Yes, we should. This meeting is being recorded. Thank you. Thank you, Ben. Welcome to the Amherst Historical Commission public hearing and public meeting on Wednesday, June 22nd, 2022. My name is Jane Walden as chair of the Amherst Historical Commission. I'm calling this meeting to order at 633. PM pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021. This meeting is being conducted by remote means, and has no in person attendance is permitted. Every effort is being made to ensure that the public can adequately access the proceedings in real time by a technological means. This meeting is being recorded and minutes are being taken as usual. Members of the public who wish to access the meeting may do so by. Opening the town's homepage on an internet browser. Navigate to the town calendar at the bottom of that page. Clip the historical commission meeting link. Zoom and telephone connections. And meeting. A link to meeting materials can be found there. So now for a. Attendance by roll call. Patricia off. Present. Robin Fordham. So. Becky Lockwood. Janet Markwart. Eddie start up here. Jane Walde here too. For members of the public opportunity for public comment will be provided during. during a general public comment period and at other times that are appropriate throughout the meeting. So first, we'll begin with the public hearing in accordance with the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws chapter 40 a an article and article 13 of the Amazon bylaw concerning demolition delay this public hearing has been duly advertised and notice has been posted and mailed to parties at interest. The Amherst Historical Commission is holding this public hearing to provide an opportunity for interest interested citizens to be heard regarding the following demolition application requests. First is 406 Northampton Road. This is a hearing continued from May 18 2022. And it's a request for the full demolition of a circa 1900 wood frame single family farmhouse. And let's see. This is a Ben this is a continued hearing so should we this will have this one separately from the from the second. Correct yeah. Thank you. The the this application and other historical information on the affected property is available at the document center on the town website and again you can find that link in the calendar appointment on the town website. Let's see so under section 13 of the town's zoning bylaw governing demolition delay for structures of historical or architectural significance. The constitution has made it a matter of public policy that the economic cultural and aesthetic standing of the town Amherst can best be maintained and enhanced by due regard for the historical and architectural heritage of the town. By striving to discourage the use of structures of historical. I'm sorry by striving to discourage the destruction of such cultural assets of protection enhancement, perpetuation and use of structures of historical and our architectural significance located within the town of Amherst is a public necessity and is required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people. Under Massachusetts general laws and the town of Amherst zoning bylaw, the Amherst historical commission is responsible for enacting the purposes and procedures of this stated policy. Before this public hearing, we will first invite the applicant to make any comments they wish to make in addition to the permit application and the supporting materials submitted with that. If town planning staff then breager has any additional information he'll be invited to share that. The commission members may have questions for the applicant. We, there will be a point at which we'll invite public comment on this application. And then we will call for a motion to close the public hearing for the commission members to deliberate. The applicants for 406 Northampton road are with us hello. Thank you very much, Madam chair. Nice to see you. So are there any other any any additional information or would you like to sort of encapsulate summarize. Yeah, sure if you don't mind so for the record Tom radio turn with bacon Wilson out of Amherst here on behalf of the governor you mess five federal five college federal credit union, relative to 406 Northampton road and our request to demolish that structure. And so, I think as was provided in the application material and as, as you noted, you know this is a property on Northampton road and Amherst, it was a late 1800s construction. Currently in the state of repair. I believe that there are some issues on the interior. There was a write up back in 2005 from Jonathan Tucker the former planning director. It's not on macros. And it's not necessarily part of a neighborhood, it might have been historically but now it's on route nine to the west of it is the green leaves driveway to the east of it is those a blood motors and then a little further to the east is Hawkins Meadow and then to the east is one university drive south so it really is a commercial corridor. The bank has received their conservation Commission approval and their planning board approval for a new branch pretty fantastic branch if you've seen the plans sustainable pervious pavers pavement. And I know it's not necessarily within a purview of the historical commission but it's always nice to know what's going to go into place. And so, our suggestion is is that that this house, especially given the change of the surrounding area is neither architecturally geographically nor historically significant and so we would request waiver of the demolition delay bylaw. And I'm sure Ben has some photos and maybe some additional plans if he'd like to show I'm, I'm in the car so it's a little tough to do all that. Happy to bring, bring up a picture here. This is the house in question at 406 Northampton road. And so I think these were taken maybe from a car I'm not sure but shows you a bit of the context on route nine here. I think this is the back of the house. I'll just go through this one more time. Thanks Ben. Hey, thank you. This. This hasn't been the subject of a previous application has it. Not recently. You know I know that like I had said in our research we had found the historical narrative from Jonathan Tucker from 2005. I think that there there might have been and I think it might have been approved and then I think what had happened was, I think Luke's a bullet might have bought it and then turned it into a rental. And so if there was I think it I don't think it was ever a delay was imposed or it wasn't allowed to be demolished I think the business circumstances changed. Because otherwise I have never, I haven't seen Jonathan do those reports, unless there was some demolition application. Yeah. Okay. Okay. Ben do you have anything else that you'd like to add. No just I can reiterate I think there was a demolition permit issued for this property. I think I just found it now. But yeah I wasn't ever acted upon. That was in 2005. And then I think more recently, for you where I read this, I think there was an emergency demolition for the garage in the back of the property as well. I think that I think that might have been part of Jonathan's narrative. Yeah, that was in 2005 that there was an emergency demolition issued for that for your bar. Yeah. Commission members, please, if you have questions please. Raise your hand or or just fast. Pat. It seems to me when I read the materials that that it's not on mattress and yet it falls within a category of a farmhouse and an age where if we were to agree to demolition. I would like to see that as a condition of demolition to, to note the existence of that property and that house in Amherst, even though the site, the circumstances have changed, the house still exists, and it dates back. Many decades. I don't see an issue from our perspective I don't see an issue with documenting it. I think it's a great idea actually. I agree that, and I think that would be enough because it's a type of farmhouse that we do have quite a few of them in the residential streets. It's not particularly unique. I guess not saying that it's important to know these, these standard farmhouses of the time period but I think there are others and being on a busy street, it makes sense that this one would be the one that was kept to say within a neighborhood where there are similar for the period so it doesn't bother me demolishing it for this new project but I agree that it'd be nice to have it documented so we know that on this now busy street at one time, there were these kinds of farmhouses. All right, other questions comments from commission members. The question is, Tom, I'm assuming from your response that you would assist the current owner to make the macros form. Yes, yes, we would. Yeah. Thank you. I will ask for any public comment. If there are. Is it if there's anyone in the watching participating that wants to make a public comment on a particular request please indicate seeing none. Can I have a motion to close the public hearing. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Any discussion. All in favor. We can we can do a hand raise. I think. Thank you. unanimous. So, the public hearing has been closed and we moved to deliberating the, the general criteria so we know that the building is not a construction according to what I'm sorry that the building is not listed as individually or as part of a registered district so that one is settled. Then there are the three categories of historical importance. And there are sub cat there are subheadings. Beyond that, but first let me ask if any member of the commission finds which is to discuss any of the subheads under historical importance. Okay, and I think the only one that would apply would be some sort of architectural significance in that it's typical of a modest farmhouse from the time period. And we can say yes on that and still approve the demolition. I don't think any of the other things in terms of an architect or events or people who live there anything like that would apply so that would be the only one I could see even streetscape doesn't fit the streetscape anymore. Okay, so nothing in historical importance. Jan has indicated architectural importance as being typical of a period anything. Does anyone want to raise anything about geographic importance. Okay, so then I think we can move to a vote on the demolition permit request. Yeah, I think we can find it finding it not significant sounds like. Yeah, should we make a motion. Yes, make a motion. I move that we allow demolition of 406 Northampton Road, based upon. No, not this money. I might I might have rushed that. Ben, are you saying that we should vote first on whether it's significant or not. Oh, right. I forgot there's two steps now. Right. Yeah, exactly. Okay, erase that. I move that commission does not find, well, we find it to be architecturally significant for its typical circuit 1900 farmhouse style. And that's the only one. Right. Is there a second. Second. Okay. Thank you, Pat. So we will just take this as a roll call. Patricia off. What is the question chain? Oh, are you in the motion? Motion has been made and seconded. We'll take a roll call vote for. For the finding of significance. Yes. So your vote is. My vote is that, that we found it significant as a typical farmhouse. Okay. But, but not a significant. Structure. Okay. Robin. Okay. I'm in favor of the motion. Jan. Yes. Eddie. Yes. I'm in favor of the motion. Okay. And I will. Don't forget Becky. Oh, Becky. I'm sorry. Okay. All right. Then I'll vote. Yes. Also. So there is this finding of significance that it's building typical of a period. And so. In terms of whether or not it's a formal, a formal, a formal, a formal, a formal, a formal style and. Social. Economic. persons. And now. Now we. Now there's a motion for. Allowing the demolition permit request or imposing a demolition delay. So. That we approve the demolition permit request. Second. Thank you. Any discussion. Then let's once again do a roll, roll call vote and we'll start at the other end this time. And I will say yes. And then Hedy. I will say yes to Jane. Yes. Robin. Yes. Thank you. Pat. Yes. Becky. Yeah. Okay. All right. Very much. Thank you for coming tonight. Of course. Good seeing you all. So long. Thanks, Tom. Bye. Great job. Thank you. All right. So. We. Thank you. All right. So. We go to the next request for 80 plain street. Let's see. So this is again. This is the public hearing. The public hearing has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted and mailed to parties at interest. The Amherst historical commission is holding this public hearing to provide an opportunity for interested citizens to be heard. Regarding an application, a demolition permit request. For 80 street. Parcel. This is a public hearing. This is a public hearing of a 86. Which asks for complete removal of a circa 1960. One and a half story detached barn carriage house. And removal and reconstruction of a single story. Rear section of the circa 1860. Wood frame. Duplex. So. This is a public hearing. And this is a public hearing. And this is a public hearing. It's that there was this issue that was raised to me where the. The applicant. They're the commission has 35 days to hold the public hearing. After the application is submitted. And this hearing is being held, I think 42 days after the application was submitted. And so the applicant. Is aware of this. And so. In normal circumstances, the, basically our 10, our hands would be kind of tied. We would. Either wave the public hearing or just, you know, have the hearing, but. It would be. The permit would be issued regardless, but. Because it's. You know, if it, if it's beyond that 35 day window, it's not a, it's not a specific permit. So. This. Case is a little bit unique in that the applicants also seeking a special permit from the zoning board of appeals. For the project. And so there's the, the, in a special permit. The ZBA has quite a bit of leeway in terms of putting conditions on a. Project.  I think we have a chance to, if you want to entertain the idea of like making a recommendation to the ZBA. And so this is technically, I think it's not a public hearing. I think we would have this be like a public meeting. We can still invite public comment certainly, but rather than an article 13. I think it would be a good opportunity to discuss whether to make recommendations to the ZBA or not. What's the zoning question they're bringing to the board. So they are, it's a non owner occupied duplex. And so they are expanding the footprint. Or they're, they're adding. Square footage to the house. And it doesn't mean more units, not just a bigger house, right? Or what it looks like. I don't think it's, I think they're just expanding that back unit. I think it's still going to be a two unit house. Okay. Hard to tell. With. It looks like it's going to be. Or bedrooms per unit though. Yeah. So it makes sense to me. So anyway, I apologize about the oversight with the scheduling. I think, you know, last. In the May meeting, we had like, what, like six demolition hearings. And this one came in like a week before that meeting. And I think I was just so busy getting prepared for the May meeting that I. Didn't even notice when it kind of popped into my inbox. And then. I just assumed this hearing was being held. Within 35 days of it, but. Yeah, I guess I lost track of that a little bit. So. Then we couldn't, I couldn't open the actual photographs. I could only look at the plan because of their. Okay. Because of the tag on them and they downloaded, but they wouldn't open. So could you show us a couple of the current conditions? Yeah. So this is what the applicants sent me. I'll zoom in. I think, yeah, so it's basically. This is the back of the house. The street is on the other side. So they're proposing to take down this back part of the house. And then build a new, like two-story structure on the back. Okay. So from the front, it's not going to look that different. Yeah, I don't, I. Except for like a few. Yeah, except from a very sharp angle, you can't actually really see this back. Right. Section. They were matching the roof line and everything. Yeah, hold on. And then this is the barn. 1960s barn in the back. That's also, you can't see this from the road. And also it's weird. It doesn't have a foundation. It kind of just hangs over this hillside. That's not our best example of a barn. Yeah. I have no concerns about. Permit for the barn. Yeah. And it's kind of a similar, I put in, I put in an email that the applicant sent to me. It's a similar situation as the one on Stanley street, where it's a barn. In a non-unoccupied rental. And basically from the moment this property manager. Took over this property. He boarded up the barn and, you know, I don't know, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know if it doesn't want anyone near it. It's a liability. And so it's basically just, it's, I think he said, there's holes in the grant in the floor. So it's like, you can't really even walk in it. So. I don't think this very attractive edition that was put on. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know if they do it drive by today. And. The barn clearly is. Disposable. And I agree with Jan. This edition was not very thoughtful in terms of, of consistency with the age and style of the house, but the house itself looks like it needs care. So I hope, I hope that when they, they do this edition, they do it. So rental. Is there any kind of. Recommendation we want to make to the zoning board of appeals. And from, I guess, from our. Stand point, it would be.  Historic. I think it would still be a question of historical significance that we. That we would comment on, but. I don't think it would be appropriate. I don't think it would. I don't think it would be appropriate. We'd like them to be encouraged to, to keep up. The original house. So it doesn't deteriorate, even though it's a rental. And, and that the addition be more consistent with the style of the original house. It is. I mean, if you look at the plans. Right. But to reinforce that notion. Okay. Do we need to vote on that banner? Is our. What appears to be a consensus. Is that sufficient? Yeah. No, I think. I think that's fine. It's not a. Article 13 matter. It's just a. I can transmit this discussion to the ZBA. They're actually meeting tomorrow. So. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. All right. So. Did I actually, I don't think I actually opened a hearing on this meeting. Okay. So we don't need to close. Okay. Great. So. Next is. Reviewing and approving. Minutes of three meetings. If we've had a chance to look at those. I just have one comment on the May meeting. Under discussion of one of the Stanley street properties. Yeah. It shows that I made a motion and then I also seconded my motion. So I don't think that can happen that way. So maybe just to change it to the motion was seconded. Yeah. That's interesting. Off made a motion. Yeah. Okay. I see. No way. Where is that? Okay. I'll make a note of that. And then make that change. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Meeting minutes. I second. Okay. Thank you. All in favor. Just to show of hands. I. Okay. Unanimous. Thank you. Let's see. We have a couple of things. That. That are more, I think discussions. One is. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. And then wash was not able to be here with us this evening. So, but we. Probably should take a few minutes to think about. The preservation. Planning. Process coming up. And the other is. Using CPA funds for private. Now. That. Concept. Can be developed and advocated for. In Amherst. I think you saw from. Email. Was it today or yesterday? Yesterday. Shannon. Recommends that we think about, and we can discuss as. As we. Feel we can hold this discussion. About what. The commission's main goals and expectations are for the updated preservation plan. And so. We could discuss how the role of the commission has changed in the last. 17 years. What main concerns. Do the, does the commission currently have related to historic preservation and Amherst. And is there anything else to. To. To add. I didn't have a chance to look at any of those links of other people's plans. I've been foggy on payments. But I would like to look at them and see. If they shed any light on what we are not doing and what ours doesn't have. You know, to have a sense. I mean, I don't honestly know how much we've changed since 2005 because none of us have been on it. You know, we're on it. I mean, Jen would be the one to ask, right? So it's hard to answer any of those questions, but maybe looking at the others. We can for next. I don't know. Well, I. I have a. A couple of comments on them. I don't know. This will. Just observation about. The 2005 preservation plan. That didn't. You know, I did a search. The word goal. Or goals. And what I've changed across in that preservation plan was. Not. The commission's goals and not really historic preservation goals, but rather. What are the community goals? And I think that was the time. Just. I think just after that, that the town adopt. That the town conducted a big master plan process. And into the master plan. There was a section in the master plan concerning historic preservation goals. So. It could be interesting in reviewing the 2005 preservation plan to also take a look at the.  You know, all kinds of stuff like that. So that's just a. Just a thought I had when I. When I read the thing about goals and I. Couldn't actually identify them in. In the preservation plan. I'll bet that the role of the commission has evolved. Or. Is at least different. And then we. We may well have some main concerns. I mean, as a commission about. About historic preservation and Amherst right at this, right at this moment. But I'll bet. I'll bet there's going to be plenty of opportunity to talk about that. If there's anything you want to sort of get out on the table. Tonight. We could take a minute for that. Can I go where angels fear to tread. That seems like that's where you're headed. So keep going. Okay. So, um, you know, it, it's a curse to me that there's, there's been a lot of building in Amherst in the five years almost that I've been here. So, um, I think that's the only reason that we've had meetings this year. We've identified that there isn't. A lot of. Shared understanding of what historic preservation is, particularly in relation to things like streetscape. Or the idea that our town has this sort of. Historic quality to it, which is incredibly valuable. And one reason that people move here. And I know that it was up to me to kind of put together some. Things to write about with the Amherst, Indie possibly, and, and I am pursuing that and talking with. Martin about that. And with other members of the community too. I also think that it just distresses me that we're. Allowing things to be demolished, but with perfectly appropriate decision making. Tools and. Arriving at consensus. Because we have a housing crisis. And I think trying to do. Trying to do the work of the commission is. Feeling very hard. You know, in relation. For me personally. I think it's very important. And. You know, I guess I'm just hoping that we also will. Ride through. A change in leadership of the commission itself. When I hear Jane. Introduce an item. I think to myself. I need to. Think about the way things are introduced and discussed and, and, you know. And so that I have a better sense of that as if I was. Writing the minutes or helping to lead discussion or whatever it is. And with six members of the commission. It's just feeling really thin to me. Not that we aren't all wonderful.  I thought, oh God, I really can't be late. I mean, I, I want to make sure we have a quorum. And I, so I'm being very upfront. And candid here, but those are my concerns. And I'll stop that. Yeah, I think. Six months or so ago, I don't remember exactly when. Our commission shared a concern about the. The, the, the, the, the, the, the historic homes on North pleasant street that have become retail at the street level and built out a little bit and. Heady and I volunteered to work with the local historic district, the sunset South Whitney Lincoln Avenue. And. I pulled Macros forms for all of those buildings, et cetera. And pass them on. And they took it over to it to do other, you know, identify other homes. And I thought is that we need to have somewhat of an advocacy role. As part of our goals to. Advocate for the preservation of buildings that have been identified as historic. Before it happens that they just get demolished and. You know, you know, any, any, any architecture of any kind goes in place with them. You know, there are some towns that have rules and regulations, whatever traditions of new. Development has to mirror. The style of the. The founding founding architecture. And so I, you know, this, this is stuff. I'm going to ask, you know, what can we do to preserve this? You know, the first historical commission member. What can we do. To actively. Try to preserve what's in danger. You know, not, not that a demolition request just come in, but that's in danger. And so I, it's a slippery slope. And I don't know exactly how we would do that except. As Hedy and I did. I don't know exactly how we would do that, but I don't know exactly how we would help activate them. Which they are doing now. Although. I think there's some members in the local district who. Whose idea of preservation is maybe different than we assume. So anyway, just my thoughts. That's actually that's one of the. Big changes that can be included in. In the local historic districts. That didn't exist in 2005. And this whole other body of a local historic district commission. So that's a big change. One thing back. Probably somewhere around the time of the preservation plan and master plan, maybe a little after that, there was a big. To do in Amherst about form-based zoning, but I don't know if that's what I'm talking about. I don't know. The, the concern about new construction and how it integrates into historic streetscapes. And. I don't know if that would ever. Ben, have you heard any whispers about that returning? I thought it was kind of a good idea, but. It went down in a. Ignominius. Defeat. In town meeting. And of course that's a little change. Let's see Robin, Ben, Jan. Um, So I've been working this summer with the virtual regional planning commission on a survey of historical commissions. And. The thinking that I've had in my brain for the last couple of months is that. It's really hard for the commission itself to. Be an advocate that are, that our role starts with planning. So it starts with things like having an effective demolition, delay bylaw in place. Understanding how to impose a delay in a way that allows for some negotiation conditions. Which aren't binding, but still gets the commission power. Um, and getting, you know, that the root, one of the responsibilities of commissions is making sure inventories are up to date. I think my frustration has been, um, you know, I would echo Pat's comments around advocacy, but I'm also starting to understand. And, um, again, and this work that I'm doing that I'm working with Chris Kelly, that one of the big recommendations is to have an advocacy organization that's outside your commission. That, that is a friends of Amherst preservation or, or something like that, that allows for that, um, that kind of promotion of, um, French demolition resources that are outside of, um, that may fall outside of what the, the, the, the legal and, um, you know, legislative powers of the commission are. Um, I think that's one of the things that I would like to do, I would like to sort of the more the persuasion and, and connection arm of things. Um, so I think I just wanted to make that comment. And later when we come to, um, And anticipated items that'll relate to some of my thoughts about how we could, um, move as a commission to move forward a barn preservation program that would exist in both places. Um, so I think that's one of the things that I would like to do with the commission. Um, because I think. It's really challenging for us as a commission to. Both. Fulfill our kind of legislative duty or administrative duty. And also be. Um, Advocates. Outside of those parameters, there's, there's not a lot of time for it. And our, our main responsibilities and our, our responsibilities and our responsibilities. Um, I would just echo some of that and say that I think what it comes down to is we can only do so much, but in terms of any advocacy that might be within our purview. The main thrust I think has to be against neglect. Um, because we have so much. By neglect. And. That's a matter of just raising awareness. Right. Um, So if we could do a better job of letting the town know what we're doing, who we are, what we do and why we do it. I think that would be a baseline advocacy, which then could be. Much more developed by another group. But we can't fight neglect if people don't know. That we exist and what we're trying to. Stop from happening. And the main, our main point purpose is this whole demolition delay issue. To grant or not grant that permit, but it, but it hinges on the notion of neglect. Because it's just too easy for people to automatically get it by ignoring the building until it's falling down. So that's why I think we should have more coverage. I think what heady started to do is a wonderful first step. I think we should start highlighting specific types of buildings. Individual buildings, whatever. In media, but also maybe. We need some other ways of getting the word out about. Our successes. You know, things like the writer's walk. I mean, I know that's not typical because CK funds probably aren't going to pay for something like that again, but just the things we do, do it would be nice if it were. I mean, I think we should have more common knowledge so that people could feel proud of their house, their street, their neighborhood, their barn, whatever. Okay. Thank you, Jan. So these are good. These are all good. I've written a list of the things that I'm. Mulling over and. I'm in touch with art about what sounds interesting to him as someone commenting generally on what's going on in Amherst. And I'm in touch with. With the rest of the commission. It's going slowly and I. I wanted. I should just say I wanted to start with a piece about. Candida Moussante and her husband, John P. Not John, who are represented in the new version of. Amherst's history mural. But I can't find the, the little hook that I really want, which is that they are related to John Moussante. And I'm a little bit stuck. But I can, I'll send this list around. In fact, but I can't put it in the chat because we don't. That's, but I'll send it to Ben. That's what I'll do. Yeah. No, there's also a Moussante beach and North Hampton. So I think. Oh, yeah. Might be like a regional. Name. The, the, the, the candidate is related to the people in, in North Hampton. Okay. Just makes me very cautious about. Jumping onto something that I really. Yeah. To have be more significant that it actually turns out to be in reality. So. Yeah. I'm, I'm a little bit. Leary about that. But I'll send you the list, Ben. We can share it. All I would say to that is how do you don't get hung up on. Hooks. If you have. Something that needs to be said about a building or a neighborhood, you know, it's fun to find a research focus, but if it doesn't quite fit with what you're trying to do for us, then. Stop it and keep going.  Wow. Jan, that was, that was really great. Professorial. Sorry. I go through this. No, no, no. I'm just, I'm teasing you. It's great. It's great. Thank you. Enough. You've given this advice yourself. I'm sure. Good discussion. Thank you very much. And. We may be talked out on that this evening. Is that you think. Okay. So let's go to the next agenda item, use of CPA funds for private properties. And I think Robin, you have, you have a case study, for example, that you want to bring. Is this on the agenda? I don't see it. It was on the. I think it wasn't your email agenda. This, I got mine off the website. Yeah, I don't. We can cover that under on anticipated items. I guess. I think I guess it. Didn't make the cut for what I put on the PDF. Sorry. But yeah, why don't we talk about that? Shortly. Exactly. I've been contacted by a few different organizations interested in CPA funds. So I feel like. I want to, I want to. Bring that to everyone's attention. The next thing on the agenda, I see here's just about the preservation by-law. And just briefly touching on the next steps with that. I don't see that on the agenda. Okay. Here. I'll share. Share what I have here. Different agenda. Yeah. Yeah. I haven't been getting. Well, I don't know. I don't know. If I don't. I try to send it out, but if I don't, it's always. I try to send it out, but if I don't, it's always. On the commission's website. Under agendas. Well, can I just say. Yippie. The by-law went through.  That was seven years of work. There's a lot of work. Yeah. Yeah. I was only here for obviously the last. Well, like two ish years of it, but it was, it was, it was quite the haul to get it over the finish line. And thank you all for. Being patient and. Sharing your input and making it a great document. And. Now we get to actually implement it. See how it works. So. But the. The point I wanted to raise was, well, I guess two fold. One is. I think it ultimately did pass unanimously, but there was. A few town council members who expressed. Significant concerns over the. The designee. Idea and having. Having. Well, I get. And they were, they were actually approaching it. From different perspectives. One was approaching it from neighbors and a butters. And saying, how would. How would community members have a way to. Be involved in the decision if it's being made just by a single person outside of a public meeting and. How could they appeal a decision? How could they make their voices heard? So. That was one per one per. Council member was raising that point. And then another council member was saying kind of the opposite perspective from, from a developer's perspective. You know, how do they make a case for. A building either being significant or not significant if it's, you know, just being made by a designee. And how can they appeal that decision? So. In the end. Obviously the bylaw passed and. These two council members. You know, we agreed that we would. Continue talking with them and try to, you know, there may be things we can do kind of in the rules and regulations of the bylaw to. Address some of their concerns. And so we're going to meet with. Them in July. There's not a huge rush, you know, because. They're all, they also agree. We can kind of see how the bylaw plays out over time and then make tweaks. But. So that's. I just want to let people know that. And. Janice here, hand up. Yeah. So the concern about. The designee. Is the point of the two step process being. Not being recognized. In that discussion. All right. And then, yeah, so Chris. Rob and I were at the meeting and we explained that, you know, the, the. A very important part of this change is to. Is to. One's, you know, streamline decisions and. Make it so that. There's a quick decision made for buildings that are not significant, but the ones that are significant. Go to the public hearing and the public hearing focuses on. You know, whether to place the delay or not. And so I think that was understood. And, and. Obviously it's. It's counter and to it would slow down the process to have an appeal process or to open it up to. You know, the public beating. So. Yeah, I think that that was recognized. As kind of the balance that we were trying to. Have. So if push came to shove. I don't think there's any point in having an appeals process. At the first stage. Yeah. Whether it's significant or not. It could be if, you know, if it, if a. Shoot. Now I'm forgetting what we're calling it. A. Permit. A. Demolition authorization. That's it. Yes. Yeah. At that stage. Maybe, but if, if. Under this structure. If there's an appeals process at two steps. That's. Yeah. That's taking one step forward and maybe four or five steps. Yeah, I know. Yeah. Yeah. So there was a few other considerations. One is that. We also added this clause in the administrative function. In the administrative section of the bylaw where. The, the designate can be. Can be. Authorized. The designate can be designated. I guess that's the word, depending on the application type. So it doesn't have to be like, all right, for like, for the next few months, it's going to be. Jan or for the next few months, it's going to be Ben. It can be like. For. You know. Outbuildings that are. 80 year, you know, between 75 and 100 years old. It's. You know, it can be X person, but for, you know. You know, primary structures that are over 100 years old, it should be a subcommittee or it could be the full commission even. So we could. We, there is some wiggle room in terms of like. You know, maybe for mid-century garages, it's, it's one person can make the decision, but for. The, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the, the older primary structures, maybe there's more consideration given. So we have that flexibility and we don't have to use it, but there is that option to split it up by application type. So. Jan. I'm just wondering if there's a way for. that a butters and developers and whoever know that this is going to be considered by the designee and the staff, right? And they could just then let us know if they had an iron in the fire, you know. Butters says I want you to know that this is a concern to three people in neighborhood or whatever. And then we would either automatically pass it on to a public meeting or we would just take that into consideration when we come to the initial deliberation. How do they find out right now and it can we make it easier for everyone to know that an application is coming up for initial discussion? Right? Yeah, so right now the way people find out is because everything goes to a public hearing we mail letters to every neighbor or a butter within 300 feet for the property. We also post a legal ad. That's for the meet the public meeting. So I'm just wondering how an easier way for the initial, you know.  You know, but then someone would have to know to check the website. What about in that? What's that thing that goes out regularly from the town office to let us know things that are happening, you know, the July 4th fireworks date, the vaccinations available, the road work on Southeast and that kind of stuff, you know, those come through all the time. But every time one of these applications was going to be considered could that just be one of those little email blasts or is that too much? We could set up a separate email blast, maybe just for like, if people want to subscribe to like historical preservation. Yeah, maybe if we only go out to like district one or just describe whatever it's in, exactly the way of making it simpler. I don't know. Yeah, but having people subscribe, that's a smart idea because we do now have that, don't we? Subscriptions for different kinds of blasts, yeah. I don't know. I just thought if people knew, they could let us know that we could deal with it up front and then maybe it wouldn't cost so much congestion down the road at a public hearing. Jane, what do you think? I think that it's a good idea to give people a way to opt in in the absence of, you know, multi-stage outreach. I wouldn't necessarily want you, Ben, to all of a sudden have to manage an email list, but would it, so how does that work? Is there communication staff that manages all of that so that we don't have to have a separate email? We can just pop something into the queue that. Well, yeah, I just, I don't think, you know, I'm sure there's, what are there 40,000 people in Amherst? I'm sure there's maybe like 10,000 people getting the, you know, emerge, or I don't know what it is, like emergency notifications or, you know, in the news notifications. I don't think we necessarily wanted to use that to notify every time a, you know, garage or barn or something is up for demolition. That's why I was leaning towards, maybe there would be a new subscription email, email listserv, I guess it would be. And I mean, I think it's pretty automated on the website. Like if we make, we would just make the category and then people would add their email to that.  But it would essentially, wouldn't it essentially add up to like the same permit request statement, you know, the address and what they want to do, you know, what they want to do. It can be pretty formulaic. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Maybe it could save you having to do those mailings to the butters and everything. Maybe this could be in lieu of that. Unfortunately, yeah, it's, it's, it's, it's written in the bylaw for all for the public hearing process. Yeah, the public hearing requires notifications. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Wow. So much for that idea. Well, maybe is it Brianna that would work on this? Or could we just. Yeah, I think it could be pretty quick to set up the email. Notifications. But yeah, it would be Brianna working on that. So I'm just going to piggyback on this. My hand is up before, before this discussion about email notifications. I wondered in terms of the, the planning board, the planning department gets requests for demolition. And I don't know whether it's a violation of privacy or not, but it would seem to me that the request for demolition becomes a public document. And whether or not whenever one comes through, there just be a rolling list from the zoning. Department. Yeah. Yeah. A website, you know, and let the town know that anyone who's interested in who's in demolition, they can go to this, this function on the zoning department. And maybe we'd want to separate it out by those buildings or structures that are over 75 years old, because that's what our preservation law says now. And then a section of everything before that, but, but it wouldn't have to be disseminated, you know, if people are told that they can find it there. If they're interested enough though, you know, there are people in this town who are interested to go online every day and check it out. So anyway, that was my thought because it seems like it would minimize. Minimize a lot of. Layers. Yeah, that's. It's available. It's public. Right. But you need. You know, the, you need to take the step. Yourself. Right. Right. But, but the town in, in, in dissemination of information. I think we'll be able to, I think we'll be able to do that. I think I'll be able to do that. And for this newsletter you're talking about, could say. As of July 1st, every request for demolition will be posted by the planning department. And those that are 75 years or older will be separate from all the rest. And so then people have to take the initiative. of butters because that's the law. But otherwise, you know, it's a question of when an application comes into the zoning department, they have a mechanism, a program that just shifts it to this list and sorts it 75 years or older or not. If it isn't 75 years or older, it doesn't come to us, it has nothing to do with the demolition delay bylaws. So, right. And so, you know, if they put all of them up, then that's public information for everybody. But if they sort out the 75 years or older, because that has the potential to come to us, they could have a program where they just move the application to this list, maybe the address only, and then a link to look at the application. But I think a person can be developed. Unless you're crazy, you're not going to be looking every day to see, is my neighbor about to try to demolish something on their property?  Check every day just in case something on your screen. If you're not worried about it, you will. Yeah, but then we'll only get the nuts out, is at the public hearing, you know. Normal people who would have regular concerns aren't the ones who are checking that list. Well, it's just one way of doing it that that's efficient and not labor-intensive. Yeah, definitely it's less labor-intensive. It's practical, but it's definitely less labor-intensive. Yeah, I mean, the thing is, obviously, if it's found to be significant, it'll go to a public hearing and, you know, everyone in the neighborhood will know. It's really if, and this is what the point Chris, my boss made at the public hearing is, if this designee is doing a bad job and keeps finding what should be significant structures insignificant, you know, I think the Historical Commission will hold this designee accountable because, and at the very least, I think there will be a reporting system so that you all know as the Historical Commission, like, wow, you know, these, you know, 1800s barns keep getting demolished and they don't even get to us or something, and eventually you're going to say, they're well designee, you're how someone else has got to do it, or you're going to say, well, maybe it should be a subcommittee or maybe, you know, the full commission should be doing it. So that's kind of, that's another point we made, which is like, you know, there could always be ones that slip through the cracks, but the commission is empowering someone to make this decision on their behalf, and if they're not doing a good job, they will find out and pick someone else or do things differently. So, you know, yeah, that's a good point, Ben, and maybe under procedures or maybe procedures, a list, a list of permit requests that the designee has acted upon should be included in a meeting packet, not for discussion unless something looks awry, but just for entertainment, or there's some commission oversight to help. Yeah, when you put them in front of the firing line. I do something similar for the local historic district because there's projects that come before me that I make a decision that are excluded from review because they're out of view from the public way, or it's, you know, one of the many exclusions in the bylaw, and so I report those to the commission every so often just to, you know, let them know that there are things happening, they just don't always get to the hearing stage. But yeah, I guess all this is to say is the bylaw becomes effective on Tuesday, so June 28th. So, if I wasn't expecting us to make a decision on the designee or the process tonight, I was just going to say maybe we can, you know, think about that today and, you know, maybe make a decision later in the summer, but for the time being, it's almost going to be like business like usual. I mean, the applications will come to the commission to make a decision about significance and then hold the public hearing. So, but once we get the designee process up and running, we can, that'll be the two-step process will take shape. We could take a designee now. I mean, what's to stop us? Unless we're expecting new members next week. No, we're not expecting new members. I don't know. I mean, it just seems to be easier for you if we just go ahead and start it as of Tuesday. Oh, no. Why kick the can down the road, right? Yeah, it's up, it's up to you all. I don't see issues either way. I would just streamline it for you. We could right away start not bothering with things that don't need hearings. They view a lot of trouble. Anybody want to be the designee? After seven years getting this ready, now we're going to instantly implement it. So, Jan makes a good point. Why kick the can down the road? Are there any, which is a pro for choosing a designee? Any cons that anyone can think of? Becky? I have a question. Like, the designee is going to come from one of us, right? Okay. Or Ben. Or what? Or Ben. Okay. Ben was the rep from the planning department. So, it was this whole thing where it's, if it's me, if there's two designees, if it's me and a commission member, it becomes a subcommittee and we would need to hold these as public meetings to make the determination. So, it's the building commissioner and a designee. Who's the second person? It's the planning department, the planning commissioner. It's two people that are making this decision in the bylaw. I thought it was you and one of us. Is it the building commissioner and one of us? No, it's one person. If we want it, it's one person. Oh, that was the issue. Okay. I remember. Yeah. If it's two people, it's a subcommittee, which isn't the end of the world. It would just be a 48 hours notice to hold a really short Zoom meeting. But the other thing was it can be one person and you all can encourage that person to discuss with like the chair of the commission or another member. But the power is vested in that one person to actually make the decision. So, that's kind of a way to, yeah. You want to do it then? I mean, or would you rather avoid it? Because if you want to do it, then we can just set it up that you would discuss it with the chair. Right. Yeah. I don't mind. There is no responsibility. The way I see it, the applications are coming into me anyway. And then if someone else was designated, I would I guess just send them everything anyway. So it, you know, it takes one step out of the process. But yeah, so I don't mind it. I had kind of prepared that it would be a staff person. So, but I also think there's some merit in having it be a commission member as well. But well, can I move that Ben be our designee and that he consult with the chair and we see how it goes. And if we want to fire him later, we can. I won't take it personally. Be on your best behavior, buddy. So that sounds like a formal motion. Is there a second, Hattie? Okay. Thank you. Uh, further discussion. Yeah, I guess I would just, I guess this is, yeah, this is more of it. So just, I guess it make it clear that, you know, as of, as of Tuesday, June 28th, when the general bylaw preservation for the historically significant structures becomes effective. And that, yeah, and then I guess I, you were designated me to make the determination of significance per section. I don't have it up right now, but I have such faith that you will write a motion properly.  Okay. Now, this has nothing to do with you, Ben, but I, I, some comments that I heard at the first, well, first hearing and maybe some other hearing, express concern about town staff being though, being the designee, being the design. So I just want to, you know, just raise that as just so you know that that was, that concern was articulated more than once in the process of, of having this bylaw passed. So, Jane, don't you think there'd also be issues though with one of us because, you know, they maybe think we weren't qualified, yeah, yeah, yeah. Whereas if we say very clearly in the motion that it's him in consultation with the chair, it kind of acts as a, okay. Yeah. So, yeah. Yeah, Jan, your point that yes, that concern was also particularly. So is that according to the bylaw or the sentiments that you've heard, Ben, is that language acceptable in consultation with? So it's not. Yeah, I think maybe say like encouraging consultation with the chair. Okay. So, okay. So let's amend the motion to include that phrase. Yeah. All right. Okay. So I think we've gotten to the further discussion. Is there any further further discussion? Then let us, let's take a vote. Those in favor just signify by saying aye, or yes, or in favor. All right. So let's, we'll just go through the roll call just for formality sake. Robin Fordham. Hi. Hi, I'm in favor. Okay. And Pat. In favor. Okay. And Jane Wald, I'm in favor. Congratulations, Ben. Yeah. You can add designee to your title. Yeah, exactly. I'll put that in my email signature. Yeah. Yeah. And then I think maybe in July, I might need you guys to make an alternate designee for when I go on vacation for two weeks in August, but other than that, no, I think, well, thank you for trusting me. And yeah, I don't have any pending applications, but matter of days, I guess. Hey. So we have two selections, plus unanticipated items. Jones Library Project Update. No, it's number three. You're not looking at the same. I'm not. I don't have that agenda. Yeah. Okay. Jones Library Update. Thank you. Sorry. Yeah, Jane, I wasn't sure if you had anything you wanted to add for this. Excuse me. Just a moment. I'm looking at two computers. So I have a communication from one of the library trustees who wants to keep the historical commission apprised of what's happening with the Jones Library design process and community outreach. So I will forward that email to Ben, who can distribute it to all of you. And if I can find it before we're done. Okay. I think that's not going to work for us today. So I'll send it to you. You will distribute it. Yeah, no rush. That sounds good. Thank you. I'll bring up the agenda. I'll be looking at the same thing. The next one's a big one. So also include vice chair and design review board rep, right? And CPA rep. And CPA. And does that need to be renewed at this point? I was wondering what the schedule on that was. Yeah. So we basically need four positions filled with the remaining four people. First procedural question. So the advertised agenda didn't have design review board on it. Do we need to hold off on that? Yeah, I wasn't. I wasn't aware that we needed a new DRB rep at this stage. Oh, I got you. Yeah, that makes sense. We've made it since she left. Yeah. Good point. Yeah, I would rather hold off on that until next meeting, just because I, yeah, it wasn't advertised. I think we can do chair and vice chair. And then maybe do DRB and CPA rep for next meeting. Okay. Let's CPA meet between now and the next meeting. I don't think so. So we had a a penciled in date of June 9th. If our business on June 2nd didn't get finished and we finished our business. So I don't think there are any more until at the full. All right. So for new commission chair, I'll maybe do this in a slightly unconventional way. And one is for anyone who has an active interest and inclination. It's perfectly fine for you to nominate yourself. And so I guess I'll just open the floor for nominations. And you can nominate others. Obviously. Robin Fordham has her hand up. I'm going to nominate Chan to take over for the time being. You know, it would only be for six months. Right. And you know, I don't want to do it, but we've already talked about this.  Here's the condition. Robin would be guys chair. Is there a second to the nomination? Any second for nominations folks, nominate other people. And so does the nominee accept the nomination, not the position, but the nomination. But me and Robin, right? No. Making it conditional here. Reluctantly. Okay. Well, thank you for thank you for that assertion. Are there any other nominations for commission chair? Come on. Surely one of you is dying for all the power. It's a good nomination. I think we should stick with it. And let me tell you just how much power there is. All right. Well, let us then all in favor of electing this nominee, please raise your hands. And do I get to vote? You do. I don't. I think you can vote for yourself. Oh, I'm abstaining. All right. Five in favor, one abstention. Is there with tutorials with you? Thank you. Pardon. Do I get a tutorial included from you? It depends on what. Yes. Yeah. I'll bring the wine. Okay. Yeah. Sure. Yeah. Yeah. Are there nominations for vice chair? Yes. I will self nominate to save trouble. Yeah, but is there, is there a second? Okay. Does the nominee accept the nominee? I accept. Good. So how many other nominations for vice chair are there? All right. Are we ready to come to a vote? All right. All in favor of appointing electing Robin Fordham as vice chair, raise your hands. It's unanimous. Ben, I'm trusting you to help me through anything. And once if I if I'm called to serve. Okay. Amazing. Good. I'm now going on leave for six months. Have fun. Now, at this point, I get to turn the meeting over to Jan. No way. Not yet. To do public comment. Maybe people will complain and then I won't be elected. Okay. Too late. You've been elected. All right. So, but I do have an unanticipated item, Ben. Okay. So, unanticipated. No. Public comment. Public comment. Okay. I open the meeting to public comment from anyone in attendance who wishes to make a comment. You would have three minutes to make a comment. And if, if you wish to do that and are, and are recognized, please just say your name and address for the record. Heal the green bomb. Heal the green bound 298 monarchy road. I have a list that I've been holding up all meetings. I'll start with the last one first, which is I think that the public for which I'm speaking really thought it was going to be a member of commission working with the building inspector that would decide what needs to go forward to the commission. I guess what we're most concerned about is that this bylaw is going to last 10, 15 or more years. We don't know who's going to be staff. Ben knows about historic preservation. I don't know whether we'll have a building inspector will have a planning department in three, four, five years with anybody on it who knows what's historical and what's not historical or has a background in architecture or whatever because it doesn't necessarily go along with planning or with building inspection. So we are very concerned that things that may or may not be 75 years old may get torn down before anybody knows anything about it. That's the big concern. Let me comment on that concern just for a second Hilda. My comment is that we're a commission. We are a group of people with different areas of expertise and different talents and our judgments come together as a group. Hang on just a second because I'm not quite done. As you know from the bylaw that was passed, the commission has the power to determine the designee and if we find that any particular designee is not performing adequately, doesn't have adequate knowledge, doesn't have adequate expertise and is making poor decisions, the commission as a group of citizens will be able to remove that designee and appoint another. But as long as people know what's going to be torn down, and my comment along with that, with one of the things I was saying, it used to be in the olden days and I keep talking about the olden days because the newspaper, the old book and the old record used to publish weekly the building permits that were issued and the demolition. That hasn't happened for a long, long, long time. But that way the public will get to know what's possibly pending to be demolished. I guess picking a designee doesn't have to be a member of the commission. I gather if you say it can be a staff member, but some people may find that picking a staff member who goes through these applications might be a conflict of interest rather than a public citizen. I just want to raise that. The people... Oops, we lost you there, Hilda. I got my list here. Getting back to the... You'll have to limit your time. I will just make the list then. Getting back to form-based codes. The only reason it was turned down is because this was a code specific to North Amherst and the North Amherst resident found it too urban for the historic center of North Amherst. And that... I won't go into great detail, but John Kuhn made a photograph, made mock-up drawings of what you were at town meeting, and we didn't like him. It was much too urban. It looked more like downtown with the five stories high and very dense. So it's not the form-based code we were against. We were against that plan. And I understand from my body some of the planning board, et cetera, that we want a style and design review. It's pretty every call regulations, and I think they're going to be working on that. And then the other thing I'm concerned about is when you're talking about CCAP, that we've been trying real hard to beautify North Amherst up here. We finally got the town to buy the gas station six years ago, and it will be demolished once the library work is done. But every time I drive by North Church, it looks worse and worse and worse. And it's not not looking beautiful. And one of the things I'm hoping is somebody might be able to talk to the the Koreans who now own that church and see if they might be interested in applying for CPAC money to repair the woodwork, which is deteriorating, paint the building so it doesn't look quite so disrupt at all. But those were the things that I had on my mind. We used to have a nice neighborhood going down Harris and Fisher Street all connected with the church. And Harris Street looks like, I don't want to say, part of the houses around are occupied with the lawnmowed and the bushes trimmed, and half the street looks like foot-high grass un-maintained. We had there been a lot of student problems. So that's another issue you guys could address in the preservation goals or improving neighborhood goals because it is the historic district up here. And my goal has been to try to beautify and make them better. I think the library is going to do a lot towards that. And if you guys could find a way of talking to the North Church people about maintaining the building and maybe applying to CPAC money, a lot of us would be very grateful. And it's on the agenda for the Neighborhood Association, though, because I put it there. All right. Those are my comments. Thank you. And that's why I come to this meeting and write it up every week so people will be aware that there are these issues out there that some of us aren't happy with. But the counselors have been working a lot with the Fisher Harris neighborhood about the tenant issues. But the main of the property really is disruptible. I hadn't been down there all through Corbett and had an occasion to make that little shortcut the other day and I was bald. Okay. Thanks. Thanks very much for your comments. So we'll go to the unanticipated items. So I wanted to just talk briefly about this property on 65 Taylor Street. Ben, I just got some pictures this afternoon and I sent them to me in an email at the beginning of the meeting. I don't know if you can grab them. Oh, there we go. Yeah. Yeah. And then I have a second set for a different barn across the street. And I wanted to just I'll try to be brief and I'd like to prepare something a little bit more formal for our next meeting. But in meeting with my neighbors and talking about this property, I thought it was such a great example of the opportunity to develop some sort of proactive structure for using CPA funds for barn preservation. And I know that I had a question to Ben about whether well, just to get my neighbor wasn't able to attend and public comments today, but they're not in a rush at this point, which is good.  That is a picture of the barn from the street. So if you were walking by, that would be the public view. They are looking to that's obviously the front. And then there's one more picture that just shows this really, I think she called them kingboards is really wide planks on the side of the building. They're interested in adapting it for residential use. The downstairs would be a garage upstairs would be living space. There's that connection on the side, just sort of they also want to rehab that area used to be living space. But my suggestion was that if they were going to pursue CPA funds, it would just focus on the barn. And my thought around Jan and I talked yesterday around kind of a general trying to develop a general framework for what if the historical commission were to help to develop a barn preservation program would look like. And my ideas were that the first step could be that property owners could request CPA administrative funds. That's allowable for preliminary studies so that they could get a better understanding of the financial implications of pursuing historically sensitive work, because that often ends up being more money. And to be able to work with a preservation consultant would help to clarify all the issues that are involved in terms of abiding by the secretary's standards and the preservation restrictions and the nature of the work and how it would change the cost outcome. And then I imagine that from that point on that they would be requesting this preliminary work, you know, whether it's a structural assessment or an architectural assessment, then that would give them the appropriate information that would allow them to go forward for a CPA proposal. And I wasn't quite sure about funding. I thought about maybe like a matching program to encourage people to do adaptive reuse of spaces like that, where you get the benefit of new income to the area and also save the property. So that's just kind of my general overview. And I'm going to try to put something together a little bit more professional for our next time, where I could kind of map things out a little bit better. But I just wanted to get people's feedback on that kind of overall idea. And part of it is that it would be a program that would be both reactive and proactive. So anybody who came to us with a barn that they wanted to demolish would be greeted with the opportunity to take and to partake in a plan for barn restoration. If they so choose, you know, the commission could feel better about composing a delay if there was money for stabilization. And that it also could be a proactive move if we, since we have an outbuilding survey now, we could send information maybe on a yearly basis out to homeowners that a program like that was available. Oh, and then the final piece being that I, the other ideas that I would like to see if the historical commission, and maybe this is a question more for Ben on the town side, if the historical commission could submit CPA proposals on a yearly basis the way that the housing trust does to fund, to create a fund essentially, so that this, that this money isn't stuck in CPA cycle for any homeowner that, property owner that is anxious about having to get something done with their dilapidated building right away. So those are all the pieces to it. And like I said, I'll try to do something, maybe do a little PowerPoint and to sketch things out for our next meeting so that we could move forward, but I'd be interested in your comments. And then Ben, if you would just show that other set of pictures, this was just Josie, whose last name I'm forgetting, my neighbor. She introduced me to a gentleman named Ed Wilfert across the street on 48 Gray, and he has this beautiful red, I guess it was a former, maybe a former horse and carriage barn that looked to be in an even better, in much better shape than her barn.   I mean, these are two barns within two minutes by foot of my house. So don't all speak at once. I'm saying myself, I think it's great what you've put together, Robin, I'd love to see a more formal presentation. I think it would be helpful to create some kind of process. Yeah. And then I can turn it into an article, or you can write it. Seems that, you know, early on in the Community Preservation Act days, this was a good example of what it was intended to accomplish. And sometimes I think that it, sometimes Amherst maybe thinks more deeply about housing, open space, recreation, those categories of the Community Preservation Act. So I think an ongoing program, rather than a series of kind of one-offs would be, you know, could make that case that preservation is a continuous activity and not simply reactive. Robin and I talked last night about the idea that if you had a separate advocacy group, it could be something that raised funds that was in charge of events that could create an ongoing fund for people to apply towards, that we would review applications, but the funds would be there. And they could be people who would help spread this idea of preservation to others in town. I mean, they would be sort of, not just the organizers of this, but they would also become the mouthpiece of preservation for us. So, you know, people who were really interested in preservation, maybe they have a local historic district or they're really involved in it in many ways or they're just, they have money and they like doing events or they like social contact, whatever reason, you could get a number of people together and it would be like many other social volunteer organizations and it would help us fight the neglect issue again by putting the word out there about what we do and why preservation is good. So, and it could start with Barnes, but obviously it could go much more universal eventually. I guess I would just, I mean, I'm sure you're thinking about this already, but thinking about a program funded through CPA funds, it would be important to kind of calculate in there the administration of the program and, you know, who actually does administer the program. Since our planning department is probably not standing. Yeah, I mean, I think the, I would also want to be mindful too, like I think we already have some funds from like 2019 that are for studies and analyses and that's more to like look at the structural integrity of a building or a barn, which that's a much different thing than actually paying for any like actual preservation or rehabilitation because when there's construction involved or, you know, actual efforts to preserve the building that, you know, adds in the discussion about whether a restriction is required and so I like the idea of a third party entity like, you know, Amherst Barnes United or something. Farm Workers United. Yeah, and then, you know, that entity could both raise funds privately, but then also be a recipient of CPA funds to be used maybe like in consultation with the Amherst Historical Commission, but not to have it be because bound and you were talking about this earlier, Robin, but just not be bound to all the procurement rules and the, you know, issues we face as a as a town to get projects done. Right. I mean, I think the challenge with that, of course, is like, you know, getting in our organization. Exactly. Running, you know, like, I mean, that would essentially be the housing trust model.  I was going to put her in conversation with someone else who I know does preservation work within her firm.    Yeah. And maybe there's, maybe this comes back to our conversation we had a few months ago about, like, when is a restriction required? Or is there another model we can look to, like, right for grants for, like, these micro grants, I'm imagining like a few thousand dollars potentially, or maybe more, I'm not sure, but maybe there's a point at which a restriction becomes required, but otherwise. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, so in this case, like, they need, they need both, they need both pieces. Like, they need production money. If they're going to do a historically sensitive project, you know, they could not do a historically sensitive project, or just do it according to, you know, how they feel comfortable with it. Yeah. So, but the first part would be the studies to establish whether they wanted to pursue CPA funds at all. Yeah. And then, you know, in the beginning, it could just be that. And then we just put them into the regular CPA proposal process, which seems like it could meet off cycle anyway. So. Yeah. Okay. Well, let me look at the, basically, I would look at the application that was submitted in 2018 to look at the exact wording of like how that money is supposed to be used. I think it's like, it's like due diligence and analyses and surveys and that kind of stuff. So, and then I would need permission. I would have to run it through the accounting department just to make sure that they think that what we're proposing is the right use of the funds, but right. There are a couple of other important stakeholder groups that need to be on board at the beginning. And that's the CPA committee and the town council, because either one of those groups can completely reject what the historical commission advises. Yeah. It almost, I feel like after the debacle we went through last year, it almost, I feel like there needs to be some like, we need to hold like a summit or something or like get everyone in the room together to just, because even now, I'm like, there's private organizations who are reaching out to me about CPA funds.  It's like on one hand, certain people in town want these projects funded, but then, you know, we've also met resistance. So I feel like we just, I need more clarity. You know, this could be a, this could be an element of the preservation plan process. Yeah. Because that plan needs to engage other stakeholder groups. Yeah, exactly. And I also think that it's a lot, a lot of it is actually just the fund that managing the economics of the grant process. Because when it came up in the discussion, I remember one of the town council members described how it might work for Salem Place. And I, you know, just hearing her describe how it could work was really the first time I'd heard it articulated sort of in a public setting. And it's not how my mind thinks, but it's, it's really important if we can grab people's attention in that way. Yeah. I mean, and Ben, I mean, the only thing that I was able to kind of discern, I think from the CPA coalition website and from other research that I was doing, which is that it's CPA funds, it's allowable that they go to private property owners. Yeah. But the communities can make their own decisions about those priorities. And I guess the question is whether that community decision comes from the CPA committee or whether it comes from the town. Yeah, that's, I think that's an important reason for some kind of summit or some kind of needs assessment. And I don't mean needs in interest assessment, you know, like what kind of pool is out there of home owners or property owners is out there that would avail themselves of this kind of program. And that's really hard to know until it's a possibility. Right. And this was the thing that was on Jane's agenda, but not yours that was going to come under and anticipated, right? Private. Yeah. I'm wondering if we need to maybe as you say, Jane, put it in the preservation plan draft or in some other way bring it before those two bodies so that we in advance agree on what our goals are either when they're reviewing our preservation plan or even before they even see it. Talk to them about this so that we clear this and it doesn't become a thorn every single time this happens because there seem to be cross purposes. On the one hand, there's advertising to get more people. And on the other hand, there's people that don't want it. We need to resolve that before we go a whole lot further. Right. Yeah.  A lot of people don't have an investment in keeping up an outbuilding. So it's, you know, a nice kind of a way to draw a line around a certain historical resource here that's one of the most threatened, you know, and kind of keep it limited to that. And then it becomes a defined program. Then there's no question about whether it's a value of the town. It's just simply that program and we allocate a certain amount of funds to it. So that's a good starting point, I think. Yeah. Maybe Robin, when you put your whole sort of proposal timeline together, maybe one of the first people we should talk to is the CPA committee. Yeah. And then formulate your program and then work it into the historic preservation plan and then talk to the town council once we have CPA behind us. Right. You know, so we kind of come united rather than trying to do everything at once. I don't know. Does that make sense? Yeah. Robin, thank you for bringing this to our attention. I think we're on to something here that's important. Yeah, I was just going to add, and this is totally unrelated to the Robin's barn proposal, but just in terms of other entities that have reached out to me, the actually, Hilda mentioned it, but the North Amherst Church, it's the Korean Zion Church. They've been emailing me. We've been emailing back and forth over the past few months. And I think I'm going to meet in person with them next week or in two weeks to go over the variety of scope of work that they're interested in. I still don't, I haven't seen any pictures or I've driven by and I see what Hilda pointed out. There's some disrepair, but I'd be curious to know what they really have in mind. And just luckily, you know, we're at this early stage, I would encourage them to get at least two, hopefully three quotes for all the different work just to get a good number. Make sure it's someone who has experience with historic preservation. So I know what they're doing. And then the other one is very similar. It's actually the South Amherst Congregational Church on the South Amherst Common. They have a very specific need, which is to replace the, it's the bell tower that needs a lot of work. It's original to the building. And they're, I think they're about to celebrate their 300th anniversary. Is that right? Something like that. Yeah, it's a very significant anniversary coming up, I think in next year. And they want to, they're doing a lot of fundraising, but also have a neat CNU for CPI funds as well. Still ring. That's a really important atmosphere for the South Amherst Common. Still ring and it's, I hear them at my house. I believe my memory is correct in thinking that this is when Jim was on the historical commission that the North Amherst Church applied for CPA funds and was rejected. So I think it would be good to look into that history. Okay. That's when Amherst, you know, all this stuff was going through town meeting and there were a lot of sort of mixed feelings about CPA funds for private property and religion and religion. Yeah. I mean, the argument about separation of church and state for funding repairs to an historic community structure, I think doesn't hold. No, we've had the Unitarian Church window and we've had the Jewish Center. Yeah. And we've awarded funds to First Congregational Church, which they didn't even use. But yeah, I think there's still a thing that people run into and I hope it's happening in this case. There's a Massachusetts Supreme Court case about this and Robin, you might know more, but I think it's, you can't use CPA funds for religious artifacts or a cross or something that's been sanctified. I don't know what the word is, but if it's just structural. Yeah, I thought it was related to the, it can't promote the mission of the church. Right, right. Structural things. Yeah, so the has to be visible to the general public. Those are right. So I've, yeah, I have a feeling I'll be reviewing that case carefully. The other thing I just wanted to jump in and say quickly is that this also brings to mind this, you know, a need that I would love to be able to try to fulfill, which I know is complicated. It's not as easy as just applying and getting money. But for all of these places, as they come to us, there may be additional funds that they can be applying to and really getting to know those resources and whether or not it's realistic to ask them to apply and to really encourage them to when we think they have a good shot. So I just listened to a mass preservation, preservation mass presentation by the director of sacred spaces. And I noted one of the things that he said was they're looking for churches outside of Boston to fund like they want to, you know, they want to get into these more, you know, places like the Goodwin Church and maybe the Grand Baptist Church.  And that's why I'd like to see, I think it's great that you're going to meet with them to be able to, you know, point them in that direction and see if that that allows for CPA funds to go further if they get matches from elsewhere. Are there any other unanticipated items? I have one last one if that's all you have been. Yep, that's all I have. Okay. Well, before we pick our next meeting date, I would like to thank Jane for her service. That's an amazing chair for more years than we can count.  But you've done a wonderful job and we appreciate it. We have a little gift for you, which I will get to you at some point. A little certificate to use provisions to have a happy time. How lovely. Thank you. Thank you. It's been a real privilege to have been on this commission for some time and see at last some things happen. But you're all a terrific group of citizens and volunteers and members who bring a lot of dedication and expertise to what you do here in the town of Amherst is lucky, lucky that you are its committee. Well, we were lucky to have you lead us to finishing a lot of projects and your expertise is going to be missed. I'll be calling you unsure because you didn't know through your job, you know, just more about stuff. So you're not totally off the hook yet. Well, I'm around at the end of an email and at the end of a phone line. So thank you very much. That's very kind. Thank you. Almost you. Thanks. I hope I'll be seeing you. So we have to miss each other. Well, thank you. There's only one motion left, which as I'd like to say is not to be able. Oh yeah. Yeah. Sorry. Rats. I'm losing. It doesn't matter for you. I'm losing my marbles now. Good thing you have a new chair. I was going to suggest. So I don't know if you guys remember this from like two years or like a year ago, but we're up against this clock of whether zoom or in person meetings are going to be allowed after July 15th. And so all similar to last time, all indications are that at the 11th hour, they're going to pass some legislation to extend it. But so that's on July 15th. I was going to propose maybe we meet July 13th, which is a Wednesday just so I don't have to deal with them. If you remember last time I like it was like we had decided like two days in advance whether it was going to be in person and it was really stressful. Yeah, I'm sorry, Ben. On the 13th, I'm in New York. I'm at week giving presentations. So you're in that? Okay. Yeah, we could do it the week before or we could do it on the 13th or 20th. So you're in that whole week here in New York? Well, I'll be back on the 14th.  Well, I think it would be over Zoom if it's that week. So yeah, I'm available. Yeah, the 13th. I have a right agenda. But about like the 6th or the 7th either. It gives us more time between this meeting and the next meeting, but that's before the 15th. Less time between this meeting and next one. Yeah, but less time, but more time than if we didn't do that. It's before the 15th. Yeah, I mean, I think I'd rather just because that's like two weeks from now. So if any application, like that doesn't give time for any application. If there are any demolition applications to come in. So I mean, we could do the 14th, which is Thursday, if they've Jan said that worked for her. On the 14th, Jan? Yeah, I could come home and turn around and do this. We have to speak French at the meeting. Is that okay with everyone? I'd rather meet the 14th than the 7th. I actually have a conflict on the 7th with something else. I think the 14th sounds better from Ben's perspective. Yeah, time in between, but I can meet on the 14th. Back into the 14th. Okay, I'll do just to meet at meeting on Thursday.  Let's put it down.  Yeah, hopefully. Yeah. Okay. And you'll, before that time, Jane, I need to meet with you and get the preliminary speech and the yeti, yeti, yetis and all the tips. Okay. And I have to get this to you. That's important. Okay, we'll meet. Okay. So shall I make a motion to adjourn? Yeah. Anybody want to? Okay. Well, then we're adjourned. Thank you so much. Thanks, Jane. Thank you, Jane. Good night. Thank you. Good night, everybody.