if you
send them to me I'll consolidate so it doesn't have to be one person then another and then Melissa will get one list rather than a series and then the other I wanted to mention is that I had
a um I didn't know how long JCP would go but I have a conflict on two week the two weeks in April so I wanted to see if we could move one of the April meetings the 9th to the 11th which would be a Friday and I'll send this out to
everyone as a request on whether we can instead of meeting Wednesday that week Friday and I'll give a bunch of time slots for because I can I will be back by then and Sarah will need Sarah Marsha will need to chair the April 2nd but I
think then we'll have enough time to have a good discussion on what what we think about the projects that have been presented and what we want to write up in the report so if so just be prepared on the that Wednesday to see if that Wednesday could be a
Friday instead it'll be I'll offer some morning hours or afternoon hours um just on Switching that one meeting to and I checked with Melissa and it works on her schedule to move it so it's it's a question of whether it works on on
ours so um I Jeremiah and Rob you can say for this or not but or we can just thank you very much if you have other things to do other than the last few minutes here um thank you Nat's hand is up also um I didn't mean to cut you off
Nat no no um um thanks just you talked about the next meeting and as you know I'll be away uh next week and I didn't see anything in on the um website in terms of agenda just out of curiosity what's on what's being planned for next week that I'll miss so Melissa do you want me to read
them out I have the I out actually sure I I get confused on who's when I just was glad to get everybody scheduled okay so what what Melissa had sent me as I think they were you know formed for March 12th it was uh fire department
planning and conservation sustainability and Cherry Hill Y and I will um change that order because Ray for the um that his small project it's a irrigation project he wants to talk first because he has a
conflict later in the meeting so just so you that's that's you know I'm not interpreting these necessarily as the order and then the March 19th would be um the school in
DPW so it's it's uh it's big in dollar yeah it big in dollars um so that so that gets us through I think it does get us through all the the projects that have been listed so we what we won't
have seen is the inventory update on vehicles or or our buildings too I'll have that I'll have that I was working on it before this meeting and I just I'm having having challenges matching up the VIN
numbers from one year to the next so it was a little messy so we potentially by the end of the 19th we'll have gone through every project on the list um with submitting questions in advance we'll have some answers to it and so by the 20 and we'll have updated debt
numbers by then too because we're doing um some borrowing work in the next few weeks okay so that's just a and so that's why I haven't updated that I'm waiting because we'll have more accurate numbers in like two weeks
so so I I took that and then I said okay then what happens on April 2nd what happens on the 9th if we shift it to the 11th and I can send this out to everybody once I find out whether the the 11th is ago because we we need to have a final report reviewing a final
report and finalize it by April April 16th at the latest to be able to get it to the town manager because his his his plan is Du back on May 1st you know but Melissa is a part of all of these so he
will be aware of what if anything we're recommending um in terms of different pieces do you want um I do I have been compiling as we went along here from the um Forum submitted uh the summaries that are in the um narrative report do you
want that um next meeting like everything I I I didn't I didn't I I I put them all in there as if they would all be approved but I could not you know what I mean so do you want me to send you that as and then you can Redline like if you
decide to take off a a project or something like that I I think that would be helpful so this is if you look at last year's report it's the one paragraph that says what the project is so you don't have to look at the complicated form that people fill out um you know and we don't have to look at it
but we have it so we can be um looking at these pieces we want to make sure we get the right projects this time right you know and that did your hand is up okay you know so we have minute takers the only one we don't have right
now counselor Lord is April 2nd so if you can do minutes on April 2nd I'm going to put your name next to minutes for April 2nd but there someone has signed up for each to the other the March 12th the March 19th and the March 26th meetings I
am good for April 2nd okay that's great and so people know our process I said this last time but Sarah did the minutes last time I review them and sent them to Melissa so they'll get posted so when we get to talking about what we
want to do you'll both have the minutes from the meeting and you'll have the the recording if you want to look at it again but we all can probably remember what's happening but that's that will be you know what we go back and reference in terms of pieces and Leah I will send
you the word document that allows you to start this set this up for um the minutes you know it's it's just okay although I use Google Docs but well you can bring you can bring a Word document into Google Docs which is
exactly what Sarah did she she sent me hers in Google Docs and I was able to download it perfect so do I is there any other question or comment and again if something occurred to you after today that you didn't ask that now you're
thinking about it send it through me and then I'll get it to Melissa so we can get answers or if we if we didn't get them today and so Kathy just for me if we're I'm going to do all of the um presentations hopefully um by you know
mid- marchish and then um so what's the what's the format for the the meetings after that the I'll send I've I've got something really rough but what we we reserve time as we're going
along um sometimes as we're going along we are suggesting well last year was different because it came in without doing what you've done and really pairing it down um so we had to get we had to ask about $2 million Worth to
have it the budget balanced but if you know it will be those meetings will be a to what extent do are we questioning a project are we thinking that it's the timing isn't right for it or the level isn't right for it that will be that
discussion for our recommendation up at the top you know it'll be otherwise accepting all the projects you know with with the exception of a few and we can highlight them and what the discussion was about this and what we ended up
recommending um so that is our that's where our discussion is the report that we're writing to the town managers our recommendations so an example of this would be a couple years ago uh body cams
were on the police list and we decided it was premature to put them on the the list and there was also some discussion on a grant might be available for them and they went off the list and it was a big reduction um that allowed something
else to be cash Capital rather than debt Finance because that was a big purchase so you know the your equivalent Melissa was behind the scenes saying okay if that's not there maybe it's more money for roads you know that we could say
allocate that money for roads and just so everyone knows when they look at roads the 500,000 that's pencilled in right now that's the Town cash there's another 890 that is chapter 90 about 890,000
that's chapter 90 money that is also for roads so that's not the only Road money we have or eight and and the 500,000 that you just did yeah and so it's it's in addition to AR our the draw on our
money so it's it's it in the past has always shown up as a line item for roads but it's from a different Source it's from uh it's it's from state money so when Gilford comes in he's looking at more than just $500,000 for
roads and the side money there's another pot of money that he's drawing on so I think um it's 552 and I think we got through today's agenda and I will send this really rough I just copy and pasted your what's coming up Melissa and
if you want to move Cherry Hill up I'll change the order and move it up more so I didn't take it necessarily as the order but that's that that will be by the end of March 19th we'll be through the projects um you know other than looking at some of these summary
documents okay yeah and so I you know certainly by by the 26 I'll have all the you know like I'll have the report like as it was
submitted last year written to to be you know redlined if you know like it's not in Balance right now it's off I think like 400 something thousand doll but um you know it I can have all the details and then we can decide how what the
priorities are right and you know we and just in the past we haven't looked at year 2 three four and five of The Five-Year Plan but if you look at 2 three four and five a couple of them are way out of balance so so we probably have time to make some comments about
those we won't necessarily be making recommendations but there's too we're two million three million off in the next two years given what the pieces are so so I have a a question I guess about that is that's always going to be the
case like if you try and balance it now you're just just you know just just you're pretending that the project doesn't cost that much when we know that when when it comes when it comes forward um to now we make you know really you know kind of uncomfortable decisions
about what our priorities are and pretend like the roof isn't leaking but but it is so you know I I guess that's that's my comment on that yeah no but it's just you know looking at some of those line items we could question some of the line items
there's six million dollar in for Southeast in Street intersections for example it's a big one DPW has for and there's some question on whether we're it's going to cost that much period it's not that we might want to do something but the timing of it so I'm just saying
we don't get heavily into those years but we can draw attention to anything we say that doesn't you know why is this at that level so so I will say that one thing that I did different from what Sandy did last year is that I was not not I'm not excited about the um choice
to split a borrowing authorization because that really doesn't help anything right so if you know if like a project let's okay let's take the $6 million project the road project it may or may not cost that much but say we have a project that's $6 million we know that's going to be borrowing if we put
that in multiple years then we're authorizing borrowing over multiple years we can't but when we actually do a project it take us multiple years to do all the borrowing it's much more advantageous for us to just acknowledge yep it's a $6 million project whatever it is you know I'm you we're picking on
that one right and yes we're going to borrow it in stages as we develop the project and the cost of that project will blend over time and so that's the um um the difficult part of this um part of the list is that that list doesn't
take into account that a borrowing is going to be stretched out over time versus um paid for in cash and I you know made a a decision that I thought it was best to do as much cash as we could and limit the amount of borrowing we're
doing right now because I just I know it's coming and it's it's a lot and so like the more room we have in that borrowing later and and the more cash we can spend now the more we can get done and we don't spend you know 25 30% on
interest um over the life of the project maybe even 50% if they're you know if they're you know 30-year projects just because we couldn't afford it today um and so the one borrowing that I have in this list and we can change that you know we can change we can say you know
one of these other big projects could be borrowed and then make it all fit or we can make make the choice to not do one of the projects which you may do um but the one project that is being borrowed is the other half of the the um the
radio the one we split right but but it's like well we can't we can't do half the project but we would have we haven't spent the money on the radio project yet anyway I think because the project costs the $2 million and so we're we're
sitting waiting for the rest of the project to be funded as the cost goes up so you know that's just a how I think of things and and how I've I have forced um some of those larger numbers into one year because that's the year we're going
to start the borrowing and then in the uh the debt stuff we'll see that how that forecasts out that's very helpful thank you so I think we're ready to adjourn and you are very much you Melissa just so you know you're very
much part of the conversation when we're having a convers you know it's not like we're just winging it with our recommendations so Bob oh okay there are no attendees left there yeah we we don't time for public comments but there I I did look at the fact that there weren't
any in the public I don't think we had any all all meeting no all the police people were in the our staff was in the problem originally in the so you're your meeting notes on the line items is
public comments no public um I feel so unloved so um I you know we've been taking motions to adjourn just so we formally do it so I'm making a motion to adjourn second and I'll take a vote on it Bob I Kathy is a yes Lee yes that yes
please and Council Lord yes we are adjourned and Melissa thank you so much and Jennifer L Fontaine you bringing this all to us I know was not an easy task so thank you very much we areed at
559 Part: 2
great welcome to the emmer planning board meeting of February 19th 2025 my name is Johanna Newman and as the vice chair of the emers 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 ammer media minutes are being taken pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 and extended by chapter 2 of the ACT of 2023 this planning board meeting including public hearings will be conducted via
remote means using the zoom platform the zoom meeting link is accessible on the meeting agenda posted on the town's website 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 adequately access the meting in real time via technological means in the event we are unable to do so for economic hardship reasons 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 please unmute yourself answer
affirmatively and then return to mute Bruce CM I am here at last welcome Fred Hartwell I am here thank you Lawrence Kutz I am here Jesse
major present Doug Marshall has notified us that he will be absent today Johanna Newman I am here and Karen winter I am here thank you board members if technical issues arise we may need to pause to fix the problem and then
continue the meeting if the discussion needs to pause it will be noted in the minutes please use the raised hand function to ask a question or make a comment and I will call on you to speak and after speaking remember to remute 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 the general comment period public comment may also be heard at other times during the meeting meting
when determined appropriate by the planning board chair please indicate you wish to speak by clicking the raise hand button when public comment is solicited if you've joined the meeting using a telephone please indicate you wish to make a comment by
pressing star n on your telephone when called on please identify Yourself by stating your full name and address and put yourself back on mute when finished speaking residents can express their for up to 3 minutes or at the discretion of
the planning board chair if a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds their alloted time their participation may be discon disconnected from the meeting all right we have a number of items on tonight's agenda and it starts
with minutes so I believe we have two sets of minutes to consider and um the yeah I hope folks have had a chance to review those minutes are there any questions or comments about the minutes or does someone want to make a motion starting with Pam can
we do these together as one motion or do we need to treat them separately I would treat them separately great so let's start with the minutes from our meeting on October 30th 2024 questions comments Corrections otherwise could I could I
get a motion to approve can you use the raise hand function great Jesse uh yeah I move to accept those minutes as they are great second who was that Lawrence thank you Lawrence okay second from Lawrence um
any discussion all right um then let's do a vote um and again we need to go board member by board member if I remember correctly right all right uh Bruce C
um I'm going to abstain I did not attend that meeting thank you Fred Hartwell I I Lawrence clut clutz ion clutz clutz thank you Jesse major
I I'm an i and Karen I thank you um all right minutes are approved um the next set of minutes is from January 8th 202 any discussion or if not can I get a motion to
approve excellent Bruce um move to accept the minutes as presented thank you Bruce Jesse a second any discussion all right then we'll take a roll call vote Bruce cuum hi Fred har
well I Lawrence Kutz I Jesse major I I'm an i and Karen winter um oops I I abstained because I was absent thank you very much all right the next part of our
meeting is the public comment section so um the first thing I'm going to do is just say the names of the people in attendance for public comment and then open it up so um present for tonight's meet there are five members of the
public who are present for tonight's meeting um I'm going to read their names as I see them on my screen they are George carus Hilda green bomb Ian Tapscott Jade Larson and Mora keen and I think some of those attendees are here
for the U public hearing but um if there are members of the public who would like to make a comment on an item not on tonight's agenda please uh use the raise hand function now I'm going to give it just another
couple of seconds and then we'll move on all right seeing No Hands um I'll presume that if folks have public comments they are gerine to tonight's agenda and we'll address them during the public comment period for those items um next order of business is our public
hearing and a site plan review um Pam are we good to start or do we need to wait um let's see that was noticed for 6:35 and at 6:42 you're good to go beautiful so um it's 6:42 p.m. um in
accordance with the provisions of mgl chapter 48 this public hearing has been duly advertised and notice thereof has has been posted and is being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be heard
regarding spr 20257 PB squared um at 742 Main Street this is a request for a site plan review approval to amend previous site plan review approvals um and it's
spr 200- 00002 that allowed for the construction of a building addition and spr 1998 0016 that allowed the construction of
the parking lot and to request approval to install a this is 15 a-12 and 15 a-105 in the RG zoning District um so at the start of this
hearing um I'd like to First make hear any board member disclosures about this project any board member disclosures great then let's move on to the applicant presentation um so let's it's possible that some of the applicant
were over in the attendees have we moved them over to the presenter I moved Ian over Ian is there anyone else that should come over with you nope it's just me okay very good thank you Ian we'd love to hear your presentation all right great thanks for
having me um so as I understand I can share my screen yes okay I'm gonna open that up and windows okay can you all see
this yes we can awesome okay um hi I'm Ian Tapscott I'm with PB squared um as was mentioned um our application is to amend two previously uh approved
site plan reviews um and our Amendment what we are proposing is a 11025 kilowatt uh solar parking canopy um this will go over uh the existing parking
lot um there will be no change all the all the uh impervious um surface that we're adding is covering all uh surface ground surface that's already impervious um so we're not really changing any hydrology
on site um tra traffic patterns will not be required to change um parking will not be reduced um this is a uh you know F five footings will be installed along the middle of the
parking area some parking SPAC individual parking spaces might be reduced slightly maybe 12 to 20 inches um but the number of parking spaces will not be reduced um we've gone over this proposed with
um with the folks who do the folks who will do be doing our excavation um are the folks who do snow removal for the jca already they uh have approved this plan as not interfering with their ability to do snow removal we've also
reviewed the plan with the fire department um who have approved that this will not uh jeopardize their ability to access um the building in the case of a fire um so yeah the the canopy is um it
covers is the total square footage is 5, 259 square feet so that's approximately 130 feet long 40 feet deep and um at its highest it's 20 feet high 20 and a half feet high and and the
pad-mounted Transformer will go right here which is a the back uh the northwest corner of the building there's already some utility stuff that's there I believe they're compressors um and they'll be removed and and the util the
Transformer Pad will be slightly further out from the building but still behind the sidewalk and I think that's it for my initial I can show some pictures of what this type of um canopy looks like if
anyone would like to see that sure why not okay if it's if it's easy yeah it sure is just get them up here
so this is a a shot of some a much larger canopy but um you know depthwise it's about the same it's two rows of cars and height uh it looks like it's about the same you know 20 feet up on the high end and about 14 feet on the low
end our proposed design has a total of five um vertical peers so it's probably lengthwise it's probably about half of what is pictured here and this is from a high school in
Ridgefield Jersey or Connecticut got it okay so this is like a sense of a canopy but the one that the jca will be a little bit smaller and like it'll be smaller it is this this is a picture from the manufacturer's
website of a project that was is the same model of uh structure great um so I guess I should I could open up the site plan again sure why don't we why don't we move on to the site visit report and
then we'll move on to questions from the board so um is there someone who went on the site board members is there someone yeah Bruce would you give us site visit report well I was going to say that uh it could be either Fred or I the two of us were there so Fred why did I give a
brief uh additional report and you can add what I what I miss um what Ian says is uh what we saw um uh there um Nate was there along with another person from
PV squ the contractors um what we should note is that the Conservation Commission has issued an order of conditions on this project there is Wetlands involved as we can see and there's a wetland boundary that's
noted there so uh as far as drainage is which you know would be of cons of concern here that we I think we can safely uh assume that the the Conservation Commission have uh looked carefully at uh what is necessary so far
as that is concerned but in in in principle the as the site plan we see now the uh the the low side is the the is the south side which is where the hand is that's where it's dripping um
what we noticed is that um that area of the parking and and and uh and and driveway pavement is asphalt um the asphalt changes to TRG or something of that sort about the middle of the array
and so uh on the other side of the array the uh the parking is TRG but the um I thought rather intelligently the uh the the the um the array is is is dumping snow and dumping water onto the Consolidated area of the pavement and
then presumably it's draining in a pattern that's acceptable to the Conservation Commission um I think that's mostly I the where the vault is there's also some uh um inverters and
various other equipment that's on the back side of the building just adjacent to the Vault so there's some material exterior material is going to be mounted on the building um it's what normally happens in these situations um and to the extent that we
care it's really not visible from anywhere but from the um the Woodland Fred do you have anything to add to that just uh that uh the Conservation Commission in their order of
conditions has uh required that the uh when the snow is plowed uh when we got there the uh uh plow snow was all mounted on the
Westbound and which is immediately adjacent to Wetlands and the Conservation Commission has asked and there doesn't seem to be any objection to this that the snow plowing take place
in a way that Mounds the snow on the Northbound uh where as it uh as it as it melts it does not immediately affect the wetlands and other than that I I think
you we've pretty well covered it uh this just kind of a no-brainer in my opinion thanks Fred appreciate it all right any questions from the board about the project Bruce CM um only to say that I
essentially agree with Fred I mean this seems to be a a very U positive uh investment in this property and this in this building uh it's uh it's it's
it's a robust piece of uh inst installation it's going to last and you know for a while it's durable and uh I can't see any U problems I had no further questions of clarification or anything it all seems
to be quite clear and uh and and quite supportable thanks Bruce any other questions then I'd like to open it up for public comments um so if you'd like to make a comment as part of tonight's hearing please use the raise hand
function on the zoom platform and again I ask all speakers from the public to identify themselves with their full name and their address so I'll wait just a couple of seconds to see if there are any public comments great okay seeing no
comments um it are we at a place where we can vote on this proposal board Bruce well I think we are but we'll see um I would move acceptance or granting of the uh um approval uh for the um um for the
applicate to the applicant for the um uh for everything as documented and presented uh with uh without um unconditionally I guess I should say I'm not sure whether we have to have
findings and so forth that hadn't occurred to me that uh but if we do we we we find uh that uh this is consistent with all relevant uh portions of um section and I don't know the section but
you would insert that so I guess that's my that's my motion I I understand what he was saying but um Nate I thought we included findings and conditions is that correct
we did uh I'm going to share my screen thanks for your presentation and then we can um just walk through Straight if this is visible a Word document so as Bruce mentioned the
finding is simple the board finds that the project complies with the relevant criteria of section 11.24 of the zoning bylaw and is an amendment to the to spr 2001 00002 and spr 98006 there are a few waivers here uh
just uh because there you know it's a it's a minor kind of adjustment uh so the landscape plan lighting plan soil erosion plan sign plan traffic impact statement and existing condition survey so we don't necessarily require I mean we could
require a full survey but we can wave these uh and then there's a few conditions they're all all all of them are standard conditions that we normally have shall be built substantially in accordance with the plan submitted and reviewed be managed in accordance with
the management plan you any substantial changes would come back to the board uh that it expires within two years of uh of its filing all work would be done within 24 months the two other uh conditions are
you know there are um lights underneath the canopy and I just said that all exterior lights should be downcast and not shine onto adjacent properties I don't I don't think they do and then there's an existing Tree near um near the Parish Hall and so I I have condition seven that the existing Tree
West of the building and along the driveway shall be protected during trench excavation including hand sawing of exposed roots that could be something we discuss but you know it's really close to the where the trench will be I don't know how you know if it can be saved but I just there was some discussion or in the application said
they would you know they would try to try to preserve that one tree so that's that's it thank you Nate Bruce um I apologize I I had read these but I had read them as being uh
um boil standard and so I hadn't registered that there was any special requirement so I would amend my motion to uh um to the the that we approved the uh the the application the project uh
with the with the with the waivers uh uh as noted with the finding as noted and with the conditions as proposed or in the U in the in the draft um condition with
the conditions as proposed great and then are you uh open to a friendly Amendment amendment to close the public hearing yes thank you all right very well very very good very well we have a motion on the table thank
you Bruce is there a second Jesse yep I'll will second that thank you thank you any further discussion then let's do a roll call vote Bruce cuum hi Fred
Hartwell hi Lawrence Kutz hi Jesse major hi I Johan Numan em and I and Karen winter hi great thank you very much for being here in good luck with the project all right thanks for having me thank you
everyone have a good night thank you you as well all right it is 6:55 pm and we are going to move into our general housing discussion so um we have two topics in particular that we're hoping to cover during this General housing
discussion the first is the list of potential conditions for by adus and the second is continuing a discussion about uh potential overlay for existing apartment complexes um and we're going to aim to spend roughly 30 minutes on
each of those topics um so I'll do my best to operate as a timekeeper to keep us on track um and then after that we'll take our 8:00 break and then or we can assess and see uh there's a lot more we need to get
done um all right so Nate are you the best person to get us started on the potential conditions for byright adus yeah I I'll share my screen in a minute I think I can we can you know walk through what what I have and I was you know I think I forwarded
to the board there is a a an online Workshop next Tuesday the 11th at I think it's three o'clock but you have you have to register it's not there's no fee just to get your name and email and it's a online Workshop where the state will be discussing a model bylaw for the
protected use adus not you know I plan to attend I you know I'm sure there'll be a lot of people on there and so you know I would say no matter what we do tonight I think we could continue this discussion till after that Workshop I have been reading other
communities so belter Town South Hadley have advertised um in the newspaper there new Adu bylaw East Long Meadow uh it has one so I've looked at that and some others around the state and so you know it's interesting I think there's some different interpretation of
the rules and regulations and what staff had had and so the most recent Adu document that was sent out I think maybe just this week had some changes that were highlighted in yellow which I can share and so you know it's it's it's interesting that I think the I think a
byock you know could evolve depending on how communities approach this and the state still hasn't as far as I know reviewed Balltown meeting votes in terms of you know reviewing them for consist with the legislation and the rules and regulations and so not that we don't
want to rush into anything we do have a bylaw on the books and some of the interpretation of how that will be applied is happening now with a Building Commissioner and so you know one important piece is um the rules and regulations say that a
principal dwelling has at least one dwelling unit on on a lot and so you it sounds like well you have you can allow an Adu or you need to allow an Adu on properties with more than one dwelling and so all of a sudden it could mean
that you know apartments or tow houses or anything with more with any with just one unit could have an Adu but the regulations don't say you need need to do that it just says that you have to have at least one unit on a property to allow an Adu so a lot of communities are actually writing specifically that adus
are only allowed with single family homes which is kind of the the thought that it was and so the you know the regulations don't say otherwise right I feel like there's a bunch of interpretation and so and one of my proposals is that it's it really were we would allow adus only on single family homes which is how we've had it written
all along um but you know there were some questions when the rules and rs first came out about that and so I'm kind of going back to that U you know it just seems strange that you could have a 50 unit apartment building and then allow an Adu you know I don't know it just I don't that was never my thought
that that's how it was would be applied um you know some communities are really having some design standards with ad use and we have some as well and you know I think it's really interesting that you know the state was it says you can't really have
any um unless you're in a local historic district but we you know most zoning bylaws don't regulate single family homes and so it's interesting to me that you know and they say you can't be more restrictive than what you are with a you know the principal dwelling or single family home and so some communities are
now saying that an accessory dwelling unit has to have the same setbacks as the principal dwelling so they it's not that they have setbacks of an accessory structure which is what how we do it now but they actually have to have the setbacks of the principal dwelling meaning they can't be you know 10 feet
from a sidey yard setback if the principal dwelling setback is 20 feet right so they have to follow all that which may or may not work on some size properties um you know we we say that you know only have one curb cut and to the extent feasible you know unless DPW
allows it you have to have the one a few community are saying that um you know we have to the extent feasible uh stairways and doors should be on the side or rear which I I'm not sure if we have it in there but you know to me qualifying it to the extent feasible allows that and
so that becomes a decision of the Building Commissioner and staff when reviewing an application and so I don't think that's unreasonable and you know so the idea was that we would look at these draft conditions and then send something to the state they've offered to review you know town
regulations and you know my thought would be even if the state came back and said we're not sure about these you know then it's still the board's decision and a local decision on Amor's part do we still want to move forward with it you know and talk to our Attorneys at KP law I mean the state might say that half of what we have they don't like or they
don't think it's reasonable but we might be able to justify it according to the regulations and so then it becomes our decision do we move forward with it and I you know I think there's I you know at first I was like let's try to get something on the books really quickly but I do think we have something and the Building Commissioner has been using it
you know we have you know half a dozen conditions that are consistent with the regulations and so um you know we can follow those I think there are some questions about how we determine gross floor area it mentions the building code in terms of height and then it mentions all these other things you know
basements attics mezzanines and so typically the building code really defines habitable space and so we wouldn't consider an unfinished basement as part of the gross flare area of the house right so if you had a 1,200 foot
Ranch and you had a 1200t basement underneath it in an attic that is unfinished but allows storage and really the building code would say you have a 1,200 foot house but the way these regulations are kind of written it almost sounds like you'd have the 1200 S
foot basement the 12200 foot first floor and then say 600 feet in the attic and you have a 3,000 squ foot home which allows you to get up to a 900 foot Adu but if you were allowed to only get to you know 900 square feet or half the
gross Flor area whatever smaller really you'd only be allowed a 600 foot Adu and so you know the a number of communities are defining it as habitable space and that's kind of the approach we've taken I know that some attorneys have called the town on behalf of property owners or
prospective applicants and said well that's not how you need that's not how it is interpreted and so you know at some Point there'll probably be a lawsuit whether it's an Amor or some Community because there you know I think the rules and regulations um you know if you take it
for what it is uh you know the way it defines the way the way it mentions building code is only on building code for height you know there's a it says the height according to building code comma basement comma yada y whatever else is
there and so um you know you it so you know I don't know you know Rob MOA The Building Commissioner is like I don't know if it really is the habitable space I think it's just this gross floor area which is really interesting because depending on how you calculate it and how it's defined open porches breezeways
counts could count towards gross floor area um and so you know what that means is anyone could get up to almost 900 square feet right you could have a really small footprint as long as you have a basement in an attic and other things and you get to 900 maybe that's not bad right maybe that's not a bad thing we
allow a thousand anyways in town and you know there's been some discussion before this of having having it go up to 1100 square F feet uh for an Adu so you know I don't know if that's a problem it's just you know again an interpretation of the rules and regulations that the state
came up with to try to help implement the legislation and um you know so I I just think that you know a number of communities are taking different approaches on how you define and calculate the gross floor area and that's the starting point for an accessory dwelling unit and so
you know we're running into that you know there's been a few calls where there's a small house with a connected Breezeway in a garage and is this Breezeway that has the same roof as the house and has walls but it's not insulated it's not really finished space
is that part of your gross floor area and you know if they say in this example if they say yes they're allowed a bigger Adu if we say no it's a smaller Adu and it could be the difference of 100 square feet you know this is say a hypothetical but you know that could mean a lot you know either you could have an 850 foot
Adu or a 750 or 650 or 550 and you know that 100 feet could mean a lot square feet could mean a lot and so you know we it we haven't received an application yet we've had a lot of questions and I you know I think the Building Commissioner is um is applying the bylaw
we have so it you know it's single family homes it's using habitable space for gross floor area and some of the conditions we have and I think you know if the planning board is kind of meaning one way or the other after this discussion you know it helps inform how we apply our current bylaw when we have
inquiries because if we said no you know this is we think we could allow adus on duplexes triplexes apartments and you know it's a different interpretation of the regulations and if we think we'd apply it only to single family homes and um you know uh limiting the number of
parking spaces is something we're doing they say you can't require a minimum I think the concern in amoris is you know if we don't have a maximum someone could put a lot of parking on a property so you know I think those are things that are unique to ammer and you know I we've sent around
the documents I can share them in a minute but I don't know if there's any you know General ideas or comments or you know we can't really require owner occupancy that's not something you know the student home definition you know doesn't require occup owner occupancy it requires that
one unit knot be something and you know if we only require adus for single family homes and that means the single family home you know one or the other and so when you read through the regulations uh you know very technically and explicitly it seems like the student
home definition you know could work and so you know again it's something that where we send it to the state and they might say geez this is unreasonable and then you know the housing subcommittee and others have worked on why it's reasonable and justifiable and so it's really are we comfortable moving that
forward if the state has a different opinion and I you know I don't you know one I'm not you know I'm not really I'm kind of agnostic in terms how how it goes you know in the state for instance says you can't really require certain utility connections and
one town is already proposing that if it's a detach Adu it can't be run the utilities can't be run through the existing house it has to have separate meters and the state regulations say that's that's unreasonable but this town you know is going to thinks they can justify it so I think there's going to
we're going to see a lot of different approaches and um my opinion might now be to you know wait a few weeks and I'm trying to gather more example bylaws from towns just so we can kind of get an understanding of how they're interpreting these these rules and regulations I mean there were the rules and regs were put
out um you know maybe a month ago and so it's been you know a fast turnaround for communities yep all right thanks for that data dump Nate Jesse I see your hand thank you I guess I kind of have a
procedural question for talking about details and I think you've answered part of it n but I was wondering what the what the next step is so we've talked about a lot of things meaning you staff could send it to the state say what do you think it could go to council just
for voting to adopt the bylaw it could go back to committee and we could talk more like what what do we think the actual next step is and what are we trying to accomplish sort of in the short term yeah I'll share my screen to in I think we'd actually walk through it and that becomes kind of a template um
you know for a zoning Amendment and so the I was at the CRC meeting last week they're curious about this I'll probably go to their next meeting and so you know I think um right now it's a an idea for a zoning Amendment so it's not even an official zoning Amendment so the next
step would be to get to a point where the planning board would vote to recommend this as a zoning amendment to Town Council you know it go to council and then they would refer it back to the CRC and planning board and so you know kind of like what happened with U Drive we discussed it for many months and then we actually voted it to go to council so
the next step would be to take what's we have and vote it to council as a zoning Amendment but so so instead of sending it to the state for opinion no that could happen in parallel you mean it happened in parallel okay yeah thank you that that was helpful or we could send it to the state first I mean I I
think my guess is the state might be really busy and so even if we sent to the state in a week might take them weeks to get back to us and maybe we want to wait the council might say oh have you done this would we wait to hear back from them and so and and again just from my all of our
understanding to send to the state is that something staff just decides we're going to do that or like we as a planning board should vote and say yes we want to get opinion like how does that work uh know I think the planning board would vote to do that and so
y yeah and it's something the state doesn't usually offer so usually we don't you know as a um you know we wouldn't usually preview our zoning Amendment with the state but they've offered it I think just knowing there's a lot of questions with the new Adu reg regulation
so thanks Nate Bruce um Nate I was going to chime well Yan I was going to chime in on the uh the question of should the the uh
adus uh should our bylaw regulate the adus to have the same set back as the principal dwelling um but it occurs to me Nate if you wanted to roll through the draft there may be the point in the in in the actual draft where that
crops up but if it's not mentioned in the draft if it's something uh that you were just saying is a an issue that's out there with communities then I would then I would give my opinion now sure no it is so this is seems like a good segue for
you to pull up the yeah yeah so I will say a few communities are now taking that approach where they are inserting this that a adus need to meet the setbacks of the principal dwelling and not setbacks of accessory structure
so typically right now in our we don't we don't apply we apply the setbacks for accessory structures to accessory dwelling units right and so if it's a 20 foot front setback an accessory structure doesn't need to have 20 feet
um you know it so you know or the rear side is a little different and so you know what I have here in yellow are new additions to you know set I we had sent this previously in the packet and then I updated it looking at other bylaws and so one would be the definition is a
principal single family dwelling a principal single family dwelling and so you know we're really putting it in the definition of Adu that it's accessory to a single family and then these proposal requirements are our kind of standards and conditions we'd have in the bylaw you know shall be located on the same
lot as a principal single family dwelling accessory dwelling unit shall only be allowed on loss with a single family dwelling um accessory dwelling unit shall not be allowed on loss with a duplex or other residential uses you know some of it's redundant but just to get the point across um and then you
know it goes on to say you know there's more but those are kind of the changes from what we had seen previously when we were looking at this document thanks Nate Bruce um on this matter uh
Nate uh uh and colleagues I I actually think this makes sense that uh an Adu should be limited to a single family dwelling uh because if there and ironically perhaps I was discussing this
on with Nate hyper on a a project for the am Community Land Trust yesterday or the day before and uh we were contemplating proposing an Adu in associate with a Triplex and Nate said
you might want to think about that or we we we have yet to discuss this and so I I think it makes sense here that that we shouldn't be allowed to do what Nate and I were discussing earlier in the week because it seems that it is an it is an
accessory dwelling unit and and it should be obvious to what to what it is an accessory because if you've got three units and you've got an Adu it might matter which of those uh three units it was accessory to and it wouldn't be
obvious and so it it doesn't seem unreasonable to uh make this limitation as is proposed in the uh in the highlighted text here but I'd be interested to know whether others agree it feels more logical and uh more
manageable to do it this way thank you Bruce Jesse yeah um keep it short I totally agree I think it's the logical interpretation rather than lots that already have multif family or
units makes sense so yeah I support that thank you all right I'll I'll scroll down if that's all right um so you know what we're proposing is with the protected use Adu you know it's a it's a 48 Section 3 you
know there's a number of things that essentially the town can't deny and you know we're taking the approach that we'd have allow one Adu is permanent un aot with a single family dwelling and it would just receive a building permit from The Building Commissioner you know the other
option would be it would go to site plan review to the planning board and I don't know if that's actually worth the time and effort and public hearing and so the idea would be to try to have enough conditions requirements whatever we want to call them here to provide guidance to the staff and Building Commissioner when making those
decisions um and you know the state in the regulations you know really they really want it to be simple and so uh you know what we're trying to do is provide enough here that is you know consistent with the regulations and can
allow allow an adus to happen so number four is the student home definition uh it's been modified to say you know with a single family dwelling um and then you know two or more persons the the red text is what the housing subcommittee
has discussed and so you know we still think that this is you know plenty where we can discuss it but you know number four you know can be justified and is reasonable for ammer and so you know we would include it as part of the standards and conditions for
adus thanks Nate let's pause there for one quick minute because I see Fred's hand Fred go ahead yeah Nate uh I uh I'm trying to remember whether we covered this in the housing
subcommittee or not but uh just uh I'm I'm I'm I'm fine with what you had here but I think that the uh just in general I think a definition like this uh
belongs in chapter 12 of the the bylaw rather than here where it's limited to uh the uh you know the accessory dwelling unit and Fred are you referring
specifically to the student home language yeah the student home definition great Nate we take that under advisement um Nate
Jesse uh I probably agree with you Fred but I think this might be a good entry to have it here and then maybe at a later date we can have it added to the bylaw as a standard definition if this moves forward
Bruce whichit out of my mouth I was goingon to say exactly the same thing great Lawrence yeah so a question I how how is how is how would something like this
be um enforced um I mean who's who is going to who is going to hold these residents to account or are you know potential residents going to be required to prove
that they're not you know attending colleges or universities I I just I I I'm still hung up on on on this and and again as I as I said in a recent meeting I'm I'm I'm sympathetic to the idea I see the issue
I know what what the board's trying to address here but I I just I I'm I'm still just hung up on using this approach um so I I don't mean to belver the point but I think
it's it's um uh just something that I I I want to raise here that um it just it I I I still feel that it it doesn't necessarily seem like um the
best way forward to essentially create a class of people who have separate housing restrictions on them again I I say that I'm very sympathetic to to what the board's trying to do here
but I just I could see a lot of possible unintended consequences here thanks Lawrence um let's move to Bruce and then Jesse and then Fred so Bruce go ahead um I'll
give two answers Lawrence uh to how it could be enforced um the first is and the more demanding and uh of of of Staff time um would be to uh learn how it is enforced
uh in State College Pennsylvania and possibly other towns that do this and learn from them um the second which I think is the more probable and the more uh appropriate initially for us is that we
it it is enforced through um it's a complaint driven enforcement mechanism um because it's it's it's it's it's not that we are um troubled so much by this uh perhaps as we would be by
um uh non-nav behavior um and uh initially we would uh I think uh enforce it um if uh occupants or neighbors or so forth had reason to
believe that this part of the law was being violated um I think that's probably the the way in which we would begin to enforce this thanks Bruce Jesse thanks um thanks Lawrence uh so I've been to
three three other Town meetings last few weeks and this is exactly the issue that comes in I want to talk about this exact possibility and this is what everybody's worried about right and I get it makes sense uh your expression that you're worried
about creating this class essentially that's treated differently um a lot of different responses I think I'm going to say what Bruce said but in a different way which is similarly to how we enforce for unrelated in a rental
house or three we we don't really it's sort of voluntary We Gather that information somewhat on the rental registration but but but then Nate please add into this I don't think the town really has the means to enforce it unless it's pointed out in some way that
there's a problem right whether it's and I don't see any of this as a behavioral measure um I don't think that's the goal uh but it's it's only when it it gives the town some ability to step in
and potentially try and enforce or change the situation if necessary and importantly I think it gives the message that this is what we want to accomplish to landlords to developers it's giving the message that we only
want one of these two units to be a student home with this whole goal of preserving long-term resident possibilities so how are we going to enforce this at this moment and Nate please add I I don't think we can or
will enforce it but I still think it's valuable to have that as our goal in the bylaw thanks Jesse Fred well there's couple things here one is that uh the uh the same is isues arise with
the four unrelated and that's been around in the bylaw for decades and decades and decades um the other thing I want to point out here is there's there's an elephant in the room and the elephant in the room is the state
legislature that has plary authority to do whatever the hell it was and they've done it and I didn't really want to go down this road but we've got to do something uh the alternative is to do
nothing and I think uh in terms of what the uh the people of this town expect from uh People Like Us is to do something and I think that uh yeah we this is an opportunity to do something
and I would also add that uh remember that we have rental registration in this town uh and a very aggressive rental registration and that can clearly uh be uh a source of information
that would allow enforcement of this uh so I I'm my at this point my conscience is clear and moving ahead with this um J before I go to you I want to just note that the time is 7:26 so we're
1 minute over our 30 minute allotment so um why don't you make your comment and then let's figure out what we want to do in terms of next steps or potential action items on this conversation go ahead thanks Ju Just to add to what Fred said I think Fred what you're referring to is
the state has removed our ability to have owner occupancy requirement which the town has long had for adus and this is really a response to that Lawrence to put that in perspective right so we can't say there has to be owner occupied for ad by right and so this feels like
way where we can not accomplish the same thing but uh uh retain the level of control on not having it be only student homes yeah and I I I totally sorry John to jump in when when we were bringing
this conversation to a close but I I I I totally get that and am totally supportive of that I I I understand how we got to this point um and I know a ton of work has gone into it as well I know other towns have have done this around the country I just I I
I have to name personally I I I wish we could explore a way to do this that doesn't involve you know applying separate rules to a class of people just by virtue of of how they're choosing to spend their
time or pursue education um and and I I just I I have to name that um but uh but again I I totally I totally understand the goal totally understand why the boards taking
this on and that we're in a difficult position um but but I I feel a little queasy about this one and to be clear the board hasn't done this yet there are members of the board who are drafting things we have not taken any kind of official action so sure right yeah I was
gonna jump in Johanna and then you know you know the half hours you know was a time you know kind of a some parameters if we want to extend it I think there's a few more conditions that are new yeah I was going to say Lawrence I think and you know I don't know so it would be difficult to kind of
go out and ask for this information but if it's written clearly enough it can be enforcable and so you know the idea would be if someone were in a unit the town wouldn't really seek to evict them necessarily but we'd work with the property owner to find different housing or different solutions that comply with
the bylaw and so you know there's um you know and I think when this would go through review you know it allows the Building Commissioner to ask questions you know if it wasn't and then you know say if it wasn't in place and so yeah to me you know can be a part of that I you
know I do think that it can get tricky in terms of enforcement um but you know I think there's like Bruce said I think even uh you know like itha has two unrelated it's not the same but they you know there's other college communities that
have different standards in terms of of how they regulate occupancy some is with the student home and some is with you know no more than two unrelated can live in a unit which is really small but then they have generous areas in town where they allow you know Student Housing and
Development and so some of it is you know if the you know we're trying to look at the University Drive overlay we might be talking about other places in town so it's kind of you know what are the what are the suite of things we're doing that can help with different kinds of Housing and so to me this would be
one that might be able to help um protect neighborhoods and preserve some neighborhoods while we're doing some other zoning measures or or incentives or things that help with other kinds of housing it could be directly for students and so I think you know it be kind of within the context of all of
that yep let me just I'd like um my proposal would be that we allocate some more time on our agenda to this tonight but that we have Nate go through kind of the whole document and we take notes on questions that we have as he
goes through it and then have one discussion just to be more efficient does that sound okay to folks okay great mate go ahead sure thanks yeah and I think this was shared as a Word document so you know you can always email me individually with track changes or comments and then you know
staff can synthesize so um number five there shall be no additional driveway or separate driveway curb Cuts unless Allowed by Public Works a parking plan needs to be approved and submitted by The Building Commissioner uh that's number six number seven the
Adu shall be operated in accordance with a management plan submitted to the Building Commissioner and upon change of ownership a new management plan should be provided to town and so again you know these are things that you know the Building Commissioner staff would ask for and the they're important because if
there's a problem we refer back to these documents and we say hey look you know you're not putting the trash away or you know the trash is supposed to be inside an enclosure and it's not and so that's why you know things like this the parking plan and advantage and plan we've been using it pretty effectively in all our conditions with the zoning
board or with other things um you have to be you know rent the property in accordance with the rental property bylaw again that helps with you know management um any exterior lighting needs to be downcast we have this one on-site
storage and management of waste and recycling shall occur on the interior of the dwelling within an attached garage or other accessory out building or screened appropriately from public view there should be no free standing dumpster or a storage unit associated with a property regulated under this section except on a temporary basis in
association with construction or similar temporary purposes you know we don't want necessarily you know all of a sudden you have an Adu and they say well let's just put a dumpster on our driveway uh you can do that but it has to be screened there should be no more than two parking spaces provided for an accessory
dwelling unit I mean it could this could say three it could say some number um more than two the accessory dwelling unit shall be designed so have the appearance and scale of the building is compatible with the single family dwelling units in the vicinity you know we could say this is reasonable the
state might say it's unreasonable given their regulations there's three criteria you have to say that it's reasonable you know it it meets a a public purpose it's you know it isn't an undue burden and it has objective clear kind of action taken
from it and so you know they might say what is the appearance in scale what does compatibility mean I think if we need to we could qualify those terms but I think it's something we would want to have to the extent feasible newly constructed detached accessory dwelling
units shall be located behind the front building line of the primary structure so we have that there we have that now and then this is one with the dimensional standards a new detach accessory dwelling unit that is not contained within or attached to an
access an existing accessory structure shall meet the setbacks and dimensional standards for the principal single family dwelling and so for instance if you had a garage that is closer to the setback which we allow as an accessory structure if we didn't qualify this right we just said an accessory dwelling
unit has to meet the dimensional standards of the principal dwelling you couldn't put an Adu in the garage and so you know the way this is written is allowing for that to happen if there's an existing accessory structure but if it's completely detached um then it has to have you know
those setbacks and you know the Building Commissioner and I have talked about this in it makes sense on some properties in others it might not right so there might be a small property where it might actually be better sight designed to have the accessory structure
meet the accessory structure setbacks we have in our bylaw and not the setbacks of the principal dwelling and so you know as a building permit you know there's no provision to wave this necessarily unless we say you know something like to the extent feasible or
some again some phrase that allows the Building Commissioner to be flexible on this and so the way it's written now if a small lock came in and the owner said oh I'd like to put my accessory dwelling unit here they look at it and say it doesn't meet the setbacks you have to put it here maybe it works maybe it
doesn't maybe it doesn't look as good um so anyways those are some considerations you know staff had provided comments on this and the red text is what the housing subcommittee um had provided in response and these have been shared previously
I'm not go through it but it's you know things to read and like I said you know feel free to email staff with questions or comments based on this great thank you that's really helpful um so it sounds like there's
this online workshop on Tuesday March 11th folks should review this submit comments and feedback to Nate is there more discussion that folks want to pursue
tonight Hilda has her hand raised I think it's been raised a bit oh thank you um well maybe now would be a good time to open it up for public comment um so
why don't we go ahead and do that um Pam should I navigate this or do you want to navigate this in terms of giving held up I I can go ahead and do that and do you want to say three minutes three minutes sounds great thank you
okay all right okay I'm here with greenbound 298 montue Road and I've managed property that I've owned for more than 50 years probably
closer to 60 and I'm really bothered by provision number four you put me in a situation of marriage I'm not allowed by law to ask people what their Mar marital statuses that's one comment I wanted to
make the other one is there are very few houses really that have this undergraduate principally well I won't say principally what sucks but anyway that that have party issues for for the most part if if
the tenants selected well there aren't problems and if there aren't problems I don't think there's something there that needs to be fixed undergraduates come of all ages all sizes all shapes I'm thinking in terms of a single mother
with a boyfriend and a couple of kids are enrolled in undergraduate studies does that mean if the mother and the F and and the boyfriend aren't married they can't rent one of these units
um there are all the all the veterans that come back and and go to school and there may be um more than two that live in the building I know with the size of 900
square feet is not very big and you can't fit a lot of people into it but I have a I have a problem with the definition of student I guess because there are so many that are renting houses
that um may or may not be married and I can't ask that but they may or may not be party people either a lot of a lot of students pick houses to live in because they want to be in a quiet place where nobody's
going to bother them and there may be more than two for various reasons so I just wanted to point out that that I'm bothered by that and I think you got to work on the definition of student because it can cause US legal
issues that I don't want to get into I've been there once 50 years ago and I don't want to get involved with mcad again I learned my lesson so that's what I wanted to point out thank you for your comment
Hilda any other comments from the public okay then um Jesse and then Bruce thanks um I feel often compelled to to reframe this as this is no attempt
at Behavior control the motivation that the subcommittee had to try and do this had zero to do with behavioral problems it's all about preserving neighborhoods and long-term year- round residents that is
the main effort and the main purpose if there's another way to do it we're all yours we've talked about lots of different things this is one way that we think could move us towards that goal that's all thanks Jesse
Bruce there it is um appropo of the setbacks that I mentioned that I was interested in earlier I I I actually think it's probably okay to have it uh
um restricted by the basic setback lines but I thought it said that it has to be the same setback as the principal dwelling and I thought that what that meant was
if the dwelling unit is not actually on the setback but you know it's inside it's it's it's it's back away from the setback but saying the Set Side yard setback is 10 ft and the dwelling is 20 ft from the property land I interpreted
what you said in your introduction Nate to mean that the Adu would have to be set back 20 ft the same as the house but I think now I understand that it has to respect the the uh Table Three
setbacks uh and that I'm fine with so I just wanted to uh make sure that I understood correctly and that uh we make sure that when we when we say what we say in the uh in the draft that we don't convey the impression that I got
mistakenly that we were talking about the actual house not the requirement that pertains to the house yep and they see Nate nodding so sounds like it is the requirement not the actual existing structure Karen
yeah it occurs to me that if our object is to provide housing for yearr round residents maybe we could somehow formulate this as a duration short no shortterm
leases uh or have a waiver I mean I I understand what Hilda is saying that uh there you know there are lots of yearr round uh residents that are students and we don't want to exclude them say there's a a mom with two kids that wants
to rent it and she's just a part-time student or or yeah I guess we said full-time student um and she's going to be there for four years or five years uh she's she is the kind of person we don't want to exclude so I think we could work
maybe on on somehow refining that so that we still uh reach our object which is that we don't want to have developers look at this as another
another way of cramming in even more shortterm expensive milk the students renters when we have such a need for people that that want to be residents of the town and that are here for
longer thanks Karen um Jesse I would just offer for what I've seen myself and heard from lots of students is leis is are 12 year they're 12 month leases and students
just aren't here using the houses so landlords take advantage of that in that same way so I'm not I'm not sure I I like your idea Karen but I'm not sure that works with this scenario and then I will share I think I've said this in previous meetings but
for me personally as a board member struggle with the student home provision of this um kind of draft bylaw and condition as well it um so you know I'm interested in hearing what comes out of the webinar um I think
a lot of the other Provisions make a lot of sense I think the parking limits I think the driveway Cuts I think the you know dimensional standards the setbacks and getting all that um and I think I actually think the single family home uh
clarification also makes a lot of sense but it's it's that student home piece that gives me pause um okay any other comments on this Nate do you want to so just in terms of next steps and moving this
along in the process so that if we want to get to the point of proposing a zoning Amendment and actually having the board vote on that um seems like let's see what comes out of the webinar folks should respond to the dra to you with
comments on the draft and I imagine we'll have at least one more conversation before we get it to the point of actually voting on any kind of language sure yeah okay Jesse thanks I'd like just make one more
comment um myself and others have put a fair amount of time thinking about this and preparing the the documents we shared so I really just hope all of us will read that and try and internalize some of the information I'm totally fine with
difference of differences of opinion I think that's fantastic but I hope at the next conversation we can talk about some of those ideas that really that are motivating us to try and do this um as as part of the conversation so
that's it thanks great thank you Jesse all right um the time is 7:45 p.m. um my recommendation would be that we
take our five minute break now and then come back and continue the general housing discussion with the focus on the potential overlay for apartment complexes does that sound good to folks all right so please make sure your audio is off turn off your video and be back
at 7:51 p.m. thank you e e e e e e e e e
welcome back everyone 7:51 let's see Jesse's here Lawrence is here we're still waiting for Karen and Fred and don't think I see Bruce either all right we have Corum so I think we should go ahead and continue our
discussion and others can join as we go um so the next thing that we were going to talk about is our the potential overlay for existing apartment complexes so Nate do you to just frame this conversation and kind of get us to the point where we have a complete
presentation board members you know note your questions and then we'll have we'll have a round of discussion sure I'll start with uh sharing my screen the you know we've discussed having where there's multi-unit housing
having an overlay to allow you know densification of these areas and I would say by site plan or view or some you know at least not by special permit and having some flexible dimensional standards uh and other things to allow you know to kind of encourage
Redevelopment some of the you know we do allow in our bylaw through special permit for this to happen I think the idea though is that a special permit is risky it's discretionary and most developers probably wouldn't take something you
know of this scale and complexity without knowing that you know they could have a permit issued and so we've talked about centering on North amoris first and so if the map's visible you know it's an area south of Meadow Street we running down North
Pleasant to presidential Village here and then to 116 it's an area um you know there's some single family home properties they're rented there's one or two old homes um up along Meadow Street and North Pleasant Street so the idea would be you might need some
of these properties to allow for again this flexible design you know entryways in or new new exits um into the overlay you know the housing production plan and a comprehensive housing market study noted
that you know to incentivize this you might need to have three or four or five times the density of the existing multi-unit development and so uh you know we've never you know we've discussed this it's an interesting approach um and I you know I do think it
would be you know it's it's a big undertaking and so what I've looked at is this whole area and so just as an example we could say that there's 650 units in this area you know it's not by property but as an an aggregate there's 650 units and so to Triple that you need
you know 1,950 units 1,950 and you know what what this map is [Music] showing is North square at the Mill District if it wasn't a mixed use project might have 150 units on eight
Acres that also includes parking and that's what these rectangles represent an 8 acre rectangle with 150 units and so you need 13 of those in the overlay to Triple the density so you know think of 13 you know it's just a visualization
it's kind of a you know something to look at like okay if you think of the two buildings at M District the spatial relationships the parking you know it it fits within this rectangle plus extra space um for open space and and site circulation so you know it works right
it's just you know that's kind of the density and scale we might need to allow to incentivize Redevelopment of these properties because you know you do have to take things offline uh phase in possible tenant relocation or phase it with rental uh
renewals and and so forth and financing and so you know the housing subcommittee has looked at this and I think some of it would be what you know what are the characteristics we'd want in this overlay and you know do we like the idea of the density here you know is it
parcel by paral is it you know in this entire overlay and again it's volun you know this would be a voluntary overlay it wouldn't require anything a developer property owner applicant would have to opt in um
and I'll just share one more document something that was sent out as well but in the uh have too many documents open here hold on a minute here we are so in the north ammer so we focus on North ammer right now you know it doesn't go north
of Meadow Street uh there's conservation land agricultural land there doesn't go east of North Pleasant I think that you know there's potential maybe but to keep it kind of in one quadrant you know so the area I showed was 140 Acres it only
had 25 properties some of the apartment complexes have have been Kindom minized so there's more owners um some of the bigger apartment units are you know 85 at presidential 85 units 170 in North Village 106 in puffton and 96 at
townhouse most of the buildings are one and a half to two stories there are some three stories in there um occupancy status when I went through the town's property cards and information I mean um most are non-owner occupied so most of those are rentals I
you know if there's you know 25 properties and say there's however many owners and there there I could find very few owner occupied units um out of all the 650 units uh there are considerable Wetlands within that area and so you know that's
something to consider you know how do we balance development and wetlands you know so again here's you know here's North Square so you know 13 of these to Triple the density in that area you know North square is four stories uh three
and four stories you know two two really big buildings try to break up the facade with different you know treatment and maybe architectural design cues um and then overlay considerations you know how tall do we want you know there was a discussion that at seven
stories is where building code and kind of um efficiencies of scale and building material and cost become uh kind of you know synergistic I don't know if we really want seven stories you know what do we want for architectural style and
design guidelines you know flexibility of the overlay you know kind of with predictability uh you know do we have affordability requirements what is the visibility from you know North Pleasant Meadow Street 116 in the neighborhoods you do we have
different kind of setback and you know how how would this actually happen and so I think one of the discussion with the housing subcommittee was if we like this idea we think the density could work you know we'd probably then discuss with property owners and maybe even with some developers and say you know what what do
you think you know we might not be the developers we normally see that come and uh mean there might be some that permit in town there's been some others that have reached out over the years um to amoris in terms of Housing and so we might you know we you know there's a few different ideas we have in terms of
discussing the feasibility of this and so you know right now it's an idea we think it's a nice one um you know the idea is really it's to allow incentivize some development where there could be some pressures taken off other areas of town and you know there could be other
types of zoning that we allow say if we think this is a a nice idea the University Drive overlay if that is approved and it in it works and there's a few other areas in town where we could have multi-unit density then you know maybe we could start talking about what's kind of
middle density what's smaller scale development in other neighborhoods and maybe we wouldn't be as concerned about you know if it's all student OCC you know occupied and you know and the thing there is with the students is really they changed the housing market in terms of price point and demand and ability
right now so Amis is very expensive with a very low vacancy rate and a very low turnover and so the market is is very difficult to get into whether it's for rental or ownership and so you know when I actually came back to grad to school now it's been a number of years but when
I came back to look at housing for a weekend it was so expensive I remember going back to Boston I'm thinking I'm I'd pay more than I I am in Brighton and I might as well just go look at other schools because you know it had been better to just maybe to go to ur um URI or or
somewhere else right some other City because it was so hard to find housing in ammer and you know I think that trend's continued and it's actually probably gotten worse and so it's it's you know I think some of this is what are some creative ideas we have and you know whether or not this moves forward
it was discussed in 2013 with the zoning subcommittee of the planning board it never became a zoning Amendment it was a discussion based on some of the Consultants we had for some of the plans at the time and so you know really we're reinvestigating it as you know we have these multi-unit areas in town they were
permitted in the 60s and 70s and then the town uh reflexively you know afterwards said wow let's change the zoning so now most of these are now non-conforming and so through a special permit they could add density but it's really risky and so the question is could we actually could we allow them to
densify in a way that it doesn't is not as impactful uh to the neighborhoods right I mean in North Amber we already have a lot of density is if these could be developed nicely you know there's bus routes you know there's a we're planning a multi-use path along North Pleasant Street that connects to the nor uh
University North um we could have another bike path and so you know what are way ways that we can make this work um and not you know not really disrupt kind of what's already happening in that area so again have questions and comments or
discussion thank you Nate thanks for the presentation and for kind of summarizing it that way I could imagine that it might be possible during the discussion that we'll want your presentation back up but um yeah why don't we move on to board discussion and then we'll go to
public comment so Lawrence I saw your hand yeah I was just going to say I so so this is this seems like a really appealing um I idea to me and and one that's not going to you know significantly disrupt uh the the
character of of what's already in that area um what one question that I asked or wanted to ask there's um I know that there's some I think protected farmland and that the university has some farmland on the far side of Pleasant
Street along where some of these developments are part of part of this overlay is going to go in um is is none of that area is being drawn into this right no the farmlands on the other side of North Pleasant Street so yeah the
overlay really was you know ere existing multi-unit um properties and then some single family home or you know multi-unit rentals but there's no protected farmland or any other you know type of use in that overlay you know other than say Wetland I don't want to say you know there's Wetlands as part of
the property but not agricultural land yeah I I was almost certain that was the case but I just wanted to clarify thanks great thanks Bruce um I think Nate's drawn a very
um well-drafted boundary I think uh and and it's and I suppose in some respects not to be disect disrespectful Nate but it's it's pretty obviously bounded to the north by the fact that across Meadow Street you've got the APR land of the
Schwarz farm and to the West you've got Route 116 and uh to the South you've got after presidentials you've got a fairly solid uh open Open Fields of weapons and so forth I think and so forth so it's it's
it's a it's a kind of an area that bounds itself in many respects and then we've got to the think about how it is bounded on the North Pleasant Street side and I think Nate's done a good job of that so it seems to me that this is a
a solidly def a well uh defined uh uh overlay District I know we had a fair amount of discussion about whether we would Dicker with the bounds that were we we dickered with the boundaries of the University Drive uh overlay a bit
but and for good reason but uh here thankfully perhaps this is a place where I think that it it helps uh it kind of defines itself in a way so I think that's a good thing about this site and the number of people that the the the
the dens this the number of uh units that are here which is we can make a difference uh if if we uh seek to allow the tripling of the density which I think we can and should do um the fact
that most of these apparently are rental seems to me to be um means that we're dealing with a Consolidated group of owners which is again you know uh good so that's it's all you know as we perhaps noted before The Dominoes seem
to be falling in the right direction um one specific thing that I I think I will speak to um the question as to whether this should include inclusionary zoning and I think maybe that's just being asked perhaps because this is a
predominantly student student area and maybe we would be thinking well is this a good place to put uh affordable housing mixed in which might be a might be a predominantly student uh concent student rental concentration which frankly is something I think we should
aim to achieve here however I and Janet mcau made this point uh to but I think it was important enough that we really should repeat it um the idea is that this could be such a large
development that if we don't have inclusion resoning in here we risk Shifting the balance of the town's uh fraction of uh affordable housing on the Shi uh dangerously close if not below uh
10% depending on how all of this sugared out of course it's not going to happen immediately but we should be mindful of uh exempting uh large uh areas of housing uh from the affordable from
the from the inclusion resoning requirement because we could uh find ourselves in in trouble if we do that um but speaking as to the concern that may be driving that thought uh which is do we want to put uh um affordable housing
uh distributed amongst a sea of substantially short-term rentals um I think that we don't have to do inclusionary affordable housing distributed in the way we normally do and in the article 715 I think says
which is it it it basically asks that the uh housing the affordable units or houses be distributed appropriately within the the full context in this case I think we might decide that we actually don't want to do that uh we might decide
that because this um these are blocks that are large enough that will develop PODS of you know 20 or more um affordable housing uh units that we might think this is big enough to be a village and it might be or you know a
neighborhood and it we might decide that this is quite a good way of uh clustering these uh the the inclusion resoning units uh uh perhaps we would in the bylaw suggest that they be pushed closer to North Pleasant Street for
examp example that we see these as the mutually supportive communities or small communities rather like co-housing communities potentially because indeed the the early co-housing communities existed largely because they were spun
off by development such as this and they were put in the hands of uh buyers groups who said we want to do this and and and the developers found well this is a very easy way of solving my affordable housing problem I'll give it to this group of people that want to
um want to develop their own housing I don't think we would necessarily do that but the notion that you can have a successfully spun-off um um micr Community is actually rather appealing to me and I think uh that would be a good um strategy to
contemplate how we could draft the uh overlay to um cause something like that to happen thank you Bruce Jesse thanks um yeah I I agree with that idea that Bruce
was just discussing came up in the subcommittee meeting um but I also wanted to add in one more idea food for thought and then I'll apologize to the group I need to leave early tonight um but another um discussion we had was although Nate showed you know the 13 blocks of similar four or five story
units to get to that density we had talked about these prop these these Lots being big enough meaning East West really to sort of have a graded approach meaning closer to um the street Side Lower housing and then lower massing and
then as you move west they get taller and taller potentially so the point is the character on driving down the street might not change that much from what it is now and I think our subcommittee group thought that was a pretty nice possibility um just just to think about
it that way also thanks Jesse um I raised my hand because I wanted to just briefly chime in so um I agree that the area that's identified is you know appropriate it's uh self-contained and kind of a natural area so I think I'm
excit like I think that boundary looks really good Nate um you were talking about how often to get Redevelopment you need to offer three to five times existing density and what the like
concept that you laid out of the 13 M District buildings like super superimposed on that I think you said would only get us to three times so in the spirit of creating a space where some of this could actually
be realized I do think that flexibility and offering the potential to do more than you know a tripling could be important and valuable here and then I agree that it seems like
scaling up towards 116 could make a lot of sense especially if that current buffer that's there is a buffer that is going to need to be maintained anyway because of wetland
concerns um and then my other thought about just imagining the mill district there is that if this is primarily student housing it makes me think that we
um should have a less um we should just require less parking and really you know in like these are folks who maybe they have cars but maybe they could leave that car at home and instead plan on you know taking the bus
or um walking or biking to campus and that we don't need to plan in quite as much dedicated real estate to cars or at least create flexibility to exempt that so that they can get more housing
than is currently offered at the same square footage in the mid District those are my two reactions and thank you again um let's go to Fred uh yeah I wanted to uh pick up and uh something that uh Bruce raised about
uh uh having uh large numbers of affordable uh housing uh grouped which I think makes a great deal of sense and what I wanted to
add here was uh what happened at North Village when the university decided to rebuild North Village and they did it uh uh with in my opinion with uh really
uh almost zero uh Improvement and actually considerable destruction uh I the uh the North Village housing
complex uh had apartments that were grouped and uh there were a lot of these apartments where uh there there were actual families living in these and and
these uh groupings became Villages and uh we actually had uh it was quite common for uh one family to agree to uh look after the kids on such
and such a day and another uh family would look after kids on another day and so forth and they were and then the university said okay uh well uh you're all evicted
and uh they rebuilt it and uh and did it uh without observing this principle at all and uh as Bruce was talking I IM this immediately came to mind this is
absolutely something that uh we could address uh if we were to follow through on uh the way Nate uh described this thank you Fred
Lawrence yeah I just I have uh one question and I'm sorry if I missed this somewhere either in the materials or in an earlier discussion um but looking at the um I was comparing the boundaries that you drew uh
Nate with the 2013 proposal um and it it looks like like I I'm noticing one difference that I wonder if you could speak to uh what's showing up is I guess uh Lots 5 C6 5
C7 5 C60 5 C9 and 5c 59 um are in your boundaries and are included as it's it's toward toward the Northern end of um uh North Pleasant
Street on the south end of that uh I guess Westerly strip of the Village Center there um uh those those areas were not included in the 2013
proposal uh but are included here which in principle I'm not opposed to but I know that some of those are are historic homes up there and um uh just wondering um if you could speak to including those
rather than excluding this is there any chance you could pull up the map so we could all look at it yeah great thank you yeah so what um Lawrence was mentioning was you know these these properties are larger um historic properties and so you know the overlay
you know bcts them and has some of the backland and then there's some homes here you know these are some of is the since 13 some of these have changed and so you know these are rentals um uh you know and it can move but some of it is the idea would be to
have as much of a contiguous area as possible and so you know this line you know is it was following the back property line here so there's some you know reason here to have it maybe it's pushed back and it could be that in this area you know for instance in this
overlay we could be really um we could be you know we could have different standards we could like you know say that here is three stories and we could say so 250 feet whatever off the in this boundary we could even just shade a map and say this is only three stories and
you know this is could be more and you know so you know this could move but I thought you know I'd rather include it and then have you know Lawrence have your questions in discussion and say well let's not include it then then you know the other way I think it's probably easier to shrink it than expand it and
so you know I wouldn't want these homes in the overlay but maybe the back of the property and you know I know some of these homes are historic but in terms of how they're used and perhaps say what their historic value or significance is you know might at some point you have to say is it outweighed by the fact that we
could then have a lot more housing and so you know it it I think it's a good discussion and good question and you know it's not necessarily resolved you know here's some older homes up here too but um you know I just thought would be a little bit more expansive here in this
initial uh boundary so and I think the 2013 was really focusing on existing properties that had multi-unit overlay so if that were the case you know you draw you know it wasn't to me this is a North amorist overlay it's not a multi-unit property overlay so that you
know the 2013 would have been like well we're just doing this you know we're just going to go along these properties right we're going to exclude anything that's not a multi-unit property and to me that ends up with an
odd shape and you you missed some areas that could have some opportunity right for instance these properties what if it's that you have a nice you could get a road in here but this property is not in the overlay then it might be difficult to cross it with because of the zoning so I you know
um you know that's all I don't it wasn't like there was a you know it could move um I we say for the afford for the affordability piece I mean I was actually thinking while everyone was talking that we should say it's 15% in the overlay given we're allowing such density um you know what we've often
heard is that at 12% there's not enough affordable units to create a massing of them that there's you know there's not a good proportion of affordable and [Music] non-affordability of the overlay you know having a 15%
affordability requirement is not too honorous I agree Johanna that in my in my example with North Square I had a lot of parking and so I've often thought that if we wanted to have a better site design and density we H we have to be
flexible on parking and so you know I I agree I'm you know in my example you know you'd have 150 units and and they have a few hundred parking spaces right so you almost have like two parking spaces or one and a half per unit or some you know so it's you know
what so you know I just did a gross you know kind of not like you know just kind of a generic kind of here's what can fit to just make sure it's feasible so you know I I think that um I I would expect a better site design and so some of it is with this
overlay I guess the question is you know how much do we want to have the developers propose and the board responds to during permitting or how much do we write into the overlay to know we get what we want and so you know as a site plan review we'd have difficulty denying things but maybe
there are more conditions or things we'd really want to write in to be careful or maybe it's not always a site plan review maybe something is different but you know I think right now if we said it's a special permit it might be difficult to get in but if we had an overlay that had
a lot of criteria maybe a special permit isn't as scary because we've we've you know provided a lot more criteria for a developer to understand and apply to not you know right now it's just a special permit with not a lot to go on
yeah Bruce um I agree Johanna with your suggestion of parking which I think is probably the the suggestion that we follow the similar principle that we have with you drive where we put it in the hands of the developer with the
obligation of creating a management plan so that they actually have to commit themselves and we get to talk about it uh uh after you drive I think we hope and it feels like that's going to be a good way to do it um so I I think we should do it
the same way again um Nate I I I think I like the idea of the 15% because I also like Johan's suggestion that we push for really uh significant uh um additional elevation as we get closer to West uh go
west towards 116 uh perhaps that does mean that we can more than a three-fold uh increase in density and if we can then I think we can uh extract some benefit from that and in doing so create a a scale of affordable housing that
would be um to say noteworthy I mean I think then and we're talking um about this substantially let's say uh student housing but it's at a scale where it's generating uh affordable housing so it's
not just generating housing but it really is generating specifically housing that's answering the goal that we have to um provide Workforce housing and so forth so it's not just that we're providing housing and hoping that it uh
can be uh inhabited by long-term residents I think we're creating and we can point to the certainty with which we are creating um real housing as well as student housing student housing we need we know it's a problem we know that the university has created as much as
they're probably going to do in the near term and so we have to fill in the Gap and this seems like the way to do it and and and the bonus is that we get some uh affordable housing and if we can do it at 15 it's even better to achieve the kind of objective that I articulated
earlier so um uh I like a lot of what I've heard from you and from others this evening I think this uh seems to be uh something that a North Amis resident I'm not really speaking for the people but I I've done a fair B in North Amis in
recent years and I have a sense of the community here um I'm sure there's going to be people who the moment we think of increasing density and so forth they're going to be wary but I think
uh a measured conversation about this uh particularly with what the way we're thinking about it should be I hope should be um eventually well received by the uh community in North Amis as well as the community in amamos itself because I
think this is going to be a benefit to the town and not an unreasonable burden for the north end of town appreciate that I know we have received some public comments that have asked that the densification not jump over North Pleasant Street and this current
proposal doesn't it just stays on that side so y um and it's not only stays on that side potentially it it drifts down in a way and because it's a downhill grade and the buildings get high and there's housing historic housing on the
street uh it's every The Dominoes really are working well here and and Lawrence to your point I uh this there's a few houses historic houses that may get uh moved may get uh taken down but I know
that in previous uh uh developments and so forth particularly on Sunset Avenue we I guess the Wii there was the uh local historic district commission um either encouraged or required the developer to move the houses and they were indeed moved so I would think that
a similar fate might uh be here but we're not too far from 116 it's not too difficult to move houses in this area because we don't have so many big trees and narrow streets and so forth which is really the impediment to moving houses
thanks Nate and then Karen sure yeah with the affordable units I was going to say um you know we could also designate areas perhaps offsite where they're built um you know what's interesting is middleberry is doing something and I've looked at a few developments where they do um allow the
affordable units to be congregated and what that does is it allows a separate developer to build them so an affordable housing developer can then come in and build them whereas with our inclusion area zoning now the private Market the private developer builds them and you know they might not actually you know
depending on how we're doing this you know it could be complicated or could it might you know it might work but you it could be there could be a benefit to having them having designated zones and either the developer helps pay for them or they work with then they can hire say
like a valley CDC who actually knows how to build affordable units and manage them build the units as opposed to then if they're integrated in the projects or in the buildings it makes it harder to do that and so there's been a few projects I've looked at that try to set up that model to actually then have
better affordable units um so you know it's just I think it's something to consider I don't you know there's probably pros and cons to it but um I looked at I'm trying to find a few examples where they've allowed this and it seems like it's worked pretty well but
interesting thanks for sharing that Nate Karen um yeah Nate you said that you need 13 of these uh Mill North North uh Mill Street rectangles and there are
only 12 here is the does the math still work that you've described and the other thing is that the historical commission was able to have a little clout because the houses on Sunset were in the historical commission that's probably not the case here but I
think know when I do I have to do you hear me if I don't do I have to turn this down because it keeps clicking I don't know um we don't the clicking you sound fine clicking oh it's driving me a little crazy but the the fate of this
historical building is exactly what we're fighting it's a case of a probably a beautiful historical building and it's gone the fate of what we're expecting is going to happen to all of downtown if we don't really move and provide enough
housing and that is that it got bought up by somebody who realizes that they can make a lot more money renting it to students in this location and again we have no more families and no more possibilities for young faculties to move in because students can team up and
and nobody can compete rentwise so um yeah that's that's a cautionary tale with these houses that are probably going to be lost but I'm excited about this I think it's a win-win I think we should pursue do it
and um I like I really like Joanna your idea that we don't have to have that much parking because it is in such a great location there's probably great bus service and it could be known that this is just an area where you you know
we're trying to encourage more and more public transportation um so yeah I'm excited let's let's go for it great all right any other board member comments otherwise I would say let's go to public comment on this
discussion and then talk about next steps so any members of the public want to make a comment on the overlay for existing apartment complexes okay not seeing any public comment Nate let's talk about next steps
what do you yeah what do you think makes sense here yeah again kind of like the Adu if there's any comments send them to me whether it's as track changes or just an email I think you know we'll bring this back at you know successive meetings and try to keep working it uh
refine it I mean if you think of an idea of a case study or a project you like send it to me you know I think there are a lot of pieces here and so I just would want to make sure that you know we've we've had you know we've had enough consideration in due diligence so
it's easy enough to say sure let's have say six stories in the west and three here but at some point maybe we have to start you know putting pen to paper again and saying okay what does that really mean and then you know in aggregate we can get this density but if
it's on a parcel by parcel basis what does that mean and so you know I think there's you know and if if we put the affordable unit somewhere does that mean that one parcel gets can't triple the density or whatever it is and so you know there's all those considerations I think I'll just you know just keep
working on it and um you know and uh yeah and you know like provide any comments and so I I yeah I think this area is is worthwhile to pursue and study and it you know I'm not trying to fast trck it necessarily so it could be something that we work on for a few
months and we really get there the housing production plan uh that the consultant's working on for the town hopefully will be done in June you know whether or not that has ideas they're starting to come up with more of a draft document so I'll share that and staff will look at it when it's ready so maybe there's things there that can help this
so um you know I feel like with University Drive we had some zoning amendments a few years ago I feel like we have an understanding I staff has an understanding of how to write some of this I agree with flexible parking I think it's trickier in terms of you know how flexible do we want like I said our
design guidelines or our density or our dimensional standards uh knowing that if a site plan review we have limited ability to deny it and so you know some of it is just kind of what's the right language or right approach permitting approach but so if you have ideas like I said send
them to me great thanks so much Nate and Karen is this a new hand or is it a legacy hand oh sorry Legacy no problem um all right well thanks for the conversation everybody um I propose we move on to our
fifth agenda item on tonight's agenda which is old business um are there any topics that were not reasonably anticipated 48 Hours PRI prior to our meeting no no okay great um any new
business and topics not anticipated within the last 48 no no great are there any form a anr subdivision applications no upcoming zba applications we do have an upcoming zba
application um that I think Nate and I are both going to talk about this a little bit so um on March 27th the zba is going to open a public hearing for property at 72 Curtis
place um they are seeking a special permit for a non-owner occupied duplex here so this um property it's really it's it's to reconstruct the
two family property um there was an existing two family property there that had uh two units with seven bedrooms four in one three in the other they had a fire um in February of 2024 so a little
over a year ago um and that building has been taken down and their back um so this is a pre-existing non-conforming Nate take it away yeah you know so it was an it was an
historic house um that was visible from belter toown Road although it was on Curtis place and so you know it was a frontend Gable house uh that had a fire and it was you know uh the commission allowed it to be torn down given the condition was in and they're proposing
to put a duplex in the neighborhood new construction I'll share my screen quickly you know the zba can use the the um design R viw standard so here is just a you know it's just a big rectangle um you know of the building
the previous building historic building had you know was a different layout here's a site plan and so you know the property is at the end of a culde saac here's route nine and so originally it was you know a historic house that was here you know with the front Gable here
facing the street now it'll you know the back of the house will face it I guess you know what I found is that it's a you know the trash is right here right in the front as you pull in they have a fence here between the two uh front entry
decks there's you know what they're doing now is they're um putting the parking here you know so you pole in and you know essentially there's you know four parking spaces on either side with a with a pole light
here and it just it no longer seems like you know a a a residential home it's seems prettyy commercial and so the planning board could you know um could ask could ask to you know be
presented this by the applicant or we could you know agree by consensus or take a vote to encourage the zba to employ the design review principles and you know just take a thorough look at this in terms of its impact on the neighborhood and so you know this is
your first preview of it um it has to go to the Conservation Commission as well you know it is a two family maybe we think oh it's not that big of a deal I just you know it is a a bit of a change from what was there to what's being proposed and so you know the board has the ability to you know make a
recommendation or would like to review it again it's kind of your decision yeah well what do you all think is this a project that we wna that we want to see Karen's nodding her head yes [Music]
let me just I would say let me just look quickly when the zba is actually reviewing this thanks March 27th okay my thinking is that we it does seem like a pretty different setup for what
it I imagine all the other homes are single family homes and have a pretty different setup in terms of orientation and parking arrangements and whatnot so my inclination would be to go ahead and take a look at
it I agree with that okay sound good Nate yeah I mean so we could March 19th for the planning board you know we'll be busy we're having well it may or may not be we're having 422 Amity Street to come back you know
that's the one down um by you drive in Amity Street we've reviewed it uh you know we've looked over the findings and conditions and everything and really it could just be a vote if they are granted a variance the week before um there's the uh project down by Atkins by archipelago so that's coming
on the 19th and that needs site plan review and special permits by the planning board and so the point of the hearing on the 19th is to see if the planning board likes a project enough to hear it and allow special permits for it to move forward
and then archipelago would provide more information and so you know I'm not expecting at all that that would be you know complete that night actually I think it would be continued for a number of weeks and we probably spend a number of meetings on it and then we could have Curtis place come and you know slate the applicant in for a 15 or 20 minute
presentation at some point uh and then you know the idea would be to then have feedback to give to the zba prior to their hearings do you think the zba will get it done in one night or will they also will it be an iterative process um it
might take two hearings they usually have multiple hearings in an evening it would just be you know it would I would feel remiss if the if the board pushed it off for a meeting you wanted to hear it and the zba concluded on the 27th and there wasn't an opportunity for the
board to see it if you wanted to that's all y I guess I can talk to Jinta make the 19th a busy even if we added it to that yeah you know if if the planner if we think that it would be continued then maybe it'd be the following planning board meeting so I'll coordinate with
staff and see what the best approach will be that sounds great thanks Nate all right any upcoming SP I'm sorry Bruce go ahead yeah sorry I I just wanted to support your suggestion
Johan that we do uh invite for the next Mee for the 19th um I think the way you and they discussed managing the agenda or that the agenda can be managed because the uh
I I think it will be it should be uh five minutes with the you drive Amity unless I mean the only reason we didn't do it last time was because it was the possibility that something might crop up in the the finalization was it of the
concom or something and let's assume that nothing crops up then we should do what we intended and voted so there's virtually no time there and I think if uh if the with the archipelago project if the intention is that it's going to be continued we should do what you did
tonight and say Let's uh put a 60-minute uh discussion time on it and then a 15 minute time on the uh I mean we typically haven't done this with our meetings and it's not the be critical of Doug we haven't really needed to as much you know we've been prepared to give
these things as much as time as they take but uh um but with continued hearings we probably don't have to do that and and with this one I think we can basically exercise a a recommendation uh that but in person that they uh that the
zba you know exercise their their their Authority and Intelligence on and apply the design stands to it and maybe give them a few minutes of help on that if we think we can and I but I think being conscious of where the uh what the neighborhood is
like it also gives us time to drive out there I don't know that we necessarily need to have a sight visit on this I think that might be a bit too much but I think some of us might uh be able to drive out there and and take some photographs and just circulate them to n he can circulate them to the rest of us
I think it might be helpful and I don't think it takes more than 15 minutes so or it shouldn't let's make sure it doesn't so I support doing it at the next meeting great all right any other board member questions
or comments on that great all right then moving on to the next agenda item are there any upcoming SP spr or Su applications well we mentioned the 19th so there's the Atkins and you know 422s
coming back uh emmer socer has submitted an application to put a a shed at Plum Book Recreation Area it's you know very it's pretty minor but that it needs site plan review um and I think that's that's it uh for
now great thanks Nate um all right our 10th item is planning board committee and liaison reports so Pioneer Valley Planning Commission uh nothing to report um may not talking
about Trump anymore so I'll be quiet thanks Bruce uh all right Jesse isn't here to report on the housing subcommittee does someone else who participates in that want to give a brief report I think we basically did in the
course of the discussion um Karen Fred would you agree yes okay great and then design review board report we didn't meet we'll meet on the 24th excellent all right um next item on
the agenda is the report of the chair I have none uh report of Staff you know I'll give my usual the um Dodson and flinker is working on the downtown design standards they're trying to formalize you know goals and vision and actually start to get you know a
draft plan or outline together there was a working group meeting this week and so and I expect that there'll be some draft documents available probably in the next few weeks for well maybe a month for the public um the housing production plan is also moving forward and so so you know
that's something the planning board will need to vote on and actually approve before we send it to the state so I think that maybe in in April we'll have um the almost a completed needs assessment which the planning board looked at and then we'll have draft goals objectives and strategies that'll
come back probably in the early April meeting for the board to discuss and provide comments to the consultant and so you know those are two things that are happening great thank you all right I think that brings us to the end of our
agenda so um can I get a motion to adjourn first so so moved and and Well Done Johanna thank you all right the time is 8:43 PM uh thank you everyone and have a
good night night by okay good night great job Johanna good night Karen good night Fred good night yes Joanna great job where's my little recording