Planning Board - Regular Meeting

that some of our Are we expecting other board members? Yeah, we were expecting everybody but Bruce. Okay. Yeah, I got one. I got a reminder. Yeah, I got it. You got it, too. I did, too. weird. Yanna, maybe I never did. I send you the invite. Oh gosh, I'm slipping, guys. I'm slipping. I got I got one yesterday. I'm not sure. I got one today. I got one yesterday and today. I got one today. I'm searching my email. Oh, yeah. I've got the one today also.

Oh, I got them. Why did they get filtered out of my important email inbox? Um, okay. because they knew you'd show up. stand corrected. sure that all the other board members got

Pam's working with Fred. I don't want to start. Fair enough. Jesse, is that like a whiskey? Maybe. Um, it's it's in your honor, Nate. Thanks. It's It's actually It is sheep dung smoked whiskey from Iceland. Is it really? Yeah. Did I say whiskey? I think I was I think I was right. Huh. When I travel, I I have a rule about ordering the thing I am least likely to get at home. Yep. And so that's what led me there and it's really good. So I brought back a bottle.

Yeah. We have a few cookbooks from Todd English who my sister was in the Bay Area, San Francisco when he opened the restaurants and he had some in Boston. But in one of his first cookbooks, he's like, "It really irritates me when I hear people mispronounce things on the menu or when they go out to a restaurant and order like spaghetti and meatballs when it's like they probably get that at home, too." Yeah, exactly.

I was like, "Oh, that's always kind of funny." I mean, I'm guilty of that. that the board is going to go ahead and start the meeting and offer him some advice and suggestions for how he may be able to participate.

Call in on his phone to get audio, right? Yeah. So stressful when your computer crashes. Yeah. Mine's been doing all these updates. I just it it takes me a while to get in sometimes. I don't integrating AI into all your software. Maybe. Who knows? I don't know what the upgrades do. They might just be security.

Yeah, I know. I have a I have an iMac and I haven't updated. every day reminds me you have not updated in like 375 days. You have not updated. And I'm like, okay, okay, here's the word from Fred. He um if this fix that he's trying to do does not work, he's going to go to his laptop and he also knows that he has the choice to try to call in. He gives us permission to go ahead and get started if we would like to. All right. Well, I think I would like to.

I don't want I don't want this meeting to start because I don't want it to end. Nate Mallaloy, you have been a blessing. We've had so much fun with you. But if I have to start it, I will. Well, I think we need to start, Pam. Yeah.

Okay, we will then start the webinar. Recording in progress. Okay, Mr. Marshall. Um, the attendees are coming in. You have a quorum of the board. You are the co-host of this meeting. We have Nate Mallaloy with us in the house tonight. Um, we are recording. I believe we are good to go.

All right. Thank you, Pam. You're welcome.

Welcome to the Emers Planning Board meeting of April 22nd, 2026. My name is Doug Marshall and as chair of the Ammeris Planning Board. I'm calling this meeting to order at 6:40 p.m. This meeting is being recorded and is available livereamed via Ammeris Media. Minutes are being taken. pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021, extended by chapter two of the acts of 2023 and further extended by chapter two of the acts of 2025. This planning board meeting will be conducted via remote means using the Zoom platform. The Zoom meeting link is available on the meeting agenda posted on the town website's calendar listing for this meeting or go to the planning board web page and click on the most recent agenda where the Zoom link is listed at the top of the page. No in-person attendance of the public is permitted. However, every effort will be made to ensure the public can access the meeting in real time via technological means. In the event public access is disrupted for me reasons of economic hardship or despite our best efforts, we will post an audio or video recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting on the town's website. Board members, I will take a roll call. When I call your name, unmute yourself, answer affirmatively, and return to mute. Uh, we know that Bruce is absent this evening. I'm going to call Fred Hartwell, but I don't believe he can hear us at the moment. He he it looks like maybe he can hear us, but we are not getting audio from him. So, I am just going to say I think I saw his lips move that he was present. Jesse Major,

I'm present. I Doug Marshall, I'm present. Angus Mloud, present. Johanna Newman present and Jara Smith present.

Thank you all. Board members, if technical issues arise and the discussion needs to pause, it will be noted in the minutes. Please use the raise hand function to ask a question or make a comment and I will call on you to speak at speak. After speaking, remember to remmute yourself. to the general public. The general public comment item is reserved for public comment regarding items not appearing later on tonight's agenda. Please be aware the board will not respond to comments during the general public comment period. Public comment may also be heard at other times during the meeting when deemed appropriate by the planning board chair. Please indicate you wish to make a comment by clicking the raise hand button when public comment is solicited. If you have joined the Zoom meeting using a telephone, please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing star9 on your phone. When called on, please identify yourself by stating your full name and address and put yourself back into mute when finished speaking. Residents can express their views for up to three minutes or at the discretion of the planning board chair. If a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds their allotted time, their participation may be dis disconnected from the meeting. Okay, the time now is 6:43. We'll go to our first item on our agenda and that is the approval or discussion about minutes. We have the minutes from January 21st of this year available for approval. Uh is there any board discussion of that of these minutes? Not seeing any hands. Uh does anybody want to make the motion or second the the motion to Johanna? You got your hand up first.

Move to approve the minutes from January 21st. Thank you. And Jesse, I second that. Thank you both. Uh any further discussion by board members of these minutes? All right. Uh we'll go ahead with the uh vote for the for the minutes of January 21st. Uh skipping Fred, we will start with Angus. Hi. And Jesse. Hi. Johanna. Hi. And Jara.

Hi. I'm an I as well. Fred, if you can hear us and you approve the minutes, please raise your arm and tell it just to indicate you can hear us. All right, I'm not seeing any response from Fred on that. So, we'll just record this as five votes in favor and uh let's say two members absent or not participating. Okay, Fred, can you hear us? I'm I I'm now hearing it. You're going to need to mute one of your probably your one of your speakers or something.

Yeah. Get up. Get up. Get up. Get up. I just muted Fred,

but not both of him. But not both of his connections. Oh, no. Okay. All right. I I just took care of that. Yeah, that's was some bad feedback.

Yeah. So, All right. So, um, as I said, I think we'll record this as five members in favor of the minutes and two members one one member having technical tech technological issues and one member absent. Uh, now we'll go to the public comment period. Time is 6:46. Um, so members of the public, if you want to make a p a comment about something that's not later on tonight's agenda, please raise your hand at this time. I typically read the names of the public attendees that I can see. So, I will do so now. There are five. They are Eric Bachrock, Jennifer Ta, Mark Walmsley, Mora Keane, and Pam Rooney. So, as of right now, I don't see any hands raised.

All right. Sounds like Fred's still having some issues. All right. Uh, that's the public comment period it. Now we'll go to the downtown design standards. Um Nate, do you want to say anything about these? We've had them on the last couple of meeting agendas. You're soliciting comments in general. The downtown design standards. Yes.

Yeah. I think there was some public comment in the packet um that someone submitted. You know, we're still working with Dodson and Flinker. uh they had some technical issues going to the historical commission and commissions for persons with disabilities the other week. So they're going to be doing that in May. Um we're still, you know, right, we're still collecting public comment. So planning board members feel free to use the form or email me. I mean, really, we're trying to encourage everyone to use the form that's set up. It's structured in a way that the consultants can then, you know, use it. So, it's more, you know, if someone really doesn't like something, you can just say that you don't, you know, you can reference a page, but, you know, they're trying to get to the specifics. Um, the CRC uh had a preview of that of the standards and there was a lot of questions. I mean, so, you know, I think the planning board, for instance, talked about could we reorganize the districts like maybe go from four to three and the CRC had some bigger picture questions and I think my my what I said to them is something I think what I said to you is I think we staff can provide a cover memo or a memo to the consultants. Um, and that can go, you know, into the maybe as an appendix. All public comments can be part of an appendix. Um but at some point you know staff and the consultants would make a decision like at this point we're not going to redraw boundaries for instance and wildly change things. I think that's a local decision. If after the this process the planning board and others like wow we really want to do something different. I think that's something we would the staff and the planning board can do. We're not going to ask Dawson to say okay now let's draw the boundary to you know up North Pleasant Street you know half a mile or something. And so um you know I think someone would be looking at the different districts they have and the standards again you know are there pieces that are seem questionable that you like or have comments you know if we don't think that the that one district is um say impactful enough actually doesn't incentivize redevelopment that can be a

pretty strong comment that goes in the memo and then that's something the town can decide how how do we want to work with what they provided us um you know the CRC has kind of similar questions like you know so so Nate right now you're looking for comments that might cause Dodson and Flinker to amend or revise their work work product I guess I'd say is and so at the end of that process then town council CRC planning board whoever else is involved can figure out how do we want to go forward with their final work product. Is that right?

Right. And how the planning board may want to adopt it. You know, would you want the design guidelines to be part of the rules and rags or pieces of it that could be used pretty quickly? And then would we move forward and, you know, suggest a suite of zoning changes to implement the vision? And so, you know, do we like what they're proposing? Do we like, you know, traditional Main Street and modern Main Street districts? We like all of them or just a few of them. And you know does the board and you know working with staff like who who wants to move that forward. I think you know Dodson had explained that it could be incremental steps to get there. I guess my worry there is we never get there. You know you increase the setbacks but you never do anything with the height or the design. And so you know I think we never answered exactly how these would be incorporated into the zoning bylaw. I think the easiest way is to do it by reference. And so in section three in the use chart in certain areas they get referenced and then they can be incorporated into the rules and regs of the planning board maybe they're in addition to the design review principles but they become you know reinforced in a number of ways. there's zoning pieces that are necessary to implement that vision, right? So, you know, height, setbacks, uh lot coverage, building coverage, maybe the additional lot area per unit, uh even uses what are allowed in mixeduse buildings, maybe the mixeduse building standard. So, there's all these pieces. I mean, there could be, you know, two dozen little pieces that add up to that vision for a certain for parts of downtown. And so, you know, it's to me it's like, all right, are those pieces are those is the vision good? For instance, if we're like, wow, we're not sure about this vision that can be a comment and maybe, you know, that that, you know, we can ask Dodson to describe that a little bit more in the report, but you know, it seemed like the working group all kind of agreed on the vision. They actually like the different districts and kind of the design intent of those. It's now the you know the details of like okay what really is the proper buildout or is it

enough or is the you know is it too big is it too small the the designer view area and you know I think it'd be good to have Dodson understand that for instance I think some members of the CRC said you know they questioned the west of Kendrick Park like really what is the right height there and you know so you know is it four floors under the roof along the street and maybe if you allow development in the back maybe you know we cap it at for instance right there is there I don't you know are there things that we would want to look at that um could make you know changes to it um some of the CRC members said oh some of your districts a few properties I think could be part of this district and not the other one and I think that's reasonable but to say like you know let's do away with like village downtown or whatever it's called and replace it with something I think that's we can put it in there but I don't I wouldn't ask Dodson to do that I think that's a local discussion after and I we haven't really determined what's the best adoption method. You know, I think some of it is zoning, some of it is rules and rags, some of it is um you know, it can be a design review manual that is used by the planning board and the DRB. I would like to strengthen it a little bit more in terms of its regulatory powers, right? Um rather than being something we refer to, can we pull some of those things in so you know someone comes in again and it's like we don't really want a fivetory building right on the sidewalk,

you You know, I mean, if we think we want like a 15 foot wide sidewalk, sure, that's okay to be on the sidewalk. But if we have a five foot sidewalk, maybe that's not okay. And so, we have to figure out how do we get there if, you know, if we really want to have that wide sidewalk. And if we're not really concerned about the design of the building, okay, but maybe this study is going to inform some zoning changes that need to happen downtown. Um, because, you know, we're not, it seems like enough people question some of the things we're not getting exactly what we might want. And it's hard with site plan review when a developer comes in and says,"Well, the zoning bylaw says this or this. You know, I really can't do five. It's, you know, the project can't happen." And the, you know, it's really hard for the board or staff to say, "Well, of course it can still happen." Um, and so I think the standards are trying to say, well, to get this vision to have a nice streetscape, here are the setbacks we need. I think that's important. So, you know, do we step back the upper floors or just the upper floor? Um, do we break up the massing of a facade? you know, why does some buildings in their visual preference survey not score very well? Is it just is it materials? Is it the kind of rhythm and pattern of massing and voiding? Is it the break up between the first floor and the upper floors? And so to me, all those pieces can somehow be incorporated into whether it's zoning or something. So when someone comes in downtown and is proposing a new building, you know, to me it's like we as staff, we tell the applicant, hey, look, here's what's on the books. Here's what the planning board is going to look at. make these few changes. Yeah, it's a site plan review use, but you're gonna make, you know, it's going to be a lot nicer of a project, right? We're gonna have a great vibrant street. You're gonna have this and this. And right now, it's it's sometimes this doesn't get there. It's harder with an applicant when we don't have clear guidance. So, I don't not specifics, right? So, anyways, if you have comments tonight, if you want to fill out the form.

All right. I need to correct you or or say that as as a member of the working group, I don't think it's really true that we all bought into the entire vision. Um I think the working group was highly was pretty bifurcated. Um there you know in in the way that most of this discuss the discussion about development in Amorest has been has been bifurcated. There's a group that wants more development and there's a group that wants less and I don't feel like the two groups ever came together in terms of the discussion and the comments but I think uh Dodson tried to split the difference and come up with a compromise.

Sure. I mean I think for me the vision is you know they have those free few phrases right we want want like an inclusive community with like vibrant streetscapes and be resilient. And so to me that's the vision. And it sound like what I've heard from Dodson is that the working group agreed on those and those principles. It's then you know how do we actually get there is what's different. Maybe some people want to not have any change because they think it it meets that now and other people are like wait a minute you know right

it doesn't. So I think to me that's the important piece is like people agreed on right some of those that vision those principles. It's now how do we kind of modify it and tailor it to work, you know, because otherwise, you know, Dawson, I think, has done a great job of doing existing conditions assessment. I think it's funny the planning board asked and the CRC asked, you know, do we want it to just stay the existing conditions assessment or how do we use that to maybe change? And I think that's a really good question because I think they did a really good job of understanding the fabric of downtown and kind of the quirks of these little, you know, the like they had the hinge and they had this area and this area and so what do you do with that? You know, do we say, "Sure, we just like it the way it is and we'll let those buildings stay there or can you take some of that information and adapt it and allow for some new, you know, new development or some change?" And so, yeah, I agree, dog. I what I've heard is the working group couldn't agree on that part of it. Yeah. Okay. All right. So, I guess the message for tonight is just uh you're still soliciting comments. Um we can do it through through the form. We can probably send you comments directly. Uh at some point you may do some sort of summary uh memo of the discussion of the board. Um, we had a fair amount of discussion in one of the meetings earlier this spring. Um, but we haven't had very much lately. So, members, are there are there any comments you want to make tonight to for Nate to add to his list? I think I made I made some comments earlier, Brad. Uh, yeah. Uh Fred, you're Fred, you I see you three times um as a a panelist and so

yeah, I'm not It seems like whatever you're on is working, which may be a laptop. So, if you disconnected your desktop and your phone, then there wouldn't be um Yeah, Brad, if you're able to find one device that works for everything, then you can shut off all the other ones. And so, why don't we go to Jara while we're wait and we'll come back to Fred.

Thank you. Um uh well Nate, first of all, I just have to say that we're really going to miss you and thank you for everything. I'm sorry if that is later on the agenda, but because I joined late, I just had to upfront say that. Um what what would be helpful for me to understand is uh the this uh proposal it expands the size of the downtown design review district or does it maintain the existing boundaries?

Yeah. Yeah, I mean I get like that's one, you know, to your point like this could be adopted in any millions of different ways, but um but to but the geographic like coverage I'm curious is that is how has that changed between what we have and what yeah uh what Donson had showed you know was the a map that you know show you know was those different districts they came up with. So to implement what they showed, you actually, you know, there has to be zoning changes in terms of how this could be applied by the design review board. You know, there's a design review district. We actually haven't determined what happens with the designer review board in that design review district. Got it. Okay. So, okay.

Right. So it could be that you know these could be adopted uh as a planning board as part of the rules and rags without zoning changes and then you're really working with the design the design piece and the design review board could also be using them. Um and so I think those are things you know Datson has asked this they asked earlier and we didn't have an answer. I think some of it was just seeing what could happen. So you know some thoughts are like give the design review more regulatory authority. Maybe they're they have a permit they issue or can we, you know,

have like an implementation workshop with them and like figure out like what's the best way to or like what is their I'm curious what their recommendation is for a path forward for some of these or like what the trade-offs are from one or the other. Thanks. Yep. Is that something we could we could do? Yeah, I think it's something we can relay. I can talk to Jeff and and others about. Yeah, I think it's helpful. Um we had talked about having the boards meet again um in May I maybe now June June but having a few boards and committees come together and talk about them a little bit as well. Okay. Where where we what's happening with these standards? So great.

All right, Fred, you still have three connections to this meeting. I can you boot two of I could remove I could remove reluctant to do it but now that he has his hand raised I'm going to go ahead and remove the other two. All right. And fingers crossed we don't lose him. Yeah. Remove.

How's this? No, I'm getting Oh, he put his hand down. Fred, if you can hear me, can you put your hand back up?

All right. So, you want to remove that second one? Yep. Hey Fred, I think you're all set. Pam removed you from the Yeah. So Fred, un unmute and let's see if you say something again testing. Yeah, you're good. We got rid of your other duplicates. Thank you. All right. Did Did you have any comments on the design review standards? Not that not that you've been able to think about it yet. Not at the moment. Uh all right.

Okay. Well, then uh I'm going to put down your hand and uh we'll go on. I'm gonna I also muted you, Fred. All right. Um, I guess before we leave this topic, uh, I will ask any of the now four remaining people in the public if they want to make any comments about the design downtown design standards before we move on. So, members of the public, this is the time for you to raise your hand if you want to comment on the downtown design standards or the process around them at all. All right, I'm not seeing anybody raise their hand. Why don't we go on to the clean energy bylaw? The time now is 7:03. Um Nate, once again, do you want to say introduce this or what?

Yeah, you know, um there's a version I think it's now version nine that was in the packet. Doug had provided a number of comments. the CRC is meeting tomorrow and the idea would be that the it goes to town council um next week and then you know as a zoning amendment referral and then it would be referred back to the planning board and CRC. So staff has met with representatives from the planning board and CRC to talk about kind of that hearing process. So you know if there's any you know you met earlier and talked about it. So if there are any other questions we can I try to relay it with the CRC tomorrow. Um it is a you know a pretty big document. Um you know I've relayed some of the I you know some of the questions about kind of the technical expertise and what's needed reviewing these. Um we had that tiered approach in terms of um how the size of both kind of accessory uses and then other uses. Uh you know the planning board would become a permitting uh board as well as the ZBA but probably the planning board would see applications where it doesn't now. Um I don't have any any comments at this time. Um you know I think you know it will come back in a hearing uh probably in May and then there you know it'll go on into June maybe July. So for board members you know continue to look at it and send questions to staff. I think there is a lot there. The state has some model templates. We um we try to cross reference those. The CRC did to incorporate things that um in it. So you know we try to capture a lot of things. things I know at the last meeting we said well is it punitive is it comprehensive so if there's you know specific things as to why you know I think you know we think it is you know is it is it's ownorous you know what is it exactly is it you know the submittal requirements is it some of the permitting pieces is it dimensional standards you know what what is there and then when it comes back to hearing those can be discussed again I think the idea is to try to keep it moving forward

knowing that you know we need a bylaw on the books later this here. So, all right. So, Nate, you have you have made a record or a note of the comments that several of us made last time, right? Right. I I think I um expressed that to the CRC um after at a meeting a meeting ago. Yeah.

All right. And I I remember Johanna made comments and I made comments. I can't remember. We had at least one a third member that night and I'm not sure it might have been Fred. I'm not sure. Okay. Um so once again members, this is the time this is a sort of a homework assignment. Um, this is the time to get in early comments on the on the clean energy bylaw before it comes to us in public hearing for a recommendation or not with or with specific edits for uh to recommend the town council. All right. Um, I guess I'm not Okay, Angus.

Sorry. I just have a question about this. Um, so I I listened to the planning board meeting last week when I was sick. Um, and and we talked about this the I think the planning board meeting before that as well when we when we had the presentation. Um, I guess one of the things that I'm I'm kind of struggling to understand, Nate, if if a if a gas station wanted to build a a new gas station somewhere in the comm are h how many pages of regulations are there to build like a new gas station in the zoning bylaw? Oh, I mean a gas station, you don't see that. It's at the end. It's like about 47 pages. Um,

okay. Yeah. No, there there I'm I'm just kind of kidding there, you know, right? So there isn't a succinct section of the bylaw that would address that, right? So right, there's a use category. There's some definitions and some other pieces like any use, right? So it's but right all told a few pages maybe.

Yeah, I guess I I just asked because when I was in fourth grade, I won the science fair. Um and my whole experiment was testing like gasoline run in different types of soils. Um, and I ruined all of my mother's Tupperware and she was very very annoyed at me. Um, but uh I I guess one of the things that I'm I'm struggling with this 20page document is just how detailed it is. And on the one hand, that's that can be helpful for development, right? For for having a sense of what you need to do as a as a someone wanting to build solar panels, as someone wanting to build a battery storage system. On the other hand, I guess I I would see a gas station as a much worse environmental outcome, knowing issues with with runoff, gas spills, people bury gas tanks in the ground, and the idea that we have are potentially putting in place 20 pages of regulations for solar panels when we have nothing for a gas station. I get that this is the technology of the future. This is where things are headed. Um, but I I don't know. just kind of sitting a little bunny with me.

Yeah, I mean we do regulate where gas stations can be located differently than we do solar. So, you know, solar could happen most most places. Um but yeah, I think you know there's the state wants you know for anything that's really large it goes to the state and then anything you know but it's still really big comes to the local municipality and you know if they if a developer and applicant chooses they could go through this consolidated permit right so all permits have to be issued within a 12-month period uh that's all the way from you know land use permits to you know building permits fire everything wetland and so I think you know the approach was okay let's get a bylaw that really is comprehensive So that during the permitting process there aren't questions about what kind of what's the review and what's happening because there is a clock that will be ticking and so um you know the idea would be okay you know what you need for submitt requirements an applicant can always still ask for a waiver from those and so staff can meet with an applicant and they could have you know a 10acre solar and say look I don't think I need to do all this stuff you know where I am is not prime farmland there's no trees it's pretty flat no wetlands and we could say Okay. You know that can be part of the first year.

Who says that? What? Who says that? Who says that? Who who makes that waiver? Is it planning board? It's the it's the permitting permit granning authority would and who is that? Well, it depends. It could be the planning board or the zoning board. So, they got to show up. Yeah.

Yeah. So, in this So, in this application scenario, they would submit something. there's the kind of local contact person the um who sees this and we would say okay given your site and everything will you know this is a risk but it seems like it's okay go forward in other sites you might say no it looks like there's actually wetland go you know meet with someone first before we're going to consider this a complete application or you know there are steep slopes you're missing that it's a difficult call um you know someone might try to push it and say I want a lot of waiverss and staff would say, "Well, you know, that can go to a hearing and then, you know, the board might say no." The board still has the ability to deny a permit. Even though we have to do this consolidated permit, any permit board or any any permit could still be denied for reasons of incompleteness or other things. So, it's not like we're forced to issue the permit. We just have a time frame to consider it if we think it can be approved. So, Angus, to your point, yeah, you know, could we do could it be um shorter? Maybe we've combined battery um energy storage with solar. Um so the state has two templates that are however many pages each. Ours is combined. You know I don't you know to me the page length is isn't it's not an issue right? I mean we you know it is a lot but you know the bylaw is pretty thick as it is and if we think it's helpful great. If there's ways to shorten it or make things more succinct I welcome those fe that feedback too. um you know would it be you know someone's have to really know this bylaw to help applicants right so the idea would be if a homeowner comes in if a small time developer you have to be really clear okay here's your path here's what's happening uh and so that's kind of where I wanted to make sure it makes sense right like someone wants to do rooftop solar we know where it's going someone wants to do agotics we know how it's going to go someone wants to do 10 acres versus 40 acres we know where it's going to go how you know how what they need to do um otherwise you

So, if we can't help them, that's that's, you know, that's an issue. But, okay, Johanna and then Fred,

thanks. Um, I asked a very similar question last week, uh, for what it's worth. And I've been slowly working my way through my hard copy of the bylaw. And, you know, ultimately I am I think we need more solar in Ammerst. And I think that as written the bylaw mostly offers clarity um about you know all right this kind of solar very minimal hurdles this kind of solar a few more things that we would want to look at and I think those thresholds are pretty sensible. Um, and then the So, I have a little bit more reading that I need to do and then Nate, I'll get you comments. I'm sorry it's taken a while. But then my the thing that I haven't kind of um proof of concept tested is this idea that having 20 pages of regs would just like scare away renewable energy developers. And so I'd be really interested in hearing the perspectives of someone from and maybe they were part of the solar bylaw working group and I just missed it, but somebody from the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center or somebody from the Massachusetts Solar Energy Industries Association or one of the leading, you know, solar developers both for roof rooftop and utility scale solar systems in the regions and just see what their reactions are to to this um because I think that would help me at least understand whether you know are we offering clarity so that we can help unleash rooftop solar and like smallcale solar development in Ammerst or does the

presence of these regulations just styy the market? Does that make sense? No, it it does. I you know I'm not sure that that has happened but it's a it's a nice idea to ground truth it a little bit. All right, Brad. Uh is this working? Yes, it is.

Wow. Uh I I think we're overlooking uh a larger context here and that is that uh we really don't have any choice because the legislature has put this whole new permitting reality in front of us as a mandatory thing. Uh and we have to respond to that. uh with appropriate regulations. So because of that context, I I don't see any problem with uh uh the uh the direction that has been suggested uh here. Uh I I have one little quibble with one little part of it, but essentially it it it made sense to me as I went through it.

All right. Thanks, Fred. Yeah, I mean Fred just reminded me that, you know, before the state had, you know, started looking at changing the the regulations and legislation, the town had a a solar bylaw working group to update the zoning bylaw or, you know, wherever it may have been, right, general regulations. Um, because there had been some, you know, proposed solar and we realized that our bylaw didn't address things adequately. And so, you know, if the state never came forward, there probably would be some draft of this that would be coming out of, you know, this working group. Um, maybe it would come out even sooner. And so, the town was already kind of thinking about how how could we add some clarity and it is would be extra pages, but how do we address, you know, solar on steep slopes? How do we address solar around this or how do we, you know, address battery systems? And so, that was already being considered. And then the state, you know, probably realized where the industry is going and what's happening and let's try to move it forward. Again, they did it in a way that now, you know, town, a lot of towns are reacting to it because they actually probably weren't considering it. So then, you know, a lot of communities probably are really working really fast to try to come up with a zoning bylaw, you know, or they're just taking the state's template and just trying to run with it. Um, you know, the town had already spent a lot of time trying to get to a point um to have something. So, you know, kudos for Amoris. I just you know it's interesting the timing you know it coincided but like if for instance like I said I think it's interesting that if the state never moved forward the town would already have been doing something and to your point we thought there needed to be something in place you know whether you know both to me it's both to clarify it and to make it easier to understand how it is permitted.

All right. Um, any further comments on this topic this evening? All right. Uh, any comments on this clean energy bylaw from any members of the public? All right. Time is 78. Is that right? Yep. And we'll move forward. East Ammerst Local Historic District discussion of the possible benefits and impacts of the East Ammerst Historic District. Possible vote with recommendations to town council. Um Nate, I guess you want to introduce this. I know there was a map that Walker had sent that I thought would be useful to show folks with the proposed district and the existing districts. Is that visible for folks the map?

Yep. Yeah, you know, I think some playboard members had asked this to be on the agenda just to discuss kind of what you know, um, we have two current districts. The Dickinson was the first one, the North Prospect, Lincoln Sunset, and now a proposed East Ammerst. And, you know, the planning board had been given a presentation during the um kind of the preliminary report um that staff was in the committee was developing. And then, you know, I think some board members said, could we revisit this and talk about what, you know, kind of what are what's the maybe the impacts or the benefits of a local historic district. Uh, you know, the idea would be that this would be coming to going to town council for a vote to be part of a general bylaw. So, it's not zoning, it's general bylaw. Uh, and, you know, it regulates what's visible from a public way. So, changes to architecture and structures. um you know it does you know it it um again so it doesn't regulate land uses but it can shape them given its ability to deny applications for certain changes. So you know what's proposed is you know this district here in blue. I don't I don't have any more than that. I don't know if you know Angus or anyone else wants to speak to the topic. Um you know again my idea would be to you know capture this uh this discussion. It could be in a memo to town council and others what the board discussed. You know, if there's a motion or something that the board feels pretty strongly about, we can, you know, also relay that.

All right. Thank you, Nate. Uh, Jesse, and then Angus and then Jara. Thanks. Um, I was already thinking about this and then the there was a comment which I think we all received from the public. I think it was from Jason Dorney. Yep.

Really ask pointing out that this would restrict development. And so I guess it's a question I have which is is do we have evidence that the formation of the other historic districts have actually dampened development or just augmented? Like I'm aware of a couple projects that went to the uh local historic commission and didn't progress from there. But I'm just wondering, Nate, if you have a sense, you know, like the North Prospect Lincoln, has it changed the development that's happened since that's been put in place, which has been what, eight, 10 years, something like that?

Yeah. You know, I think I can think of maybe like two projects that didn't advance. Um, you know, they were never actually official applications. there was, you know, owners kind of prospecting, uh, pulling in North Prospect. Um, but, you know, I, you know, there was some literature reference and there was another article on the current, but, you know, it was over, it was a 10-year-old article and so staff had done a little research when we were forming the first one and, you know, we actually couldn't find any substantial literature on the, you know, the dampening of development. um you know and then there's there was also some about property values and what we could find was at least they were stabilized not reduced um some of it would be also you know I think it's really different how communities say advertise or interact with their local historic districts and how staff and others work with property owners and developers and so you know I think there's probably a lot of answers in some places that might actually deter development and maybe that's actually what they want to do with it in others you know I think in Amoris we're not so strict with it that you know what we've heard of someone's like oh this is insurmountable so you know we have people coming in still looking to you know build ADUs in the local historic districts you know we have people asking you know how much more they could redevelop a property and it's really then the zoning that is a you know as much of a say if you want to call it a barrier as a local historic district. So, um, you I think there's a lot of factors, uh, at play, not just the local historic district. Great.

Yeah, that's my sense, too. Thank you, Angus.

Yeah. Um, uh, so, yeah, I I had asked for this to to be brought back before the board for for us to kind of further talk about. Um, I I guess I wanted to start off by saying I I think that the work that the historic commission and the consultant that they hired um did to kind of chart the historic properties in this area is really impressive. Um, and that that presentation that they gave us that I think they they've shown other people, they've put up on the website is really incredible work and I, you know, I've only lived in Ammeris for a few years and so it's been fun to learn both about the historic properties in that area and also through being on like the CPAC to learn about the like crazy mills that used to be all along the river that that one of the petitioners was asking for funding to kind of continue researching. So, it's just been fun to um as a historian to learn a lot more about the history of this area. Um I would however um like to uh voice some skepticism um about this historic district and that it uh I I am concerned. The the uh paperwork from the historic commission and from the the consultant said that you know it's not about freezing development. It's not about limiting development. it's just about shaping it. And I think there's some truth to that. Um, at the same time, what these historic districts tend to do is create more hurdles for development. I mean, that by their very definition, that is what they're doing. Um, and that's fine. If if the town council wants to move forward with that, I think that's fine. Um, and uh, but I think it's important for the planning board to be kind of cleareyed that the area that's proposed here is an area that is potentially ripe for redevelopment. It's along two major thoroughares. It's incredibly well serviced by PBTA.

It's near a brand new elementary school that's being built and it's along it borders the commercial zone that we're commissioning a study to re-examine for possible redevelopment. Um, and it's one of the only commercial zones in the entire town. So, um, while I I see that there's a number of of properties that are very much worth preserving in this area, um, there's also a number of properties that are not worth preserving. Um, for instance, there is a four building apartment complex that's part of this historic district that is going to be considered a historic building as a result of this historic district being created. Um, I asked in when they brought the presentation to us that why that's included and basically it's because there's another house on the other side of it and they didn't want to make a non-ontiguous historic district. I get that. I understand that. At the same time, I found the lack of any changes to the actual geographic boundaries of the district disappointing. Um, and I'm just concerned that we're not being clear about what we're trying to do in different parts of the town to increase housing for people um, and to change uses and imagine kind of a different future that follows both a master plan and a housing production plan. So, I'll stop there. I can I can share other thoughts, but that's kind of what what I'm feeling about this historic district and why I wanted to talk about it more.

Uh Jara Nate, I think you could you could uh stop the share. Okay, Jara.

Thank you, Doug. Um, I want to echo everything that Angus said from the value that this study produced and the um intrigue in reading it. Uh, I'm not a history major, although I will I have a bone to pick with Wheaten College about that because I took eight courses in history, but I'm going to leave that for another time. Um, I appreciate the value of historic districts, but uh to Angus' point, this does in in its very nature limit or slow down or disincentivize development on these properties. And so even if perhaps we've only seen one or two properties in the existing historic districts come across some problems or be denied or they were just you know fishing or whatever. The very nature of its existence is a disincentive for anybody interested in redeveloping that property into something different into something that is something other than his storing p their primary purpose being preserving that property. And as Angus pointed out, there are a variety of properties in that district that I don't feel are worthy of that level of protection and should not be disincentivized for future redevelopment. Um, you know, missiondriven developers are not going to look in historic districts to build affordable housing because it's going to take longer, which costs them money. it's riskier to do because they don't know if they're going to be asked to provide the to incorporate this more expensive mortar or trim or whatever the case may be. So, we're effectively turning off any opportunity for any kind of affordable housing for any of the teachers that are living or might be

working in that school right next door. So, I under I appreciate the value of these. I think uh this particular tool is a bit too blunt and maybe an overreaction to something that happened a couple years ago. I think there are a variety of sight specific um strate preservation strategies that could be equally as effective without blanketing this particular neighborhood. especially when it was something like, and I guess correct me if I'm wrong, it was like eight people out of eight properties out of the 122 that said that they would like this and there were certainly comments opposing it as well. So, it just feels it feels um like overkill. Uh, I I I I do not want to see, you know, Shea's Rebellion's Tavern get demolished by any means, but I also have faith that there'd probably be a pretty strong grassroots organization to save it if that were the case. Regardless, I think there are a variety of different sightsp specific property specific strategies that the town has not investigated yet perhaps that could be significantly more effective at preserving those properties without deterring the redevelopment that I think some of those properties would really benefit from seeing. So, I plan on um I would love to hear everybody's thoughts here, but I'm planning on proposing a motion that we recommend that town council reject the historic district and instead instruct town staff to investigate sight specific preservation methods for historically significant properties in that area.

All right, Tara, why don't you hold that uh that motion for the moment? Um, I will say, um, in terms of my my opinions, I had asked for the drawing that, uh, Nate shared a few minutes ago, just because I was concerned that we were starting to have a sort of disproportionate fraction of our downtown area uh, within a historic district. And um you know if everybody could agree that 25% of the downtown should be preserved then we could talk about well what 25% really makes you know is the most important. Um and I'm not sure it's the zones we've got. Um you know I would probably agree with the Dickinson zone but the other ones you know maybe maybe not. Maybe the maybe the buildings that front the town, the North Common. Um so anyway, um you know, I I have concerns about dampening uh development. Uh as Nate said, uh the zoning is currently a a pretty effective uh impediment, let's say, to a lot of drastic change to the development in that area. Um, so if we wanted to sort of call the question, we could recommend a pretty significant zoning change in that area and see, you know, how did the historic commission deal with that? Um, and that might be worth thinking about. um you know may then they'd have to decide which buildings are really critical and which you know are the which buildings are not really critical and could go away uh if the zoning allowed something else to to happen. Um so that's a couple of thoughts from me. Um I know we have a

member of the public who'd like to make a comment. So I'm going to call on Jennifer Ta Pam. Uh would you bring her over and we'll let give her her three minutes. And Jennifer, please let us know if you're speaking as a private citizen or as a town counselor.

Yes. Can you hear me? Um yes. I'm Jennifer Ta. I live at 259 Lincoln Avenue and I am speaking as a resident um not in my role as a counselor and I'm speaking um as a resident who lives in the North Prospect Lincoln Sunset Local Historic District. And I can say um with no reservations that in no way has this local historic district prevented development from happening really at all. I think in the precinct that I live in, which is the local historic district, there's probably been more new development here than in any other residential uh district or area in town. Um we have ADUs are being, you know, built all the time. There's probably more ADU development in the North Prospect Lincoln Sunset Historic District than maybe any other neighborhood in town. And in terms of a single neighborhood, um the Sunset Fearing Apartment Complex was built. Um it they did have to come before the local historic district commission who was very supportive of the project and you know when it didn't deter it hasn't deterred development in any way in this local historic district. There are developers wanting to build here all the time. And yes, the if you drive over to Sunset and um fearing, you know, you'll see that development and it looks like it belongs in the neighborhood, but it h includes affordable housing and the developer, Barry Roberts, was more than happy to work with the local historic district commission. Um there really is that in the proposed um uh East Amherst local historic district, it's really only 50 properties. Um and for those individual properties like the Shaes Rebellion Tavern, um the Jewish

Community Center, which was the second congregational church in Amherst, there's really no other mechanism for ensuring that those very historic buildings don't come down. The most the historical commission can do is give a one-year delay, but they cannot ensure that very historic buildings will remain intact. and the local historic district and they do this all the time. The commission will there's been like when I was on the commission before I was on the council and people came and wanted to take down garages that were historic or parts of you know their houses if they were adding on to them and if they were not historically significant which many outer buildings aren't the local historic district commission can you know um approve a demolition. So it's um really I have not seen and it has not been the case in Ammerst and again in the North Prospect Lincoln Sunset local historic district which has 200 properties way larger than what's being proposed in East Amherst and it has not dampened new development in any way. And I might also add that like the East Street School which is in the proposed East Amherst um LHD area that is binders or I just want to say Weightfinders is currently trying to get funding to turn that into affordable housing and they were going to keep this the original building and add on to it. So again that um it doesn't in any way impede development. In fact, um, it encourages it. Thank you.

Thank you, Jennifer. All right. Um, so Fred, you'll need to unmute. Yep. We hear you.

Yeah. Um, I uh I'm reminded of the Joanie Mitchell song. you don't know what you got till it's gone. Uh and uh I've had my position on uh historic districts uh evolve considerably over the years that uh 20 odd years ago I thought that they were probably more uh bother than uh and didn't accomplish much. And uh I don't I I think Jennifer uh summarized the situation quite correctly. Um I will strongly support the uh the East Amoris District. Uh and it will not be a major impediment to development of the uh the historical record over the last decade or so. I think pretty conclusively demonstrates that and we will end up uh preserving some some buildings that uh may not otherwise be preserved and again once they're gone they're gone so I will support it.

Right. Thanks Fred Johanna.

This is my village center. Um, like I I live a mile from here and I bike by here, you know, twice a week and coach Frisbee on the playing fields in this neighborhood. So I I keep feeling like right now at least it feels like dilapidated and haphazard and kind of junky like it's mostly student housing. I just keep think and I so it doesn't and then I know there's there's a project that we that went through the planning board process to redevelop part of like maybe a quarter of the frontage kind of on the common near where

the wayfinders the wayfinders project that included the school I believe that's right what is so one question is just like what's the status with that cuz um and then and then I do keep feeling like the school itself actually has a very modern feel to it like um from the solar panels in the parking lot to the kind of you know it's like modern colors. What's that? You mean the new school?

The new Amethyst Brook Elementary School. It feels very contemporary. It feels very modern. And so it feels strange to me to lock the surrounding neighborhood into historic design standards when we just put in place a very contemporary building that's going to be there for, you know, knock on wood, serving our community for 50 years. So, um, you know, there are a couple of really amazing buildings like that Sha's Tavern building. It is, it's stunning, right? The original woodwork. I don't know if anybody else has ever been inside, but it is really a lovely building. Um, and right now there are a bunch of local businesses that operate out of there. I don't know, like in order to save that one building, do we have to like enshrine the whole neighborhood into a historic district? I have a hard time believing that's true, but it's not my area of expertise. Um, so I'd say I'm like a little bit ambivalent on this. Um, leaning more in the direction of feeling like I would be inclined to support something like the proposal that was it Jara put forward that we

Jar's told us he's going to put forward. Okay. That he's So that's where I'm we're working our way around to that. Okay. Anyway, that's kind of where I'm where I am right now. All right, Jesse. Thanks. I guess I wanted staff input on that idea of uh sight specific protection versus a district. Do we have any of that? Like what's the process on having that happen? Is that you know a thing we might do easily?

I mean Cambridge and some communities have you know individual properties on a historic as listed as a you know historic district which you know in some cases like great you preserve that that one thing but you lose its context if everything else changes around it. So you know a district is just that right it's a contextual tool and we think that there is a reason why say emerous why the boundaries were chosen given the period of significance and time of construction and all those things why this is a cohesive district

um there probably are some tools individually they're probably a little more difficult to to manage um you know there wasn't a great response on the survey in part because a lot of these properties are non-owner occupied and not you know homeowner lived in the, you know, um, what's nice about a district is, you know, some people could say what's not nice or what's nice about it is that it's a, you know, it's a municipal form of government vote. Uh, individual properties, you know, you could have the individual property owner not agree to something. It could be a little trickier. In the past, when I worked with historical commission, we wanted to get a few properties individually listed, just honorary designation, and a few property owners thought this was great until we started saying, "Well, we'd like to get pictures of the interior. we need that and then they get you know um so it happened twice that the property owner is like no we don't want to move forward it just seems really strange even though we've met with them for a long time and tried to explain you know these pictures are for application they're not going to be used and for other reasons they just you know when you say oh well this one property you know like there are a few listed in town like if Maroni house on Main Street you know and um people get really you know they find that to be really odd right oh my gosh what does that mean and so um you know a district is a little we could try to pursue that. I would say you know to me there's a a lot of um a number of older homes there that if you know to have say eight homes try to be eight properties be individually protected. Someone could say well why not just do a district. It seems odd to have this kind of scattershot within a district though even if you have non-contributing structures or whatever they might call them. The reason why you have them in a district is so if they change again it's the context. you know, you don't want to have, you know, these, you know, significant homes and then in the middle have something that's not regulated and all of a sudden you have, you know, something much different. Um,

yeah, I got, sorry, let me clarify my question in terms of making those 8 12 places. Is it any different than this process of a district? is any more difficult or I'd be curious to hear what Jarro would say is the right you know what would be the tool because what I what I'm thinking of is not less any less it's not it's just as much work it's just you know the outcome would be different in terms of how you know how it's used or how people view it.

Yeah. I guess the other the other comment I was going to make and I agree with Johanna's thought about it doesn't feel particularly well upkept and so making a historic district doesn't change that either. Right. So it it kind of just locks it in as it is. And if they continue to be student rentals, frankly, they'll continue to be dilapidated. Um, so anyway, thanks. All right, Angus.

Yeah, I was just going to say two things. One is is just that the that area I think is in need of change, not in need of keeping as is. So that that's one one core core element. I I understand that that the historic uh district process doesn't necessarily freeze things. Um but if we're imagining greater zoning changes to the area, and again I think it's a ripe area, then that I don't see that as the changes we'd be making with zoning as consistent with making this a local historic district. Um I'll just also add I think there's a lot of great old old properties in that area. Um there's also a lot of properties that are not very old. So, so to me, the the other challenge that I run into um in that area is that there's there's not a clear to me historical um character to the neighborhood. There are properties from the 1750s. There's a whole slew of properties from the mid 1800s and then there are ranch style homes from the 1960s and apartment complexes from the mid 1900s. So to me, it's not a super coherent historical area um in the way that the other two districts seem to have a greater chronological coherence um even with differences in styles across time. Um and then the final thing I'll just say is that I I like the idea of Jara's uh proposal for for um sight specific um preservation tools. I'd love to hear more about that. And I also think that we should be inviting the town council to think about employing more of those tools beyond the local historic districts, which I think is the other thing. Like historic preservation shouldn't just be happening in these districts. And inviting the council to think in expansive ways about alternatives that are more geared towards um specific properties that are under threat is preferable than this kind of broad brush.

All right. I'm I'm having uh I'm being reminded of of Paul River's house in the north north end of Boston which you know we've the house is preserved it's probably close to what it looked like 200 years 250 years ago but the context has completely changed and and that's I think what a district is intended to prevent that you end up with just these individual structures that are in a context completely alien to where what it was like when they were built. So, um although I was a little bit tongue and cheek about, well, what if we change the zoning and how would the historic district react? I mean, I think first of all, I I'd be surprised if town council agreed to change the zoning because they've already agreed that this is a historic district that whose character as an environment for those structures should not change very much. Um, and so, uh, I I just, uh, I think if if this historic district goes forward, regardless, I I just don't think the area will change very much. And right now the the value of those properties seems to be such that it's going to remain student housing. Okay, Jara, I think we're ready to hear I think again about your ideas for other ways to preserve. I I remember you going through some before.

Yes. Well, so I want to preface I am not a historic preservationist and this is uh from like an evening or two of research. So there are definitely much more well-qualified people than myself. But the point is that I spent an evening looking at alternative sightsp specific strategies that didn't instead blanket the entire district because I also I just have to underscore the the the lack of congruity between the homes from 1750s to 1960s because then it's like which era are you conforming to architecturally? I it's it feels uh it it it doesn't feel like we're preserving a particular era or a particular style. So, um but I do believe in the value of preserving specific properties. We're also not downtown. I hear you, Doug, but we're not, you know, downtown Boston or whatever or wherever Paul Roier's house is, right? We're we're Ammerst. Um but there's a couple things that I found that we could pursue as a town. I'm not going to include these as like we as a planning board should recommend the town pursue them, but I just want to for example give some four examples of other ways to do it. So number one, we could extend the demolation the demolition bylaw from 12 months to 18 months or 24 months. There's already 14 different towns in Massachusetts that have done that. So that would give advocates more time to pull resources and purchase the home on their own or uh lobby the property owner to not de demolish the property or whatever the case may be. If the town had a twoyear demolition, you know, bylaw that could heavily disincentivize any kind of significant renovation to

historically significant properties. We could also create our own landmark program. So, um I don't know a ton about this, but the Massachusetts has set up a preservation restriction agreement um where essentially you can put a set of preservation easements on a specific property. I wrote a memo that I sent to town staff. I'd be happy to share with the rest of the planning board. I just didn't know how to do that appropriately for um public uh public um notice and public visibility purposes. Um but it's kind of a combination of New Bedford has this historic uh marker program that like designates specific homes or properties as a significant property for that town of New Bedford. And then as um as Nate alluded to, there's the in Cambridge there are preservation easements on specific properties. And so if Ammerst wanted to create a landmark program where it chooses where to designate these properties and can then get the property owners to voluntarily participate in this preservation easement program. That's one way to preserve those properties. It's a little complicated maybe, but like it's it's it it saves putting the burden on all of the properties to be in a historic district and instead puts that on the one specific historically significant property that we're trying to preserve. Um there also are the state just created something called a small property state acquisition fund um as a part of the affordable homes act that can be used to buy that towns can tap into that can literally buy these specific properties they would probably have to be used for some kind of missiondriven purpose like affordable housing or something though I don't know that to be the case but regardless there is a resource that is now available by the state to acquire

small properties that towns can tap into called the small property state acquisition fund. There are also preservation uh uh purchase pools which can be either a townfunded trust fund which is essentially you know like an acquisition fund that the town uses to acquire historically significant properties or there are just grassroots community acquisition pools that do this kind of thing. Um and then the last idea that I had is there is a uh something known as right of first refusal where essentially um usually a mun municipality or some kind of public agency has the right to make a to match essentially the offer or to create a fair market it's fair market uh uh offer for a property before it goes to the private market. And so if we perhaps did like a landmark program and then applied a right of first refusal to those landmark properties, that would perhaps give, you know, the town, the Ammerst community land trust, whoever, the opportunity to match the or whatever the case may be, match the the the the fair market value of this property rather than letting it go to the sharks of of the private market. So, I like I just want to underscore I I I want to preserve these properties. I don't want like there to be, you know, this to be some crazy uh discontiguous neighborhood, but I just feel like uh this is taking a machete to something when we really have a scalpel available to us and we should be using that. Um I guess so. With that, I will uh motion

go ahead and go ahead and do your do make your motion. Yeah. Uh I will motion that we as a planning board recommend that town council uh deny the uh recommendation to establish a district and instead pursue sight specific opportunities for preservation instead. All right. Uh Angus second.

Thank you. Um members, uh further conversation or do you want to go right to a vote? I'm not pushing either way. I don't see any hands raised. I know we're coming up to 8:00 when we usually do our our break, but uh hopefully you can hold out a couple minutes more. Um, okay. So, not seeing any hands. Um, I guess we'll we'll go through a vote. Uh, starting I think we'll start with last name at the end of the alphabet. That means we'll start with you, Jara. Are you in favor of your motion?

I'm in favor. I All right. and Johanna. Hi Jesse. Hi Angus. Hi Fred. No. And I'm an I as well. That's five in favor, one opposed. The motion carries. Nate, um, do you think you can use this motion and tonight's discussion to generate a memo or somebody on staff might do that?

Sure. I'll have AI do it. Um, but it sounds good. All right. Well, I'm happy to review it. No. Yeah. No, thanks. Yeah, we'll have Doug review it and um, yeah, I don't know when it's going to council, but we can have this ready. Okay, thank you. Thank you all. So, um, Nate, why don't we move up the staff report to now and just have that staff report before we break.

Sure. Thanks everyone. I sent an email to the board you thanking you for your time and effort to work with Amoris. You know, as you may know, I'm leaving to become the town administrator in Hadley. So, this may be my last planning board meeting. Um, you know, I it's been something that's been ongoing, you know, the discussions and finally a contract in place. Um, so yeah, you know, I have a few more weeks left with the town. Uh, staff is working on a transition plan to have coverage with the planning board. Yeah, I don't have, you know, a lot to say. I mean, I really enjoyed my time working with everyone here and with the planning board in general the last so many years. Think you guys are doing great things. Keep it up. um you know have these good discussions. You know I think it's great to have time to plan and be proactive and so you know it's not it's not always the case right there's times in the last so many years where it's been really busy with permitting or other things and so I think there's been some great discussions and ideas and just I'd say keep keep working on that. I'll be, you know, I'd like to stay in touch and keep watching what's happening because, you know, we can, you know, as I told Hav, we can learn from our neighbors and so I'd like to, you know, reach out across town lines once in a while. I think that's a good thing, especially regarding housing. So, thanks.

Well, thank you, Nate. Thank you, too, and I wish you the best in your new position, Angus, and then Jara. Yeah, I was just gonna say thanks, Nate. And and Nate, you can still join us on Wednesday nights, even in your new position, right? You know, the select board meets Wednesday evening, so I've been juggling. I've uh I've been going to select meetings, I think the last five Wednesdays, and also coming here, it's been it's been busy.

Uh well, then I want to say congratulations again and sorry for jumping ahead of the agenda. Um, Nate, uh, congratulations. This is so, so deserved. You know, we are really going to miss you. Um, I just want to throw out there like I don't think it would be crazy for Hadley's planning board and Amoris planning board to talk to each other. Housing markets do not start and end at municipal boundaries. And so any kind of intermunicipal coordination I think is a good thing.

Yeah, thanks Joe. Yeah, I was actually just speaking with someone today about that. You know, we had our 2015 market study and RKG consultant said, you know, really the housing market in Amoris is, you know, say what people are willing to commute to UMass and Ammeris and say it's like 45 minutes north,southeast, and west. So, you know, it's like cool rain to Palmer to whatever to whatever. And we never actually really I I think we the town tribe but never really reached out to those you know those other communities. PVPC has a regional housing committee that we meet we used to meet monthly but you know um there's not representatives from every community. I think it is something that we could be a little more proactive on and have some great ideas shared. So thanks for that comment.

All right. I don't know if I have anything else for staff report. Um am do you have anything at this time if you want to just add to it? No, not at this time. I will say um we do have somebody here to do an ANR and I don't know if you want to squeeze that in before the break or if you want to take that out of order as soon as we come back from the from the break. Um, I don't know if Mark from Kestrel plans to talk, but I'm just trying to be mindful of what Jesse suggested a meeting or two ago um about people people's time

attending. Well, I'm happy to to go ahead and do the ANR if you if everybody's agreeable. Okay. I'm seeing heads nod. So, are you okay, Nate? Oh yeah, that sounds great. Okay,

there was information on the online packet. I'll just say, you know, it's um I think it was 107 Henry Street. Yeah. So, you'll need to bring Mark over when you're Can you see my screen? I'm I'm not sharing from You can see your navigation. Uh, I see your Windows Explorer. Windows Explorer. Yeah. Okay.

You want me to share my screen, Tam? I don't know. I do. I thought I had it all set up. I don't know what happened. That would be awesome if you would. And I'll work on bringing Mark over. You'll need to stop your share, I think. There you go. All right, Nate.

Sure. The the property in question is here outlined in yellow. So, it's at the corner of Pine Street and Henry Street. Uh it's actually a pretty old house talking about older homes. And the idea is to create two properties out of this one property. And the Castro Land Trust would be would be acquiring it. So, some reason this is now turned sideways with Henry Street on the top. But what is showing is a the you know existing house and house lot is made smaller and then there's a few acres uh with a new lot. So essentially, you know, you're creating two lots out of one. Uh you know, the town engineers looked at it, fire department, you know, there's been transmittals. No questions or concerns or comments about it.

Is this uh is this near where the salamanders cross? Yes, exactly where where it is. So, you know, this so this the 2.3 acres will become conservation land or be under a conservation um restriction and then this remains a private house lot. Okay. Um, Jara, I'm I'm just curious. Does Does Kestral Land Trust ever buy properties? Because like that's exactly what I'm talking about in terms of like a pulled acquisition. Sure.

Yeah. You they so Castro's focused on conservation. I mean, the town over the years has talked about doing like a housing conservation deal, but they wouldn't necessarily, you know, buy a property for historic preservation. Maybe they might know partners, but they're, you know, interested in land conservation. I I don't want to speak for Kestrel, but that's typically what, you know, my understanding. I I figured I just wasn't some some organizations do both and so I wasn't sure, but yeah. Thank you. Well, Jar, like the uh trustees of reservations, they own houses and they own land. Yeah. And and they own properties all the way ac all across the the Commonwealth. Yeah.

And um some of them are historic houses and some of it's for some of it's conservation land basic. basically. Um, so I think the question before the board is whether you have any objection to my uh signing probably looks like in the upper right hand corner of this sheet on behalf of the board to agree that uh a subdivision plan is not required for this for this kind of subdivision of land. It has frontage. Uh, it doesn't look to me like you'd need a subdivision to access either parcel. So, if I'm going to ask if anybody objects, please raise your hand. All right. Uh, not seeing that. Uh Mark, uh is there anything you want to say before, uh we move on and and I'll just uh get with Pam and sign sign this on behalf of the board.

Wonderful. Thank you. Yes. I number one, just it's nice to meet you all. I don't think I've ever come before the planning board in Amoris before. Um you're absolutely right. This is the iconic salamander Henry Street salamander crossing with some structures uh maintained by the Hitchcock Center. uh the land owners approached us to donate this land to us at the end of last year and just given its importance to the town. Uh we were happy to take it on and move it forward. Um but yeah, no, there's really not much to add. Uh you I'm sure the land owners, you know, would thank you for this. I will add just for the previous question, I we do occasionally buy properties. Actually, we buy properties quite a bit. Um they're usually for conservation but we have now done several combined housing and conservation uh projects uh including one in Pelum and uh one in East Hampton are both fairly major projects. So would be happy to talk to the board in the future about that. Getting a bit off topic I know.

Well thank you. Expect an email. wondering since since Mark's here, just wondering if you're going to add salamander viewing stations now that we're going to own it. What was that? Add salamander viewing station. You know, I I think they only come out once in a while. The community does a really great job. Very well celebrated place to go.

You know, I I will say actually honestly though, there was one correction. Um, you know, we will be taking this on as a donation of conservation land. there will not be a formal conservation restriction on the property and and there was talk about eventually potentially uh combining it with town conservation land which it it is adjacent to. Um so we would be open to that but we're also open to holding it in perpetuity as well. Uh whatever makes sense to the town. But uh I look forward to getting out there for big night next year and helping out. Yeah, I know Hitchcock Center really tries to make a big deal out of it and get everybody out there to help guide the sal salamanders. Okay. Um I will my interpretation of the board is that it's okay for us to sign this and move on. All right. So the time is 8:06. Mark, thank you very much. I think

Thank you all. You can get back to your regularly scheduled programming tonight. will do. I appreciate you taking me forward here this Thank you. Thank you. All right, the time is 8:06. Why don't we take five minutes and come back around 8:101? Certainly by 8:15.

All right, I see a couple of members back. Please turn on your cameras when you return.

Looks like we still need Fred. Do we have to wait for Fred or can we get started without him or would you would you like to wait for Fred? I'm just

Yeah, I think I' I'd answer that. I'd like to wait for Fred if we can give him a couple minutes more. Nate, I was I was wondering whether we ought to go to old business so that we could talk about the mixeduse building zoning before we go into the housing the general housing discussion.

I mean, I was hoping that this meeting was going to go to 11 as maybe one of my last ones. So, I don't really The order is Sorry. I mean, either way, old business we had is open space as well, too. Yeah. Um, all right. Well, we'll just stick with stick with the current order. Yeah, current order is okay. There there's a lot on this agenda.

Right. Why don't we go ahead? Um and then we'll just try to note when Fred returns.

All right. Um general housing discussion. Um I think before we start the the potential zoning amendments for the PRP discussion, I wanted to say that with Nate's departure, we're going to be We're gonna there's going to be less town staff to support um to support zoning amendments, frankly, and the processes that have to happen within some statutory time periods to to to move them along. And so, uh frankly, I I had a meeting with with Jeff and Pam last week about that and the mostly about that and they are interested in uh particularly given that there's the clean energy bylaw um and there's um you know the design the design downtown design standards we've got some big things already on our plate. Um there's some interest in us essentially slowing our recommendations for recommending things to town council to and partly because of staffing with the town staff and also uh town council has some significant things on their agenda. So, um, when we, as we talk about the PRP, um, you know, I think we, my hope is that we can bring it to a point where we're kind of happy with it, but then let it sit for a little while before we formally recommend it to town council. So, I'll stop there. And Jesse, I see your hand is up.

Thanks. I was going to raise this later, I guess, with the report of the subcommittee. Um, but yeah, I was wondering how it's going to play out. Um, I'm very happy for you, Nate. We will miss you sorely, certainly. Uh, I definitely do not want to add more to staff plates than they can handle. They're already strapped. At the same time, I'm very disappointed if that's the approach we need to take. Um, I think most of us, maybe not, if not all of us, are on planning board because we see a real need to make changes. And I have to say it out loud. It's a huge mistake to tell Planning Board to stop planning. A huge mistake. Who else is going to do it. I'm not saying we've accomplished that much in the three years I've been on here, but we're trying. And if we're told to stop and back off, it's just not going to happen. And I think it's a very important thing for our town to keep pursuing. Whether my ideas are right or wrong, whether someone else is the right idea, we can't back off. So, if we're voting, I would say no. I'm not going to vote to slow things down.

Okay. That's all I got. Uh Nate, you you can you can say whatever you want tonight, I guess.

Yeah. No, I um you know, we worked hard to get the priority lists and to try to focus the board and staff and I would still say to work on that. So, kind of echoing Doug's last point is that you know, still advance the idea of housing in the PRP. You know, it's the subcommittee discussed it. You know, I had, you know, staff had proposed an overlay. Angus said, could we do it without an overlay? And so then now, you know, we've worked on how it could be incorporated um within say bay zoning and it and it's a lot of factors. So, like Doug said, keep working on that. I would still say, you know, keep working on if it's, you know, small lot subdivisions or is it just changing lot sizes townwide. And so, you know, staff is still working on a few other zoning amendments that I thought could be brought forward this year, which maybe will be tabled, but still advance them so that when they're ready, they're ready. Um, so yeah, I agree, Jesse. I I I I think you know staff is really trying to find uh someone to um replace replace me and work in my position and help the board and you know complement the whole planning department and I think that you know they'll be they'll be successful. Um and so yeah I would like to you know encourage the the planning board and subcommittee to keep doing that. You know what I was going to say is maybe the subcommittee the planning board seems like there's time on the agenda. Maybe the subcommittee doesn't meet for a month or two and meets during the planning board time, but we try to allocate, you know, time at at the full board to discuss what we're going to do now, some housing topics because I think that's really important. Um, you know,

I will say that that some of the burden is just having the separate subcommittee meeting to do the advertisements to schedule the meeting and, you know, I guess they're not they're not producing the minutes, but there is some some time there.

I think Doug said too, you know, there's also potentially other zoning amendments or other things happening. East Ammeris, we're really hoping to get that going and have the board be the venue with the consultant. I think that's a will be a really important thing happening uh this year. So you know the board will be busy like I said keep the ideas moving and and um you know you can always jarr to your point yeah you can send stuff to staff and we can disseminate it to the full board so that way there's no issue with open meeting law violations. So any evenformational thing can be shared board member to board member you know if you see an article you know as long as there's no response to it. And so they're all the concern always is like, "Oh, Jared, you see a nice article, you send it to everyone, and all of a sudden someone's like,"Oh, this and this." And all of a sudden there's a conversation that should be happening in open meeting because they're talking substantively about part of it. But sharing information can still happen. And so, you know, usually we caution against it, but you know, again, again, like the 40y idea or small lots, if someone sees a great article about why small lot zoning is is beneficial, you can send it to staff, we can send it out, or you can send it along and just say, "Please don't reply." all because I think there's a lot of good of information out there and I think yeah I think especially with I don't know I feel like in the last year or two especially with the planning board and the town right I think there's been some really good ideas and people are more willing to have conversations that say maybe 15 years ago we weren't having in terms of um changing zoning or things I think that's great

all right so I have three hands up for Jara then Jesse actually just Jara and Jesse

thank you uh Uh, I was well, I wanted to say that Doug and Jesse, you are both right and I I really appreciate both of the points that you guys brought up because Doug, I cannot tell you how many times I work with municipalities that propose lots of great ideas and new policies and new regs and new things that they're just literally is not the staff capacity to functionally administer and do. So, like I really appreciate you pointing out the fact that yes, we're going to be missing, you know, the town's going to be missing a significant capacity in in Nate's absence. Um, but Jesse, I I mean, I hope you saw my little clap because I just loved the urgency in your voice. And so, I think that there is a way, you know, it's not ideal, but there are ways to split the difference. Like, we can take on more responsibility. We as a planning board are not limited to any particular amount of time that we spend outside of these meetings other than our own, you know, obligations. But so like that is one thing is that we can commit to spend a little bit more time working outside of planning board meetings on particular topics. We can also ex uh you know look at our networks to find expertise like I have a lot of friends who are much more steeped in zoning bylaws than I am on a day-to-day basis who I could ask to get some help you know getting our ideas into an actual into actual language. Um there's technical assistance opportunities like I don't know Massachusetts Housing Partnership there might be a technical assistance opportunity where they are able to send somebody here to help us and fill that capacity gap so that we can actually

continue to do things. So you're both right. I love so much both of the points that you both brought up. Um and I think there's ways for us to not be left totally in the lurch um in Nate Sab. Well, we won't be totally in the lurch. Um, I think I think they are looking at assigning one of the current staff planners to support us, but everybody's going to be a little bit stretched. Yeah. All right, Jesse.

Thanks. Yeah, I was going to again bring this up later, but since it came up already, I would also vote to maybe suspend the subcommittee until staff feels like they have bandwidth for that time. Uh we and we're happy to put put zoning discussion on the agenda. I think that's I think that's a very good move until staff says there's someone else in place and we can actually have the appropriate support. Yeah. You might have to bring a couple of us up to speed with what you've been talking about. Sure. Yeah. All right, Dangus.

Yeah, I was just gonna um second what's already been third fourth what's already been said. Um, just that uh there's a number of times in the in the subcommittee meetings where we've asked Nate to do things and uh Nate's very good at doing those things and uh and we won't be able to do that in the same way. Um and so there's um I've tried to take on some PRP things, but it's also slower going if we're doing it in our spare time. And um so I've I think repeatedly made promises to like finish things and then things have happened with my other job. Um so anyway, I just think that we'll have to be maybe a little bit more patient with our with ourselves and also recognize that when we have an idea and want to execute something, it it's just going to take longer.

Okay. I'll I'll also kind of remind everybody we did get a couple of homework assignments for the downtown design standards and the clean energy bylaws and they may not be our individual priorities, but they they seem to be a pretty pretty major priorities from a townwide point of view. So, okay. Um, that was is that kind of the first item and then we should go right into the report of the housing and zoning subcommittee. Jesse and Angus and um

um yeah, I I missed playing board last time. I don't know if there was discussion then. We haven't met since before then. So, there's not a whole lot to report other than I think the PRP which we're going to talk about. We spent a lot of time on that. Um, and the mixeduse building we also talked about a lot, which I think is on our agenda as well. So, I'm not sure there's much needed more than that at the moment. Uh, Angus, uh, or Fred, please join in or Nate, if I left something out, Nate.

Yeah, I was going to say, you know, you know, Pam, you know, does a lot to support me and the board and she'll be with you. So, I think that's I want to acknowledge her and her work. So it's not, you know, it won't be in the lurch. Um, yeah, housing in the PRP, I think it's something we talked about and what, you know, I think what the subcommittee, um, reason is that, you know, there's different ways to approach it and different, um, ways to allow it. So, you know, one idea was an overlay that, you know, again, it's an overlay. doesn't change the base zoning and you can, you know, have standards and conditions that allow certain things or what the approach the housing subcommittee took was, you know, allow apartments and mixeduse buildings um but don't change the definition of apartments. So 20 units still stays the cap. You know, we're not, you know, we're not trying to tweak mixeduse buildings and come up with something new if some of the standards from other areas can be applied. And so um you know everything else that happens in the um PRP is still allowed and then we're adding housing to it and it could be you know you add other things and so you know like I said the PRP although they're large areas of land there are a number of constraints on them in terms of wetlands or um topography or other things. So the developable land is quite small. So the idea would be to allow multi-unit development uh and then you know really it's a a permit process idea to me would be it should be site plan review because if it's a special permit no one you know too discretionary and so you know what what you see in the packet is that to do that and without having an overlay you need to change you know a little bit say in article two and three and you know all these other articles so that they're all consistent. The idea though is say to allow you know different residential uses in the PRP but you know to get there you have to do all these other things like maybe change the dimensional standards in the table

change the conditions in the use chart change something here and here and so you know it looks complicated but the idea is kind of simple and I think that's it's a really good idea I think one thing to consider uh is that there's three PRP zones in town you know there are some discussions about what's happening up in Ammerst uh with the the beacon the proposals beacon project that's PRP you know could this changes affect only the PRP say along um in emergtown road old belt town road or does it apply everywhere you know there's so many different ways to move it forward but I think it's a good discussion to have as part of the regional housing committee with PVPC the other week and valley community development council a number of communities that PVPC works with are looking at as adding housing to say like their industrial zones or something similar because again they've been in place for decades and they haven't you know been utilized completely or they have been used but now there's some potential to have housing and still allow you know whether it's industrial or research or professional uses and so it is something that's gaining traction in other communities and I think it's something to continue looking at um you know once it gets moving I think you know Rob more the building commissioner other staff will be important to pull in to say okay how does this really work you know are there pieces we're missing or details we don't see. I think the idea is straightforward. I think it's like then the nuts and bolts. Okay, how does it actually work if you have a 20 acre property and someone wants to do this but also maybe do an office building two years later? Like how does all that work? I think I think you know to me the bones are there. It's really just kind of you know that homework piece of like okay thinking through those kind of scenarios does it all make sense? Um yeah, I I you know I don't have any any great changes. I think you know it's almost like you'd have to do almost like concept designs given what Angus has proposed and say okay does it all can we all does it all work? You know can we do

this? Do we want to do more? Do we want to include other types of residential uses? We just like these two types of uses and you know so those are the kind of pieces to it. All right. Um, Angus, was there was there work on this p on this proposal that you were planning to do and you haven't been able to get to?

Yeah, the the stat the status that it was in before um I made a bunch of changes in the documents that that I think Nate sent around that are uh basically it's it's um getting rid of office park as a separate designation. There is there are essentially two properties um where the Kulie I think it's where Kulie Dickinson is their like outpost off of Route 9. Um and one other property um the the town staff's idea was to move those actually into BL I think right Nate um and they both fall under the University Drive overlay already. So um those are the only Office Park properties. Um and it would open up PRP to a few other things that are currently allowed in office park um around office parks. Um and then uh mostly it would be targeting um opening up PRP to housing of different varieties. And so, uh, what that requires is a bunch of minimal changes kind of all across the, uh, zoning bylaw to make sure that anytime office park appears, it's deleted and to change PRP to, uh, uh, you know, account for some of the additional uses. Um, and so the the most probably the most complicated document is the expel spreadsheet, which I think see these.

I I don't know. The Excel spreadsheet is a little confusing because um I use track changes in it and track changes in Excel is not as friendly as track changes in Microsoft Word.

Um and I think it's the use classification section 3.3. Um, but that's really where I would say the meat of the changes are. So, the things that I still need to do, um, I need to write up a memo explaining the specific changes that that are in all of these documents so that people don't have to look in all of the documents. Um, that's kind of minor, but that's probably my next step before we go a ton farther. You can see this red line on uh Pam's screen is where office park is. So that would be essentially eliminating that entire column. And then where PRP is, there's a bunch of recommended changes moving things from nose to um site plan review. Um but you can't see those unless you go to this track changes feature. Um,

I mean, we we're looking at the PDF, right? That's what I We're not we're not looking at the Oh, I see. Excel document. Yeah. Yeah. So, so this is the kind of thing that I need to put in the memo like what is each box that's been changed in this Excel document

so that people don't have to try and figure out how to find it in Excel. Um, so that's that's one of my to-dos. I think the other to-do um is uh we there was a couple of things that that Nate um that the town staff kind of needed to take a look at because what I was trying to do is make the changes to the overall zoning bylaw that would accord with what Nate was trying to do with an overlay. And he can do a few things more easily in an overlay than we can do in changing the overall bylaw. Um one of those is parking. Um, so, uh, the university drive overlay has separate parking, um, requirements than general zoning. Um, so Nate was trying to recreate that in the PRP. I'm not sure if we can do that in the overall zoning code. That was that was one question. Design guidelines. The um, University Drive overlay has some has some limited design guidelines that would be harder to do. So, these were some of the questions that I think town staff was gonna um take a look at, but that's kind of where things stand.

All right. So, you don't you don't need anything from us tonight? I don't think so. I mean, I think the main question is is getting like a the full go ahead from the board that we'd like to pursue. I don't want to do more work on ch changing writing up this memo on all the changes I made to the overall zoning if we would rather do an overlay. So, I think I think my my question to the board is, do we want to move forward with trying to make changes to the PRP by simplifying the zoning code? Um, or do we want to add an overlay which would simply add things to the zoning bylaw?

Well, philosophically, I'd vote for simplifying. Um, you know, it's clear that this change ripples through a lot of the, you know, a lot of the sections. So that's a little bit tedious. Mostly mostly. Yeah, it's sem. It's mostly semantically. It's not like substantively. Um so it's just annoying rather than like, you know.

All right, Fred. Yeah, I I think the uh zoning subcommittee pretty much came to a consensus that uh uh we'd rather go with a straightforward uh change to the underlying bylaw rather than have another overlay floating around out there. uh and there really isn't the the kind of justification for it that you see on uh University Drive, for example. That is a a completely legitimate place for an overlay. Uh but no, I I think the the way to go is to make the the bylaw read the way we think it ought to read. And it's it's it's really not that complicated,

right? Um Nate, what would be the right time to engage Rob Mora if we wanted to look to talk about the you know the implementation and and and whether what we've done seems to be workable. Yeah, I think if Angus um you know sends the board the so you know I think some of it is also our bylaw is you know the document is every section is its own word um word document and then Excel the use chart is an excel document and so there's all these different formatting so actually the just the kind of process of making the changes to the documents is is a task in of itself not just even thinking about how to make those changes so I would say like after the next planning board meeting if the board, you know, if Angus gets the board some changes, the board talks about them. I think then it's a good time to have Jeff and Rob look at it and before it goes too far. And so, you know, to the parking point, um, and some others, it's like, yeah, you'd go into the section and you can say, I mean, again, it's like one of those things. It's like in these areas ex, you know, maybe like except in the PRP,

these parking ratios or these commercial things don't apply.

Again, it's a ripple effect. So, you know, the way we did on University Drive, we can say that this overlay, you know, supersedes all sections of the bylaw. So, you know, this part of seven doesn't apply. So, then we can do shared parking a little more easily. Right now, the bylaw says to do shared parking, you have to have, you know, 120% of the space is required and blah blah blah. And so it, you know, it's just kind of trying to how do you allow shared parking in the PRP between different uses and maybe not try to rewrite also I just haven't but I think that's where you know Rob could be really helpful. Um and sometimes it might just be really like a phrase you know except in the PRP I just so there's again there's a few different ways to do it but I think pulling out those things I you know if you look at what Angus has proposed I think it's like four floors and 45 feet. So again, kind of what you know, do we like that new height requirement? Um, you know, do we like any design um kind of standards from the UD drive overlay or from Datson and Flinker that we'd want implemented uh in there? Is there things that we like in terms of, you know, facade treatments or something? So I think what's important with the PRP is that because it's not a lot of available land. You might have, you know, five acres here, three acres there, seven acres here. to me I think is really multi-unit development because you know you don't have the you know you might have a 20acre property and not much of it could be developed and so you could have just single family zoning I don't think that you know maybe that's where the board wants to go to me I'd say well let's try to do multi-unit development you know do you want to throw in town houses or some minimum density whatever it is so I think those are the pieces to look at um right now the definitions you know don't have those kind of standards so then they become added to the use chart maybe standards and conditions to those kinds of uses. So, you know, the idea for the subcommittee was we're not changing the definition of apartments or mixeduse buildings. We'd be making those changes

in the use chart under standards and conditions that would apply in the PRP. So, that apartments, you know, are still allowed in these other zoning districts, nothing's changed, you know, we're really then going to have the language uh in the for appropriate for the PRP. So, you know, just kind of think about that what you might want to see. Um, I agree with Fred. It's I don't think it's complicated. It just, you know, it hits a lot of different pieces of the bylaw.

Okay. All right. Well, thank you, Angus, for taking the lead on this. All right. Um, so that's that's our discussion of the PRP zoning. And so time is 8:42. We'll move on to the old business uh portion of the agenda, starting with the open space and recreation plan. Um Nate, I assume you want to get a kind of consensus agreement from us on this plan this evening.

Yeah, you know, this plan has been um in an update phase for a few years now. So, the planning board looked at it in 2024. I I I think took a vote or agreed by consensus to you know say um the board supported it and staff continued to work on it. The state updated their guide book on how to what to have in an open space and recreation plan. So what was sent to you is really a pair you know the staff not not I can't take credit for it you know Walker Powell and Aaron Jock really took the plan which had been growing to almost 200 pages and synthesized it and you know made it a lot more succinct and said you know what's really necessary to meet the state goals and what still captures all the information in the you know in the what we have a 2017 version. So they have a you know a 70page document which will be which will grow with maps, appendices and other things but really try to come up with what you know kind of to me is a reasonable document uh that gets across the goals and and and objectives and um strategies of the open space and recck plan. So I think we're calling it an update to me. It's really almost a new plan. The state can approve it for I think up to 10 years. And so the idea would be as part of this review, the planning board is required to take a look at it um and say they've reviewed it. Typically, we'd ask for a vote and a letter of support or a letter of review, I think is what the state calls it. If it's not won't happen tonight, I'd say, you know, at the next meeting um to have the board look at it. You know, really it's, you know, it's an open space and recreation plan. So there's open space goals related to conservation. There's recreation goals and then you know there's an implementation matrix at the end in terms of you know you have if there's a number of goals each goal has to have objectives and then under each objective is a strategy or action step and then who the responsible party is and a time frame and a priority and so that becomes kind of the the really important part of

the plan. Uh and there's a required action plan map. Um, so the town did do a survey a a while ago and we had all this information. It's really just kind of putting it uh together in this formal plan. Uh, having it in place does allow the town to apply for certain grants. So it is a prerequisite to apply for certain funding opportunities which the town may want to apply for this summer. So, you know, the conservation commission is meeting tonight and they're also looking at it. I don't think they'll come to a a vote on it. I think they might want one more meeting as I was told. So, you know, I think the planning board could have that as well. Um, you know, I don't have anything, you know, you know, we've had one in place for since 2009. Uh, we had kind of a a rough plan before then, but really since 2009, we've had a formalized plan. Um, you know, the goals have been updated a little bit. Uh, you know, I just take a look at it. If you have big questions, sure, let let staff know if there's, you know, some other questions related to strategies or objectives. Um, you know, every part of the plan now is a required section from the state. So, they have this guide book and essentially you can follow it. It's a template, but you know, I think those the shortest plan I've seen is 45 pages and the longest, right, is over 200. So, some communities go, you know, uh, they go heavy on on the narrative. So, I think we're in the middle.

All right. Um, so my recollection is that we did look at this maybe a couple of years ago and and I think we endorsed it. Uh, but you wanna you want to go through this again, right? Yeah, I think you know it's like I said, it's changed enough. I think it would be good to have the board um take another look and go on record. Yeah. Okay. All right. So, Pam, can we make sure that this is on the agenda for the next meeting? We sure can.

And it sounds like we have a third homework assignment from tonight. Just quickly, if there's priorities, I would say let's try to get the I would like, you know, I think staff really would like to get the open space and recck plan moving. Not that you would do not do your other homework, but if you were my kids, I would say, um, just given the funding opportunities in the summer and that staff has been working really hard to, you know, kind of complete this, you know, take a look. It, you know, I say it's short is 70 pages. Um, you know, and if you add that to the downtown design standards and the clean energy bylaw, you have a few hundred pages of reading. I laugh because that, you know, it is a lot. Um,

yeah,

it is a lot and it's a lot of material. It's a lot. So, um, you know, like I I agree with Doug. I think it was like two years ago the board looked at it. Um, and I think we, you know, there are some changes made. Like I said, we're really trying to be succinct and a little more concise in this version. So it you know what what the board looked at last time I think was probably 180 pages and now it's 70. So sure things are omitted but really we try to find where there's redundancy you know so we talked about some things in four different places um didn't add didn't have value added so staff really said okay can what what is the right section for this to be in in the plan and so you know there are pages removed without really losing information because it was just you know streamlined but if the board has questions you know staff's available to answer them. Okay, great. All right, next item is the mixeduse building zoning amendment. Um Nate, do you want to introduce this?

Yeah, so the planning board, you know, voted to refer this to town council and after that fact, you know, Rob Moore and staff looked at it and said, you know, there's a there's there's a few kind of big issues with it. um it wasn't as easily as easy to apply some of the standards from University Drive to mixeduse buildings in the other village centers. And so, you know, I'm coming to you tonight with a recommendation, a strong recommendation to, you know, change that vote to refer it back to the board. So, to say, you know, we won't push it to council right now. We're going to vote to bring it back to the board and look at it. So staff is you know working on a memo with a few key points that you know it could be changed then referred in the near future but really consider a few things. Um you know some of it is just also you know does the standard from university drive work or could it be as simple as a smaller percentage or you know in the standards and conditions in the use chart say you know 30% except in these districts the permit granting authority may allow as as low as 10 or 15%. And so the building commissioner is kind of leaning toward that because the way it's written now with all these changes, there's questions about what if there's two um you know what if there's two street uh two frontages. Um and then you know we started doing the math and looking at RVC properties and a number of them are small and given their shape the 75% to a certain depth actually ends up being more than 30% of the gross flow area. So, it actually doesn't do kind of what was intended. I think on larger projects it does. It actually is less than the 30% of the gross flow area, but on a lot of properties it would probably be more. Uh, and so it's just one of those things where, you know, the smaller percentage might just be more effective. Um, and also, you know, maybe we ask the applicant to justify it a little bit

differently than just that that proportion. I think on University Drive the way it worked is that you know there's no streets behind it. We asked that all the properties be built out along the front edge along University Drive and it was pretty clear and easy because it was one it was a linear you know area these RVC properties are not as uniform and consistent in shape and frontage. And so you know although I looked at it I feel a little embarrassed that it, you know, came this far and we have to pull it back. I think it was great that staff looked at it. Um, I think some of it was also too, let's not bring it to council if we think we could make it a little bit better beforehand because they're gonna have a lot of questions and we want to be able to be pretty clear and say, "Yeah, we think this works. We've run through a lot of scenarios. You know, I showed the subcommittee a few scenarios and then staff looks at a few more and realize, okay, it doesn't work." So, it's really interesting that you can look at four or five scenarios and it's great. You look at a few more and it it isn't. And so I think we've just, you know, I think staff has been doing that since the referral and wanted to come to the board with that recommendation. Um, and so, you know, we still think it could be, you know, modified and then moved forward again, you know, this year. Um, but, you know, just to take a look at it again one more time before making a referral.

So, you know, we want a vote, you know, a motion to vote by the planning board. Uh, if not, you know, it would go to council. it would be referred, you know, council will look at it on Monday and we're just not sure it's quite ready. Um, you know, and I know, you know, you know, there could be different opinions like, oh, it'll come back, we can do things. I think really we want to make it as best as we can. And like I said, I think we can do that with another meeting or two of the planning board.

All right. All right. So, um, so I'm going to make a motion just just to kind of get it on the floor. And that is the motion would be I move that the board uh agree to retract the recommendation to town council which it made on March 18th of this year uh to to refer a zoning amendment for mixeduse building standards and village centers and zoning bylaw table three and reconsider this zoning before we again refer it to town council. Does that make sense as a Is that adequate, Nate? And did that make sense to everybody that just heard that long sentence? Uh, okay. Um, Jesse,

uh, I will second that, but I also have questions. Yep. Okay. Thank you for seconding. Uh, now we can have some discussion. Jesse, sure. Thanks. Uh ju just so that before we vote, this will come back to us with the clear issues you're raising, right, Nate? Yeah. So, yeah, you know, we're going to try to rush to have a memo tonight and I said I could relay some of the points, but the idea will be to have, you know, not a memo, a bullet list of questions or concerns, but when it comes back, there will be this clear guidance about what you think needs to be better. Yes. Correct. It will.

Thank you. All right. Um, anybody else have any questions about this? Okay. All right. I'm not going to try to prolong the conversation if it doesn't need to. Um, why don't we go through a vote to with a yes vote being agreement to retract. And so Nate, the urgency tonight is to keep it off of town council agenda on Monday, right? Um before it's really ready, right? Okay. All right. Well, let's start with you, Fred.

Hi. Thank you, Angus. Hi, Jesse. Hi, Johanna. Hi, Jara. I and I'm an I as well. That's six in favor, one absent. Um so Nate, you think that this could come back next meeting? Uh you think by that time staff will have some like a bulleted list of things that they're concerned about.

Yeah. If not next meeting, the meeting after um you know, I think we can keep it on the agenda. Um and then you know we'd have to gauge with staff where where they are. Um you know I will say that the clean energy bylaw will come back for a hearing in late May. So I think the first meeting in May actually would be a good time to talk about the mixies one knowing that then you know there'll be new topics or you know other business for the planning board to pick up in May and June. Well then the first meeting in May is our next meeting. It is. So yeah, I I you know I don't I don't want to promise for Jeff or Raw, but I think it is likely that they could come back with information.

Okay. All right. So we'll keep that on the agenda for next next meeting. Not on my list. All right. Uh third item under old business. Did we have any other topics not anticipated? Not seeing anybody indicating that. Angus, I don't know. Is there is there going to be a time for us to talk about Hampshire College at all?

Um, well, we don't have it on the agenda. Um, we I mean I guess I I've had some conversations with with Jeff about the fact that that's likely to prompt some conversations about zoning. Yeah. I don't I didn't I'm not looking, I guess, to to launch into discussions about about planning so much as um I just wanted to to say something about Hampshire. Okay. Well, um, go ahead.

Okay. Thanks. Uh, so I just wanted to to express, um, I think a deep disappointment and sadness about Hampshire's closing. Um at the reason I brought this up in old business is that when we were um informed that Archipelago had pulled its plan for Atkin for the area around Atkins um I raised some concerns about how that could impact Hampshire. Um and I I think it's clear that Hampshire had long-term challenges. The higher education environment um over the longer term doesn't look great for institutions like Hampshire. But um I I can't help but feel that um the town and especially the different committees that were involved in that decision at some level failed to take into consideration the full scope of what a negative outcome for that sale would mean for Hampshire in the short term for their financial viability. Um, and from my understanding of of how Hampshire officials have talked about it, that was one of, apart from fundraising from alumni and other donors and um, and increasing enrollments, that sale was kind of like one of their key ways for short-term financial solveny. So, I just wanted to kind of re-register my disappointment that Hampshire didn't show up more often to to kind of make their case. uh but also disappointment in all of the stakeholders across our town in failing to do what we could to to help that institution. And um it's obviously an enormous loss to our to our town, to the intellectual vitality of the whole valley. Um but it's also a huge loss to higher education. They were

doing cool work. Um, and it's just a unique place that's going to be a whose loss is going to be felt very deeply. So, I just wanted to register all of that. Um, it's not there's nothing we can really do about it at this point, but I hope that in future decisions we think more holistically about how our planning decisions impact different stakeholders in the community. Thanks. Sure. Thank you, Angus. Uh, Fred.

Well, thank you, Angus. Uh, you took the words out of my mouth. I think the town uh does have uh a role here uh and a role in the outcome. I've known Hampshire College for a long time for personal reasons. Uh I back in the ' 90s I was the head electrician at Hampshire uh and uh uh one of the closest friends in my family uh was a professor at Hampshire for a very long time and uh yeah I think that uh uh the uh the situation that I think could have helped Hampshire uh stay going. Uh uh you know it it didn't work out and uh I think it should have. Um, I also think that uh and I this this is kind of open-ended, but uh it seems to me that uh uh UMass could extend uh its reach to there and uh you know you have a have a a functioning campus and uh I I I think that there's there there might be a way to handle that. So, uh but uh I think we have to think outside the box here.

All right. Thank you, Fred. Yeah, I think uh we're all feeling a sense of loss and you know, it's hard to know. I mean, I think there's multiple parties that probably have some responsibility and and it's it's a challenging time to be offering that kind of program. Okay. Um, we will probably be coming back to Hampshire at some point in the future. Um, but it seems like there's a lot of moving pieces at the moment and uh some of the chips need to fall before that. All right, time is 9:01. We'll move on to new business. Any any unanticipated new business, Pam or Nate?

Nope. Nope. Okay. Um, we've already done the form A&R subdivision applications. Anything for subzba applications? Not from me. Okay. No, I think you know there's um you know more applications um that'll probably be coming in shortly and so they can you know we can you know bring those up at the plan board meetings but there's nothing right now.

Okay. About SP RSUB applications. Anything on the horizon? Um yeah, there's a few um site plan review applications. Uh you know um one is the high school is looking to it was a class uh if it was a class project. It was a club project. They you know the idea was to kind of research I think it was the architectural and maybe design club architecture and design club. and it was kind of research what you know what what are some amenities at school and what would what could you know what was there and anyways they they determined that a gazebo out in front of the high school would be something that would be used and very nice right so it was like there had been some seating there isn't it there now and when they discussed this in their findings of their survey um you know the school committee and others said this is great let's keep actually trying to make let's actually implement this rather than just say here's something that would be nice and so staff has met with them and they you know it'll need a site plan review application But it's a pretty big gazebo that would be in the front lawn between the walkway and the school. I'm not sure how fast it'll come before the board, but you know, they're working on it. And so I think that, you know, it's it's a it's, you know, it'll be something that needs cycle review. I don't you there's probably a number of considerations be offered to them, but I think it'll be a great project. Um, but it needs to go through that permitting. So,

okay. Um and there's a few others which I don't know you know there's a few property owners and applicants may potential applicants who you know contact the town and then we don't hear from them and so you know if they come forward there could be two or three in the next you know month but I I I don't know at this point um there is a a public sha tree hearing that may be coming forward in May on um East Pleasant Street. uh you know that's a it's a it is a public a scenic road so it's a sorry a public a scenic road a public hearing and cha tree public hearing a combined hearing with the tree warden um so that might be in May or early June uh for one tree removal it's just one tree

okay um planning board committee and liaison reports um Bruce is not here to talk about PVPC Angus, anything on CPAC or have have you guys gone quiet until the next round?

Well, the Jones Library saga continues a pace. So, um there's been sort of a legal advisement. Um there's been historic commission um calling into question some of the things that that we recommended funding. There's been um issues with work from that seems to have been already completed that we may have been or was already underway and CPAC funding is not supposed to be used for it's only supposed to be used for future projects. So, um I'd say the Jones Library stuff continues to be sort of a morass um with very vocal opposition from some segments of the community and then huge amounts of support from other parts of the community. So, I have no idea what the town council is going to recommend, but that's a big chunk of the CPAC funding that we set aside. Um although not all of what Jones Library requested. Um everything else seems like normal. Um, but that that the um report has been presented to the town council. I don't think I've gotten a copy of the final report, so I should I should probably ask for that and send it around. But but Nate, they the town council got a copy of that report, right?

Yeah, I believe so that it was sent to them. Um, so you know, the CPA then gets voted on as part of the budget. Sometimes it's a separate uh order by town council usually earlier just so they know you know they can you know solidify that especially if there's any borrowing or larger capital things that could be tied to you know kind of matches in the in the other bud in you know town budget. Um yeah know the CPA committee Angus thank you it's it is a lot so you know it's seasonal it's pretty intense Doug you had done it before and you know statutoily the planning board you know I don't say it's obligated but typically we you know it has a rep on the CPA committee so the CPA committee is made up of representatives of other boards and committees from town uh and then they make these funding decisions and you know I think you know what Angus probably has realized that you know it's become competitive and there's more

that came in and your upper Um Fred, I'm gonna mute you.

Um it's become more competitive and there's more funding being requested than is available and so the CPA committees, you know, in the last few years there's a lot of work to really prioritize that and whittle down the funding request and they meet frequently. So Angus, thank you for your time. I know it is, you know, it's extra meetings. Um I also think they're great projects. So, you know, they're everything from open space to historic preservation, conservation, recreation. So they're things that may really benefit the community. Uh and then those sometimes those projects come back to the town whether it's through permitting other things. So you know first step is getting the funding to these organizations and and having those projects be implemented. Um thanks Angus.

So Angus, are you thinking you might do this next year or have you had enough?

Uh we we're having a baby in July and so another baby. So, um, I'm not going to make any commitments right now. Um, I mean, there was some there was one week, I think, when Nate presented to CPAC where I had the planning board on Wednesday, a subcommittee meeting Thursday morning, and then a CPAC meeting Thursday night. And so, it was like my eighth or ninth hour of meetings that week. Um, so, so I don't know, but and and I was told we had 16 proposals. Um, and I've been told that's really a very unusual uh amount. So, lucky me. Um, but and just like way too many funding requests. So, I I you know, maybe it'll be easier next year and it wouldn't be as many meetings, but but yeah, I I'm not going to make any commitments.

I'm not asking for a commitment. I was just asking whether you had already decided No way.

No, it was great. I mean it was a really cool process and really really neat to hear the proposals and and the discussion was really tough. I mean, you know, like there was there was there was a lot of alignment around things, but there were, you know, um it there there was so many requests and so many needs and it it became clear over the course of the CPAC meetings that there's just a ton of deferred maintenance that this town has has for various reasons um kind of put off and is and is really grappling with in the last few years with the elementary school um with parks, with the public works building with the town hall with the Jones Library. It's just thing after thing after thing. So, um, that became really clear as we were hearing all these presentations and I'm I'm glad that the community in the town is making changes, but it's it's a lot.

All right. Thank you. And, uh, as far as I know, I'm still not on the design review board, so uh, no no uh, report from me. Um so last second to last item on our agenda is report of the chair. Um all I'll say this evening is that I will miss the next meeting on May 7 6th or 7th I think it is. Um let's see I think it's that's when it is and Johanna will preside in my absence. So have a good time at the next meeting. Thank you.

Um, Nate and Pam, anything you forgot to say earlier that you want to say now? Should we give Nate another round of applause? Applause. We're so proud of you, Nate.

Yeah, thanks everyone. Yeah, I don't have anything to add. I was trying to think of things, you know, I like to use this meeting. It is it is, you know, live streamed and people watch it. Um, I think there are some big, you know, big uh topics on the agenda. So, I think those are really important to continue following for, you know, the board and the community. Um, yeah, Hampshire, I think it's a, you know, thanks for your patience. I think it will come back. So, just, you know, when it's ready, staff will put it on the agenda. So, um, I know people had asked about it and the town issued a statement. I think, you know, um, it's still things, you know, people are considering and thinking about, but it will, you know, likely come back at some point. So, I'll just say thanks for your patience on that. Um, yeah, and I think there's a, you know, a lot of work to be to be done. Um, I'll I'll be watching.

Nate, I will say on on in terms of Hampshire, you know, we had had at least a brief mention of should we reconsider the the village center extent down in down at Atkins just because the, you know, the wetlands were more extensive than were realized on that that other parcel that Archipelago was working on. And if we actually want a village center down there, do we should we change the geographic extent of it? So as as as staff is working on that, I think that's worth considering.

Thanks. Yeah. And I think all those all that is will be part of the discussion. So I mean New Hampshire owns a lot of most of the land is in Ammeris, some is in Hadley, but it's a you know a lot of property. Um you know there's still you know they're still operational through next semester. Um I think but you know with the announcement you know I think after everything kind of settles really what you know you know I think there's probably a lot of there'll be a lot of discussions and how to move forward and you know the planning board can be integral to some of those. So yeah I think I you know don't keep that in mind. I I think that's something that will be on the table as well as other ideas.

Okay. All right everybody. Anything else? Okay. The time is 9:11 and um we are we are adjourned. Thank you all. Good luck. Have a good night and good luck. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you. Stop recording. Yes. Recording stopped. Hey Doug, I just wanted to ask you one quick question. Um did you get an invitation to come to Nate's celebration? I did. Okay. I'm gonna be out of town. I just I responded to Athena today. Oh, to Athena.

Oh, or was it Athena? Angela. Angela, maybe. It was Angela. Yeah, I had asked for it to be sent around. Um, and I was not CCd. So, yeah, I did get that and I I just responded this evening that I'm going to be out of town. Okay. All right. So, I'm very sorry to miss it, but I know who maybe we'll have one of those backyard potlucks again. Well, we could do that. All right. Hey, have a great vacation. We'll see you soon. Thank you. You see you. Bye. Goodbye. And