assured him that it was. >> Yeah. >> So, um >> Oh, here Jesse's here. Let me promote him to >> Okay, good. Save by the bell. >> Hello. >> Good. Morning. So,
>> still morning I guess technically. Um hi everyone. Did I come in incorrectly? Where was that link not working? Uh that's fine. You're p your panelist and co-host now. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um okay, we have quorum. Great. Guess we
got started. Are we recording yet? >> Uh yes, it is recording. >> Okie dokie. Let me just arrange my screen. All right. Welcome everyone to the Amoris Planning Board Housing and Zoning Subcommittee. It is October 5 16th. The
time is 11:36 a.m. We'll start with a uh roll call of attendance. So, please indicate you're here if you're here. Uh Bruce Pum >> here. >> Fred Harwell,
>> I am here. >> Angus Mloud >> here. >> And I just am here. Excellent. I forgot to send around another batch of minutes, so nothing to approve this time. Um Nate, I can send them to you just as drafts.
>> Yep. >> The remaining ones. So you can just load them up. Then we can try and approve some more next time. Uh okay. Any announcements? I do not have any. Nate, do you have any announcements for us?
>> Uh I do not. >> Okay, sounds good. We as usual just have a pretty loose agenda. Um oh, let me see. There's someone in the attendees uh with a name of a mat. Azamat Azamat
don't know who that is. So hello. If you'd like to join in, please raise your hand and uh add to the conversation. Um I had a couple of thoughts on what we might discuss today. The agenda again is pretty general. Uh I think we might want
to spend some time talking about the upcoming meeting. Nate, I don't know if you wanted to lead that discussion and we can try and assign some roles, etc., etc. Uh, I also thought it might be good rather than spending our whole time
focusing on North Ammerst, uh, to get to two other things. One is thinking more broadly. So using the map that Nate put together of the different areas and maybe just spitballing ideas of things that might be a little more
comprehensive changes we could think about. And that really taps into the second thing I want to offer for Tom which was uh Angus if you had any priorities on the zoning pieces for us to discuss because I want to start giving that some attention as well. and they're really related, I think. Like
I'm imagining maybe there are some broader zoning changes we can make or even a more sweeping one for all of these areas together, things like that. Uh, does that sound okay to everybody for a plan for the next hour or so? Great. So, why don't we give ourselves
maybe 20 minutes to talk about the upcoming meeting? I'll start a timer just to keep us on track. >> Yeah, Bruce, go ahead. Um, I've been privy and I don't think the rest of you have to a bunch of emails that have been uh coming in from people in North Amist
who have been uh Kathy has been uh basically putting together this Kathy Shane has been putting together this meeting. uh and I think the uh the notification went out on the District 1 neighborhood newsletter that there would be a meeting
to discuss this and there was a number of folks who've already chimed in and I can tell you that the uh the dominant sentiment is um that UMass should be building this
housing, we shouldn't be building this housing. And I predict that that is going to be the uh the wall that we come up against first. And my sense is that we should my sense is that that's a
um a wall or a topic or a point of view that is going to derail intelligent conversation because I I mean it's perhaps not very charitable but I think it's fact is it's essentially true that or appropriate that this is a bit like
you know King Canute being carted to the beach by his folks uh to command the tide not coming in. >> Now, we we never quite know whether that was Canute proving to his acolytes that there were limits to his power or whether it was his own hubris. One way
or the other, it doesn't really matter. The point is that certain things are not worth discussing. Um I think >> but uh and so >> agree >> and so I had put together a a preamble that I was thinking of uh
that we might give uh that basically sets up the conversation. I know we had thought that we would go in by saying here is all of the areas of town that we're thinking about and uh that's not North Amistan, but I'm thinking that
might not be the the best way to open this meeting. >> Yeah, I I like that idea. Um I have a couple thoughts and then uh I guess I see your hand. One would I mean I totally agree and this comes up all the time in all the conversations. Um, but
from my perspective and somewhat unique perspective wearing multiple hats, at least what I've seen from planning board and these conversations is like you said, Bruce, we just we have very little leverage. We can say that all we want as a town, but my sense is
until the council and the town manager maybe get serious about applying some pressure, that's that's the best we can do is suggest that that happens. >> Yeah. Um, and the other thing I know that the university would say is, well,
they have launched a long-term assessment and made a call for proposals and know it's an issue and are starting to address it. >> Yeah. >> But I think I agree with you. We might try and cut that off at the past and phrase it as, okay, that'd be great, but
they probably won't build enough to solve the whole problem. So, we should still address it as best we can. >> Yeah. I've got an out the structural outline here which I can go over or I could uh um write it up. >> I also I also think delivering that
message is probably better from Nate than from us. Well, certainly not from me. I I should not be the one. I think >> I I would be happy to deliver it because it's based on the work that I did for the first six or nine months in joining
the planning board when I called out you know basically tried to identify towns like Ammerst across the country and began to want to understand how those towns were dealing with this problem and essentially there were three ways of dealing with it and I would go into that
and uh uh and so you know speak try and speak initially from a fairly high level and then as you said here is we are left with uh we are the planning board we are not Elon Musk uh we are not a lot of other things that could do the solve the
problem differently we are the planning board and the planning board has this tool this shovel this pick this sickle or whatever and here's how we think we can use it and this is what we would like to talk about >> quickly I just want to jump in so I just
um the meeting is now October 29th. So, originally it had been for some, you know, there was a date discussed at the planning board meeting and that didn't work. Um, I'm not available on the 29th. Uh there's a civic academy. So, the town's, you know, hosting aformational uh meeting, there's like a class called
civic academy for 20 to 25 residents. And on that evening, the planning department and a few other departments are are giving a presentation. So, Doug and Bruce said that they're comfortable without me there. Um, we've discussed having maybe another staff person. Um, >> sure, >> Rob more and I. But in any event, I
think, you know, really this is, right, a a a district one meeting, um, you know, that they've requested to have some, you know, time to comment on what the planning board has been discussing. And so really, it's not a planning board meeting, which is, you know, which is a nice way to frame it. And I think Bruce
and Doug could manage. Um, and you know, um, so for, you know, Bruce and I was going to email everyone and Jar said he could help with a presentation. So, if we have any ideas for printed material or a presentation, you know, I can help facilitate that and share documents. Um, I think, you know, it's probably going
to be a lot of listening and note-taking or um, you know, idea gathering. And so, >> yeah, >> I think framing the conversation is really important. And I like Bruce what you just said. It's interesting right how um right probably since the citizen petitions and in the last two weeks there's been a lot of conversation about
what you know whose responsibility is it for housing student housing specifically and where and how. Um I just want to let you know that's those are the dates. So October 29th that I think it's 6:30 uh >> in the north. Yeah.
>> Okay. Thanks for updating us on that. Um Angus go ahead. Uh yeah, I won't be able to attend that night. My wife's out of town, so I'm on baby duty. But um uh I guess I had a couple of questions about the since the the the UMass thing seems
to be coming up a lot. Um I I guess I wanted to ask you all who have more experience with this and and Nate as well for some clarification. Um, my understanding is that UMass houses a fairly high percentage of its student
body compared to most public universities. Is that accurate? >> Uh, Jesse's probably better, but that's always been the impression that I've been given and been uh houses of 16,000.
Um, that leaves 11,000 looking for housing. uh 2,000 of which find it out of town and leaving 9,000 uh looking for housing as student rentals in the town of Ammerst. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I guess I asked that because I I went to a big state school for undergrad and
they housed uh 5,000 out of 50,000. So a much smaller percentage. >> Yeah, that is that is true and that's always what UMass will tell anybody who asks. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Um, Bruce, maybe you want to share again that document you put together with this
group. Just >> that' be great. >> Sounds like Angus. >> You mean share the screen now or just >> No, no, no. Just email it around again. >> Bruce Bruce did a lot of work collecting. >> Yeah, I'd love to see that. >> And putting things together in a digestible way. >> Yeah, >> especially because the >> actually it comes out backwards, doesn't
it? The other thing I guess is that we had >> uh it was when I first joined the planning board I guess two years ago when we started to work on overlay districts um >> Tony Mer Marulis and Nancy Buffone who are some of the UMass um relations folks
came to plan meeting and discussed all this with us and okay there were there were some subtle in disagreements about the numbers and stuff but the overall idea overall facts seem to be aligned. Yeah. And I guess the other question that I have just in thinking about
planning long term, my understanding is UMass has several high-rise student housing buildings. Correct. >> So Southwest um are Yes, they are very tall. I think they're 20 something
floors. I think >> three, four buildings that are that tall. It's a big complex. It's where the majority of the students are housed on campus. Uh they also have recently they're they're kind of old. Um >> yeah, that's well that's what I was going to bring up. I guess I'm wondering
if we have a sense of how long those that's not the building style anymore. And so I'm wondering when those are going to be torn down. And if so, the town will have a a a bigger issue with housing because they're not going to build
>> I I feel I feel comfortable in offering that it won't be like a tear down. Sorry, go somewhere else. Yeah, >> UMass will make >> will not drastically decrease the number of students they're housing. They'll figure out a way to build first or re do
one tower at a time and upgrade. I I don't know any detail. I don't know if anything's actually planned. I do feel confident they're not going to suddenly say, >> "Sorry, all we have 5,000 fewer beds." >> Yeah. Okay. It's just something that I'm thinking about longer term as those
buildings age. >> Yeah. This last year there were lots of grad student and undergrad sort of protests about this issue. So yeah, it's a it's a hot topic for sure. I can also send around the request for proposals that they also put out in case you
haven't seen that. As far as I know, nothing's progressed on that, but I guess about a year ago there were they they made it a big announcement that we're thinking about long-term housing. >> Oh, that'd be great. Yeah, thank you. >> Sure. >> Yes. I will incorporate in that this pre
this intro that I draft. I will draft that in the next. >> Yeah. Oh, and other piece just to say, sorry, Fred, on the UMass side, I did offer myself to be involved once that gets going from the UMass side because I
feel like I'm at this unique intersection of being UMass, being planning board, living in town, like on the edge of campus, having two kids who go to school here, like so all the boxes I sort of checked on this issue. So anyway, uh but again, nothing, as far as
I know, nothing's progressed very much. Uh Fred, please. >> Uh yeah, just a couple things. One is uh I think I can date the Southwest complex pretty accurately. I think it's 1964.
That gives you an idea of uh how how long it's been there. And I I agree. I don't think there's any immediate likelihood that UMass will decide to tear them down or something. I I I don't see that happening. Uh and the other thing I wanted to
mention was uh I think Bruce came up with a marvelous analogy to canoe and uh yeah that absolutely uh I think describes the meeting that we had with
UMass uh uh representation. This is one of the in-person planning board meetings. Uh, and uh, and they, I have to say, uh, based on
Bruce's research, they are are correct that UMass does in fact house a relatively high percentage of its students. >> So, yeah. So uh that is the case and it
is also the case that UMass is a state institution and am the town of Amoris has essentially no effective leverage to uh uh force UMass to do very many things.
>> Yeah, thanks Fred. Um, Bruce, that's sort of a angle you might work into to your preamble, meaning pointing that out and >> sorry, pointing out that >> they do house more than many others. >> Oh, yes.
>> Not enough. I I would take it one step further because to to try and make this very even-handed I think you know trying to get the confidence of the of the of the group uh as as uh you know as as as as good actors we would say yes uh the
uh this is what UMass claim and yes this is correct they are significantly higher however there's another factor here that we should acknowledge for on behalf of the town is that whereas UMass uh has a very high percentage. Um it
also has an extraordinary ratio in terms of the size of the student population of UMass to the size of the resident population in town. I couldn't find another town in the country that had that ratio.
I mean, >> some of some of you, Angus, you mentioned that you went to a place that had a fairly low uh onampus population, but I'm but but I'm guessing it either wasn't a
huge university or it wasn't a really small community. When you put those three things together or those two things together, the size of the university, the size of the tertiary institution and the size of the permanent population of the town, which
is about 13,000. So the number of students in UMass at around 28 is more than twice the number of residents in the town. I can't find another place in the country that has that ratio with
such a huge university. I mean, you might find it with really small colleges that have got microscopic uh communities and they themselves are the it's like a like a factory town or something. But where you've got a a respectablesized
town with a with an outsized uh institution uh in its midst, I couldn't find another place like that. >> I think this is a point we should have on the tip of our tongues in all these conversations.
and eventually to get to the town council as well. >> And I know we've tried some of this with some of our other >> recent suggestions and not gotten much >> support on that people, but but I I completely
>> but it still means I mean can the the the thing is still that we can't just say the uh the answer to all of our problems is that the university should do more. I mean, I think we can dignify our position by being upfront about all
of these and and and demonstrating that we think we understand the picture and then say, let's talk about what we can do and whether it's a good idea or not, not about what should happen that we have no control over.
>> Yeah. Um, I have two thoughts about what you've put together, even though we haven't seen it yet, Bruce. one is that may maybe you want to send that around to us as a more useful way to get some feedback rather than trying to go through it now. Um >> we can't go through it now because I
drafted it in the 20 minutes before the meeting. Okay. >> So it's it's just a bunch of cards and notes. >> Other it's all up here in the sense. >> So if you want to even just bullet point the flow, maybe we could give you some feedback. >> I'll I'll do that. But it might be hard to do it before Sunday because I've got
a large hopefully work weekend for >> you got a little more time. >> Yeah. >> So it'll be early next week. >> Other thought about that and this meeting might I'm not sure it's a good idea. I'd love your all feedback. Maybe we want to prepare something that can be sent
around to the district one people in advance. just this introductory part so that they have some time to think this through and and absorb the information that we're offering on the UMass piece. Just
on the UMass piece, not the whole plan. Um maybe that's a good idea, maybe it's a bad idea. Maybe they'll just come come armed to sort of nitpick the numbers. I I I don't know. It >> It doesn't feel right. That doesn't feel like [Music]
that. No. Maybe we should have a beer next early next week and talk this through. But >> I could see that going either way. It might okay some might prevent some people from just showing up and saying, "No, you has to solve the problem." >> But again, it might just arm people to
want to argue more about details. >> No, I I I I think uh I mean we it's I'm sure we're going to get um uh kind of dumped on. >> Yeah. I mean the other thing I was going
to bring up later but I sent I think to most of you name maybe you've seen the ammerish current article written by Ethan I don't remember the last name the name anyway if you read the comments there uh it's I think a good representation of
what we're going to experience also um >> is current huh >> yeah Angus go ahead >> uh yeah I was just going to say I think We probably I think we want to keep this
discussion as focused on our approach to to increasing housing in a variety of different ways to help a variety of different populations. And the North Ammerst overlay is more focused on um undergrad and graduate students. Um but other overlays are
focused on other populations across town and we're we're really trying to think expansively. So, I I don't want us to get too fixated on the UMass thing. It's it's relevant to this North Ammerst overlay, but at the same time, um I think I I would I would if we were to send anything out in advance, I think it
should be more focused on the overall strategy rather than, you know, getting into UMass um stuff, especially because it's kind of UMass's battle to fight to to an extent, you know? I mean, like we we just we don't have control over.
>> Yep. I agree. Yeah. Nate. Sure. Yeah. I mean, I was going to also say that um you know, the reason we're looking at this, right, is we have the purpose of the overlay that's proximity to UMass. It's already multi-unit development. And so we're looking at ways to,
you know, it's not, you know, to me it's like, you know, these are properties that um have been identified from other, you know, by other planning boards, by consultants. And so to me, this isn't like a one-off. This is something that has been, you know, assessed and said, "Oh, why could could we allow, you know,
increased density here, infill density and so, you know, the comprehensive housing market study, you know, the both housing production plans and and so to me there's a reason to to talk about it." And so, um, yeah, I mean, I think it is important to talk about UMass, then it's also to say, well, you know, that's to me, housing more students on
campus is one option, and another option is to do some other things proximal to the university. And so, um, yeah, I I I know I hope we can move that past the you should do it all and so we're just not going to be constructive because, um, you know, I think I think it's
unrealistic to say that we could house 9,000 students around campus, but maybe there's some percentage of that uh, in new units we could, the town could and it's and there's benefits to doing it off campus as well as you know that
article mentioned and um, So >> great. Um >> so yeah, so I think so Bruce and you know and yeah, just let me know what you know how we'd want to go about it. I guess um I think the meeting room is equipped to have like a digital presentation and maybe we want some
large printouts. I would just need to know, you know, bit ahead of time what what's necessary. >> Yeah, I think I'd hold off on the printouts. It's just work and and uh and
and uh I'm thinking that we should follow up with any print out that we want to deliver so that it can be delivered electronically and so forth. I mean, >> uh, I think we'll need maps,
um, that we can point to whether and I guess, um, whether we should have a presentation. Um, uh, >> what do you think? What what what what
did you have in what would you have in mind as a as a as a as let's say eight to 10 slides? >> Uh yeah thing with slides is that they're off. I like maps because they stay on the wall. Um I favor but of
course you can't have too many of them maybe three or four but uh >> can I make a suggestion? Maybe I I could imagine a very simple slid set which is maybe only three slides or four slides. introductory, it's just whatever title,
something like that. A one slide that sort of lists the factual numbers, some of them setting up the problem of the overflow of students. Third slide, which is the whole town map with all these areas highlighted, >> just like you sent around just now, Nate.
>> Yeah. >> Pointing out, okay, this is, you know, we not to we've had this conversation already. You know, here's the big plan. Here's what we're looking at. Here's what's been done. University Drive. Here's what's next. Here's what may be coming after this. And then one closeup
of the North Ammerst uh area. Um and if that stayed up for the conversation, then we could go back and forth easily between the big map and the small map, the more zoom in as needed for the conversation.
I I don't think it need I wouldn't think it needs to be much more elaborate than that. Um Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. And I think if even with like to say that one slide with the overlay itself, we could just have a few bullet points like purpose like the framework of the zoning, you know, if we
want to talk about what residential use categories or certain things, you know, there's that framework um document discuss the planning board and just kind of hope hopefully generate some discussion there, right, about okay, well, what's you know, what's really going to happen with this if it moves forward with the
overlay? Yeah, I think it could be as simple as that, too. I, you know, not many slides and >> well, if we only had three or four, I might prefer that they be produced as posters and we could stick them up on the wall and then we then we could keep
going back to them. That would certainly be true of the whole town map on the one hand and the overlay map on the other. And then the other piece that you mentioned uh suggested Jesse was the the the data set that describes the problem.
Um and that could be a bulleted point as well. And uh >> I don't know the room you know the room probably better but like yes is the projection big enough so everyone can see it. >> Oh yes everybody can see it small enough that a big screen. It's not even it's a
it's a video what you call it. It's it would be a um I think it's I think it's I think it's a a Wi-Fi or what have you. Uh Bluetooth videos. >> So, it sounds like we're all here in
pretty much agreement about how this should go. And sounds like Bruce, maybe you and Doug are taking on putting this together with Nate's support. >> Yes, I think that's true. >> So, then why don't we leave it for you to ask us for help as needed?
That's that's good. And the first piece will be just circulating. Uh uh I should talk to Doug about this obviously. I'll I'll start by talking to Doug about this conversation. >> And I'm certainly comfortable just letting you two decide how this should go here on out because again I think
we're I think we're all pretty much the same page what the goal is. >> Okay. Um >> any other conversation on this before we move on? clicking that time wise. Okay. Um
let's go next to some more more townwide thought thinking. Maybe I'll start and share just some thoughts I had. It's not very well detailed. Um, but I was looking at the the map with all the areas, right? And this has come up before.
Both Angus and Jarro are clearly starting to think this way, like what are some more sweeping changes we could propose? Uh, and I was wondering, it might not be all of these areas appropriate, but is there some standard change we could
imagine that would be appropriate for all of them, but then pick others to add more. So, like, yeah, the North Ammeris one, we're talking about potentially pretty high buildings, right? But are there other ways we could look at all these properties and say,
"Okay, well, if you're whatever 200 feet set back from the street, you're allowed to have four stories. Uh, and all these you're allowed to consider rowouses and all the are there more sweeping changes to increase density. We could think about not for the whole town, not for all our
zone districts, but sort of a group overlay, right? That's where I think a lot of this started 10 years ago, Nate, where they were trying to look at the multiple sites at once. And maybe that's both politically and logistically a lit way a quicker way to
make some broader changes to get to get things going. Um, and again, I don't know the specifics on that. I'd really lean on Nate to help us with that. Uh, at the same time, I really like your idea that you wrote up last time, Nate, about taking specific neighborhoods and
they really thinking about redesign, reform, relayout that'll be more appropriate for individual spots. But I don't see that as needing to be exclusive from this other idea. like is there something we can do soon to open it up across town
and then continue to focus on specific areas to maybe add additional overlays or whatever they become. Um yeah, so other other thoughts how how else we could make some significant change.
>> Okay, I guess >> Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I don't know. I mean, it's interesting. The um the ADU bylaw is going to be uh going back to council for the first read, you know, on Monday. I'm not sure. So, I'll be curious to see how that conversation goes. I think
everyone, you know, the concern is, you know, there's an extra unit now allowed and will it meet the kind of intentions of what the state was thinking or is it just allowing more, you know, student rentals in Ammerst? Right. So, um I do like what you're saying, Jesse. I feel
like um you know the towns had zoning in place for a long time and you know there's a lot of growth in the 60s and 70s with multi-unit apartment complexes and then afterwards there was this kind of reflexive nature where the town changed its zoning and there's there's a lot of static
um you know zoning measures and then there were some changes in the 2000s which led to the you know the new buildings downtown but it was really and it really was just like a mixeduse building right it was a definition in one place and but apartments and town houses and kind of our density calculations, all those things haven't
changed in a long time. I I'm, you know, I'm looking at a zoning map and it's typically, right, we do a zoning change districtwide and so it's hard to say, well, this, you know, here's something that's small. Um, you know, Mandy Joan Pat had proposed a
few things. Um, and then there's overlays or there's different ways, but you know, it's like for instance, do we if we said yes, you know, duplexes townwide are just site plan review instead of a special permit. What is, you know, what does that do? Is that does that actually
create housing that we think would, you know, would allow different households or is it just, you know, more of the same? I don't, you know, I I guess I'd have to think about it. Um, but I like the idea, right? Right. I mean, we don't we aren't very good at defining town
houses and how they're permitted in residential areas. And so, you know, we've talked about tiered approach to apartments and is there a way to look at town houses and then we apply that in a number of zoning districts if we came up with a new definition or classification of townous for instance.
>> Yeah. I think you know what what gets really tricky. I'd love for someone knows how to do this is the problem is we just need more units. We just need more beds. And we've had this discussion in various ways over the last couple years. Until we have a
lot more, they're probably mostly going to be filled by students. And that's what's driving me to just think about, yeah, let's try and open it up. Um, I I don't I don't know how to design specifically or zone specifically to get those specific uses in our town
given the problem we just laid out because I feel like even if even if someone were building, you know, a little neighborhood of small houses, who's going to build that? And probably the student population is still the most attractive for making money. I I don't
know. Angus, go ahead. Yeah, I think there's a couple of things that I'm thinking about. Um I there are um there are a couple of different areas we we could look into that would all make changes um that would make it make it
easier to build. Um so for instance um things like lot minimum lot sizes is is one change that could be made to certain zones um that would make it easier to build. But um when I look at the map um
the zoning the town zoning map um there's a it's a there's a surprisingly large number of zones for um for our town. Um which is which is not a huge town. Um one thing that it's making me
wonder, we have RVC and BV VC. Um and and one thing that I'm thinking that could be a lighter lift would be trying to um possibly combine them into just village center um which would allow for both you know
business and commercial as well as mixed use and some residential and try to make um you know certain major uh thoroughare corridors the village centers where we allow denser for housing to be built.
Um, and those are more discreetly limited. I mean, there's not um there's a couple of spots that might where this might not make sense. Um, but most of the village center zones are at major intersections of thoroughares. Um, and
we could change some of that and and there's some of the places we've already identified. So, you know, down around Atkins um over on College Street where we've already been talking about um and uh north of you know the the town
center. Um as well as the North Ammeris spot that we've been talking about for this overlay. Um so I I that's one option for thinking about about some of this. I think there's there's a lot of other options. I think my concern is
um doing trying to push too much um and we don't we don't really know how the town council is going to be viewing is going to view development in the next after the next election. And so I guess I just worry about throwing too much at them. Um and we have we have a long list
of proposals here. Um and the the bigger and grander our proposals are, I think the harder it might be for them to swallow. So, it's just one of the kind of balancing things that I'm thinking about. >> Yeah, I mean, that's a that's a good point about things possibly changing in
the next couple months in terms of council. Um, I don't I don't think it should stop us from going down this road, right? Um, but yeah, we'll see what we push forward. I guess I can't imagine us getting anything ready very soon anyway, to be honest. >> Yeah, really.
Um but yeah, I like a lot of what what you just said, Angus. I think it makes a lot of sense. >> Um >> sorry, just to jump in. Yeah, you know, there will sorry that you know with the elections council will be changing. So, you know, what staff's talked about is um you know, trying to get a few zoning
amendments say ready for the spring. And so, you there's a few that our staff is looking at and if the subcommittee, you know, there's one or two that we think could be ready >> uh say in March. So, you know, give ourselves six months or something to work on some, you know, an amendment,
then bring it forward. I think, um, that could be a good approach. And so, you know, I agree, Angus. You know, sometimes I've looked and said, well, could we combine zoning districts? You know, even different residential zoning districts because, you know, what what's, you know, there there are a few differences, but are
they enough to keep having those different districts? Um, but yeah, I think, you know, I can send the list around again. you know, even if for instance, um, you know, we're looking at the PRP. So, just for instance, Angus was looking at that and you know, those are discrete zoning districts. If we
said in the PRP zoning districts, you know, one change we want to bring forward is to allow apartment buildings or something, right? And and you know, and it and you know, it's a say it's a simple idea. it. You know, there's
probably then more to consider to it. But that could be something that is just do we discuss that a little bit more or um do we come up with a new definition or tiered approach to apartments and then that can be applied townwide. Um you know and maybe you know those are
the things um that we could look at. Um you know I yeah I I feel like there's a lot of things we could look at. I agree. I to me I you know 40y is something uh staff and I have been looking at um you know it's a starter home overlay it's a state program it limits the size of
homes um you can have small lots requires a certain percent o you know owner occ owner occupancy um it's pretty new is looking at doing it and so essentially in Mansfield they took what would be three properties and they put an overlay there and maybe instead of getting 10 lots they're going
to get 80 you know and they're 8 to12 thousand square foot lots um with this overlay. And so it's by, you know, and they're allowing smaller subdivision road, right? So instead of having, you know, 24, 26, whatever, it's like 18 in, you know, 18 foot wide roads, like no
sidewalks. And they created a neighborhood. And so, you know, Greg Rashane, the housing coordinator town, we've talked about like, oh, is there places in town where we could have kind of this 40 Y and maybe it's not for a subdivision, but just to allow smaller lots and hopefully then maybe that
encourages a different kind of housing development than say an apartment building. Um, if you could have these even smaller lots, you know, would you get you could even get like zero lot line town houses and then they're all fe simple as opposed to being a condo. is that a way to kind of get a different housing
um you know end user and so uh you know there's a like I said it's pretty new I haven't we've been looking at it a little bit but to me that's something I want to we're exploring a little bit more um >> yeah I'd love to think about that too and I I'd be curious to know what if it
if you actually do a 40y what are the pieces that we could change what can't we change like percent owner occupancy lot the things you just Can we change some of that and still count as a 40 and get the support that way? >> Yeah, I I can send some information along like like Mansfield is going to
town meeting this fall to adopt it and so they have, you know, a zoning amendment and some ideas, you know, already out there. They're probably pretty far along. >> Uh Bruce, go ahead. >> Um I think that was first of all so I don't forget it. Nate, at our last uh
meeting uh the subcommittee, we reviewed the proposed this list of zoning changes and we put it into three categories, I think, but we didn't we we kind of did it on the fly and you were
going to uh consolidate uh that and I thought it was coming to the planning board and maybe it would have except we spent a lot of time on the uh on the uh estamist local historic district thing, But uh do you have that uh product of our last
conversation u where we um there were certain fractions >> I think it was attached to the agenda today Bruce is that right? >> Oh it was okay I'm sorry I must not have seen that. I guess I saw the the the reminder of the meeting. Okay I'll look at that. Don't worry about that. Um uh
on the second uh thing that I would uh mention the the 40 Y I I do like that possibility but I think that could be in some perhaps combined or we could think about how it might be combined with a
looking at the OCD which is also on that list and maybe we we put put them together on that list already. I don't know but certain uh of the aspirations associated with creating that OCD 20 years ago was to uh enable
um housing something like this but not exactly like this. The 40y is much more focused on starter and affordability whereas the OCD was focused on more kind of mutually supportive community and uh but they're not
inconsistent. uh and one could learn from the other. So in so far as we do the 40y, it might be that there would be things that would rub off onto the OCD or maybe that the that that we would
decide to uh invest the whole of the value in the OCD into a 40y and that the OCD would disappear. I mean it's it doesn't seem like it that might be the but it doesn't seem inconceivable that that could be an outcome because you know one doesn't
want to have ever you know more complexities in the in the zoning bylaw. So I'm raising the possibility that we looked at those two things together and perhaps even with the possibility of uh
of um creating a 40y as a an alternative to the current OCD. It's not a it's way from it's way it's it's a long way from a proposition I'm making. It's simply a question as to whether that line of inquiry might end
up in some way ending in that direction. like that. I think we we can we can self volunteer Jar since he's not here and he was the one >> 40 wise. We'll give him an assignment. >> Okay. >> Um yeah, what else?
>> Yeah. No, yeah, I've updated the list. I can sit around. I added 40 Y and I added combining RVC and BVC. Um so right now there's you know you know half a dozen under the subcommittee you know eight under staff and then you know a bunch under kind of unassigned.
Um but I think it's worth um you know we can you know discuss this and then you know maybe after another meeting or two we then say okay here's four or five that we're going to spend a little bit more time on. Um, we've kind of done that a little bit, but I think it, you know, we could then really bring it back
to the planning board and say, "Okay, here's what we'd like to do." And, yeah, and give ourselves, like I said, whether it's 6 to 8 months to really try to research some of these and bring something forward. Um, you know, knowing that, you know, once it is in discussion,
becomes if it becomes a zoning amendment, there's another six or eight month plus long process to it. So, um, you know, >> I wonder if let me say one thing and then drop Angus. I wonder if a good approach would
also be get a little closer, a little more organized on a couple of these ideas and almost preview to the new council in December, January. Here are some things we're working on. Just so you know, we'd love you to come to some of the meetings and
give input. And even if they don't, just so it's on the radar before we get to something we actually push forward. Um anyway, I'll try and remember for us to do that. >> Go ahead, Angus. >> Yeah, I just think that's a great idea and by that time hopefully the housing
production plan will have been, you know, fully done. Um so, uh I think that that that that's great, Jesse. I agree. Um, one other thing or I had a couple of questions um, as I'm thinking about the
the PRP work. Um, and so I'm wondering if I can ask a couple of those real quick. Is this an okay moment? Okay. Um, >> so I'm I'm also wondering uh, so there are three PRP zoning zoned areas. Correct.
the Belchure Town Road one, the one off of Northampton Road, south of the University Overlay, and then north, the one that's currently a farm. Okay. Um, is there And then there's, near as I can tell, there's only one office park.
Is that correct? >> And it's the one on University Drive. >> That's the R&D label one. >> No. >> Uh, the office park should be OP. >> Yeah, there's a very small area zone for
office park >> and it's and it's on University Drive. >> Uh, I guess I my map is generalized. It's University Drive or that area, Route 9. Yeah, just right down there. Yeah. >> And is is that zoned area part of the
University Drive overlay? Everything I think it is everything north of um Route 9 is so I think there's one or two properties that are in that that are zoned. >> Okay. Okay. Um because I guess one thing I'm thinking about is is it do we need you know in addition to thinking about the PRP
do we need if there's a single zone for OP is that really accomplishing what we want it to as well? >> Right. >> Um and if that's already in an overlay then I guess it raises some questions for me. Um okay. Um and then the light
industrial is is it just the properties in North Ammerst? >> Yeah. So there's light industrial, you know, um um North Ammerst and I was looking at a
map. Um you might be right. Um North Ammerst. I think it's only North Ammerst. Yep. Uh, and then yeah, it may be the uh I think if if not if it's not commercial.
>> Um, it's the uh lumber store down on College Street, >> right? Okay. >> Might be um a relic light industrial. I think it might be not commercial, but Right. There's very little light industrial. >> Okay. Okay. Um anyway, I'm just trying
to trying to think about some of these lightly used zones. Um and and um which I think are just at least some of them like the light industrial I'm sure is is a um because of pre-existing structures. Um okay. Okay. Thank you. That's that
was that was all as I'm thinking about this. I'm trying to reach out to some um owners of properties in PRP and OP um to to try and think about what they would find useful. Um but um and if anyone has
any suggestions on anyone else to talk to about um both PRP and OP um I' I'd welcome suggestions. >> Great. >> Yeah. I mean just quickly some of it would be I think you know zoning can be an opportunity. So I think the owners are good. Some of them would also be,
you know, what I think about say with the University Drive overlay or what we're doing in North Ammerst is, you know, if the owners aren't willing, if there's something in place that could encourage it, would then another developer, could a partnership be formed? And so, you know, we've, you know, staff, we've talked to a few owners around town and they some of them
that own multi-unit properties aren't willing to undertake a a big investment to, you know, increase density. But I think if they had the right partners, they would be, you know, they haven't said that. That's just something that you just kind of inference from the conversation. And so to me it's like oh well now on University Drive you we have
one project I'd you know I'm I'm like okay there's a few people I want to reach out to to see if there's another project that could take shape there. Um you know I think some of the owners are interested. I just don't know you know I think there's a lot to consider. Um so yeah with the PRP I think um interestingly enough you know there's
the zones in North Amoris and um along nine they're big. It looks they're big properties on the zoning map. a lot of its wetland. And so, you know, you could like take the PRP down off Route 9 and say, "Wow, there's, you know, 40 acres and maybe there's 10, you know, that
could be developed." But, um, I think it I think it's funny if we show it on a map, people will be like, "Oh my gosh, look what could happen." But really, there's a limited development. But, I think there's I think it's good to look at it. >> Oh, well done. >> Sure.
>> Um, Fred, go ahead. Uh yeah, just a reminder I think 85 North Whitney Street is light industrial. Um that was originally uh the Amoris Gas Company back in the days of gas lighting
and uh they they got their gas from the railroad uh uh and that of course abuts the uh the railroad. And I I'm not sure I don't think that has actually ever
been reszoned. That that that brick building is now a part mostly apartments but not completely. There are some uh I I remember wiring one uh uh plainly an industrial use uh in the first floor of
that building. And I think there's maybe some some of those still. >> You're right, Fred. It is. >> Bruce, I saw your hand pop up. You're good. >> Uh, yes. I was just uh what Angus is uh
and then Fred drawing to our attention is what essentially is is spot zoning. Um, it's probably done back in reverse. In other words, zoning that was created to accommodate something that already existed. But I recall the conversation
many years ago around Maplewood Farm uh and what the proposition that was being uh put forward to town meeting u to allow it to be reszoned in some kind of uh into a into a zone that would
allow it to operate more as a expansive retail restaurant so forth the way it really wanted to op. And the argument against that I mean the one that I remember from the time was well we we don't do spot zoning and this is spot zoning. So in a sense uh we we what what
I hear um Angus and and Fred speaking to or Angus you particularly is to say rationalizing these things. These these are things that we perhaps need to eliminate in order to avoid something that we have stated for years is a
policy that we don't uh want to pursue. The one thing that I do say about the PRP is I as I said I think before but maybe I'm not in this forum I don't know that the the 30 years ago uh trying to
find places where um invest uh people could invest in um research establishments that would basically pay much higher or higher taxes than uh than retail than residential. I mean uh and
and trying to find these uh zones uh was what the board what the planning uh staff and so forth were trying to do in the '90s trying to identify places where uh prospective uh research uh um
where where commercial exploitation of UMass research could take place and there were precious few of them and uh and and the and I'm sure To the people of the time, the idea that we would allow housing into that area would have been anathema because we were
actually trying to avoid trying to keep housing out. In other words, we were trying to identify places where higher tax base investments uh u higher tax yielding uh um uh properties could uh could be. So
um we should bear that context in mind I think as we contemplate putting housing because I understand now 30 years later the the the dominant concern in town is not how can we um boost our tax base which it was in the '9s we're now
talking about how can we boost our housing so times have changed but uh the the the but we still should keep our eye on the 1990s ball I think because uh it it was a real uh concern and
remains a real concern. >> Take Well, I never had my hand up. Sorry. >> I mean, Brad, go ahead. >> Uh yeah, the uh the one on Sunderland Road is a case in point, Bruce. Uh I
vividly remember that discussion. Uh that was uh there was a a a um enterprise that was ready to ready to go on that segment. And
they were so anxious they were prepared to extend at their expense town sewer all the way down that road. uh so that they would have access to town sewer on that. And
uh the I the citizens of North Ammeris croaked that in town meeting. I remember uh uh Hilda and we we uh uh Hilda
Greenbomb and others uh standing up and saying look at the town symbol the the book and the plow and uh you are uh violating the uh the the the
sanctimity of Ammerst by uh imagining this. I was absolutely beside myself at that argument. Uh and it it ultimately prevailed. That zoning chain failed in town meeting and it's
you know it's still there. I mean but the uh the uh the uh opportunity I think was forever lost at that point. Uh these things are never simple. Nate, go ahead.
>> Sure. Yeah. No, I was going to say, Bruce, I think your your reasoning why, you know, there's the PRP zoning and other zones is a reason why the North Ammeris overlay makes sense, right? So that if we want to keep areas for, you know, commercial or other types of development, non-resident residential
development, we, you know, if we allow it to turn to residential, given the market pressures, that's probably what will happen. Um but if we want to say okay well are there opportunities right where there's existing housing that could be redeveloped then you know that's why North Amoris is you know why the planning board looks at other areas
too um for infill um you know there is right precious land outside um you know of conservation land institutional land that could be used for you know commercial retail industrial whatever research and development and so um yeah
I think is still worth looking at I think it's something to consider um you know is it you know uh right so is there part of it that could be reszoned or allowed for housing and some not or some some piece um you know I'd like to think that at some
point if we had more density uh then we you know maybe there is more opportunity for some of these other uses to come into town it's just you know finding the right place to put everything >> you know for instance the R&D overlay on University Drive has been in place for
11 years. It might be longer, might be 14 years. It was never used. The idea was to try to zone a place that right um research ideas from UMass could come off campus and there's actually a specific professor who had something but it never materialized and so was never utilized
and the zone is still there. So if someone ever wanted to use it, right? So that's was one nice thing about an overlay is any other existing zoning is still there as an opportunity. Um, but yeah, I I and I look around, I'm like, okay, well, you know, if we reszone some commercial areas and encourage
residential development, you know, then we lose that that area for commercial. So, you that's why we talk about mixeduse buildings, right? So, even if they're vacant at for a point, the idea is that there's still some opportunity to fill those if we have the the ability later.
>> Bruce, go ahead. Um, a little more on the the North AmIst. Uh, just I'm trying to I can't find out how to lower my hand. the the the North Amis parcel, the P the the the PRP zone up there that Tread was
initially talking about. Just three or four years ago, there was another initiative that would have in involved the uh development of that for um commercial um industrial use. Uh it
was the uh the enterprise was called the erupter. a funny name, but it was uh uh it it seemed like it had legs and so forth. Uh so it it was a but that one fell through because of the u the the
conservation commission's determinations of uh the area that would be subjected uh to orders of conditions and so forth. and the uh the aspirant developer decided there wasn't enough land left for them to do what they needed. So that
uh parcel has been tested recently by a somewhat erratic uh development enterprise or a development investor but still tested and uh um so the wetlands up there are significant inhibition uh
to the successful exploitation of that site and that in that zone apparently. Thanks, Bruce. Um, this is all very good for me. I'll confess I'm not super wellversed in our own town zoning. This taking this
opportunity to get there. Um, I I was wondering, I mean, I haven't really looked at any other towns zoning in this detail. Is this unusual for towns our size, Nate? Do you know of a sense of like how disjointed and historic and all these tiny little pockets of different
zoning? Is that just how towns evolve? >> Yeah. So, you know, Ammeris has had zoning in place for a hundred years. Um, and then, you know, like I said, it changed in response to different developments on the ground. Um, I don't Yeah, I mean, I think it it is I
think um, you know, I look at other communities sometimes and you're always like, oh, why do they have zoning like that? But, you know, it could be in response to what was on the ground or they would want to encourage certain things and maybe it doesn't happen. And so, um, I think the difficulty is,
uh, you know, say it's like every 20 years, does someone does the community or planning board go back and then look at all of the zoning and it usually doesn't happen, right? Kind of that systematically or um, and so, you know, maybe the idea was that, you know, a zone doesn't have to be in place
for a hundred years. it could have evolved and but once the boundaries are drawn and there's development on either side of the zone then it's really hard to say oh well you know let's take this business zone and make it bigger because now next to it it's residential um but I think it's worth you know
talking about I think there's areas in town where there could be you know some combination of things whether it's you know combining zones or just allowing different things to happen in those zone zoning districts. So even if we end up not changing zoning boundaries for instance what we allow in the RN might
be you know some you know different use classifications residential use classifications or something than we do do now right or if we like the idea of having the PRP um for instance do we also look at what kind of research and development uses we allow in the PRP and
does that need to be updated so maybe you know if someone's looking and they say oh well you know that's actually a special permit use or it's not really allowed in the PRP because it's not really clear. Do we just have to update our use classifications to capture what happens today? Right? So, you know, there's clean cleaner manufacturing or,
you know, innovative workspaces that aren't the same as, you know, we might have to put those under an industrial use that's not allowed in many places, but maybe it it could be allowed for instance in even mixeduse buildings, right? Some of the newer 3D printing stuff for instance. I So, I don't you
know, I've looked at it a little bit. I feel like um I think there's probably some of that that could happen too. Um, >> do we do we often have do you rather often have discussions with developers or business owners or whoever want to come in and the end
result is no, sorry, that doesn't work in this spot or is or does it never even get there because people look at the zoning and say, "Oh, that won't work." >> Yeah, I'm I'm part of some of those conversations. I know uh Rob and Dave are are also part of those. Um I think
it's half and half. You know, it's kind of mixed. um you know sometimes we don't hear from a developer until they um you know they're at a permitting phase right so then you know sometimes they might just be talking to real estate agents or other developers and we don't hear about
it till till some point um you know I think there's you know what we've seen um in recent years is you know say outlying areas on Southeast Street where there's the old cold storage buildings from Atkins um um um orchards and then there's some farms where people are
like, "Oh, this would be great to have weddings or some venues." And we're like, "Well, that is actually not allowed in our zoning." And so, we've had a few in the last 10 years say, you know, half a dozen interests where they people might want to start a brewery uh in one of the coal storage buildings. We've had a few of those, you know, before say like Treehouse came to
Southfield and um we said, "Well, we're not allowed to do that." Um sometimes for um you know, more commercial, we've had a few owners say, "Oh, I'd like a bigger space." And then, you know, we just there might not be that facility in town. The zoning might allow it. It's
just there's not it hasn't been built yet. Uh you know, say with the erupter, um agree with Bruce. I if you actually Google the erupter, there's still a website uh talks a little bit about it. You know, then right there's the land use constraints in town with with
wetlands or river front or zoning. um you know typically we'll try to work with someone if they you know to see what the zoning could be and try to find a place in town. It might not be what they what they ultimately need. And so, you know, there's been a discussion about having say like a downtown grocery
or in East Ammeris Village Center and, you know, when Atkins went um was in North Ammerst, you know, what we heard is that they wanted so many parking spaces out front, you know, and all the certain things. And it's like, okay, well, is there a big enough space where you could have, you know, a small store
and 70 parking spaces and, you know, and so and from a planning perspective, we don't want we wouldn't want the parking along the road. would rather have the parking say to the side or behind the building and you know there were some of those discussions um with different property owners and but not you know I
feel like um yeah sometimes I'm I don't know if it's they just look at the zoning and they don't we don't hear from them you know um you know UMass I think has done a great job of building space you know there's in you know just in the region right between Springfield Holio Ammeris
and Greenfield Northampton I feel like there's if someone's looking they you know they probably look the whole you know, corridor, right? And if Amoris is expensive to develop or it's kind of confusing and they say, "Oh, well, look at, you know, this other place has cheaper land or easier
zoning." We might not even get an inquiry because they've already, you know, found a place closer to 91 or, you know, what have you. >> Yes. Yes. Our advantage is that we're close to the uh
faculty teaching uh research space and uh and that's what was appealing to the erupter which was essentially a um an industrial scale maker space for uh high-tech uh spin-offs.
um and being able to come and go quickly between the uh the spaces was what was uh beneficial and and I think it would have happened except for the the wetland problems that we weren't a they weren't able to solve or they didn't they they
they they weren't they they expended their budget of effort to solve is probably more accurate. >> Go ahead. Yeah, the um I know there's a new project. Was it is it senior housing that's that's being proposed up off of
Monu Road? Is that part of the that that is it is that part of is part of that land currently zoned for PRP? >> So that's that site is also where the erupter was proposed. So that property is the one where the erupter was
looking. Um and so the um yeah, you know, that would be a comprehensive permit. So they could wave zoning and so right the um I think that is um PRP zoned right now. >> So >> Okay. >> Yeah.
>> But it's only one portion of that PRP zoned land, >> right? So that's the first property zone PRP right out of the village center and then it's like, you know, four properties north along Sunderland Road and 116 are too. Yep. >> Okay. Yep.
But it's it's wet down there, >> which of course is why it's hasn't been demisful of uh last opportunity sites. I mean the so
much is what's left is left because it's the least favorable for one reason or another. >> Yeah. So I think what we're doing in looking at sites that are already developed and how we can uh um cause a more intensive
redevelopment is probably the logical saying logical strategy or or way of thinking for a town such as ours. >> Can I ask another question?
>> Sorry. Um the um oh gosh the Stavro Center for Independent Living is it shuttered right now? >> No, >> it's in operation. >> Yeah, I I hope so.
>> Okay. Okay. Um but that's also PRP, is it not? I don't know. It feels like feels like it. I mean, it's it's all alone in a big open space. >> I don't know. >> I was going to um I was looking at the
map quickly. It might be um that's an older building and some of it may have been you did it predate the zoning or not? Um yeah, >> but >> Okay. >> It's very much in operation. I can tell you that. >> Good. Okay. Okay.
>> Yeah. So, interestingly, in that area where Stavros is off Old Farm Road, you know, there was a developer, um, this is in the 80s had proposed, you know, like hundreds of units down there with like almost like a new, um, um, you know, package through a treatment plant and everything and it ended up not
happening. Um, some kind of did um, and then I think but then there was some resoning that took place there. So, uh, it is quite wet down there and now there's a lot of conservation land and so there's, you know, some opportunity for redevelopment, but
you know, a little bit off Old Farm Road and then off, you know, old Belchuretown Road and Lark Spur Drive is where the PRP is and Hall Drive. >> Yeah. >> So, the different question for you, Nate. Um,
how often do you interface with other town planners? So like to get a little more specific, every time I drive down AD and cross into Hadley, you know, where the storage site is and U-Haul and then going up Rocky Hill Road, I think
this is where there should be tons of beds put in. Like it's such a great spot for many reasons in my mind. A, I don't know if there's a barrier to that. Uh I know it's mostly not Ammerst land I'm talking about. Um but like do joint town
projects happen often? >> There's been some discussions, you know, not at my level with Hadley in terms of say um extending utilities, water and sewer for some of those areas to allow that to happen, but I don't think it happens frequently enough. You know, I was I was I have been I am a part of
like the Western Mass Housing uh group and we haven't met in a while actually. Um and there are you know neighboring communities you know from Southwick you know around but in terms of having focused meetings with the neighboring towns a lot of them don't have professional staff so it might be with say like the chair of the planning board
something I feel like could be happening more um you know and it could be organized through PBPC too the regional planning agency u you know I I they have you know priority development maps for their region and yeah I think it's something to talk about um
>> in particular We're focusing on proximity to UMass for >> right >> intentional student housing. They've got I mean they meaning Headley there's there's a whole side. Right. >> Right. Right. No, I agree. I think even you know when the UMass studio looked at
the mall site you know where where Target is. I mean to me that's actually a nice opportunity as well. It's people were concerned about it. But, you know, if you again have it close to the university and transportation routes, you know, there's not going to be a lot of spill over into the rest of the into Hadley, right? Or rest of the community.
It's kind of like the North Amoris, right? If you can create transportation connections and >> pedestrian connections from that to UMass, it's not like, you know, there's going to be a ton of spillover because of those impacts. >> Yeah. >> Bruce, go ahead. Um, I was thinking the
same that PVPC is is a is is a broker for this sort of thing. But more particularly, uh, just so we know, uh, Bill Dwire, who's the, uh, chair, I think, of the planning board in Hadley, is now, uh, the, uh, chair of the, um,
the the com the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission commissioners. So, he's a he's an active presence. And uh so just a an FYI on that.
I have been thinking that I would button hole but that we the event that I went to last Thursday uh it it was um there wasn't a lot of um smoo time and the whole thing was done around tables. So people arrived and
immediately sat at tables and uh so that didn't allow me the opportunity that I vaguely had in mind to just introduce myself to Bill and and uh basically make open opportunity for conversations at
that level. But that's what's in my head anyway, just so you know. >> Yeah, Fred, go ahead. >> Yeah, couple things. One is that um it is a fact that the Amoris sewage
treatment plant from the get-go was designed to have enough potential capacity to include input from part of Hadt. And uh this uh
was mentioned in a a recent newspaper article uh in terms of this Hadley is looking at using this in order to avoid the expense of increasing the size of their plant. Um,
and uh I'm uh that you're the other thing that you're up against here is the politics of Hadley. Um, for example, uh I used to
own a three family uh building in Hadley and it was remarkable because it was a three family which Hadley does not allow. But the reason that uh it was an allowable three family is that it
existed as a three family prior to Hadley adopting zoning and so it can continue legally. Uh but that's uh I remember reading a newspaper article about uh well
if you look at the big picture between Northampton and Ammerst there is Hadley and it is a totally different animal in terms of politics.
Look at what just is going down in Hadley right now with the uh override. So, this is a very different animal >> uh than uh Northampton and Ammerst politically.
>> No argument there. >> All right. Um maybe that's good for today. Unless anyone has any other burning thoughts to share. >> Now, if I if I if I go now, I might be able to uh get some uh words on paper
for this uh great intro. >> Do it. Do it, Bruce. >> Okay. I'll see you. >> Okay. Thanks everybody. See you soon.