live. >> Okay. The chair notes the time is 6:02 and I call this meeting of the Ammerst Zoning Board of Appeals to order. I am David Slovder, vice chair of the Ammer Zoning
Board of Appeals. I will serve as chair tonight. I want to welcome everyone to this meeting. We will begin as always with a roll call of the ZBA members on tonight's panel. Mr. Offeld
>> here, >> Mr. Meadows >> here, >> Mr. White >> here, >> and Miss Greenbomb >> here. >> I note that a quorum is present.
And also on the meeting tonight is Miss Justinta Williams, a planner with the town and principal staff liaison. Thank you all. Pursuant to chapter 2 of the acts of
2025 extended through June 30, 2027, the ability of 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 in-person attendance of members of the public will be permitted, but every effort 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 quasi judicial body that operates under the authority of chapter 4A 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 Ammerst. One of the most important elements of the zoning bylaw is section 10.38. Specific findings from this section must
be made for all of our decisions. Statutoily for a special permit the board has 90 days from the close of the hearing to file a decision. For a variance, the board has 100 days from
the date of filing to file its decision. No decision is final until the written decision is signed by the sitting 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 cont to contest the decision with the relevant judicial body in superior court. After the appeal period, the permit must be requ recorded at the registry of deeds to take effect.
Tonight's agenda, uh, the review of the minutes of March 26 and April 9 will be done at a future meeting, not tonight. There are two agenda applicants on
tonight's agenda. They are Valley Community Development presenting documents in accordance with conditions listed in a 2024 special permit. And the other is a request to remove an owner occupancy requirement at
43 South um South Prospect Street. The first item is a public meeting. ZBA FY2026-15 Valley Community Development
Corporation, known as Valley CDC, requests an audience with the ZBA to present items in accordance with conditions listed in their ZBA FY2024-03 special permit.
The items are condition 70, affirmative fair marketing plan for the selection of income eligible firsttime home buyers. And condition 75, drafts of the master deed, sample
individual unit deed, and bylaws to the board and for review by town council. said property is located on map 5A, parcel 56,
RN neighborhood residents and RLD low density residential zoning districts and FC farmland conservation overlay zoning districts. Before we open the public meeting, does
anyone on the panel have anything to declare or disclose? Wonderful. The this first item is a continuation of ZBA FY2024-03-40B special permit. Tonight's hearing is a
bit unusual because it is only a public meeting for Valley CDC to comply with two conditions of their approved special permit. Those are condition 70, the affirmative fair marketing plan for the selection of
income eligible first-time home buyers, and condition 75, which is a draft of a master deed, sample individual unit deed, and bylaws. When I saw this agenda item, I realized that it would not be an effective use of
time for me, not being a real estate attorney, to read all of the information submitted to meet these compliance conditions and try to make a determination of compliance. Furthermore, condition 75 states that
the information required to comply must be submitted to both the ZBA and for review by the town council. I felt that a clear opinion by the town council would be the most effective and efficient use of our time.
I contacted Rob Mora, Amoris building commissioner, because Ms. Williams was away last week. to request a clear opinion in writing from the town legal council to guide our consideration.
That requested letter has been received and provided to this panel as part of the documents for this meeting. Please note that this is a public meeting and not a hearing. We are asked tonight only to determine
if these two conditions in an already finalized approval from 2024 have been met by the documents submitted by Valley CDC. Our discussion will deal with those topics and not general topics about the
project as we cannot change or add any conditions. A public meeting is supposed to be a deliberation among the panel members without input from the applicant. But I will allow in this case the
applicant to make any comments they wish and for the panel members to ask questions. It has been two years since the previous process was undertaken and approved and the opportunity for participation seems appropriate.
Um, so since this is a public meeting, before I invite the representatives of Valley CDC to join the meeting, are there any comments from members of the panel in view of all the information that we received that Miss Williams um
distributed to us prior to tonight? Okay, Miss Will um Miss Williams, do we >> Yes. >> have um I'm looking Yes. Okay. Um
would you please invite into the meeting anyone from Valley CDC who would like to participate? >> Certainly. I will be promoting a Miss Jessica Allen to panelist. Welcome, Miss Allen's picture. Hello.
>> Hi. How are you? >> And now, Miss Allen. Okay. In in living color. >> In living color. >> In living color. Welcome. Thank you for being here to represent Valley CDC. Would you please for the record state your name and address please?
>> Sure. Uh Jessica Allen uh real estate development director at Ballet CDC uh offices at 256 Pleasant Street, Northampton. >> Thank you. Would you like to uh we uh we have
received a lot of information and the panel has had time I presume to review this. So, um, do you want to would you like to start with a few comments? Is there anything you'd like to mention to the panel and then the panel can ask you
some questions if they'd like? >> Um, no. Um, you know, as you noted, we are um adhering to the conditions that were in the comprehensive permit that were that was granted to us in 2024. Um as part of
that we are providing we provided um the final draft condo documents the master deed and the declaration of trust. These documents were reviewed by the ZBA during the permitting process. Um they have been updated and revised based on
comments from town council Ammerst Town Council um from Mass Housing um and an additional attorney that is uh works with Mass Housing um in terms of Fanny Freddy Mortgages. So those comments have been incorporated and are now in final
draft. So that has been provided to you um or I think it was provided to the attorney um and she provided a letter stating that we are in compliance with those conditions. Um the other document that we provided to the attorney was the affirmative fair housing marketing plan.
Um this is a document that is um reviewed and certified by the monitoring agent um which is noted in the regulatory agreement which I believe was an attachment to the letter from town's attorney. Um the regulatory agreement
sets Chapa um as the monitoring agent on behalf of Mass Housing. The plan was reviewed in detail. We had multiple iterations back and forth and was finalized and certified and signed um by Chapa as part of that review.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> Mhm. >> I will note that the letter which I had requested through Mr. Mara in Miss Williams absence from uh KP Law, the town's attorney, we did receive. It's
from a Sharon Everett. And I'll note the the most significant sentence that I saw when I read it is that the above quote the above referenced required documents are consistent with the permit and I approve
them as to form. So, um this seems to me at least as um an indication of compliance with these conditions with the documents.
Does anyone on the board want to ask Miss Allen any questions or any comments as we're in a public meeting? I don't see any. Oh, Miss Greenbl, your hand is raised. >> Um, I would like to ask, are we just
talking about this one issue now or is this a general question? Right now, >> we are talking about Valley CDC's compliance with the two conditions in the in the
approved permit. Um, part of the the packet and part of the issues that we were going to was the marketing plan was on the agenda. And I would like to ask a
question about the 71 applications that you got and the 50 that were approved and um how they relate to local preference. In other words, did I have
asked in writing several times over the past few weeks if you could come in with some statistics about the people who live, work, or send their kids to school here who were in the list? And um have they already been chosen or is that
about to happen? And um did you did you bring any statistics about compliance? I I'm particularly interested in knowing whether we are fulfilling a local need or a regional need. And it relates to a
study the town meeting commissioned 30 years ago and a bunch of us wrote it on uh the housing impact on the on the tax rate particularly. And so that's why I'm looking at these statistics again 30
years later. if you could enlighten us a little. >> Um, Miss Allen, if you if you have any information that you'd like to share, >> um, you can you can bring that up. We are that is not actually part of the
agenda for this evening. I'm I'm happy to um to allow the discussion for a a few minutes, but we are really here just to discuss whether or not you're in compliance. But for Ms. Greenbomb's sake, if you can give her a bit of
information, that would be lovely. >> The marketing plan was on the agenda and we did get information about that. So, I'm just asking for more details. >> Okay. >> I'm happy to share a slide with some data if you'd like me to do so. >> I really Okay,
>> sure. Please do that. >> Okay. Okay. Are you seeing the screen with the lottery analysis? >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay. Perfect. Okay. So, you Whoops. Sorry. I have a little presentation if you need me to go through it. If not, that's totally fine, too. Um, but in
terms of the lottery analysis, so we had 72 applications that were submitted. Of those 72, 53 of the applications were entered into the lottery. You'll see that on that same chart at the top, four of those applications were withdrawn um
by applicants and then another 15 were denied because of various reasons, but typically it has to do with they were over income. Um this development is homes for um households that um are 80% to 100% AMI. So they were either over
income um some of them are also over ass had too many assets. So, as a one of the requirements of the Commonwealth Builder program, um applicants must have assets of $150,000 or less. Um so, some of the
applications were um they basically didn't meet the basic thresholds in order to enter the lottery. So, that's where that 15 came from. So, underneath that, you'll see that we've got some local preference data. I do want to note and this is important to note that this
local preference is self-reported at this time by applicants in order to enter the lottery process and as they move forward with selection um this uh local preference will be verified at the income certification level by both um
valley's sales team which is DVM housing consultants as well as Chapa as the monitoring agent. So both of those entities will review everything. Chapa has the final say. They are the monitoring agent. So if the um if the documentation cannot be provided, they
may end up not being part of that local preference pool. So at the time of lottery, we had 53 applications going into the lottery. As I noted, um 36 of those self reported as local pool applicants. And I'll just note that's
about 67% of the entire um pool of applicants that came in. And I want to credit to a huge amount of work that was done by our village initiative. They are a consulting firm, financial literacy consulting firm, pre-arketing that we worked with them in starting in
September of 2024 and um with some local members in the BIPO community that really did a tremendous amount of boots on the ground outreach to reach applicants before we were even in construction, before we even closed on financing to get people queued up to get
their finances in line because we know that it takes a lot to be able to buy a home, we need to make sure that people's credit scores are over 640. They need to have um money set aside for an attorney for down payment assistance. So, we did a lot of of leg work. Um so, of those
53, 36 were local pool. 17 um households were um self-certified as a minority applicant. And so, as a result, we had uh 47% of our local pool um applicants were minority. and which is higher than
the statistics um for minority residents in the town of Ammeris which is 35. So as a result if you know about local preference one of the the steps that you have to take in terms of to do the local preference at the lottery is you have to do a minority balancing if you don't have if you if we didn't meet that 35%
there would have been some shifting from the opal open pool applicants who selfidentified as a minority and they would have been put into the local pool preference. Um so of the 36 that identified as local pool um 26 of them
um stated that they were a resident of the town of Ammerst, one was a municipal employee. Um six identified as being employees at local businesses and three identified that they have a child that attends school in the town of Ammerst. So that is the um those are the data
sets that we are looking at for the applicant pool at this time. Like I said, once we get through on now that we've gone through the lottery, these applicants will be put into specific buckets based on their preference, their income, and the type of unit that they are looking for, two-bedroom,
threebedroom. Um, and then they will be um they will be um invited to move forward with the process. Does that answer your question? >> Can I ask you a followup? I think that's fabulous. I I just want to make sure that even though there are this many
local people, can they be bumped by somebody from the outside just because they're from Ammerst or can are they still eligible to live here? >> So, if you recall from the permitting
time that we went through this, um there are certain preferences. First is ADA. Um second is appropriately sized household. Third is disproportionately impacted households which is defined by
the US Treasury. And then last is local preference. So for instance, say we have um we have somebody who is ADA that um that received um that is in the local pool. Um let's just put both of them in
the local pool. It makes things easier. Somebody is ranked a three. somebody else is ranked a four, the person who's ranked three um would be invited in before the somebody who is ranked four. So they go into those buckets. So if you have somebody whose local preference who
is a single person household, that is a lower criteria than say a family of five. So you have two parents and three kids trying to move into a three-bedroom. That's going to have a higher ranking in the lottery whether they're local um preference or not.
That's what I really wanted to know. Um, and that that helps a lot, Jessica. I appreciate learning that. >> Sure. No problem. >> I, you know, you look at all the statistics from the and the most recent one being from the Don Center that Hampshire College, Hampshire County
looks really good compared to the counties northeast or west. And uh, I'm glad that that we still can take care of our people first >> if they fit. So I I'm I'm grateful to hear that. >> Good. Any other information that anybody
would like? >> Uh yeah, thank you very much for all of that. That was very informative. And there are there any questions from any other board members? Okay. seeing and hearing nothing. Um
I would and uh I find that all the documentation is appropriate. I am majorly influenced by the letter from Sharon Ever from the our uh town
council. So, if there's no further discussion or any questions, I would be very pleased to entertain a motion that we approve um wait a minute. Valley CDC's I just
lost the word for a moment. Valley CDC's um effort to show compliance for these two conditions. >> So move. >> So move, Miss Greenbomb. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second. Mr. Meadows, is there any
discussion? In that case, the um this occurs on a roll call vote. Miss Greenbomb. >> Yes. >> Mr. Meadows. >> I. >> Mr. Rel.
>> Mr. White. >> I. >> And the chair votes I. It is a unanimous vote to approve five to nothing and um therefore you are officially in compliance as far as we're concerned.
Thank you Miss Allen for your time and participation and clarity and information and all the goodness that you brought to the meeting >> and we neighbors. We're waiting for our new neighbors
>> soon enough. Soon enough. So the only thing remaining is to close the public meeting. Uh M do that. >> What? >> You can leave it open. Doesn't you don't have to >> Why would we leave it open?
>> Because we're still in meeting. You don't have to do >> We're moving on to a public hearing. >> Well, you can. We're going to clo We're going to close this particular public meeting to finalize Miss Allen's wonderful effort.
>> Do can I would anyone like to make a motion to close the meeting and move on to the next agenda item? >> Sure. >> Moved and seconded. Um, it occurs by a roll call vote. Mr. Arfeld. I
>> Miss Greenbomb. Uh, Mr. Meadows. >> Hi, >> Mr. White who we believe is still there. Okay. >> Uh, and the chair votes I. The public meeting regarding Valley CDC is now
closed. We will move on now to a public hearing. This is for ZBA FY2026-143 South Prospect Street requests a special
permit to modify condition number two of special permit ZBA FY1984-15 in order to remove the owner occupancy requirement and adhere to the resident manager. requirement under section 10.33
of the zoning bylaw. Said property is located on map parcel 14A/232 RG General Residence Zoning District. Before we begin the public hearing, does
anyone on the panel have anything to declare or disclose? No. Okay. I will open the public hearing and begin by reading into the record as soon as I get it
the applicant submissions for consideration for tonight's petition. Okay, this is from the PAR. Okay, applicant submissions from December 9, 2025.
43 South Prospect lighting. 43 South Prosp Prospect CRP. Exterior lighting dated 12925. Additional information not dated 1984 plans
the decision of the ZBA from 1984 that's 1984-15 the application the letter filing special permit modification application
a management plan for the property and information, a document about pipeline properties, which is the um the proposed leasing agent from March 16th, 2026. The submissions
are a residential rental permit, an application packet, a site plan, and some documents stamped by clerk. And from April 21st, there is another
submission from pipeline properties Ammerst lease lease master with resident manager, a draft that has been updated, a lease agreement that addresses the resident manager role.
There are also two staff submissions uh dated April 10 and April 22. So, we can now um Miss Williams, you can invite in whoever
is representing um 43 South Prospect. >> Certainly, I will be promoting attorney Tom Rei to panelist and if needed, Mr. Robert Eaten, the applicant.
Welcome, Mr. Rei. >> Good to see you, Mr. Opener. How you doing? >> Good to see you. I'm all right, thank you. It's been a while since I saw you. You've been either busy elsewhere or keeping a low profile. >> A little bit of both, I think. >> Or or in witness protection, but came
out for just tonight. >> Well, it's nice to see you again. >> Likewise. Uh why don't you we we all received the P. We have a document with background and a bunch of information. So why don't
you tell us what you're um requesting given that I believe it's quite limited. >> You've got it. Yeah. So um this might be one of the least conversational I am. Um, we are just requesting a
modification of condition 2 to the 1984 permit as you read to essentially substitute the owner occupancy requirement for a resident manager requirement. And so, um, Pipeline Properties would be managing the
property. They're a professional management company. They've got a master lease. The master lease does require one of the two units to actually be a resident manager. and it's a resident manager compliant with the terms of the zoning bylaw. Um, I think he did a site
visit if you're familiar with the location. Um, I it's a it's a good site. It's appropriate to have this use at that site uh appropriately managed. Um, we believe that with Pipeline, which is
a local management company, and with a resident manager, it will continue to be appropriately managed. So, I'm happy to answer any questions. I don't want to belabor it more than I I need to, but it really is that simple of a switch, >> right? Um, I did neglect I'm sorry I
missed the note to myself. Um, I did neglect to report on the site visit. So, let me just take a moment. We had a site visit on Tuesday attended by me, Miss Greenall, Mr. Afeld, Mr. Meadows, and
Ms. Williams. Uh, we also encountered Mr. Eaton at the site visit. We stood out front and looked at the property and got a feel for the neighborhood. I walked down the driveway before other
people arrived and saw the barn at the back, which had been uh part of an earlier application that was approved but has now expired. The barn is not part of the residential operation and is
just used for storage, so it's not a factor. Uh, and so we saw the neighborhood and the property and we saw that it's across the street from an Ammerst College dorm. Do any of the members of the panel who
were also there, would you like to add anything about the site visit? was relatively uneventful because we weren't looking at any new construction or the impact of anything. So, okay. So,
I apologize for having missed that note. Um, members of the panel, do we have any questions for Mr. Rei about their application? >> I have
>> Mr. Meadows. >> My question is during the site visit, Mr. Eaton indicated that you're planning on moving back to Ammerst within the next two years.
You're muted. Are you planning on moving back to to this house as a residence? >> Um either this house or the town somewhere nearby. We we like being downtown. Um, as we get older, that house is a little challenging for for
us, but um, we love the house. Um, our kids also want to move back and so they are adults as well now. So, uh, we all expect to have a footprint in Amherst if not in that house. >> So, there is the potential for this house to again become owner occupied.
>> Yes. >> By yourself or one of your kids? Correct. Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. And it's three years just to be clear. Three years is our plan. Not two. >> Well, you can hope for two. >> Yes.
>> Yeah. >> Are there any any other questions about the application? I do have I have u two questions. One is how will pipeline
select the resident manager? How will they go about selecting that and not simply renting it to anyone who applies and essentially saying raise your right hand, you're the resident manager.
>> Um I I you know it's it's a good question, but I think when you are showing an apartment, you have several potential candidates from that. When we rented the apartment, uh we interviewed people and talked to them carefully, made sure they would be a good fit for us living in the house. And I would ask
pipeline to do the same thing. Um I I also want to note that I've instructed them to um to exclude undergraduates uh from that and they say they can do that. So we will not be um looking at a pool
of undergraduate uh uh leases or or tenants and that will also help quite a bit. Um we had that original arrangement with Valley Property but that did not stick for some reason. and they they started renting donor graduates.
>> Ah, all right. So, the members of the panel will have to find another venue for beer pond. It won't be it won't be 43 South Prospect if it's no undergrads. Um I my my other question is we are
generally somewhat well we're quite sensitive to resident managers as opposed to uh owner occupied um having control over the rest of the
occupants of the building. Um and often it's a it's a concern to separate the resident manager from other occupants. Will the resident manager be the only occupant of that unit?
>> No. No. They would be part of a part of the leases there. They each have multiple bedrooms. So, uh the resident manager is could be the only adult, but it's potentially they're one of several adults. >> One one of several. and and they would
they would be put in a position to essentially police the people they're living with which can be a little dicey on occasion. >> Yes, they they would be in that position. Um we have um described that
role as uh you know really focused on communication, advising and occasionally reporting issues. Um, but they are uh not responsible for the leases. They're not responsible for direct maintenance. They're in a a uh local presence to help
us keep the property under control. >> And is Pipeline an experienced property management company? Are they wellestablished in handling properties like this? >> Yeah, in the Amoris Northampton area, I think they have at least 50, maybe closer, maybe up from that a bit
>> higher than that. And I think um >> Mr. Chair, I think they've um merged with Cayman's property too. >> Ah okay. >> So their pipeline is legitimate. >> Okay. And you said that that it is legal
for them to exclude undergrads as tenants, right? I think Mr. Rey, you said that. >> I that would not come out of my mouth. Uh but if Mr. Eaton has directed
um his management company to I I don't believe that undergraduates are protected classes but I I have not done case law research on that lately and I don't ever like excluding because um there are pitfalls along the way so
>> is that okay >> and you went to law school so I understand yes >> um okay are there any other questions questions. Mr. Rel. >> Yeah, I see in the um uh complaint
response form that there's one contact which is Mr. Feldman of Pipeline. >> Yes. >> And I just he's he's available 24/7 >> or is that is that more generally the company that would be the >> it's the it's the company. We may need to update the um update that contact
info. I don't I'm not sure. But um but they've always been very responsive. if I call somebody and I get an answer that day. And we've had a fair So, under uh Valley Property, we had a fair number of um repairs we needed to go through in the last year over the last, you know,
as that's been rented out to younger younger uh tenants and um every question I've had, they've been very responsive and come back to me immediately. So, >> okay. >> So, and >> that's the general number, Mr. Rael just to that's the if you want to contact
Pipeline Properties that's the number that you're calling >> and you get somebody it may not be Master Feldman because he may be at bed but somebody from the company. Yeah. Okay. Understood. >> Y >> thank you Mr. Meadows.
Uh, I know that there are other properties where they require uh anyone signing a lease to have their parents cosign. Are you intending to do that or have you considered that?
>> I did not see that in their lease. Um, I haven't read it front to back for a few months, but I do not remember something like that. Could we suggest that as uh another means to temper
student activity? >> Yeah, a co-signer. And I think uh Mr. metals just as a practical matter. That's how a lot of these management companies work >> is when they're vetting >> uh typically if if there were to be an undergraduate or a graduate student that
didn't have the financial resources to perform because ultimately like performance has a you know there are obligations here. There's financial obligations. There's also uh action obligations or inaction obligations, right? Uh don't be loud and don't do this or keep the property in good. And
so practically uh these management companies will require a co-signer. It's like a guarantee from the parents which has the parents kind of put their money where the the kids mouth is if you will. >> So this is something that you would suggest as part of
>> Absolutely. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. This is good that's good practice to require a co-signer um especially in those instances where the individual does not have the financial means. um the potential financial means to stand on their own.
So yes, >> any other questions from panel members, >> Mr. Chair? >> Yes. Oh, yes. Philip, >> Mr. White, Mr. White, I mean, >> thank you. I'm fine out of the way. Um,
hello, Mr. Rey. Uh so just for a little bit of clarification on this um uh we've used the term undergraduate. Um however I mean I would like to note that that is not specific of a general time frame as I went back to school to
Ammerst College to get my undergraduate degrees at 42. So in this language when you're saying undergraduate are we denoting this in an a specific age range that will require a co-signer or would I at 44 if I decided to rent the unit
require a co-signer? >> So I guess a couple of things here Mr. White. So first I completely agree and that's why I think I answered Mr. over this question the way I did with not categorizing right because there are there's nuance to it all and so I don't know that a condition would be
appropriate in an in an approval here which limited a group or prohibited a group from occupying the property right so if Mr. Eaton wants to separately advise or direct he can. I would advise him to be careful about it because of
exactly what you said. So that's a b and I don't want to fall into that trap of over generalizing because undergraduate I mean your case in point um there is sure there's a traditional arc but what
does that mean anymore? And so as long as you have from a financial aspect the the means um and you demonstrate a responsibility, it almost doesn't matter if you're an undergraduate or not. And so that's again why I suggest not to to
generalize a a group of people. So that's where I sit on it. Obviously whatever Mr. wants to do ultimately, but that's I just don't know. I want the board to be careful about um imposing some condition which I don't know that the board necessarily wants to get in
the habit of doing for a whole host of reasons. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. And I imagine that when we say undergraduate, we forget that one of our members has that personal history and
that we're thinking um you more than anything UMass undergraduates who want to make sure that I can't sleep at midnight on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday nights. So, um, I don't think
we're thinking so much of 42year-old mature, dashing, handsome ZBA panel members. Uh, if are there any other questions from board panel members tonight?
Seeing none, >> has her hand. >> Uh, Mrs. Greenbomb has her hand up. Yes, Mrs. Greenbomb. Uh, I'm nitpicking a little bit here, but I think there's a discrepancy between what I read in the P, which I think was the most recent
one, and what we learned at the site visit about the parking. And so I think that we just should clarify the I understood that there were two parking spots on site and um anyway he
should clarify what parking will be there just so that we get the facts straight in the decision. >> Mr. Eaton. Yeah, there are uh easily two parking spots for people to get in and out independently and those are always
associated with the uh downstairs apartment. Um and even when we lived there, we did not offer parking. It was on street parking and that was just the right from the start. We always made that clear. Um, the permit should say what then?
Or the that part of the rental registration package probably rather than the condition on a permit. >> Okay. All right. So, you're confirming that there are the two spots that we saw at the bottom of the driveway in front of the barn.
>> Yes. >> Are the two are the two spots that are on the property. And those are the same ones that have been there for a while. And also the practice historically is that they are for the
downstairs unit and the upstairs unit parks on the street. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Even and I I would just add when we had the permit for the barn, that was also going to continue that way. We were not going to add any um any additional
parking for the three new bedrooms. And that was still agreed on with the time and approved. >> Okay. Thank you. If there are no other questions from the tonight's panel at this time, I will
take comments from the public. Uh, Miss Williams, do we have any public people? >> No. >> Any members of the public who want to say anything? No, it it's the attendees waiting room
is completely empty. >> Okay. All right. Well, apparently we won't make the 11:00 news then for all the controversy tonight. Um and I don't have to remind them that it's three minutes and I own a a watch.
So, this saves me some trouble. All right. um hearing. Having no public uh request for public comment, we can move on to the public hearing.
Do I Is there a motion to move to the public hearing? >> No. >> Wait a minute. The public meeting while public meeting while keeping the public hearing open. Mr. Chair, we make that motion.
Did Did Mr. White just make that motion? >> No. No. I was saying before we make that motion. >> Yes. Yes. >> Just for the record, um, can we hear from Miss Williams that we didn't receive any public comment either? >> That's correct. We did not receive any
public comment via email or in-person visits. And um to Miss Greenbomb's point earlier, thank you for reminding me about the parking from the site visit that just forgot to update that in the P. But that is correct. The applicant
did mention that the upper unit has um to just rely on street parking. Am I remembering that correctly, Mr. Eden? And then it's just lower the first floor unit that just gets to parking spaces on site. So, just stating that for the
record and um attorney Rey, you should have the P. >> I got it. Thank you, Miss Williams. >> You're welcome. >> But on that note, Mr. Chair, I will make that motion. >> You will. And you did it beautifully. Do we have a second?
>> Second. >> Okay. We have a a motion and a second to move to the public meeting while keeping the public hearing open. This uh the vote occurs on a roll call. Miss Greenbalm,
>> wait a minute. I say yes, but I forget what we're voting >> to to move to a public a public meeting to discuss in great energy what we're doing. >> Is that a yes? >> Yes. >> Mr. Meadows? >> I >> Mr. Offeld
>> I. >> And Mr. White >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The motion passes unanimously 5 to zero. Um, okay. So, we move into the public meeting
and is there any further discussion among members of the panel before we move on to reading all sorts of things? Nothing from the panel. Okay. Um so now
we will make findings. We will read the findings that are under section 10.38. The following findings are not applicable and with the board's permission will be skipped. 10.384
10.387 10.388 10.390 10.391 10.394 10.395 and 10.397
also some of the others also seem unnecessary since the applicant is not applying to make alterations of any kind so I will abbreviate iate reading those by noting staff comments on them in the
interest of time. 10.380 The proposal is suitably located in the neighborhood in which it is proposed. Staff finds the proposal is suitably located. >> Danny Ballad,
>> sorry, >> did somebody just say something? Okay. I thought I heard a voice. Sorry. 10.381. The the proposal is compatible with existing uses and uses permitted by right.
Staff finds the pro the proposal is compatible with existing uses. 10.382. The proposal would not constitute a nuisance due to air, water, and other pollution things. Staff finds the
proposal does not constitute a nuisance due to air and water pollution. 10.383 staff finds the proposal will not create a substantial inconvenience or hazard to abutters or pedestrians.
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, and vis
or visibly visually offensive structures or sight features. The staff says that the proposal does not show any signs of detrimental or offensive uses. 10.386.
The proposal ensures that it is in conformance with the parking and sign regulations of this bylaw. Staff review states that there shall be no tenant parking for either Well, no,
that's not correct. Condition three says that there will be no tenant parking for either of the rental units. There shall be no rental tenant regular tenant parking for either of the rental units on the street. I think we need to change that. Yes.
>> Right. Right. Yes. Let's change that. >> Yeah. That's not correct. >> May I Mr. chair. Just so my understanding of ZBA FY208 is that it's without effect because that was the one for the barn that was never
acted on >> and so I believe it would have lapsed. >> Okay. If that's if that's the case, then we could >> you can add whatever you want about the actual like the two parking spaces that Mr. Eaten talked about, but I would just
avoid in there. And I think there it might appear later because there's a reference to the barn. Um, >> right. It doesn't identify that it was related to the barn, which no longer is even a valid permit. So, >> um, Miss Williams, what do you want to
put there? Do you want to just say it does not apply? >> Um, no. I'm going to reference what Mr. Eden explained to us. >> Okay. Okay. Which was that at the site visit the top floor unit
um >> will park on the street, >> right? >> Yeah. Yeah. Is limited. Oops. Do on street parking
only. I'm just going to say and only the first floor unit um is eligible for the two onsite parking spaces. Does that sound good for
everyone? Yes. No, I can't see you. I'm typing. I >> I think it reflects what Mr. Eaton maintained. Yes, I think that's fine. Okay, attorney reading. >> Are you all right with that, Mr. Reedi?
>> I am. Okay, >> great. >> All right. So, that was 386. 10.389. The proposal provides adequate methods of disposal and/or storage for sewage,
refues, recyclables, and other waste resulting from the uses permitted or permissible on the site. Uh staff review the applicant's management plan states that trash and recycling are provided by USA waste and recycling. Trash is picked up weekly and
recycling is picked up bi-weekly. The property management company would be the party responsible to contact in case of complaint 10.392. >> The proposal >> David. Yes, Mr. Meadows.
>> 10.387 is incorrect. >> Hold on. >> 10.387 was deemed not non-applicable. >> 10.387
talks about parking. >> Okay, hold on one moment. >> Well, it was in the Okay, it was in the >> Well, we can fix it now. >> Okay. I'm thank you, Mr. Meadows. It was in
the list of of uh findings to that are not applicable and to be ignored and um apparently incorrectly. So, thank you for catching that. >> Thank you, Mr. Meadows. >> You're welcome.
I will strike that from the list above as well. >> Okay. >> All right. Is that Let me Is that satisfactory corrected? >> One moment. >> 10.387.
>> Sorry, I'm trying to not pass it when I scroll by again. There it's in the red. Let's go back. This is the correction that I've made for 10.387, which matches 10.386.
>> Wonderful. Thank you. Great. >> You're welcome. 10.389 the proposal. No, we did that. 10.389. We already did. 10.392. The provo proposal provides adequate
landscaping including the screening of adjacent res residential uses, provision of tree street trees, landscape islands in the parking lot, and a landscape buffer along the street frontage.
Staff review says that taken from the applicant's management plan, landscape man maintenance is currently performed at the request of the property management company. So what our finding is that we accept
this and that it's adequate I presume. Is that do we agree any nodding from the committee? >> Any nodding from Mr. Meadows and >> yeah, Miss Green Bomb. Yes.
>> Yes, Miss Green Bomb. >> You're muted, Miss Green Bomb. >> We can't hear you. >> My phone rang. I turned it off. Um I'm I'm a little bit uh concerned about the um grammar of that sentence. It's not
clear what that means. when it says at the request of the property I that's not quite right that man management is performed by the m I just leave out that at the request because it doesn't
make sense to me >> well I can see that >> huh >> so no that makes that I get that >> but what does it mean who's what what's the in other words the management company is requesting that it be mode or or
somebody's requesting the management company to move it. I would just say, >> m Mr. Eaton, is this is is the landscaping handled automatically? Do you have a landscaping company that takes care of it? >> The resident manager takes care of it.
They >> res Okay. So let's change that to landscape maintenance is current is will be performed by the resident manager.
>> I guess there's no grass there. Basically >> I didn't I didn't see much. >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> Uh Mr. >> Is it the resident manager or is it the property manager? >> Oh, I'm sorry. It is property manager. Yes.
>> Property manager. Pipeline. The pipeline company, right? >> Yes. >> All right. >> Did I just say pipeline property management? >> That could change over 20 years. >> Leave it open at this point. I would say
>> because they they may hire somebody else next year >> to manage the property and don't want to be locked into one name in perpetuity. >> Right. >> Okay. Okay. >> All right. We are we satisfied with
10.392? >> All right. 10.393. Uh the proposal provides protection of adjacent properties by minimizing the intrusion of lighting including parking lot and exterior lighting. Staff review applicants management plan
states all exterior lighting is downcast. All lighting will be dark dark sky compliant. Um, you're not changing any lighting either, are you, Mr. Reed? >> No. >> Okay. All right.
Um, 10.396. The proposal provides screening for storage areas. Staff review says that provided by the applicant the propo the proposal provides screening for storage areas,
dumpsters and other similar features. 10.398 The proposal is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this bylaw and staff agrees. Uh
so that's the end of the findings. There are proposed conditions for approval. Um I looked at all of these. The first one
I would contend is not applicable as it already exists and will not be altered. Condition. The first condition discusses the proposal shall be built according to certain things. All we're doing, all
we're being asked to do is change the owner occupied uh um requirement. So, Miss Williams, you want do you want to weigh in on what we do with number one since it seems highly outdated?
>> We can strike it. Okay, let's just strike that. It's doesn't seem to be reasonable to include. >> I think that you need part of that. >> What do we need? >> And if they decide that they want to
change something, they need to come back. >> Well, don't they have to do that anyway? >> Sentence. I take you can take off the first sentence and um and leave any changes must be reviewed
if they decide they want to change something you know then who knows >> sure significant sense changes if a formal okay take off the first sentence and leave the rest it can't hurt
anything it just seemed unnecessary to me >> well they may want to they may Somebody else buys the house, they inherit this permit, and the next person may want to change something. >> I take your point. Not a problem.
>> Okay. So, this is the condition one as it appears currently. Is everyone okay with that? >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Condition two, all local, state, and federal fire safety and health codes shall be met.
Number three, no. Uh, number three does not apply because there's no active barn unit permit. So, you could take that out. Um, number four,
pardon me. >> Going back to >> going back to number one. >> Yes. >> It indicates pipeline properties as one of the approved plans. >> Yes. That seems to me it locks them into
pipeline properties. Is that not correct? And if you wanted to change property managers, you'd have to come back to the ZBA. >> I then just then just strike it. If you don't want to lock them in, we can take
them out. There's a the management plan is already in there. I think I think that's appropriate. >> Okay. Take out take out F, please. Miss Williams, >> can you add to number one any change to the approved plans?
Any changes to the approved plans? >> Add that to number one. >> Yes, because there was nothing modifying changes. Add to approved plans. What do you want to add exactly?
>> No, I said to add those words, any changes to the approved plans, which which include the list that Craig is referring to. Um >> Oh. Oh. The the heading for that section. >> Yes.
>> You want to say any changes to the approved plans >> shall be reviewed. Yes. >> Must be included. I'm adding the words plans because there wasn't anything any the change was modified. >> Okay.
>> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes. >> Uh following Mr. Meadows point, >> item F is the residential rental permit which I think is renewed every year. Mhm.
>> So that is also something we don't might want might not want to have in there as a as a a plan that needs review, an element of the plan that needs review. >> Okay.
It's it's automatically done building inspector in either case. So yeah, >> right. All right. Take out F, please. And Miss Greenbl wanted the the heading above
item A to say something. What did you want in there, Miss Green? >> No, no, no. We fixed it. We fixed number one. >> We fixed by adding any changes to the approved plans. >> All right. As long as it's fixed. >> As long as it's fixed.
>> It's fixed. >> Okay. Um, number four, we're down to number four. All All exterior lighting shall be downcast. This is was already noted in 10.393. The granting of the permit requires a
resident manager to live on site in addition to the property management company assisting with the management and upkeep of the site. >> Can I can I make one suggestion there? Or owner because we may live in that house, right?
Okay. >> And or owner. I mean, I'm I I don't know if that matters. I'm not sure if I should be >> And I don't think you want The whole point of your being here, Mr. Eaton, is to remove any sort of owner occupancy
or, you know, requirement. So, by adding that, you're now kind of it's almost like you're working against yourself. >> Okay. Sorry. Attorney, I'm sorry, that was your job. >> No, I would rather you say it. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Okay. Um All right. Yes. Leave it alone. And isn't she wonderful, Mr. Eaton? The applicant. Number six, the applicant is required to provide a copy of the receipt of filing with the registry of
deeds. And number seven, all conditions under the previously approved ZBA FY1984-15 special permit are still active and shall be followed at all times.
>> Ah, I have a question about that one. >> Go ahead. >> Because I asked specifically whether we were amending the old permit or writing a new one. And so since this is a new one, that should not be there. If there are conditions we want to carry
forward, then they should be in this one. And then and then the the number five. I'm that's part of the rules anyway. I wouldn't put that in there. First of all, the permits extension doesn't make sense either. I would get rid of five
and and and um figure out what we want to do about six because I understood from the question I asked specifically at the site visit whether this was an amendment to the to the 40-year-old permit or whether this was a new one and
I get told this is a new one. So anything the other one you want to carry forward should be in these conditions. Miss Williams, what is your opinion? >> Well, there's two ways of doing it, right? What I've learned from the town
or doing this for the last two years for the town is that sometimes the original permit is still the acting permit. if we're just modifying something from the original permit. However, if you want to just do something and that's clean,
we could just copy whatever conditions that are applicable from the 1984 permit to this permit. Um, it's really a matter of preference at this point. And >> I think it's confusing to have two active permits.
>> So, this either would be an amendment or a new one. And I think it makes more sense to forget one that's 40 years old. >> May I? >> Attorney Rey, >> thank you. >> I refer to my lawyer. >> You know that's right, Hilda. I'm actually going to go against you here.
So for something like this, like so we applied under 10.33, which is obviously the special permit modification section. Uh the application was to modify just condition two. Um, I don't know that the board would want
to treat this as a new permit. Um, I don't know that we would want you to. I haven't even, frankly, thought about what the bylaw was at the time that we got the original permit as it relates to the bylaw in effect now, which is
something that I think we'd have to investigate. And so like all of that being equal and uh then to think from a practical level like okay so where does this come up? it comes up in enforcement, it's going to be on on line with the town and it's not unusual as
you know. You'd have 1984, you have 2008, which is probably the red herring here, and then you have 2026, 2026 is only going to say modify condition to a 1984. And even if you make an explicit statement here that 2008 was never acted and is therefore
without effect, that's probably helping more people in the chain of title, including folks five years from now, than it would be to just issue a new permit for a converted dwelling, which is what I think this was originally. Because if it was a new permit, you'd
have to go I guess here's the thing is would you have to go through to find out if it's on a smaller lot than allowed, which is what converted dwellings allow, but you can only do that once. And so would the argument be well, you already did that once, you can't do it again. So for for like I could just talk about it
for that long. If I'm you, I'm just modifying it. I'm putting the condition that uh Miss Williams put in here and I'm saying this works just fine. and and I think it is a needless complication. We are only being asked to change one
specific condition from the permit. I don't think if if if Ms. Williams and um anyone else in the town feels that this that number seven is appropriate, then I would be in favor
of leaving it. >> David, you're numbering them incorrectly. Uh, well, they they're verbally numberling. >> Why? I don't >> Oh, six. What? What did we Which one did we take out? >> I can't. We took out something that was
superfluous. I don't remember now. >> It has to do with the barn. >> We took out No. Oh, we took out number We took out previous number three. You're right. I'm looking down at my paper and not at the screen. Sorry, Mr. Meadows. You're correct.
>> So, I'm ask I'm asking why are we going through all of the things for a new app new permit if in fact all we're doing is changing one condition on an old permit >> because that's what the bylaw requires.
>> What? >> Because that's what the bylaw requires. >> Then this looks like a new permit because it has a new number on. I think that's very confusing. the the new number it denotes the year the fiscal year that it came in and the
order in which it came in. So this is simply it's tracking right and this this last condition is linking it to the original special permit. So when you look for this in ArcGIS in the on the
town's system and you go to the permitting history, you'll be able to see ah 1984 was the original permit that allowed this to become a converted dwelling. And to attorney Rey's point, I actually did look up the 1984
uh zoning bylaw and it was a converted dwelling at that time. So, and the owner occupancy requirement was a requirement that was active in 1984. >> Then number >> number six needs to be the first sentence in the in the um
>> condition. The um in the permit rather than a condition. That should be the first very first sentence that this is a special permit to modify. It shouldn't be a condition. It should be the first sentence of the permit. I
think >> this >> I'm I'm I don't have a problem. Does anyone besides Mrs. Greenbomb have a problem with number six remaining the way it is? I don't >> Hold on, let me stop sharing. Attorney Rei, do you have any input?
>> To me, it's confusing, but but I mean, I'm an old-timer. I've been at this for 50 years. Okay. >> Don't sell yourself short, Hilda. >> You're the Huh? >> I don't I don't find it conf Does anyone find it confusing other? No. Okay.
>> Some somewhere it's got to say in the very first sentence that this is an amendment to the other permit. That should be the number one thing when you when you go to write it up that that we approved a special >> an amendment to the that that what we
are approving and what I will make as an emotion. We are approving an amendment to the to the earlier permit. >> Isn't that what you just Isn't that what you just wrote in number six? >> But it should be at the beginning, not at the end. >> What's the difference? >> Okay, please.
>> Big difference. When you go to look for something online, >> um, just one moment. I think this will clarify things for everybody. At least I hope it will. in the legal ad that's posted, right, it does reference this
request a special permit to modify condition number two of the original special permit, right? >> Well, then that's where it goes at the very beginning. It's not a it is not a condition on the permit.
>> It is it's not a condition. It's a permit to do that. >> This is respect. It's a nitpicking scholarly thing. >> Okay. But if I can't finish a sentence, >> it's not a condition. That's what the
permit is for. >> Hilda, can you please uh tone it down so that Miss Williams can finish her sentence, please? >> Yeah. >> Okay. All I would like to say is that adding the condition in allows whoever
is enforcing this permit to know that the acting special permit is still the original permit. Right? And so if there are any additional issues regarding enforcement, they should also reference the 1984
permit for conditions. That is why it's there. >> Okay. I'm I think we've spent enough time on this point and I'm going to ask for a motion to accept
the find to approve the findings. >> So moved. >> And is there a second? >> Second. >> And is there any discussion on this motion hearing? No. Seeing no discussion,
the um the vote will occur by roll call. Mr. Meadows, >> I. >> Mr. White, >> I. >> Mr. Offeld, >> I. >> Miss Greenbald, >> I. >> And the chair votes I. The motion passes
5. Um, >> okay. So now we have done the conditions. We did the fi we did the findings and the conditions. >> Mr. Chair, did you vote on the
conditions? >> We just did. >> That was just for the findings, right? >> No, that was for the findings. Okay. Sorry. Sorry. Um, now we will vote. Do I I'd like to entertain a motion to vote to approve
the conditions as they appear. >> Some moved. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Vote count occurs by roll call. Mr. Meadows >> I. >> Mr. White >> I. >> Mr. Afeld
>> I. >> Miss Greenbomb. >> I. >> And the chair votes I. This also passes 50 and is approved. Uh the conditions are approved. Um
okay. So that is that and then now we come to the motion to approve the request for
to um for special permit ZBA FY2026-14 to modify condition number two of special permit ZBA FY1984-15 to remove the owner occupancy require requirement and adhere to the resident
manager requirement under section 10.33 of the zoning bylaw for 43 South Prospect Street. Do I hear such a motion? >> Second. >> A second. Mr. Draweld second.
Is there any discussion on this motion? In that case, we will uh vote by roll call. Mr. Meadows >> I >> Mr. White >> I >> Mr. Afeld >> I >> Miss Greenbalm >> I
>> and the chair votes I so that also is 50 the motion passes the request your application is approved Mr. greeting wherever you are on the screen. Congratulations.
Be well and make your appropriate plans. >> Thank you. Much appreciated. >> You're welcome. The >> Thanks. Thanks, Mr. Chair. >> Oh, you're welcome, Mr. Rei. You You also have a pleasant rest of the
evening. It's still light. Go do something fun. >> Thank you. See you. Uh the next order of business is general public comment for any matters not before the board tonight. >> Mr. Chair,
>> yes ma'am. >> Did you >> Who is that? Miss Williams. Yes. >> Yes. Did you vote to close the public hearing? >> Is that be Is that next? >> Yes. >> Is that before Okay, that's right. That's before adjournment.
So if anyone is interested in closing the public meeting >> so moved >> then make a motion. So moved >> and any then Mr. Rafel was second it >> um is there any discussion
here? Seeing no request for discussion we will vote by roll call. Mr. Meadows >> I. >> Mr. White >> I. Mr. Afeld. >> Hi, >> Miss Ms. Greenbomb. >> Hi.
>> And the chair votes I. So 50 the here the public meeting is closed. Now um Miss Williams, are there any members of the public who would like to make
comments on matters not um not before the board? No, I think everyone is outside enjoying the wonderful weather. >> All right. Well, if the town is ignoring us and does not want to make comments,
we will move on. Um All right. Is there any anything else before the committee? Any members of the committee have any business they want to bring up? Anything that was not anticipated
before now? No. Okay. Um, Miss Williams, do we do you want to quickly review the upcoming schedule? But I know I would appreciate it if we do not meet on uh May 14
because I'll be I'll be I'll be um virtually celebrating a birthday that night. >> Thank you. Um, so our schedule is before us, >> right? >> We just concluded
Fall Lane and 43 South Prospect. Both were successfully approved. And yes, to Mr. Chair's point, the May 14th meeting has been cancelled. The next meeting is May 28th and I have Mr. Alfeld marked as
being out. So, Miss Greenbomb, would you be willing to substitute in for Mr. Alfeld? >> Sure, I can do that. >> Mr. Meadows, are you going to be available? >> I don't know. My son is having surgery
on the 27th in Boston. He doesn't get out of there. He either gets out on the 28th or 29th. And so that may put me in Boston at Mass General that time. I'm not if that's the case that I won't be
able to be on the board. I don't know. >> Okay. >> And I won't know until he has the surgery and they tell me what's going on. >> Okay. We'll keep us posted um
that evening. These have not been confirmed. Uh these are still being reviewed by town staff for completion in terms of application completion and um so these are just very very tentative but if they are deemed
complete and are able to go through the rest of the process of notification via legal ad and a butter's notices then they will be on the May 28th meeting agenda and that is Paul's pavilion. They are proposing to sort of reconfigure.
So, if you remember those of you who attended the Tilted Orbit site visit, the barn structure and house structure next to where Tilted Orbit is going to be is going to be reconfigured to have a pavilion and a few other items. So,
that's what they're proposing. And then 66 Bridge Street is a pre-existing non-conforming house in which the owners just need to make changes to the interior to create more living space for their family. It's not being rented out or anything like that. They just need
the approval to expand upon a pre-existing non-conformity because and solely because where the property is located, it is with it's too close, if you will, to the public right away. But it's always been like that. So that is
what the pre-existing nonconformity is. It's just the front setback is not to code essentially for town standard. >> So those are the only two. >> I'm sorry. I thought you were finished. Go ahead.
>> No, I was finished. >> Okay. So four four yes votes can pass something. If Mr. Meadows is unable to attend that night and we only have
four four panelists, um could we go ahead if the applicants feel that their cases are strong enough that they will get four asenting votes?
>> Yes. >> Okay. So, >> yes. >> So, if if Mr. Meadows um is unable to attend as of now. We would still go ahead with the with the meeting that night. Correct. >> Correct. Yes.
>> Okay. All right. Um Okay. Anything else? >> Nope. That's it for now. >> All right. Um review upcoming schedule. All right. So, the only business left is
a meeting. Then a motion to close the meeting. >> So moved. >> That's a little on the eager side. >> Yes. >> And do you adjourn? >> This is to adjourn. Yes. >> Okay. Debatable.
>> Second, Mr. Afeld. Um, this is not debatable even if somebody doesn't want us to adjourn. Mr. Rfeld >> I, >> Mr. White, >> I
>> Mr. Meadows, >> I >> Miss Greenbalm, >> I >> and the chair votes I. The motion passes unanimously. We are adjourned. Thank you all
and have a pleasant rest of the evening all of you and stay healthy. You too and happy holiday, whatever one it is. >> Okay. >> Is it always a holiday? >> It's always a holiday.
>> Uh I believe I believe the latest one has ended, >> but but you never know. Okay. Good night. Good night, everyone. >> Not sunset quite yet. >> Good night.