and we are live. >> The chair knows the time is 6:03 p.m. and I call this meeting of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals to order. My name is Everald Henry, chair of the Amherst Zoning Board of Appeals. I want to welcome everyone to this meeting. We
will begin with a roll call of the ZBA members. Mr. Offel >> here. >> Mr. Meadows >> here. >> Mr. white >> just because I'm difficult present >> and the chair is present. The chair
knows that a quorum is present. A quorum of three is permitted to take testimony. Um also attending the meeting tonight is Mr. Justint Williams planning with the town. Pursuant to chapter 2 of the acts of 2025 extended through June 30th 2027 the
ability public bodies to meet in a fully remote or hybrid manner. This meeting will be conducted via remote means. Members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so via Zoom or by telephone. No inperson attendance of members to the public will be permitted.
Every efforts will be made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time via technological means. The zoning board of appeals is a quasa judicial body that operates under the authority of chapter 48 of the general laws of the commonwealth for the purpose
of promoting the health, safety, convenience, and general welfare of the inhabitants of the town of Amherst. One of the most important elements of the Amherst zoning bylaw is section 10.38. Specific findings from this section must be made for all our decisions.
Statutoily, for a special permit, the board has 90 days from the close of the hearing to file a decision. No decision is final until the written decision is signed by the city and board members and is filed in the town clerk's office. Once the decision is filed with the town
clerk, there is a 20-day appeal period for an agrieved party to contest the decision with the relevant judicial body in the superior court. After the appeal period, the permit must be recorded at the registry of deeds to take effect. And I do see Mr. Slovder is now present.
Um, so we do have our full panel tonight. >> Present. >> Thank you, Mr. Slovir. >> You're welcome. >> Um, tonight's agenda, we will have a public hearing on ZBA FY2026-18 174 Am Street, who is requesting a
special permit under sections 3.32 and 3.01 01 to create a 3-unit townhouse from an existing two family home in conjunction with an affordable duplex on the same lot. Said properties are located on map pars 14A-332
general residents zoning district. As always, we'll have general discussion um general public comment period any other business not anticipated within the last 48 hours. And as a matter of clarity, Miss Williams, I didn't see any minutes for approval tonight. Is that correct?
Um, they're not listed on the agenda. I did send them through email. I thought I did. >> Okay. Um, >> that's okay if we don't get to them. >> I was going to say I didn't have a chance to read them. I didn't think we
had them. So, we can um skip them for tonight. Everyone's okay with that. >> The panel for tonight's hearing um is myself, the vice chair, Mr. Ald, Mr. White, Mr. Adams before we open to the public meeting.
>> And Mr. Slovener, I'm here too. >> And Mr. And >> not impressive, but don't forget me. >> Sorry, Mr. Sloven. I did say vice chair >> and David S. >> I did say vice chair. >> Mr. Meadows has >> Yes. She recognizes Mr. Meadows.
Uh I think that the way that it was introduced tonight's agenda indicated that there are spe there there's a a special permit on a special permit
and that's not really our understanding from the site visit is that is not really the case. >> There's only one special permit that's being requested. So, I think that needs to be rewarded so that it um is correct. And since you're
an attorney, you could do that without any problem, I'm sure. But um there is only one special permit within the context of what we're looking at tonight, and it does not include the existing building.
>> That is correct. And thank you for that um point of clarity, Mr. Meadows. When we did visit, we did get clarity from the applicant. Um that they're only requesting a special permit under sections 3.32, which is a townhouse section. And the request is to make a
finding that under 3.01 that the new building that they intend to build is a complimentary use. There is no requirement to grant a special permit on the new construction. Yeah. Right.
>> Go ahead, Mr. SLair. >> Actually, I I don't know if if Mr. Meadows unintentionally misstated the special permit is on the existing structure, >> I believe. >> Yes. Yes, he did say that. Yeah. >> Oh, I thought he said it was not on the
existing structure. I'm sorry. I misheard. I'm sorry. >> No, he said it's not a special permit on top of a special permit. Yeah. >> Right. Right. Yeah. >> Okay. Um so before we open the public meeting um do we have any more
clarifications or we're everyone's good settled? Okay. Um does anyone on the panel have anything to declare or disclose? I see no answer in the affirmative. So to that regard, if there are no
disclosures or declarations, I will open the public meeting and I will begin by reading into the record the applicant submissions for consideration. So I do want to note um that there are um there
are lengthy submissions and so for the record I will do this in block um and I will start with um the applicant submissions and we had submissions um dated April 10th, April 24th, April
27th, May 28th, May 29th, June 4th and June 5th. and I would enter all those submissions um into the record for this application. >> Mr. Chair, >> go ahead, Miss Williams.
>> Do we want to include the two that were sent today for June 11th? >> And apologies. And yes, um, we had two submissions for June 11th. From the staff submissions, we have the
project application report that was dated June 5th that was updated for today, June 11th. In terms of permit history for 174 Amity Street, this is the first time this property has appealed before the zoning board of appeals to request a special permit.
Terms of complaint history, there have been nine noise complaints reported for this property during June 1st, 2015 through August 30th of 2019. There was one complaint registered in 2015 regarding the stacking of overflowing trash recepticles in the
front of the property. As with any applications before the ZBA, um the various departments within the town has the ability to review and provide comments. And as of this hearing,
we have comments that were done by the historical commission. They've done their due diligence and submitted comments on May 18th, 2026.
The Municipal Affordable Trust Housing submitted comments on May 18th of 2026. And I also believe that this application also did their due diligence and went before the Conservation Commission on
May 1st, 2026. and it was signed off by Concom with their order of conditions dated May 1st of 2026. At this time, um I will invite any
I'm sorry, there were no public comments rather um as of May 27th, 2026. On June 9th, there was a site visit that was attended by um Mr. Meadows, Mr. Mr. Slovener and myself along with Miss Williams. And given that I'll be doing a
lot of talking tonight, I would invite Mr. Met and Mr. Sloven to report in on the site visit if they wish. >> Go for it, Craig. >> I was going to say you should do that, David. >> Okay. Well, we can't arm wrestle on Zoom
to see that who and we have to do it. But you have better hair than I do. So >> I have more >> I'm more and better. I'm hap I'm happy to at least start and then Mr. Meadows can join in.
>> We met and we walked around the property. We had a a very I thought very helpful discussion with um three of the principles of the applicant, the architect and uh I don't
exactly know what the other what positions the other two held, but they were very informative, very forthright. We walked down both sides of the building and saw the property and everything seems as represented in their
application. So I I thought that uh they have their application is very comprehensive and it reflects the situation there. We did see the property. We saw where the new structure
to be built by Habitat for Humanity will go and that it it complements and is consistent on the site with the existing building. And they did point out that the renovate the construction that
will take place on the existing building will involve demolition of one section and rebuilding on the exact present footprint so that there will be no change in the footprint of the building. So everything that we saw
confirmed their application and um I think it was a very successful and actually informative visit because it enabled me and I'm sure Emerald and Craig also to really put a face on what this application is because it's a
little bit complicated and being on site made a big difference at least for me. Craig, over to you. I think that there are a couple of additional points that might be taken. the the porches that are going to be
added to the building on the west west side. Um will be used primarily more than likely as the primary entrance to each of the
um each of the units because there will be mudrooms just inside those porches. the door to the porches. Additionally, we learned that the problem that there the conservation
commission pointed out that there is runoff from the adjacent property owner on the east side which was illegal in the sense that it
uh on two two reasons. one, it was supposed to be corrected when that building was given uh permits and the conservation commission, they did not follow through with the permitting as they were supposed to
the with the uh the changes that they were supposed to so that there would be no runoff into the property that we're looking at. And secondly, the driveway for the property on the east side infringes upon the property
uh that we're looking at. So, there are a couple of noticeable and uh apparently illegal factors that are um contained by the property on the east
side of the building. Thank you for that both Mr. Meadows and Mr. Slovder and I I do concur going there um and hearing um from the applicants um all these nuances and
details about the project was very helpful um and it was um very um deliberate. So thank you both. Um before we open the public meeting um
to invite the applicants rather Mr. Meadows, Mr. Sloger um anything else to add or are we comfortable to um invite the applicants in? >> I'm I'm I think we're fine. I think Craig and I got it. Okay.
>> All right. Thank you both so much. Um, Miss Williams, could you invite the applicants from Amoris Community Land Trust um in please? >> Sure. Just as a matter of clarity while you do that, um I have a very minimized video
screen. So I I think I'm only showing whomever is actively speaking. >> So we should have Felicity Hardy, Greg Rain, and Linda Sley joining us. >> Thank you. Should we bring this back up? I am going to identify you guys by the
name that's on your Zoom. So I do see um Linda Slinky, I see Greg Rain, and I see Felicity. Um so welcome. um this is your opportunity to present to us um explain to the ZBA what it is that you're asking for and answer any
questions that um the board might find relevance to help consider your application. I do ask that before you speak only the first time just introduce yourself and your location please and whomever wants to go first. >> Good evening Mr. Chairman. My name is
Felicity Hardy. I'm an attorney here in Ammerst. Uh my address is 53 Iduna Lane in Ammerst. Um I'm a solo practitioner. The name of my practice is the Felicity Hardy Law Practice. With me tonight is
Linda Slaky. Linda is the uh president of the Amoris Community Land Trust. And although I can't see him in the gallery, I understand Greg Rashine is with us too. Uh Mr. Rashane is a member of our
um working group team um and uh helps um Amoris Community Land Trust uh lies with um the housing uh piece of um of the town of Ammerst. um and is also going to
be facilitating um some of the public funds that are coming into uh this project to allow us to construct it. Um we have received a um a positive um
approval by the Ammerst Affordable um housing uh municipal housing trust um and uh the community preservation act and Mr. Rashane is helping uh with those items. Um so um I thought it might be helpful
for me to give a uh the board a brief overview of the Ammeris Community Land Trust before I dive into the overview of this particular project. Uh some of you may not be familiar with the land trust. Um it is a nonprofit uh charitable
organization that uh is organized here in Ammerst to do affordable housing on a land trust model which is a little bit different than some um community development corporations that may have appeared in front of the ZBA in the
past. Um, specifically our uh model for developing affordable housing um is that ACLT will acquire property locally in Ammerst, typically discounted um but from a seller who wants to uh create and
preserve affordable housing in the town of Ammerst. And then uh what we do typically is ground lease that parcel to a qualified affordable home buyer. Some recent projects that we've done include
a single family uh house at 60 61 Fearing Street. That is the first project uh I did for ACLT as its attorney. Uh but another recent one that was uh was uh accomplished by ACLT is
also at 111 Logtown Road. So that's just sort of a general overview of the organization and kind of our model. Um so um with that uh having said that um why don't I just um speak a little bit
to 174 AMD Street. Um, ACLT uh plans to close on the acquisition of uh that property with the existing structure. Um, it's owned now by Deborah Gross and her brothers who
inherited the property from their parents. Um their parents lived in the house uh for many years um but um then deeded it over to the children and um the children live in various locations
and have rented out uh the structure for quite a long time. The concept has been all uh always in terms of the grossest to make the property available to artists and uh people who uh create
artistic works. Um and some of you may recognize that on the exterior of the facade facing uh Amity Street is a um kind of a sculpture of a bird um that sort of reflects the artistic history of
um the property. And in fact, we are planning on uh keeping that as kind of a sort of a central element uh to the to the um the structure. Um the project is a little bit more complicated than we've
done in the past. Um the first phase will be to convert the existing house to three town homes. Um, we're not changing the footprint of the house, but the way the structure
lays out, it lends itself uh to uh three demising or two demising walls. Um, so that we will be creating uh three units of um housing on uh two floors. Uh there will be one that faces Amity Street, a
central uh unit, and then one in the rear. Um the second phase of this project uh will involve uh our work with Habitat for Humanity. Habitat will be constructing um a duplex on the east
side of the property. All five units will be affordable to firsttime home buyers. Um it's likely that our three units will be affordable to uh persons uh at the 80% um of um adjusted median
income. Um at that level um Habitat may be able to uh make its units uh more deeply affordable. Um we're still um we're still working that out. I think their goal perhaps might be to make
those two units um affordable to those at a 60% um AMI level and um one of the units that Habitat is constructing uh will be uh accessible to people with mobility impairments.
Um the chairman has uh has explained the permitting to date. Uh the conservation commission um has uh reviewed our application and has issued an order of conditions. Um as the chairman indicated, the order of conditions was
required because there's an isolated wetland in the rear of the property that was caused or has been caused, we believe, by runoff um from the uh abuing uh property to the east uh which is a um
a dental practice. Um the the reason that that was created was because it appears that um the that um property owner when it was permitted to uh create
uh the property as it is now was supposed to um install some subsurface um storm water um management and that appears not to have happened. Um, in addition, um, so there's this this storm
water that's being discharged onto the property at 174 AMD. Um, what we determined early on in the um, process for planning for this uh, project was rather than getting into an argument
with the butter, um, we are simply managing that runoff um, in a way that is satisfactory to the conservation commission. So that's uh that is um basically done. Um we have our order and that's been recorded. Um the historical
commission has also reviewed the project. Its jurisdiction has was limited to uh the question of whether or not a demolition delay was uh necessary for this project and the commission determined that it was not uh such a
delay was not needed. Um, of course, we're in front of you tonight for a special permit uh to convert the existing um structure to three town home units. And uh the final um permit that will be required is site plan review
that is needed by the planning board uh to approve the duplex as it's shown on the plans that we've submitted to you. That um hearing is scheduled for July 1. All of this is in aid of um a closing
that we are attempting to uh achieve for July 31st. So the plan for the renovation of the building, the pro the building now is a single family house that is divided into two apartments. Um our plan um is to
convert that to three units. one three-bedroom unit which will face Amity Street, a second fourbedroom unit that will be in the middle of the structure and then a three-bedroom unit in the rear. Um, we're also going to be
rebuilding a shed that's kind of in the back. There's there's a lot of junk in the back of the uh property that obviously will have to be cleaned up and debris dealt with and so forth, but um the plan is to rebuild the shed at the
back and that will uh help us to um store maintenance equipment and that sort of thing. We plan, as I said before, to keep the front facade and the roof line basically the same. The parking for the units um for the three units that we're talking about this
evening will be on the west that is to say the downhill side of the structure. Um right now there are um porches on the east side of the building. Um and we're
going to keep those rebuild some of them. Well, the idea is to keep those because um some of the we anticipate that some of the um the traffic, if you will, to these uh houses will be
pedestrian traffic. And so we want to uh uh uh encourage uh pedestrian uh access to um to the site. And if people are walking from the center of town towards
174 Amity Street, those uh the existing porches and and access on the east side is kind of a natural way to access the um the units. But in addition, because the uh parking is going to be on the
west side, we are um planning um small uh porches and entries on the west so that people can easily access the units after they've par uh after they've parked. The site uh is large enough to
accommodate all the parking that's need for all of these units. Um and um while it's not gerine to this special permit, um the plan is to have a couple of parking spaces uh near the duplex uh
to facilitate access uh for uh anyone who is mobility impaired. The use as you uh know is allowed by special permit. And in fact, um, the Ammeris zoning bylaw is very interesting in that it specifically contemplates,
uh, the creation of this type of town home. Um, it fits into the neighborhood because there are multifamily properties, um, all around that, uh, section of, um, Amity Street. Marsh cond
Marsh Commons which is a condominium is across the street as is uh the Perry house which is a multif family um uh structure also across on AMD Street and there is also a multif family uh
development on the same side of AMD Street about four houses up. um the dimensional uh requirements are met. Um and so this project really fits very nicely into um the um special permit
that we're uh requesting this evening. Um, I had prepared a PowerPoint to talk specifically about why we are applying for a special permit as contrasted with a comprehensive permit because I
understand the ZBA um has jurisdiction to also issue comprehensive permits. we that's not needed in this particular case and I do have a set of slides that addresses that if the ZBA is interested
in um hearing about that otherwise I'm just going to make myself available for your questions. >> Thank you um Miss Hardy Attorney Hardy rather. No um given that it is not a comprehensive permit that's before us I would say we do not need to um go
through that PowerPoint. >> Sounds good. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you, >> Miss Leaky or Mr. Shane. Anything. >> You're both on mute just in case. >> I have uh nothing to add at this point, but I'm happy to answer any questions
both about the land trust model and questions you may have about this particular project. The house has an interesting history. But you don't need to know about that to make your decision. So I'll wait for questions.
>> Thank you. Um I I personally don't have too many questions. I think having met um everyone at the site that answered the questions. I read the project application report. I understood um
what's been asked of us, what's been done, um the need that's been fulfilled. Um but I will in order on my screen I will just call some names to see if there are any um questions from the panel before we go to any public
comments. Um Mr. Meadows. >> No I have no further questions. >> Thank you Mr. Sloer. >> I have no questions of the applicants. I actually, believe it or not, read all 20 pages of the application
and felt that it was very detailed, very comprehensive, really very responsible. I I thought that everything was answered. So, I have no I I have no questions that re to require further clarification. Thank
you. >> Thank you, Mr. Sloer. Mr. Offeld. Yes, I do have um a couple of questions. I'm sorry I missed the uh site visit yesterday and was unable to uh meet the applicants um or those who
were there. Um but I I I live nearby and I've walked by that parcel probably thousands of times literally. Um, okay. So, my questions, um, the applicant is this is the, uh, land trust
before us, but, the land trust doesn't own the property yet, expects to own it. So, this is more of a procedural question. Is it premature to issue a special permit if the applicant is not yet the owner?
Um I I know Miss Hardy wants to respond, but I um part of the documentation was there's certain timelines and certain things have to be met um conditions be met before I think um things are fully turned over to the land trust, I
believe. Um but the special permit would be tied to the property um not necessarily um the owner of the property but I think Miss Hardy can better answer that question in terms of ownership for us. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. Yes. Uh getting
the special permit and the other permits that we need for this project is a condition for our closing on the property. Um, so when we applied for the special permit, Deborah Gross, who's the current owner of the property, joined in the application with us. We have to have
the permits before we can close because obviously if we can't get the permits, then we can't do the project. >> Okay. And then the other question had to do with the the land trust model. And as I understand it, you'll be um
um selling condominium units, but the land the land trust continues to own the land that the units sit on. Is that is that correct? >> This is such a great true question. I was hoping somebody would ask me this question. >> Okay.
>> Okay. So um we will so what will happen at closing is we're going to acquire the property from the grosses and then um the land trust will immediately ground lease the property with various
affordability restrictions and also with an explanation about the development of the property to a subsidiary that is completely controlled by the land trust. I'm going to create a nonprofit
subsidiary. Okay. So that we maintain the ground lease model and be so that we can maintain Ammeris community land trust ownership of the real estate. The two entities because they're kind of
alter egos of each other will move ahead to do the construction and to develop the units. And then when the three town homes are complete, they will be sub the the land and the
units will be submitted to the condominium statute. That's what it's called. When you make a condominium, we lawyer when lawyers talk about condominiums, they're talking about creating a condo. It's submitting the property to the condominium statute.
We want to get families housed in those first three units as quickly as possible, but the habitat structure won't be ready by the time we're ready. So, the plan is
to submit the the land and the existing structure to the condominium statute is the first phase. sell those three units to an afford affordable housing affordable homeowners uh with families because they're multi-bedroom units and
then Habitat will do its phase its duplex. We'll amend the condominium and we'll submit those two duplexes to the condominium statute and then we'll be done. >> Okay. Thank you. That's great.
So for purposes of uh conditions that we might impose and making sure those conditions are met, it is the land trust that is responsible for that. Is that right? >> Right. I I my when I was reviewing the con the conditions that um
Ms. Williams had and staff had sort of put together. One of the things that I was looking for was make to make sure that we would be that ACLT could assign the rights and obligations to this subsidiary that will be the developer.
So, so it looks like we can do that. We will be of course recording the special permit. So the conditions then as soon as they they're recorded then whoever is involved with the property whether it's us or the subsidiary or habitat will
have to abide by the conditions in the special permit um and um because we're doing this as a phased project. one issue came up today about
kind of the phasing of the project um which I should um I should explore with the board. Um, one of the things that we uh that our kind of our site team realized is that
there are some portions of the site work that are required by the conservation commission that'll have to be done kind of later in the process because we don't want to put in like detention basins and
so forth, struct underground structures, that sort of on the east side of the project before habitat has excavated its foundation. Okay. Sure. Yep. >> So, um I have drafted some language
which I can share with the board that speaks to the the phasing of the two the the two phases and our getting the certificate of occupancy for the town
homes because we're going to want those as soon as we can so we can get families housed. Okay. But we'll be seeking that certificate of occupancy before all of the site work is done. And what I
suggest to the board is that the board include as part of that condition that the work we have to do to satisfy the town and satisfy the state that these units are will in fact be affordable.
that that work be done as of the time that we seek that first co. Okay. So, for example, we'll need to uh put together an affirmative fair housing and marketing plan. That's a requirement um
for the town funds that we are getting and it's a requirement for these units to be included in the subsidized housing inventory that's maintained by the executive office of housing and livable communities. So what
I'm suggesting is uh when we are finished with the town homes we'll apply for a co for that structure. Okay. Um and we will have done all of the work for the uh to ensure that those units
are affordable. Okay. And then Habitat will do its construction and you know once they've excavated for their building, we can finish up the site work. >> Yep. Yep. It all makes sense. That's uh that's a great answer. Thank
you. Very detailed as as is the entire proposal. >> Thank you very much. >> Very exciting project. very exciting project. That's all the questions I had. Mr. Chair, >> thank thank you, Mr. Afeld. I I just want to make sure I understand um
Attorney Hardy, in in the middle of that, did you reference that some of the conservation conditions may not be completed until both buildings are >> That's right, Mr. Chairman. And the
reason for that is because there's a detention basin at and I'm I'm probably using the wrong words and Mr. was probably sitting in the background nashing his teeth. But there are structures on the east side of the
parcel um which are part of our obligations to the concom infiltrate any sediments and that sort of thing. Okay. But um what we want to
do and what I think it is it's important to do is we don't want to put that infiltration basin in prematurely before habitat has done its excavations. it's going to excavate for its building for a
foundation and we don't want um that work to compromise the the work that needs to be done on the east side
to to deal with this runoff and the you know the treatment of sediment that's coming off of that other parcel. So what we're suggesting is that we that the board incorporate a condition that says
that we can pursue with the building commissioner. Obviously the building commissioner has to be satisfied, but we can pursue a certificate of occupancy for the townhouse when we're done with the townhouse. And
then Habitat will start its duplex. And once the site work for the duplex is done, we can finish up with the um infiltration uh basin and associated equipment that's required on the east
side. >> Thank you. Um the other question that was triggered by um your answer, I believe you said the intent here is to have um the first building be occupied
before the second one is. And so I forget the term that you use when it comes to um transferring I believe the property. So if if if there's going to be occupancy in the first structure before the second one is completed um
is the the deed to the property as because there's going to be an HOA does each owner own the entire property including the structure that's not been that's not there yet or how does that
work when you transfer the deed for the existing structure while contemplating and build another one. >> So, great question. So, because this is a ground lease model, okay, the first thing to remember is that ACLT will
always own the underlying land. Okay. Um because it's ground leasing the the property to this subsidiary I mentioned. When when we form the
condominium, we'll create a it's called a master deed, but but the subsidiary can only make into a condominium what it has. Okay? Which is it's going to be the ground ley of this ground lease. Okay?
So, it's going to submit that interest to the condominium statute, which actually the condominium statute contemplates that you can have a ground lease condominium. Um we will
uh create well through the construction we're creating three units and the what we sell to the owners okay to the affordable homeowners is the condominium units units one two and
three in this case okay with a percentage interest they'll have a percentage interest as condominium owners do of whatever whatever it is that's in the that's in the condominium. Okay, in this case it's they're getting
a percentage in interest of the you know of the ground lees interest in the land ACL. So the what what we wind up with at the end is ACLT owns the land has the uh is the ground lesser of the land. Okay,
it's it's granted like a lot most of the rights to the property to the subsidiary which is the developer. Okay, developer submits it to the condo statute and the individual condo owners get their unit
and their interest the proportional interest of what's left which is their interest in this grand lease. >> So and and one final question before I go on to Mr. White or anyone else. So in the very end when both
buildings are finalized the the property is 100% of where you need it to be in the master deed. The owners will own their unit but will have a lease in the land. >> Right. >> Okay. They will all five of them
together will own the interest the ground lees interest in the land. >> Okay. Thank you. Um Mr. Wes. >> Uh thank you Mr. Chair. Uh I thought I
didn't have any other questions and then I listened some more to the question that came and now I definitely do not have any questions. Uh no I want to thank you guys for the thoroughess of the packet. I think if there's one thing that we definitely all appreciate, it's uh someone that's exceptionally
thorough. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Um are there any other questions from the members of the board? Um I do Mr. tomatoes. Not to complicate things, but
have you considered um community solar for the uh property and or utilizing um ground source heat pumps
for your heating systems to reduce down the cost of maintaining ing or heating and cooling the buildings and how would you handle that? >> Um, I'm going to defer to Linda. She may
have a little bit more information about that than I do. I don't recall that that was uh part of the specifications in the um in the construction contract that we're entering into with Right Builders.
I'm just not sure that there's room in the budget for that um from a capital point of view. But again, I I that's a level of detail I just haven't immersed myself in. So So if if Linda, if you know the answer to that, by all means, jump in.
>> I believe it's the case that the newly built habitat units um will use heat pumps. Um the I think is Bruce still in the audience? I think he can give the most
accurate answer. I while we're waiting to invite him in that um I'll just say that that our uh builder right builders we had an extensive conversation about what it would cost to completely
modernize the old building with respect to energy efficiency and basically for a manageable cost we can make it very much better than it is now. um to get it to the point where it could
be completely served just by heat pumps I believe is um out of the budget for the renovation. Um but Bruce knows that more accurately than I do. >> Shall I continue?
>> Our architect. >> Um yes, Bruce, welcome. Um >> thank you, Mr. Chair. Um Linda's essentially correct. I don't really need to add much that the the front the the the the the existing house is basically divided into three units as I think you
know the rear unit is being completely reconstructed uh because and in that place we are able to build to a high level of energy performance and so we will have heat pumps uh heat pump system
serving that rear unit. It'll be an air sourced heat pump. it won't be a ground sourced heat pump. Uh the cost of the ground sourced heat pumps is quite high and and airsourced heat pumps have been getting progressively more and more efficient and more and more effective uh
as the past 25 years have uh moved on. So yes to the heat pump in the rear and yes to the heat pumps, airsourced heat pumps for the other two habitat units which will follow uh a year or two later, a year and a half later. Uh the
um the just to add the front units as Linda said the existing wall structures are it's it's a it's a leaky building which we'll do something about. There's very limited insulation. We can't afford to replace the windows. Um we wouldn't be
able to effectively uh um use heat pumps to make that uh those two front units comfortable. added to which there's already a gas uh service there, two gas services. We are also dealing with
potentially some difficulties related to uh the Eversource and whether we may have to be driven in some ways to a a padmounted transformer. We want to avoid that because that would put a year or two delay in the project because of the unavailability of these things. So
generally speaking, uh the forces of uh that around us on this project are driving us to uh have gas to replace the gas heating systems in the front two units, but the other three units will all have air sourced heat pumps. And uh
Craig, to your question about the uh uh community solar, um I think that's something that the project hasn't yet considered. Um, and you might uh we we could we could move in that direction. Um, but I think that might also be the
decision of the new owners rather than the developer. Um, you probably know more about that than I do. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Bruce. >> Mr. Meadows, do you have any additional questions or comments?
No, I don't want to make it more complicated. >> Thank you. Um, the chair recognizes Mr. Offeld. >> Just clarification again, I'm I'm looking at the management plan and I I just want to be sure I understand
correctly that it's the um the occupants of the buildings, the owners of the units will implement the management plan. They'll be responsible for implementing the management plan through presumably some condominium association or some such. It will not be the land
trust that is implementing the management plan. Is that correct? >> That's correct. Um >> although they're they're part of the land trust. I understand that those residents will be members of the land trust but they're operating as a
condominium association in some way to decide on trash hauling and whatever. Exactly. Um I you know my sense is that ACLT will kind of stay in to be
supportive of the homeowners um at first. Um that's typically that's we typically do that just to make sure everybody's kind of gets on their feet and the management of the condominium association is going well. But
ultimately it's their responsibility. Thank you. If there are no further questions and or comments from our panel at this time, I would invite any members of the public who wish to comment on this application
before us to do so. If you are on Zoom, you can indicate your desire to participate by using the raise hand function. And if you are on the telephone, you can do so by pressing star 9. Um, Miss Williams, are there any members of the public?
There are three members of the public, but no one has raised their hand as yet. >> I think let's give it a minute. >> I don't think there wish to comment at this time. >> Okay. Thank you, Miss Williams. Seeing
that there are no members of the public that wishes to make any public comment on this, I will therefore entertain a motion to move this application into a public meeting while keeping the public hearing open. Um, is there such a
motion? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Is there any discussion? With no discussion, the vote on the motion. Um, Mr. Offeld,
>> I. >> Mr. Meadows, >> I. >> Mr. Slother, >> I. >> Mr. White, >> I. >> And the chair votes I. We are now in the public meeting part of the consideration of the application. Just a note for the
applicants, this is not an opportunity for you to add comments and or feedback unless directed by the board. Um, this is the opportunity to consider the merits. um off of your application. Um
does anyone want to start or I'm happy to do so as well? Okay. While we contemplate, so I am inclined to support this. Um I I love the idea of the affordability.
Um I read the application and I think it is It meets all the criteria. It checks all the boxes. Um it it preserves and rehabilitates the existing historic residential structure. Um it expands housing opportunities through creation
of additional dwelling units with the new building. Um again it's providing affordable housing units that advance community housing goals. Um it makes efficient use of the existing infrastructure. Um knowing that you know the footprint is not moving. um it is
just being remodeled. Um I thought that it promoted thoughtful um development rather than um this big double structure doing the two structure um I thought was very well considered. Um the community benefits here outweighs
any anticipated impacts. I do not anticipate that there would be much given um I would argue it is a low footprint adding an additional unit and it allows redevelopment of this underutilized parcel um while preserving
the neighborhood character. Um so for all those reasons um I I would recommend that we grant the special permit. Um there are three or four rather waiverss that were
being requested and the first one was a traffic impact study. I think we all know Amity Street very well. It is a busy um road. I don't necessarily think that adding >> it's 7:00, >> excuse me. I don't necessarily think that adding um this additional building
um with five units is going to be that significant of an impact because I don't think there's anything we can do to reduce amod street traffic. Um it is um what it is for that. So I'm inclined to support the traffic impact study. Um the
lighting plan on the design plans that I looked at um there weren't a lot of significance in terms of what's been changed. Um the fixtures were clearly articulated right there and as always we require that all our lights be downcast and dark side compliant. I did not see
that will be an issue. There is a waiver request for erosion control plan. Um I am not I do not believe we are the experts here. So this went to conservation commission. They were given their conditions. Um satisfied with that
and the signed plan waiver. Um I think that one is ins insignificant as well unless people feel differently. But given that it is the signage is minimal. Um location identified. It has limited visual impact. Um I would advocate that
not only do we grant the special permit but we also um grant the requested waiverss. Um, in the end, I only see this to be an overall public benefit. >> And with that, I'll pause for additional
comments. And the chair recognizes Mrs. Slovener. >> Okay. Um, I have my usual list of points from notes I've taken throughout everything. So, I'm just going to run through them in hopefully some sort of productive order.
First of all, I think this project fulfills many of the goals that we hear about on a regular basis that are needed in Ammerst housing, affordable housing. It's near town. I think that everything about the intent
of this project is positive. on specific points, the runoff issue from the adjoining property that did not fulfill its obligations and was not enforced on
that property. I think that the approach that this group is taking is entirely reasonable. They are taking responsibility. They don't want to enter into any kind of legal confrontation.
They're going to take care of it. And I think that what we discussed with them at the site visit was a rational and sensible approach. And I actually applaud them for taking the non-letigious practical route to get through this
problem. the phasing that um uh attorney Hardy mentioned, I think uh about not excavating before the Habitat for Humanity unit is built
even though it is required to ultimately be done. I think that the phasing not only is reasonable, I think it would be irresponsible to ask them to do it any other way. That would result in duplicate and additional
costs and effort and delay. And I think that once again their approach is sensible. It's the only sensible one. So um I also think that they have answered
every concern raised about energy including addressing the aspect the age of the existing building and other factors that they have to deal with. So I think that all of their answers have been very
reasonable. Air supplied heat pumps. I have one at my house. It does a very nice job and ground supplied would be prohibitively expensive. Um
I also would would mention that I actually unintentionally have a lot of condo and homeowner association experience. I was the president of a homeowner association
I can't believe I'm saying this for 20 years. and ran into I mean if you need to suffer I suggest you agree to do that. Uh every answer they have given us is
completely reasonable and consistent with everything I ever had to deal with. So once again I commend them on their approach. Uh which is really the last comment I have. I think that they everything I heard at the site visit and tonight is
reasonable. I am supportive of this application. It's clear to me that they have addressed as many contingencies as are reasonable
to think about and address in coming up with a plan. No doubt they'll run into something else. And I am confident from what they've shown us so far that they will approach whatever comes up with the same rational thinking. So I have no
problem whatever supporting this application. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Mrs. Slovor. And going in order of my screen, Mr. Offeld. >> Yes. Thank you. I'm inclined to uh support this as well. I second um all
that's been said so far. Um I haven't heard the word complimentary so I'll mention that that I it it's or at least uh not in the immediate recent comments. Um it's it seems to me quite clear that the duplex use is complimentary to the
townhouse use. So I'd be happy to support that um element of the special permit >> and of course the transition from a duplex to a townhouse. And uh as far as I've seen, all the conditions for that have been met.
Um and the chair mentioned the waiverss and I've looked at those as well and they all seem quite reasonable to um to implement. So um that's where I am. >> Thank you, Mr. Hos. Mr. Meadows,
>> I agree with what's been said already. >> Thank you, Mr. Meadows. Um Mr. White, >> thank you, Mr. chair. I tried to pop back on video and immediately I froze. So, I'm back to no video, but uh I won't take any more of anybody's time. I agree with what's already been said and I'm
inclined to support this. >> Thank you, Mr. White. And and thank you, Mr. Offel, for raising the issue of complimentary use. I I do agree that um it is complimentary under 3.01. Um it is consistent residential character. um the
integrated site design. Um we were able to see um what they would look like when they're completed. Um it is advancement affordable housing goals. Um the scale um of the existing structure is compatible with what's being asked to be
developed and under 3.32 I would argue that um it preserves existing neighborhood character. it is appropriate residential use. Um as I said earlier, it is efficient use of existing infrastructure and there is no
substantial detriment um to the neighborhood and I know we have to make those findings. So those would be my arguments for 3.32 and 3.01. Um so thank you um to everyone. Um given
that um there are no further um discussions um we now have to make findings. Um Miss Williams um let us go through um our findings.
And I do believe that there were two that were noted as not applicable in what we have to review. I think that was 10.384 and 10.390. And as all with with the board's
permission, I will skip those. So um I think we are starting with um just make sure I'm seeing your screen. Article 10 is special permit granting authority. So the board is required under 10.38 of the
zoning bylaw to make specific findings um for all special permits. And one of the first we have to consider is that the proposal is suitably located in the neighborhood in which it is proposed and or the total town as deemed appropriate by the special granting authority. Um
the staff finds that it is suitably located. I recommend we adopt that finding. Um 10.381 the proposal is compatible with existing use and other uses permitted by right in the same district. The staff finds that
the staff review suggests that it is compatible with existing uses and other uses permitted by right in the same district. I would recommend we make a finding that it meets the qualification 10.382. The proposal would not constitute a nuisance to air and water pollution,
flood, noise, odor, dust, vibration, lights, or visibly or visually offensive structures or sight features. The staff make finds that the proposal does not constitute a nuisance due to the air, water pollution or any of the above mentioned conditions. I recommend we
adopt that finding. 10.383. The proposal would not be a substantial inconvenience or hazard to butters vehicles or pedestrians. I the staff recommends that the proposal will not create a substantial inconvenience or hazard of butters or pedestrians. Um, I
would recommend we adapt that finding 10.385. The proposal reasonably protects the adjoining premises against detrimental or offensive uses on the site, including air and water pollution, flood, noise, odor, dust, vibration, lights, or
visually offensive structures or site features. The proposal does not show any signs of detrimental or offensive uses on the site. The applicant seeks to provide much needed affordable housing in close proximity to the downtown Ammeris Quarter without encroaching on
protected farmland or wetlands. I make a recommendation that we adopt that finding 10.386. The proposal ensures that it is in conformance with the parking and sign regulations under articles seven and eight respectively of the bylaw.
The staff review says the proposal is in compliance with the town's parking regulations and per the applicant's management plan, a total of 10 9 by8 parking spaces are proposed which meets the requirement for two parking space per dwelling unit with one space
dedicated to accessible parking and make a recommendation that we adopt said finding 10.387. The proposal provides convenient and safe vehicular and pedestrian movements within the site and in relation to the adjacent streets, property or
improvements. If a special permit granting authority deems the proposal likely to have a significantly adverse impact in traffic patterns, it shall be permitted to require a traffic impact report and the proposal shall comply with section 11.2437 of this bylaw
based on information presented in 174 application site plan. The proposal provides for adequate, convenient and safe vehicular and pedestrian movements within the site and in relation to the adjacent streets property or improvements. I make recommendation that
we adopt said findings. Um 10.388 the proposal ensures adequate space for the off streetet loading and unloading of vehicles, goods, products, materials and equipment incidental to the normal operation of the establishment or use.
The staff review suggests that both the duplex and the townhouse will be used solely for residential purposes. The board may wish to confirm how construction materials and crew parking will be managed during the renovation. I I'm not sure, but um
Mr. Williams, just as a matter of clarity, um isn't there a project manager that has to report to town as to construction? Um isn't there guidelines that the town sets for
construction projects and that is monitored by town? Yeah, that will be monitored through building inspections and through the building commissioner. >> Okay. So, I'm not um 100% sure that um
>> you want to just take this out. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Is everyone comfortable with that? >> Okay. Thank you. Um 10.389.
The proposal provides adequate methods of disposal and or storage for sewage, refuge, recyclables, and other waste resulting from the uses permitted or permissible on the site and methods of drainage for surface water. Um there is a management plan that is been that is
submitted that addresses this. I'd make recommendation that we adopt that finding. um 10.390. This has to do with conservation. The applicants went through the conservation commission and they were issued um the
approval with their conditions. So I will skip to >> 10.390. um 10.391 the proposal protects for the extent feasible unique or important national historic or scenic features. Um staff
notes that while the house is registered as a historically significant property the proposed changes the majority of which are taking place on the interior of the 1830s Victorian are in keeping with the design standards and character of the surrounding area under section 3.2041
design review standards and section 3.2040 2040 general principles of the designer degree principles and standards. Exterior changes to the structure include the addition of three new porches to provide access to each unit. The reconstruction of the rear barn portion of the building, the
addition of the new shed and restoration of exterior walls where windows have been removed, new asphalt shingle roofing and new windows will be installed to match the original roof material and original windows. I make a recommendation that we adopt said finding and I think we also heard
testimony tonight as well that um not much is going to be changing on the exterior with the exception was mentioned here especially um the windows not changing. I didn't believe anything was mentioned about the sighting. So yes, I would agree that it does retain
um its history. um 10.392. The proposal provides adequate landscaping including the screening of adjacent residential uses, provision of street trees, um landscape islands in the parking lot, and a landscape buffer along the street frontage. When a
non-residential use joins a residential district, an uninterrupted vegetated buffer shall to the extent feasible be established and maintained between buildings associated with uses under the section and the nearest residential property boundaries where natural undisturbed vegetation already exists on
site prior to site preparation and clearing. The majority of that vegetation may be retained and included in part of the buffer along with the addition of such new planting, selective removals and other management of site plans as are determined to be necessary
to maintain an effective year round visual screen and that is under section 11.3. Per the applicant's management plan, there's landscape maintenance and there is tree care. I would make recommendation that we adopt that
finding as appropriate. 10.393. The proposal provides protection of adjacent properties by minimizing the intrusion of lighting including parking lots and exterior lighting through uses of cutoff luminaries, light shields, lowered height of light poles, screening
or similar solutions. Except for architectural and interior light designs, all exterior site lighting shall be downcast and shall be directed or shielded to eliminate light trespass onto any street or abing property and to eliminate
direct or reflected glare perceptible to persons on any street or abing property and sufficient to reduce a viewer's ability to see. All se all all site lighting including architectural sign and parking lot signing shall be kept extinguished outside of those businesses hours established under an approved site
management plan except for lighting determined to be necessary for sight security and the safety of employees and visitors. Um staff recommended that the applicant's management plan states one downcast exterior lighting fixture will be attached to the exterior western wall above the port steps for each of the
three dwelling units. Additionally, there will be lighting fixtures mounted on the ceiling of each of the porches that will provide spill out lighting. I make a recommendation that we adopt that this meets provision of 10.393 10.394.
The proposal avoids to the extent feasible impact on steep slopes, flood planes, scenic fields, grade changes in wetlands. Um again, this went before the conservation commission and there were approved conditions. Um I make a recommendation that
we adopt the findings based on that action. Um 10.3 95 um the proposal does not create disharmony with respect to the terrain and to the use scale and architecture of existing buildings in the vicinity which
have functional or visual relationship there too. Um I would make a recommendation that we adapt the finding made by town staff. The design plans that we looked at the structures um that are going to be the new structure rather that is going to be erected is
consistent with um what's already there. So the staff findings under sections 3.0240 and 3.2041 2041 confirm that the proposal is in keeping with the character and harmony of the surrounding neighborhood with respect to terrain,
use, scale, and architecture of existing buildings in the vicinity. And I make a recommendation we adopt that finding um 10.396. The proposal provides screening for storage areas, loading docks, dumpsters, rooftop equipment, utility buildings,
and similar features. And per the applicant's management plan, there will be a single trash and recycling bin enclosure in the setback where we're shown on the site plan near the western driveway entry. The enclosure will be 4x12 and contain four bins, two of which
will be for trash and two for recycling. The structure will be less than 4 ft high and will screen the bins from the street and the sidewalk. The structure will be covered. The roof will be a low shed roof plane and the front long side with with be fully open. I make
recommendation we adopt 10.396 as applicable. Um 10.397 is not applicable. 10.398 the proposal is in harmony with the general purpose intent of this bylaw and the goals of the
master plan. The proposal is in keeping with the general purpose and intent of the bylaw and the goals of the master plan to create more affordable housing. We all heard that the intent here is to have this be fully owner occupied for
low income. Um I believe so I would make a recommendation rather that we adopt that finding. Um, so does anyone have any comment on the findings? Um, would like to
add anything or make any additional recommendations? Mr. Offeld, >> Mr. Sure. Um, on 10.391 there was mention of windows and then a little quick conversation. I'm not sure I caught it, but I think I heard Mr.
Golden say that there would not be windows changed, new windows, that is. >> That is correct. I did hear that as well. >> Okay. So, do we need to correct that in the or maybe you already did. I'm sorry if I missed that. Um,
while the house is registered as a historically significant property, the proposed changes, the majority of which are taking place on the interior of the 1830s Victorian, are in keeping with the design standards and character of the surrounding area. Um, exterior changes to the structure include the addition of three new
porches to provide access to each unit, the barn, new shed, exterior walls where windows have been removed. So I I think um Mr. offel there may need to be um
repairs to some windows but for the general structure itself the intent is not to install new windows is my understanding >> but if they are installed they will be similar to original windows I guess architecturally similar >> yes
>> okay that's fine then I think the language is fine as it is >> okay thank you >> thank you Any other members of the board have any comments on the findings? >> Hardy has her hand up. >> I I do and
with I I do see that rather um if the board is okay um we can hear from attorney Hardy. I see no um response in the negative. So um attorney Hardy. >> Um Mr. Chairman, I just had a question
about um the um ZBA findings that are identified as starting as at section 3.0. Uh I I I this is the first time I'm in front of your board, but it looked to me
from the staff report that there are findings that are required um starting on page eight. So uh uh finding under section 3.01 and so forth. I unless I missed
something. It seemed like you had started um on the section 10 findings, but I'm just wondering do you also need to adopt findings um for section 3? Thank you. >> Thank you. You are correct. We um I
deliberately started in 10.38. Um but one of the requests um here is to make a finding that the proposed conversion of the existing Victorian residence into a 3 unit townhouse complies with the intent requirements of
section 3.322 um and 3.01 01 is that it's complimentary. Um so yes, I I would have gotten to those. Um but the 10 the 10 are the general findings that we
typically have to um make. These are special findings um for this one. Okay. Um right. So given that this has been um raised um so we can look at also um 3.01
that the development um or operation of a single lot or more than one dwelling or more than one of the principal uses described in section 3.3 is expressly prohibited except where the principal uses are clearly complimentary to each other or otherwise
provided by this bylaw. And I think we've had discussions um and we raised concerns that it was complimentary. Appreciating um the town finds that the two principal uses are complimentary to each other and do not create any detrimental impacts to the surrounding
properties for the following reasons. Both buildings meet all three requisites for a townhouse. They are located in an area close to heavily traveled streets. that are within walking distance to the main corridor of downtown Amherst and are located in the area that is already
developed and being used for multifamily housing. um within with an actual lot area of 28,127 square feet with a total lot area for the building footprint of the two building um not believe we have that
just yet um but I think it's less than that as a result um the town finds a proposal to be a perfect example of infield development which focuses on utilizing vacant or underused urban land to increase housing density while preserving existing neighborhood
character. And I think I had also added um that I think it is it is consistent with the residential character. Um the duplex is designed as part of a coordinated residential development on the parcel.
Um there is shared site access, parking, landscaping and utility infrastructure that demonstrate the uses function together as a unified development. And that's part of my argument why complimentary um in terms of advancement of affordable housing goals. Um the
affordable duplex directly supports um what what the town is trying to do and the creation of affordable housing opportunities is a significant public benefit recognized um by the town of Amherst and by extension the bylaws. So
I would argue again that it is compatible in scale and intensity and the duplex is subordinate to and compatible with the overall residential character of the site as well as the neighborhood as a whole. So I would recommend we adopt the finding to say
that it meets the requirements of section 3.01 in terms of use classification and standards. Um the conversion 3.322 townhouse um each building shall be separated from
another such building by a minimum of 20 ft and have no more than 10 dwelling units and staff finds that the clearance between the two proposed building exteriors duplex and townhouse measures 25.8 ft. the conversion of the sevenbedroom um
two family Victorian to a three twotory separated owner occupied dwelling units with the following configuration. Um three units, one has two bedrooms, one has four bedrooms and the other has three bedrooms. Um the building is going to be connected with the public source
system prior to the occupancy and it's lot if in the residence district shall fall within one of the following areas. close to heavily traveled streets, areas close to businesses, commercial and educational district and areas already developed by multifamily use. Um the
staff wrote that with require with regard to the above listed requirements, the proposed townhouse and duplex are located on Amity Street approximately 400 yards from the center of town. All five affordable units are four-minute walk from Ammeris Cinema and Ammeris
Coffee, 10 minutes from the Amherst Town Common, home of the Amoris Farmers Market and approximately 11 minutes to six different bus stops connecting residents to the PBTA, Peter Pan. Um residents are minutes away from hot spots like Murphy's Tavern, the Drake,
Goldberry Cream, First Side, CVS, and Antony's Pizza and survey the surrounding area reveal that 20 parcels within a 500 ft radius of 174 Am Street are currently multifamily properties, meaning there is a mixture of two
families, three families, apartments, 48 community, apartment, 8 plus residential, and a map was provided um within the management plan. Um there rather there was a management plan provided
that goes into very detail. I'm not going to read the entirety of it, but it is available um for public review. So under the 3-unit townhouse conversion, um I would recommend we adopt the finding that it does meet the criteria
under section 3.32. Um again, it is a preservation of the existing neighborhood character. Um the map survey showing the different types of residential property that's there is evidence of that. Um it is appropriate residential use. Um it is efficient use
of an existing structure. Um it creates housing diversity that already exists there and I would make an argument that there is no substantial detriment to the neighborhood in adopting that finding. And I think with that we um bear with me
one second. And under 3.2040 general principles in design um every reasonable step shall be made to preserve the distinguishing original qualities of a building structure or site in its environment. removal or
alteration of any historic material or architectural features should be avoided when possible. And staff finds that the proposal to be an expansion of the current historic character of the building and the applicant did provide detailed information as to how they plan
to restore the existing structure. Um I think in section two of 3.240 all building structures and site shall be recognized as products of their own time. Alterations that have no historical basis and that seek to create an early
appearance shall be discouraged. And the applicant has not proposed alterations that are contrary to the existing style or structure of the current building. I recommend we adapt that finding. Um section three, the historical commission agreed that the building was significant
um as a good example of the traditional big house, litter house, back house, barn architecture. Given the condition of the rear barn portion and the proposal to reconstruct the section to the house with the same footprints and roof line, the commission agreed that the demolition would not result in a
loss of the community. I'd make recommendation that we adopt that finding. Um section four, contemporary design. Um I would defer to item three above. Um and in terms of number five, um the the
proposal improves the quality, appearance, and functionality of the existing 1830s historical structure and the proposed adjacent duplex also is in keeping with the character and style of original Victorian home. and make a recommendation. We adopt that finding and
design review standards. The maximum allowable height of the building in the RG zone is 40 ft. The height of the proposed townhouse and duplex are each 30 ft. As a result, the staff finds that the alteration to be compatible with the style and character
of the surroundings, therefore meeting the design review standards. I would make a recommendation we adapt the finding. In terms of proportion, the staff finds that the proportions and relationships of height to width between windows, signs and other architectural elements to be compatible with
architectural style and character of the surrounding based on the information provided. Um I would make recommendation that we adopt that finding and in terms of relation to the of structures and spaces the relation of a structure to
the open space between it and adjoining structures should be compatible with such relations in the surroundings. Um the staff finds relation of the townhouse to the open space between it and adjacent structures namely the duplex to be compatible with such relations in the surroundings based on
the information provided um on the site plan. I would make a recommendation we adapt the finding in ter in terms of shape and landscape. I'll make a recommendation that we adopt the findings made by um town staff. Um
in terms of scale and directional expression, I would make a recommendation we adopt the findings of town staff. In terms of architectural site details and signs, I make recommendation that we adopt the
findings of town staff. Um and I think with that we have gone through all the required findings that we need to make. Um are there any comments um and or
questions on the findings? I do not see any hands in affirmative. Um seeing that there are no further discussions regarding the findings, I would entertain a motion that we approve the findings. Is there such a motion? So moved.
>> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> It has been moved and second. Is there any discussion? Are >> are we voting on all of the findings that we have looked at this evening? Not just one group. Right. >> All the findings. Yes.
>> Okay. Good. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, M. Um with no further discussion, the vote on the motion. Um Mr. Offeld >> I. >> Mr. Meadows. I >> Mr. Sloer >> I
>> Mr. White >> I >> and the chair votes I the vote is 50 to adopt the findings. Now that we have um adopt our findings
um we now move on to our conditions. And so there are so far I believe um 16 proposed conditions and has everyone had a chance to review the conditions and are there any questions
and or edits to be made on the conditions? I see no hands um in the affirmative on modifying and having any questions or concerns on the conditions. So rather than going through all the conditions,
um I would entertain a motion that we adopt the um conditions. Um, I I do see Attorney Hardy's hands raised. Um, so before we do that, bear
with me. Um, Attorney Hardy. >> Um, Mr. Chairman, I'm not exactly sure which version of the conditions that is in front of the board. Um, but there were a couple of uh conditions that appeared to be duplicates of one
another. So on the version that I have condition 14 uh 15 states the affordable units shall be available in the tenant selection process shall be complete at the time of any full or partial certificate of occupancy for the
finished units. It's the first sentence and then on again on my version condition number 16 is exactly the same. So I guess one question I have is is that are those the conditions that the
board is looking at because those two conditions are identical to the condition that I have as number nine which states that the affordable unit shall be available and the homeowner selection process shall be complete as
of the time etc. >> We work from Miss Williams' conditions because she makes edits in real time. Um, so I do believe um she did identify that some of them are duplicative and so
Miss Williams, did you delete the one that was a duplicate? >> So when I share my screen, um, Attorney Hardy, you'll see that I've left those in, but I've struck them out just so that it's not confusing for anyone. And once we all agree that those are duplicative and we can delete them, then
it'll be a much cleaner read. I will share my screen now so that you can see that. But I did include those updates as you mentioned them earlier this afternoon. Can everyone see those conditions? >> Yeah. Okay. >> They So 16 and 17 were the old 15 and 16
and then the language that you shared regarding the phasing of the work and the certificate of occupancy has become the new condition number 15. >> Thank you very much. I have one more item to bring to the board's attention.
In item number 14, um it says, "Subject to the approval of ACLT and EOHLC, a qualified agent shall be engaged by the applicant to administer the initial marketing and lottery for the affordable units and to
maintain a waiting list. the because these are home ownership units that I don't believe our uh our marketing plan will involve a waiting list.
>> Okay. So, I can take that out. Um do we want to just review the language now that that has been removed? >> Sure. So, I it's a little hard for me to see. Let me see if I can make my screen a little bit bigger. Oh, yes. That's perfect. Okay.
So um >> there's still a reference to rentals. >> Yes. >> It should be removed. And at the end of that uh last sentence it says in in compliance with the income
eligibility requirements for homeowners instead of tenants there. M just so we can see the clean version. Do you have the ability to delete the ones that we are striking so we can just only see what we're leaving in? Yes, I can do that right now.
>> Thank you. >> And let me delete this so it's not highlighted as much. >> So, we just cleaned up um condition number 14. >> Mhm. Just want to make sure everyone is okay with all the other conditions as they
appear. >> Reference to rented in number 13. >> Okay, let's look at that. Ah, >> sold. Should we say sold? >> Sure.
I I did actually see um and one of the it might just be the wording. Ah, number nine. The affordable units shall be occupied at all times only by qualifying home own homeowners in accordance
regulatory agreement. Um >> number nine. Yeah, I I I do not like the sentence because occupied is not the same thing. It's the last sentence, the last complete sentence. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um occupied is not the same thing as
owning because you know if you have family there is been occupied. Okay. So yes, that's better. I think I may have seen it elsewhere as well. Um, I think maybe further up. Um,
>> I see something. >> Yes, >> Mr. Chair. >> Oh, Mr. Office. Yes, >> this may be a general question. Is it I assume it's precluded that someone would buy a unit and then
subsequently rent it. >> Yes, it's owner occupied only. Um and I think those conditions are part of um the qualifications to buy the home. >> Okay. Thank you.
Um, just to be thorough, do we at least want to read through all of them once? >> Yes, I I can. >> Okay. The granting of the special permit establishes the creation of a three unit owner occupied townhouse under the section 3.322 of the December 2027 25
Ammer zone in bylaw finds that two h two two uses townhouse and duplex are complimentary to each other as conjoined residential uses on a single parcel or lot. Any changes to approved plans as presented during the June 11th public hearing shall be reviewed by the
building commissioner to determine if the changes are significant. If the changes are deemed significant, said changes must be reviewed by the zoning board of appeals at a public meeting or may require formal modification of the permit and or condition. If a formal modification is required, submission to
the ZBA by way of public hearing is necessary for the means of obtaining special permits. Um it lists the approved plans. Um all state and federal fire safety and health codes shall be met. um including local. All exterior
lighting shall be dark sky compliant and downcast in accordance with the December 2025 Ammerzoning bylaw. The townhouse and duplex units shall be permanently affordable in compliance with the definition of affordability under article 12 of the Ammeris zoning bylaw.
Um as defined by article 12 section 12.24 to four of the ZBA um of the zoning bylaw rather. Affordable use in houndits are units which may be sold or purchased by families or households whose annual incomes adjusted to family size do not exceed the limits for the maximum annual income for low-income
families or households which is 80% of the median income for Amoris as calculated by the US department of housing and urban development or any successor agency and are eligible and and accountable for the purpose of common subsidized housing um inventory
or successor prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupy. The applicant shall present to the ZBA at a public meeting the final information regarding the affordance. Um the approval um and application and affirmative fair housing
market residential section plan. May I ask um why do we need this to come back to a public meeting? because um wouldn't the the sensing occupancy granter verify
that I'm sorry I'm asking me a screen anymore I'm I always prefer not to um have people come back if there isn't an absolute need um present sent to the ZBA at a public meeting the following information regarding the further units approval of
the local initiative program local unit application from the fear housing market and residential selection plan. Um I do not necessarily and the board um can chime in if um see fit. Even if this
does come back to us um I'm not 100% sure what we would do with it. Um it's I I think it's a matter of record and wouldn't this be something that should be presented to um the town to say they
are in compliance with um these provisions and you know we they have the appropriate marketing plans or selection plan because if again if it does come back to us
what are we actually going to do with it? I think the intention with this condition as it was proposed was to sort of like be a matter of good faith to say that they've closed the loop if you will on their requirements and they've met
them. But attorney Hardy, did you have a different perspective on that condition? Um I'm my suggestion would be that we file with
the board the um marketing plan um but not present it at a public hearing. So the board would know that we were in compliance with this requirement, but that we're not taking up the board's
time with something that frankly is dictated to us by the Executive Office of Housing and Liveable Communities. I I would suggest either doing it that way or or removing the condition. Thank you, >> Mrs. Slovener.
I believe that we fairly recently except I cannot remember the property had a similar situation where someone an applicant had to come back to us to uh for us to to acknowledge that they had
complied with something. I think it may have been the town houses on Pulpit Hill, but I'm not sure. there was something about affordable housing and it was a pretty significant non-meating.
So if we can find a mechanism where um the applicant can establish compliance without having to go through uh a scheduled meeting presence
presentation I think that would be more efficient. What I don't know is can they do that with the building commissioner or does it need to be done with the ZBA and if so can they write to the chair who I am have more than enough
confidence in can make a blessing and it can be done. So I just don't know that it needs that something like this needs to come back to a public hearing. >> Yeah. and and I I agree that is always
part of our consideration is to not have people come back where there is no need. So I I would support um something being sent in without the option of a meeting and if um the receiving body thinks it
needs to go back before the ZBA then that person makes a recommendation as opposed to um have just have a generic meeting scheduled or requirement rather. >> So should we replace ZBA with building
commissioner >> Mr. still there. >> I have one more possible suggestion to not torture the applicants more than we normally like to do. They could write to the ZBA
and we could as an agenda item at a meeting without them necessarily appearing have a vote on whether we feel that the submission by email or letter to the ZBA
is sufficient proof that could be done very quickly. we would all see it and I would think that it would comply with all of the open meeting requirements that are always part of our
deliberations. That's it. I have no other brilliant ideas after that. >> Mr. Moss, >> I think what you're talking about is sideststepping our obligations. I think that we're obliged to do the
review, not give it to the building inspector, not take a shortcut. We do what we need to do. We can do it in an expedient manner, but it's our obligation as a board
to look at these things. Shortcuts are not part of our job. >> Thank you, Mr. Meadows, Mr. Off, I think I saw your hand. >> I just note that um the this particular
project, the applicant would like to get a certificate of occupancy and move these units along as quickly as possible, and I'd hate for us to delay that unnecessarily. Um I I have to say I don't quite understand
who could or should review these. um these documents. But if we can do it exped expeditiously, then that's what we should. >> I I hear the arguments on all sides. Mr. White, before I before I say what I'm
going to say, do you want to chime in? >> Uh no, go ahead, Mr. Chair. >> So, I hear the arguments on all sides. The only concern here is we are reviewing um Miss Miss Williams, can you put it back up for a second, please? >> Sure. Um we are reviewing
this document and it is um approval of the local initiative program local action unit plan application affirmative fair housing marketing and resident selection plan. Um so essentially the request with this
condition is to review um is it the application for the the criteria for selecting someone to get one of these properties. Um because that's what it says. Um to Mr. Mr.
um Meadows's point. I I think we sat together on a couple low income and I I I do not remember and you can correct me if that if those were available because I know they know they presented their comprehensive marketing
plan and residential selection plan as part of the comprehensive permit. Um I don't necessarily think we had issued any conditions that asked them to submit anything to us in writing. They I think they provided a presentation as to how
they market and you know they went through the resident selection plan and that if I'm remembering correctly was they walked us through the the value of each property and what each person's income needs to
be. um to qualify for one of these properties. So to that end, if that comes back to us, um are we the authority to say that this is insufficient or this doesn't? I'm just
not sure um what our um expertise are to say this marketing plan is not sufficient or this residential selection plan is not sufficient. Um that's my only concern. Is that a question for the panel at large or for staff?
>> For the board. >> So, um, go ahead, Mr. Meadows. >> There is an agency involved, a state agency involved of the in all of this, is there not? And I think it's just as it's our
obligation to review things pertaining to the um to the land and to the building, it it is the state agency's obligation to review what we're discussing here.
Is that correct, Attorney Hardy? >> Yes, that's correct, Mr. Meadows. So the um in order for these units to be included on the subsidized housing in inventory, we will need to collaborate with the
town to submit an application for a local initiative program. Um and uh the state agency, the executive office of housing and livable communities will review that and make a determination about whether or not
they're included or not. Um in the same way we in and in order to do that, we need to prepare an affirmative uh uh fair housing and marketing plan. um that's a requirement for these units
to be approved um for the SHI by EOHLC. So we can present these items to the board if the board needs them presented in this way, but the board really doesn't have the jurisdiction to change
them. We have to satisfy EOHLC. So whatever EOHLC tells us we have to do, we're going to do. So, if I may ask a followup, um, Mr. Meadows, so, Attorney Hardy, when you do all those things and the state signs off on your plan and
those criteria, are you required to provide the state sign off to the town? >> Not unless you require it. The state does, that's not a requirement of the state. You can require it, but the state
doesn't require it. The LIP program doesn't require it. And as a matter of fact, we're probably going to have to produce it to another branch of town, namely the affordable um housing municipal trust because the fact that
these are units that are going to be designated this way. They have to they have to be notified that EOHLC has approved it. >> Mr. Meadows, would you be comfortable if we add language to say that upon review
and approval by the state um this document must be submitted to the applicable towns body as opposed to >> I would say I I I would go so far as to say that upon approval by appropriate state agencies that have the expertise
to deal with this there is no need for this body to review them any further. Okay, that is Miss Williams. Can you capture that? >> I'm attempting to capture it. Hold on. >> It's okay.
>> Okay. So, do we want to shift some of this language? Um, >> Mr. Meadows, I'll let you um do the language. >> Oh, thank you. If it were a little larger, I might even be able to see it.
>> Oh dear. Hold on. >> Is that any better? >> That's much better. Thank you. >> Okay. Okay. So, upon approval of the appropriate state agencies, what were you thinking? Uh,
a certificate of occy will be granted based upon approval of appropriate state agencies. >> Okay. So, we can take out this whole thing about coming back to the board, >> please. Okay. >> Unless there's objection from anybody
else. >> I I think Don't we want to say approval of the local initiative project, the action plan, all all that that whole phrase? >> We do. Yes. I was going to say approval. Yeah.
>> So, I think we tie a um subsection A to it. Um. Um. Yeah. Hold on, guys. It's still a little rough. >> Second. >> You're getting there. >> Okay. Let me try to straighten this out
so everyone can see it. Um, no. Hold on. >> It's 8:00. >> Will be granted upon approval um of the following documents. Okay, here we go. My brain is working. Except I don't want you to capitalize
that. Thank you. I'm just going to zoom out a little bit so you can see the whole thing. Except and now I see why I did that. >> There we go. >> Um, we should change the word will to shall.
>> Will is a strong directive. >> Okay. Shall be granted an approval by the permit. I'm going to do one more thing just so it's clear. >> Okay. >> Is that better?
>> Yes. And something that >> Mr. Sver has his hand up. >> Complied with Mr. Slovter. >> We have missed the traditional 7:30ish halfime five minute break. >> Oh no, don't drag it out any longer, please.
>> I don't want to drag it out, but it's dragging. Um, if if this is going to last more than about another 15 minutes, could we take the traditional five minute halftime? >> No, because I have to catch the bus. So, let's move faster.
>> Well, is it possible to move along and be done so our favorite town staffer can make her bus? >> Yes. >> Yes. I think we will be done in 15 minutes or less. >> No, not maybe 10. Right. So, >> I'm done.
>> I'm done. >> That's okay. Thank you. I think we've made all the corrections to um the conditions and okay. Are there any additional discussion or modifications of the conditions by the
board? I see no hands in the affirmative. Um so now that we've discussed and tailored the conditions, I would um enter in a motion that we
um approve the conditions. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Is there any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs. Mr.
Ser. >> Wait a minute. I >> Mr. Whites >> I. >> Mr. Meadows. >> I. >> Mr. Offs. >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The findings have been approved. The conditions have been
approved. Um, I would start with a motion to grant the waiverss as requested. Um, is there such a motion on the waiverss? >> So moved. >> It has been moved. Is there a second?
>> Seconded. >> It has been moved and seconded. Any discussion? With no discussion, the vote on the motion. Um, Mr. Offeld. >> I. >> Mr. Meadows. I >> Mr. Slovener >> I
>> Mr. White >> I >> and the chair votes I. The findings, the conditions and the waiverss have been approved. Um I will now entertain a motion that we approve the special permit. >> So moved.
>> It has been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Is there any discussion? With no discussion, the vote on the motion. Mr. Offeld >> I. >> Mr. Meadows >> I >> Mr. Slovener
>> I >> Mr. White >> I >> and the chair votes I um with a 50 vote ZBA FY2026-18174 Aminous street requesting a special
permit under section 3.322 and 3.01. Your special permit has been granted. Congratulations and good luck. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. We really appreciate the board and its uh its dedication to uh the town and uh we look
forward to delivering these units uh for the good of our community. >> We do too. Thank you so much for your patience with us tonight. Um, I will entertain a motion to not only close the public meeting but close the public hearing as well on ZBA um
FY2026-18174 Amity Street. Is there such a motion? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> It has been moved and second. Is there any discussion? With no discussion, the vote occurs on
the motion. Um, Mr. Offeld, >> hi. >> Mr. Meadows, >> hi. >> Mr. Slovener, >> I >> Mr. White, >> I >> and the chair votes I. ZBA FY2026-18
174 Amin street the public hearing and meeting has been closed and for time per purposes um I do not believe we have any other business not anticipated within
the last 48 hours. Miss Williams, is there anyone in the public um for any public comment? >> Uh one second. Let me see. Why am I sharing my screen? Hold on. >> Wrong screen.
No, I don't see anyone >> with no one in the audience for public comment. And then we'll take a look at our calendar for our next um meeting. >> Yes, very quickly. It's going to be very
fast. 174 AM we just did. Fantastic. Congratulations. 27 new court is an appeal but this particular meeting on the 25th of June is simply to vote to extend the opening of the public
hearing. So we have about uh 35 days to open the public hearing but just due to staff availability um because of the 4th of July holiday and and such we won't be able to open the public hearing until July 23rd. So that's outside of the
window of 35 days to open the public hearing which would have been July 19th. So some staff are traveling, the applicant is traveling. So the applicant is going to fill out a form to say that you know he is um how do you say granting approval or permission or you
know to extend the opening of the public hearing to July 23rd and then the chair just needs to sign that form. But the chair will only sign that form until after everyone has voted and that vote takes place on June 25th. And then the public hearing will actually open officially on July
23rd. And then on the 9th we have 65 High Street and then 112 114 North Whitney. So that's where we are for the next 1, two, three scheduled meetings. >> Thank you very much, Miss Williams.
>> Okay. Can Can I infer that the uh June 25th meeting would be very short? >> I think it's safe to infer that. Yes. >> Thank you. Just make making sure I heard that right. >> There's one short question. It should be less than an hour.
>> We hope. We do hope. >> Okay. >> I know I know we're press time, but I'm actually very surprised that this needs a vote to extend the as >> Okay. So um you have they filed the appeal on May 15th. 35 days from May
15th is July 19th. July 9th would have been too um difficult because the building commissioner needs to attend. He's going to be out of town. The applicant needs to attend. I think they're also going to be out of town just cuz that's the 4th of July week or
travel week. The 25th would have been too quickly for us to try to make this work just because we have to run legal ads. you need to have everything duly noticed and then the 23rd would have been an option but it falls outside of the window of the 35day period to open the public hearing. So that's why we
need the extension to open the public hearing on July 23rd. But in order to do that, the applicant has to say it has to make the formal request. The board has to vote to recognize and approve the request and then the chair has to sign off on that request.
>> Is that the only item that night? >> Yes. So all kidding aside, we could convene, establish the meeting, we could all ask Emerald not to read the statement and
>> read the statement. You not >> Yeah, you're chair Henry will not be here. >> I can Oh, >> you could do whatever you want. >> Okay. >> I mean, not really. >> Okay. So the tw the 25th I didn't realize that the 25th
>> Mr. Afeld >> we will start at 6 o'clock and you can make a 605 dinner reservation. >> Thank you so much. >> Okay. >> You're welcome. >> If you if you miss your bus, one of us will give you a ride. >> Okay. I appreciate that.
>> Right. Okay. >> Let's get a Let's get Justinta on a bus. >> Okay. All right. Is that good? >> Yes. I will entertain a motion to adjourn ZBA's meeting for June 11th, 2026. Is there such a motion?
>> So moved. >> It has been moved and second. The motion is not debatable. Requires a roll call vote. Mr. Offel. >> I. >> Mr. Meadows. >> I. >> Mr. Slovener. >> Well, ask Mr. White first, please. >> Mr. White. >> Hi. Okay, then I can vote against
adjourning and it can still pass, right? >> Yes. Yes, you can. >> No, I'm voting yes. >> And the chair votes I. Thank you all for your service. We'rejourned. >> Good night, everyone. Bye. >> Get that bus, baby. Run.