It's, I guess, you appropriately, I think, Ben chose to not record the deliberations on Marianne. Right. But then you had to remember to hit it when we changed, changed the page. Okay. So the meeting is being recorded now. And so now our next applicant, let me just go back to the agenda quickly. We have the Emily Dickinson Museum. And so I'm going to add Celine Weber and Jane Wald to the meeting to make their presentation. Okay. And as a reminder, so there's two applications for the Dickinson Museum. And the first one is like their path and lighting project. And then a second quick one is a town project that just happens to be on their property. And it's for a welcome away finding sign. Okay. And I'm going to, I'm just, I'll make that and discuss that. Yeah. Okay. So, but we'll do their, their path and lighting project first. So, um, welcome Celine and Jane, both of you. You're muted currently, but I'll, uh, Oh, there's Jane. Okay. Okay. Well, I'm Jennifer Taub, um, the chair. I'm the chair of the commission and, um, I know Jane's been through this process before, but this briefly will invite you to make your presentation. And then, um, you know, during the public portion of the hearing, the commissioners may have questions or request more information. And then we'll close the public portion, although you'll still be with us. And then we'll discuss it amongst ourselves and then take a vote. So thank you for coming. And I will turn it over to both of you. Now. Thank you, Jennifer. I'm going to just begin by, uh, describing the goals of this project. Uh, The path. To fold. Um, the path. I'll start with the path itself. It's a, um, uh, we're endeavoring to, uh, re-instate a historic path between the homestead and the evergreens that was known to be, um, uh, very frequently traveled by members of the Dickinson family between their two homes. Uh, there are existing, uh, historic photographs that show the layout and suggest the materials of the path and where, uh, we would like to put that back in place, but as, as a, uh, historic feature, uh, and on a, on a very practical and much needed note to, uh, provide an accessible way for visitors to make their way between the two homes, uh, on their, uh, public tours of the property. Um, the lighting component, uh, includes the path. We need some kind of, um, lighting of the path during, um, shorter winter days when, uh, the sun goes down before our, uh, public hours are over and for our occasional evening events. We're also, uh, hoping to provide some, uh, architectural lighting to the various facades of the two houses. Um, it intending it to be kind of gentle lighting, but, um, the goal there is to, um, call some attention to the homes as, uh, uh, significant cultural assets right in the center of Amherst. Yeah. So with that, you will, uh, ask Selena to, to take over. Thank you. Thank you, Jane. Um, can you hear me? Okay. I have a different mic. Um, yes, I can hear you. Okay. Very well. Okay. Good. Um, thank you, Jane. Um, so, uh, my name is Selena Weber. I'm a landscape architect working with, uh, Martha Lyon of Martha Lyon landscape architects on these improvements that Jane mentioned. And I want to start by saying that, um, well, Martha's been involved in a number of projects with the museum. She's also, uh, I don't know, maybe 10 years ago, she worked on the, um, preservation plan for the town of Amherst. And as part of that, uh, community involvement, they found that overwhelmingly the town felt that the Dickinson houses were the most important asset in town. So this is really, um, an important feature. And, um, so the museum reached out to her to, um, uh, make some of these, uh, improvements on the property that Jane mentioned. Um, so the goals again were to highlight the, the architecture of these historic homes, uh, during evening hours, kind of, uh, extending their presence in town beyond just daylight. And also to, um, improve the safety, um, on the property. So, uh, you know, to, uh, illuminate the path to make it safe to walk, uh, during, um, darker hours. So, um, we, as part of this project, we worked with a architectural lighting designer to help us come up with, um, the best way to light these, um, facades and the path. And it was a, uh, uh, it's, it was not a simple process. Um, he actually came and worked on site to, um, test the temperature of the light and, uh, distance and really kind of fine tuned it to a point where it was, um, a beautiful without being overpowering. So, um, let me see. Um, Selena, I also have your, uh, this is like the 21 page, you know, like, um, lighting demonstrations. If this is a helpful tool for you. Yes. We'll, we'll want to, uh, probably refer to those. Okay. Um, but maybe, yeah, start with this one here. Um, so, uh, I'm just trying to find, I had something I wanted to say here. Um, right. So, uh, the, the, the second goal, um, was to increase the safety and the security by eliminating the paths, you know, making sure it was safe to walk, um, that you're not tripping over anything. And then providing some security lighting at night. So, um, the idea is to live, illuminate these two buildings, um, during evening hours. Um, and if you look at the plan, there are these fan shaped, um, little lights, uh, pointing, yes, there you go. Thank you, Ben pointing that, uh, at the, uh, facades. And so that fan shape, uh, indicates the, the beam of the light. And so we've worked on making sure that we're putting the light on the house and not spilling beyond the house. There's several different types of lights there. The ones that Ben was just pointing at those are, um, a broader beam than there are some lights that are, excuse me, um, placed much closer to the house. There are kind of a narrow wall washing light that kind of fills in some of those gaps as the two beams, um, leave some darker areas. Um, in addition to lighting the facades, um, we'll also be lighting, uh, on the evergreens, the, the tower, um, I don't know if that's the correct architectural term, but, um, and then the cupola on the homestead. And, um, so that, those are the lights illuminating the facades, then there's path lighting, which Ben's cursor is right there. Those circles indicate the downspread light from fixtures mounted in trees. And if you can look in the trees, there's little dark circles. Those are meant to indicate, there you go. The lights that are mounted on the trunk of the tree, they're pointing down and the circle is the approximate spread of the light. So we've tried to, uh, create a fairly even wash of light. There's some gaps, but it's not critical that the whole thing be lit, but to kind of create this, um, pathway that's visible. Um, they're also, um, on the backside of the homestead, there's those little fan lights. Those are downlights on a little pathway. Um, and near the garage, there are lights mounted on the garage and then there's the circle with the crisscross pattern that's indicating, uh, the spread of the light from the security lights. And then similarly on the backside of the evergreens, there are tree mounted security lights that are also, you know, down, downward pointing. And those security lights will be on all night long. The other lights will only be on in the evenings. The last bit of lighting is in front of the gateways, um, along the fence on the outside between the sidewalk and the fence. Um, it'll actually be probably better to look at that on one of the other drawings, Ben, because it's so small on this one. So if you scroll down, um, to the fence post, yeah, one more. So yeah, here the, the plan is blown up. If you scroll just a little, yeah. So you can see where the sidewalk is between the sidewalk and the fence post we're putting in a flush mounted recessed light, which points up at the fence post.  And you can see it in elevation and in plan in this drawing. Those are the different kinds of lights. I guess we could scroll back and look at the light elevations. Um, this is the homestead. I mean, the evergreens. And you can see these are, these lights are mounted on posts, on granite posts. Um, and, you know, we're aiming them on the house. And similarly, if you could scroll back up, the same thing is for the homestead. Um, there are the post mounted lights, which you can see on posts. And then that, um, like a wagon wheel, like a steering wheel, or a ships wheel light. It's just the symbol we used for those wall washing lights, which are closer to the house and, um, spread up the wall of the house. Okay. And then these ones are for the cupola. Those are for the cupola. They're mounted on the chimneys. Um, and so they won't be visible. Right. You know, to. To the street. Um, and then there's one more act. Um, one more, um, part of this is that the pendant lights. At the entrances to both of these, um, houses. Are currently quite bright. So we're going to tone them down. So they're a little more pleasant. Um, Great. And I noticed there was some pictures here of like the demonstration. Oh yes, there you go. So, um, the demonstration for the evergreens, which is shown right here was done a year or two ago. And, um, we captured it with photos. This is not up anymore. I hope you all had a chance to visit to see the homestead demonstration, which is still up. It's not all the lights that will be installing, but it is, um, representative of the post mounted lights that are, um, shining from farther away onto the house. So you can scroll down to le 11. This is what's up currently. So what's missing here is all the wall wash, not all the wall washing lights are in here. And the cupola is not lit. And I think there's one more picture, which this isn't a great picture. This is, um, A path light at the old Manson concord. Um, And so this is a starting point, but what we're planning to do is our lights will be, um, wider and the shroud will be longer. Um, I mean, shorter so that, uh, The effect is not so much of a spotlight like you're seeing in this drawing or in this photo, it'll be kind of a more even spread. Yeah. Very well sorted through. Yeah. Um, the photo metrics we've, uh, decided to use the 2200, um, lights on the homestead. That was, um, Nice and warm on the, um, evergreens, the lights. I don't have, we didn't have the, the photometric sheet when I submitted, um, we're 2700, um, Calvin. Um, the color of the evergreens is richer. So it kind of has the same effect. We didn't have to change the light to the 2200. And, uh, are you using the seven 11 or the 15 watt? Uh, we are using the, um, 15 watt. Oh, okay. Yeah. Although I have to say when we get ready to install it, the lighting designer did make it clear that he, you know, he may make some adjustments because we want these houses to look fabulous. You know, Um, the question, it seems like questions are about to be in order. Yeah. So this is Bruce speaking. Yeah. Um, first question is, uh, is this going before the planning board? As well as us. It is. Yes. We presented to the planning board and they've, um, They, uh, what's the word? They were going back to them because they wanted to hear what you had to say. Okay. Um, I don't know the planning board too well now. Nate, Ben, um, are there people on the planning board who have some wisdom when it comes to, uh, uh, exterior lighting? Um, there's multiple architects on the planning board. Well, they may have, uh, Um, one of the things that I've noticed, um, with lighting design over my 50 years, 30 of them, here, I guess, so let's say 30 is that, um, Is, is your lighting designer, um, based in, and in an, you know, in an urban area, they Boston based or, or do they? Yeah. They are. The, the tendency for urban. Lighting designers is to overlight rural. Um, Situations. Um, I've seen that over and again, particularly with schools, uh, where they, uh, They don't seem to understand that, uh, Hilltown schools and people who live in Hilltowns. Have a different sensibility when it comes to intensity of light. Then people in urban areas. And it's, it's profound, let me say. Um, Which is why I was thinking that as you looked at those, it may be that something less than the 30 watt. Um, Power might be sufficient. Might be. I mean, this is, this is speaking personally now, but I, I, I would, uh, Suggest only that, uh, Be aware that, uh, there may be an Amazon, Maybe different because we are, uh, although we're a country town, we've got a lot of city people living in it. And so it may not apply so much, but my concern. Uh, and it's more appropriately a concern that the planning board would have, I think. About the intensity of lighting and also the cut offs. It seems that. Do you, are you reasonably confident that the, uh, That there will be no spillage? Cause we probably should be concerned a little bit. About, uh, over, over spell and, and, and, and night sky, dark sky, lighting concerns and so forth. Uh, how, how can, how confident are you, uh, that the, uh, The targeting of the lights will really, uh, Be contained will be. Will be, will not creep past the building. Well, we worked really hard on placement of the lights so that we would achieve that. And obviously when it comes to, installation, that can be tweaked to, um, you know, this is just a drawing, but it will be tweaked to the architecture. The, uh, eaves of the house help us somewhat so that, um, Ben, if you scroll to one of the elevations. So, um, The homestead doesn't have as much eaves, but if you look at the angle, the six, for example, um, on that. The, the, what will wash your tight lights? Yeah. Yeah. So, you know, we're going to try to, uh, to, we're going to point them in a way that, you know, we're not pointing them up into the sky. Cause. We might as get our, get our money's worth and point it at the house, which is what we're trying to do. Right. That's a good answer. Yeah. Um, and the, on the evergreens, the, if you scroll to that, the, um, the Eve is even longer. So that kind of helps us have a little play there. Yes. Okay. Does that answer your question? I'm done for the moment. Yes. Okay. I have some comments. Uh, Peggy and then we'll go to Bruce. Okay. Peggy, go ahead. Okay. Um, my concern has to do with that area between the Dickinson property and the back of the Amherst college residence hall. Right now that, and I live on the corner of Leslie and triangle. I know this, I know this neighborhood. Round, you know, round the clock for many years now. And it is very dark. At night. In that zone. And my concern, and there's, and that area serves as a bit of a wildlife preserve. And the last. It's been particularly intense the last few weeks. There's been some foxes seeing. There were even some bears in the neighborhood. It's like, because it's been darker and quieter, which I assume has to do with the pandemic. And there are no students in the two dorms, the two Amherst college residences are not occupied right now. The ones that are on left C street. Um, just, I have a concern about it. That over lighting that, that wildlife area. That's one of the few areas right in town. Where there is a sense of old Amherst and. And the mystery and the quietness and the darkness, the nights are dark. We're not in the city. So. I just, I just have some, some questions about how, whether this adequately preserves the sense of. Old Amherst, when the Dickinson home, when there were not bright lights, the room. And I would guess I don't even know what kind of lighting they were using to, to travel up and back, but, but just how, whether, whether this would go too far. Into a modernizing lit up. Dimension. My husband and I took the drive last night. No, it's a little late to just see what it felt like driving that by the two, the two homes. And. And you know, there were lights, you can see them and. It felt to me proportional to the neighborhood to Amherst to evening. In a way that, that having. I'm just concerned about it possibly being overly lit. And I know so little about lighting that I don't. Stage lighting. I know, I don't know. I don't know the landscape light. So I don't, I don't quite, you know, I don't feel like an expert bringing, bringing an opinion in, but, but a neighbor and a neighbor of very many years. I don't know. I don't know. I think that's very, I think that's critical that it not overpower that, that what is it? What is the purpose? Is it to say, hello, we've got the Emily Dickinson or is, or is it safety? Walking between the two things. I'm not sure quite what the, what the. What the. Designing of the lighting is, it's. Which needs are being served. I think that's very, I think that's critical that it not overpower that, that what is it? What is the purpose is it to say, hello, we've got the Emily Dickinson or is, or is it safety? Walking between the two things. I'm not sure quite what, what the. What the. Designing of the lighting is. It's. Which needs are being served. And how, how. So raises questions for me, but I, I, I don't, I'm not an expert. I don't have answers. So I don't know if this is helpful or not, but. They were bears and they were foxes this week in that, in that, in that zone and that's for better or for worse, but that's where we live in rural Amherst and we share it with the wildlife. Yeah. Yeah. So that's my concern. Nice. Did you want to respond to that? Did you have a follow up question? Well, it was something a little closer to a point of order. In a way. Or it's more a question, let's say, but not of the applicant, but of ourselves and, and, and Nate. It seems to me that this is coming before the Historic District Commission, Local Historic District Commission. Looking for approval for the ballards and the various visible elements that the lighting will sit on, which is almost nothing because some of them are flashed with the ground and some of them are in the trees, but there are granted posts or the support them. So it seems to me that it's, it's those posts and those, those infrastructural presences that we're being asked to, to, to, to, to consider. It seems to me that the, the lighting itself is not something that, I mean, because of course, when we look at, is it consistent with the historic character? Of course, there's no change except that the historic character is being illuminated when the sun doesn't do it. And, and so we can, we can appreciate that, I guess, but it's my question is, do we have just the, it's the actual lighting and so forth? Do we have any standing in regard to that? Or is that purely the planning board? Bruce, that's a good question. In the Amherst media building, we definitely weighed in on their sign in the lighting. We did, but it doesn't mean that we should have. The whole point of this application or the huge portion of it is to do with lighting. And that was not the case with Amherst media. So the question has to do with, do we have business? Should we have business in coming to judgment on the lighting as opposed to the infrastructure that's supporting the lights? Yeah, Bruce, as, as we were reviewing this, I was, you know, I was kind of thinking that the commission could have a, you know, an agreement or something that goes to the planning board, you know, so whether or not this is approved, you know, there is concern for, you know, being dark sky compliant and, you know, if it's, if things are being over overly lit. I do think it's a, you know, to answer your question squarely, I'm not sure with Amherst media, I mean, the commission looked at the fixtures themselves too, like you're doing here. Yeah. Didn't discuss so much how much light was being shown other than, you know, it's not going to go over the property boundaries or onto neighboring properties. So. Yeah. I mean here, the question of, you know, how much is visible? It is some of just the ballards and the posts and maybe the fixtures would be. If some of the fixtures would be so. I mean, could be a commission wants to send a transmittal to the planning board just, you know, saying that there was a discussion about, you know, being dark sky compliant or something and it's not, you know, it's not part of the, the vote. It looked to me as though it was just on the. On the. Yeah. Yeah, I'm just wondering. To Selena or Jane, are there any. Images of the fixtures themselves in here. Okay, cool. You see, they're nicely hooded. So it does look as though they're. They're equipped to do the job, so to speak. At least that's what I thought. Yeah. And then one question I had, this is Nate again, are the, are the lights in the trees? Are they. Has the electrical inspector or staff commented on that. In terms of attaching light fixtures to. We haven't gotten any comments on that. These will be 12 volt lights. It's, it's, it's commonly done. Right. Right. You know, it's low voltage. Yeah. Yeah. But it's, you know, it's tricky. You've got to bring them in underground.  Right. Not against a building, but against a tree. So it, it can be. Awkward, but it can be done well or less well. And I'm, it sounds like these folks know what they're doing. Right. I'm sorry. Jim Jim's been wanting to ask a question, Jim. Or make a comment. You know, I think Bruce brought up a good point about the dark skies. That was my main thing. But the lights that are currently on the garage at the homestead. Well, they'd be similar in, in, in the sense that they have a cone shape on the outside of each bulb. Right. Really is directed very specifically. Or like a. Not like a flood light that goes all over, but one that's specific. Correct. So it will be very much like the lights on the path. There'll be light. They'll be mounted to the corner of the garage pointing down. And it will be less intense than the current. Lighting on the garage that is there currently. Those are very strong, but. Question. Yes, Karen. The lights, the path between the two buildings. Is that, are you planning to keep that on as part of the lighting or is that just used. In the evening when you have something going on. That's a good question. So the currently the pathway is planned to be lit. You know, in the winter, when it starts to get dark in the evenings from maybe four to six. And then occasionally if there's a special event, the lights would be turned on. Yeah, that's good. And obviously all this lighting has separate switches. So you can be very specific what lights you're going to. Correct. Good. Okay. But then that's actually a good question. Just following on Karen's, but the lights. Are they on all night? Kind of for security or just. The security lights are on all night. The house will be lit till 10, 10, 30. Oh, okay. Okay. Thank you. And Peggy, did you have a question? Well, I guess what I'm hearing to clarify this. Okay. I'm the house between, between the, uh, college residents and the Dickinson properties. That area would still be dark. It sounds like, am I, am I understanding it correctly? Or. Yes. Okay. Well, then. It's very thoughtful. The whole process is obviously been very, very, very carefully thought through and research and that, that answers my questions. Okay. I don't know if the area won't be lit illuminated really. Okay. Yeah. Okay. I think that makes sense. Um, and is, is it already lit between, um, the house where the offices are now and the museum? Yes, there's path lighting there. But you're not working on that. Different kind of path lighting. Yeah. And it was a separate project. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So should we, um, You know, Bruce is very helpful. Helpfully pointed out. Should we, um, You know, look at the fixtures themselves. I mean, I maybe we kind of did, but when you, not just the light fixtures, but the post, do we have to be, um, are those new additions, the posts that they're going on? They are. If you actually, Ben, if you scroll up to the lighting plan, um, I put a picture of what we're proposing. It's a granite post. Right. Um, it'll be core drilled to bring the, the wire through it. Keep scrolling. Scrolling down here. Yeah. Okay. Um, That one. No, no. Go up, up to the lighting plan. There's a little picture on the lighting plan. Oh, okay. Does anyone see it? The lighting plan is a separate document. Keep going. L five. It's a separate document. Sorry about that. The light fixture photo. That's kind of what it's going to look like. Most of them are going to be 18 inches tall. There's a couple that are, uh, on the. West side of the evergreens, which will be three or four feet, but all the others are like 18 inches. Yeah. Well, that's pretty safe. I would say. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Which is good. Very exciting project. Yeah, I think it's exciting. I think. And also, uh, you remember that from the street, there's that hemlock hedge. So you're actually not going to even see the posts or the lights on top of the post. Yeah. Okay. Yeah. So long as the hedge survives. Yeah. It's looking good right now. Doing well. Yeah. Okay. Um, are there any other questions or comments? I think it looks gorgeous. Yeah. It's just such a privilege to live up the street from it. And I. I think this is my yard. I would say. Bruce's suggestion about not overlighting. It really is a wonderful addition to that part of town. Yes. I mean, it's interesting. I looked at the, uh, those, uh, distribution charts and you've got, uh, two plus foot candles at 50 feet out. And, um, and, and I know that, for example, when you're, uh, in gas stations and so forth, which are pretty well lit, the pavement out that far is less than one. So it's this three times the amount of light. I think that you might see in a gas station. It seems to me if that, if, if, if I'm reading that, um, photometric diagram correctly. So it would seem to me that the, uh, professor, uh, uh, wattage would, would, would be fine, but that's, that's just my feeling. One thing that could be, one thing that could be done, uh, which probably wouldn't be very difficult at all, although it might have a, it might be problematic from a, from a custodial control point of view is if you put the whole damn thing on a dimmer, even if you could lock the dimmer down so that you could, uh, put the, the, the powerful, the more powerful lighting in, and then you could, um, adjust it to exactly what you want. Uh, um, uh, the course of six months or so or a year. Bruce, did you have a chance to drive by and see the lighting at night? No, I didn't. I, I thought about it. And then I, I didn't, I didn't realize that it was so elaborate until I, this afternoon sat down with the lighting plan. Um, and then I realized that I should have, but of course it was too late by then. But I drove by last night and I have to say, I didn't find it too bright. Okay. I drove by last night too and I felt the same way. Well, we would have to be sad. We would, we would have to know that what is there now and we already know that it's not quite exactly what's proposed. Yeah. I was going to suggest maybe if, um, and Nate, feel free to weigh in if you, if you all want to, if you approve the fixtures. Um, and then, or, you know, whatever you want to do, but then maybe like make, uh, uh, uh, a suggestion to the planning board that, um, you are or not concerned about the lighting and it's, um, you know, the impact on the integrity of the, you know, historic nature of the neighborhood could be a way to like separate it out. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. You know, it's interesting to, I just quickly looked through the bile on everything. You know, we say lighting. And we don't really, you know, we say lighting in its entirety. Whether that's both the illumination, you know, and the fixture. So, um, some districts define it better, but. Um, you know, the color lighting they're using, it's really on the, you know, the yellow or side, which is nice to warmer light. It's not, you know, they don't go above the 3000. Um, And yeah, you know, so I, I think it could be that there's right discussion or vote on the fixtures themselves, right? The hardware and then maybe something separate about the illumination. Okay. I think that's, that's, that's well said. Yeah. And I would just even add when I went by last night, I. I almost thought it was a little under, I know. Like it didn't really feel like lights were on. So I definitely, you know, so if they weren't, if it wasn't as bright as it was going, as it is intended to be. This is, I mean, I don't know why this is not just my opinion. It seemed like even if it was a little brighter, then it appeared last night that that would be okay. Yeah. Can I clarify something there? Yes. So, you know, our intention is to reveal this architecture. It's not to put a spotlight on it. And so, um, the, the wall washing lights, my understanding is to kind of fill some of those, uh, gaps to make the, the wash on that house more even. So, you know, we're not trying to, uh, make this Disneyland. We're trying to show.  Yeah. Yeah. I think, I think I've had, we've had our say of this and it's, and everything that you've proposed, uh, has the hallmark of, of professional consideration and thoughtfulness. Um, so that suggests to me that my concerns will be, um, probably not realized. Um, so I, and particularly having said what we've said, it's probably enough for you to take that in, into your calculus to the extent that you haven't already done so. And, and also the planning board is, is going to have a similar, um, concern I would think. Right. And maybe with, they'll have more. Roof says there to have more expertise. Um, So I think with, uh, that there's no more questions, we can, uh, have a motion to close the public portion of the meeting. Um, but anyone, I can't make the motion. So. Oh, so moved. Second. I second. Oh, was that Karen. Thank you. Okay. All in favor. Yes. Hi. So, um, so should we, um, I, you know, uh, either have more discussion or move to. Issue the certificate for the hardware. It's again, it sounds like that's what we can issue a certificate of appropriateness for. And then if we want to. You know, just include our comment. You know, our, just our, um, maybe.  You know, when that have that suggestion go the planning board. Yes. That we are ready probably to make a motion. Unless there's some more conversation about approving the lights themselves and the mounts that they'll be on. Well, I would make the motion. and trust that the conversation regarding lighting intensity and so forth be simply relayed by staff. I don't personally feel strongly enough about it that I feel it needs to come in a form of a letter or a memo or anything. Do the rest of you agree? I agree. I agree. Okay. Well, in that case, let me move to approve the grounding of a certificate of appropriateness for the lighting and pathway related to the Dickinson and Evergreen's house, finding that the proposed work meets the review criteria expressed in sections 8.1 and 8.2 of the Amherst local district bylaw and that the proposal is compatible with the overall appearance of the neighborhood and will not have a negative impact on the Dickinson local historic district. The work shall be executed in accordance to the documentation submitted by and I think Nate, if you could fill in the title, the Martha Lyon landscape architect has dated and the drawings L1 to LN. And I don't think I'm going to put any specific requirements so that's it. So just basically with the in accordance with the documentation submitted then in so noted for its source and date and title. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, Bruce. That was a lot to go over. A little motion. Is there a second? Second. Thank you, Jim, seconded. Okay. So we will do, as we have to do, since we're remote or we're having a virtual meeting as a voice vote and at the top of my screen is Peggy. Yes, I approve. And your name? Page four, sorry. Thank you. Jim? Jim Lombly, I approve. Thank you. Karin? Karin Winter, I approve. Thank you. And Bruce? Bruce Coldham, I approve. And thank you, Greta? Greta Wilcox, I approve. Thank you. And I'm Jennifer Taub and I approve. So you will be issued a certificate of appropriateness and I think we all agree that we're very excited about this. Yes. Yes. Do these very thoroughly conceived? Yeah. And I'll convey this to Chris and the planning board. Okay. Thank you all for hearing this application and we're excited also. Yeah. Your thorough discussion. We appreciate it. Okay. Good luck. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Stella. Okay. And if I could just add a postscript here. The reason for my initial mentioning of the difference between urban values with exterior lighting and rural was made clear on a Hilltown school or actually it was the Hardwick Elementary School some years ago. And it wasn't just that we removed one or two in lights and so forth. The exterior lighting was ratcheted down 300 or 400 percent. I mean, it was a huge reduction that the town wanted in terms of, I mean, I was working for Bill Gillen at the time and Bill and I were kind of amazed. Yeah. And I don't think Amos is the same as that by any means, but it just taught me that one has to be mindful of where the lighting designers are coming from and how it differs depending on the clientele. Yeah. Great. Thanks, Bruce. The new LED lights were so intense and now they've mellowed them. Yeah. They're mellowing the lights. I remember when they first came out, kind of hurt my eyes driving to Northampton, but they've mellowed, I think. Right. I think so as well. They've been able to improve the quality of the light by having a greater color range in the light than this makes up. And it's changing all the time. It's a devil of a job to keep up. But I mean, lighting designers have the worst time in a way or the most exciting time in another way because, of course, they're needed because it's the wild west in terms of the product range out there. Well, I'm glad they're mellowed. I'm glad that they're improving. Yeah. But I wondered if the Hadley might be also the intensity, rather. Right. Well, the museum's looking better. Although, I mean, it's amazing what they're, but it's gorgeous. Great. Great. I think it looks so beautiful. Yeah, it really does. Nice when somebody leaves you $80 million since it's light. So we have one more, or we have two more applications to go over. One, this one will hopefully be, it's also on the town's, it's on the Dickinson property, but it's a town project. And then after that, we have 19 McClellan Street and Jamie from 19 McClellan Street is here. So, and I think we might as well just do this, do the Dickinson project first while we have if Jane is still here. But yeah, just a little bit of background, basically the town is embarking on like a new wayfinding sign project.  And it was put on pause when town council came into into being and but the money's still been there. And so slowly we've been working on the design and the site and the location for these new signs. And the plan is to have four, yeah, four, like kind of like welcome to Amherst signs around town. And then also these like directional post signs that are mostly in the town center, which, you know, point to like Jones Library Town Hall, like, you know, UMass all the different landmarks. But one of the welcome signs is basically at the intersection of Main Street and Triangle Street. And we'll be replacing the existing Emily Dickinson Museum sign. And, you know, we've been working with Amherst College and Jane and the Dickinson Museum to basically incorporate some of the components of the Dickinson Museum sign into the welcome sign. So it can also point to the Dickinson sign or sorry to the museum as well. So I'm gonna show you, yeah, here it is perfect, what we've been working on. And so essentially, do you all know where we are in town right now? This is the intersection of Main and Triangle Street. Yep. So if you're at the intersection at that light, you know, Triangle Street will be to your right and then you'd be looking straight ahead and you'd see this sign. And so this has gone through the design review board at this point. And they've made comments which we've incorporated. And now we're coming to the local historic district for this sign in particular. And then the next step in the process would be, you know, some of the other signs need to go through the planning board for various permits. But this is the one that's in the local historic district, you know. Right. And did the Emily Dickinson Museum also, like Jane, did you have input? Yes. Yeah. So the idea, so there's a few things that we noted, like one, we made sure to try to take the elements of this sign incorporated into the new panel here. So the logo comes in over here. And then the, you know, we're pointing out where the entrance is. And I should note to like this brown color, it corresponds to the rest of the wayfinding system. Right. So these are going to be the ones that are placed around town.  So we've been consistent with that brown color for the Dickinson Museum and other things such as the West Cemetery. So that's where the brown color comes from here. So it's another kind of cue for people that it's all part of the same sign system. Branding. Branding, yeah. I love it. I think it's wonderful. I interject something. Yes. Yes, him. I'm not a real fan of block letters. I like them when they have serifs on them. Right. Most of the common one that we see on the Internet is Times Roman. But something like that. And that kind of, you know, this is common, you know, the block letter. I'll admit that, but it might give a little bit of cachet and quality if it was a serif. It has had serifs on them. Is that too close? Maybe. I don't agree with you, Jim, but it's not a strong disagreement. It's just as I think yours is not not an emphatic critique. But I think I would, I guess it's, you know, I think it's because I'm, I've just had too much time in the architectural business. And so lettering on drawings so I'm probably not a good, I'm just I'm discrediting myself here. I think I shouldn't say anything because I'm very comfortable with this style of lettering. But as I said, I think that might be because of where I've come from. Great. Jim is an artist. Yeah. Well, I think the college uses serif printing. Okay.  Should be like Walmart up there or something. I guess the problem would be that, that this is part of a science system, right? And we've corrected that there are already signs that are installed that have committed to this lettering style or not. Not installed, only designed at this point. Oh, well then, then Jim's comments should be brought forward. Yeah. And I do agree with Jim. I think I like this sign. I like all the correspondence, but those block letters are kind of very blunt. I know they should be blunt, but they could be more beautiful. Is it the, is it the Amherst or the Emily Dickinson Museum? No, the Amherst. The Amherst. So I'm just holding this up. Would this be like a serif? I don't know if you can even see it. They're really close. I can't see that. Put it closer, Jennifer. I just googled it. There you go. Yes, there's a serif on that. Yeah. The whole idea behind serifs leads your eye to visually go from one letter to the next letter. Rather than an in-your-face lettering. Yeah. I agree. And in so far, is it, Jim's speaking specifically of the word Amherst, and I suppose Massachusetts, I'm much more in agreement than with the directional lettering below it. So who would that suggestion go to? We're working with a designer on this. So we could, yeah, we could pass that along.  The colors are great. Oh, Ben, you don't think it's going to delay it anymore? This could be months of conversation. No, I'm hopeful. We've been derailed by more than this before. Yeah. I actually think that this is a little change that the designers could easily make that will have a big impact. I mean, those letters are pretty darn blunt and could be a little bit more beautiful and still a message across. I agree so strongly with Jim. Great. Okay. I think Ben, right? Is it Amherst and Massachusetts are both, are they raised? I forget if it's just Amherst now. No, I don't, oops, sir. I don't think they're raised. Here's the specs for them. Are they painted? Oh, plate, aluminum letters, stud mounted. Oh, yeah. So they do have a little bit of, they are raised. Well, they would have to be purchased as serifed. I guess that's possible. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Are there any other questions or comments? Jane, maybe I was wondering, oops, where did, like maybe if, you know, this is a nice serif on here. You know, this one is sans serif, but maybe we could try to, you know, play off of the existing font and, yeah, use that for the panel signs and maybe something a bit more bolder for the welcome to Amherst, but we have a nice font. Are there signs at the roundabout? Are there signs at the roundabout that go, aren't there signs there? Aren't there signs at the roundabout that goes into the university that direct you, would it be the same letter, the same font and the same lettering as that sign? I think it's consistent. So, yeah, the, you know what I'm talking about? Yeah, I know exactly what you're talking about. Yeah, those point to downtown and there's two of them at the roundabout. So, yeah. Right. So there's, is there a concern for consistency between the signage and lettering? Yeah, I mean, that's a valid concern. I think there's already some differences between those signs. These are a little bit darker, I believe. Those are a bit more, have more of a rusty color. And I think they, this, those were done without, those were done by the business, the bid, the business improvement district. Whereas these are coming through the town. And so, we're, we're trying to match those. The same designer, but we're putting a little bit more details into these. And so I think, yeah, that this is the same font as the roundabout signs. So, you know, I guess there's some concern about matching. Well, if we were to move to approve, or let's say as we move to approve, I imagine that we will, we could express an opinion, or at least a preference for a serif front for the, for the word amist and leave it at that then, then because it does seem that the committee, the commission is, I, it feels that there's a consensus on, on that topic. So, if we simply put it into the motion, into the, into the certificate, and let the, as a preference, not as a stipulation, then leave it just because there, there are these considerations that we may not be aware of that would have to be integrated. But it seems that there's a, there's a consensus and that, and a, and a strongly felt consensus that we would prefer to see a serif lettering, a serif font for the word amist. So thank you, Jim. You're, we, yeah, thanks Jim. Here's our real estate representative, but you're also an artist. So that, yeah. Well, that's the strength here. Just kind of upgrade the quality. I think of the visual impact of it. Yeah. The block letters, but it certainly, I don't think we should be guided by what's at the roundabout that the bid designed. Yeah. So the bid, you know, they use the same designer, but then they, they, you know, they took it a little bit in their own direction. So the thought would be that the signs that Ben's presenting now with changes would be the final wayfinding signs, you know, the four signs around town. And we'd always, ideas, we'd go back to the, to the roundabout and change that sign. So we'd want, you know, all these other signs to be consistent and then have the option of changing the first sign that went in. Yeah. Yeah. Is this a public meeting? Do we have to close it? No, no. So do we want to, yeah, have a motion to close the public portion of the meeting so we can move to a vote? So moved. Well, no, somebody else, I'm not allowed to make the motion. So someone, no, I did. Oh, you did. Okay. Thank you, Bruce. Second? Second. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Greta. Okay. So I think we're ready to go to a vote. Are there any other comments or questions that any of the commissioners have? What exactly are we voting on? We're voting on the sign. Okay. So yes, we're voting on if we, well, you know, this is an interesting question. Are we actually giving a certificate, Nate, or just, I mean, are we giving a certificate to the town if we vote to approve? I assume so. It seems like it could be in two parts. If I might suggest that we vote to approve the development of a sign, but I'm feeling like we're getting muddied over now, whether we're also including a stipulation on what the print would be. Maybe that, Bruce, yeah, I think I can get us through that problem. I was going to suggest maybe if you approve like the idea of the sign or, and then, you know, we could, we could also we've done this with the DRB where we take their suggestions and then just like email out the result and then if there's anyone who doesn't approve, they can respond just individually saying we still have an issue with this and then we can hold another hearing. Yeah. I guess my question is would they change the sign just for the LHD if the commission? No. No, I don't think so. Yeah, so, okay. Yeah, so we're... Well, I think it's a good thing to add a sign. I'll just, I think signage like that, I think has some cash today. It's delightful and I think we should go ahead with that. I agree. Well, I'll move to approve the granting of a certificate of appropriateness for the sign, the proposed wayfinding sign of the town of Amherst to be located at the intersection of Triangle and Main Street, finding that the proposed work meets the review criteria expressed in 8.1 and 8.2, the local historic district and that it is compatible with the overall appearance of the neighborhood and will not have a negative impact on the Dickinson local historic district. And then we could add the commission, however, would prefer to see a serif font applied to the word Amherst in this sign and therefore similar signs in other locations around the town. Okay. Okay, thank you. I second that. Okay, Karen. Yeah, thank you. So if we can move to a voice vote for all in favor, starting with Bruce. Bruce called him, I approve. Rita? Rita Wilcox, I approve. Oh, I have to go up. I'm sorry. Peggy? Peggy Schwartz, I approve. Thank you. Jim? Kim Blomway, I approve. Thank you. And Karen? Karen Winter, I approve. And Jennifer Taub, and I approve. And thank you very much, Jane. Yeah, thank you, Jane. Yeah, we appreciate that. And I just wanted to add, maybe another item we could take up is signs entering the two local historic districts, but that's a different meeting. I agree. That would be cool. Yeah. Okay. All right. Well, thank you all again. Yeah. And thank you. And I'm in luck with all your work. Thank you. And I'll see you soon, Jane. Bye-bye. Jane and I have a historical commission meeting after this. Oh, you're kidding. So it goes. And Nate, I should add as well. Okay. Well, it's 545, so maybe we could finish at 6, but yeah. Okay. So we are going to move on now to 19 McClellan Street and is the applicant here? I believe so. Yep. Yes. So, Jamie, I've promoted you as a panelist and you can unmute yourself. Hello. Hello. Hi, Jamie. Thanks for joining us and for your patience. I have your application on the screen here for all to see. And go ahead, Jennifer. I was just going to say, I don't know if you can see me, Jamie. We can't. I'm Jennifer Taub at chair of the commission and, you know, we appreciate your being here. So yeah, we'll turn it over to you and Ben to make the presentation. And then the commissioners may have some questions and that would compose the public portion of the meeting. And then you'll stay with us, but we will move in to the hearing portion and we will make a decision one way or the other, most likely on your application today. That would be our goal. So we'll turn it over to both of you. I don't know if you're both making the presentation or Jamie. Thank you, Jennifer. So yeah, we're just looking to update this front porch that's kind of, you know, rotten and disrepair. And basically, we're hoping that as close as the way it is with updated materials, such as composite decking and all like PVC material. So we won't have rotting wood. I did email Ben a couple pictures. Oh, you have them right on there already. Yeah, from your previous application. Yeah. Okay. I resent a few because I wasn't sure if you had those. Oh, perfect. Okay. So yeah, that picture there that's on the screen is the treks transcend railings. It's all like solid composite material. The posts that are in that picture are not the ones because this deck, this front porch is going to have the eight foot colonial posts, which if you don't have it here, it's in a new email I just sent you. Oh, there they are. It would be posts kind of like that to resemble the ones that were there, but it's a composite material. And then let's see. So that picture is just for the white vinyl lattice on the bottom, the wood there. I just kind of grabbed pictures online of the material we're using. So yeah, it would just be the white composite lattice PVC. And the trim boards will be all white PVC, like the fascia board on the deck. And around the lattice, we're proposing just white PVC. And the decking boards themselves would be treks, pebble, gray. And then the posts are remaining the same. The posts are going to be a composite material, but they're colonial style posts like that picture right there. That's the posts. Okay, I do have a question. Does you have that really, right now there's that really nice design at the top of the post? Yes. And is that not going to be there? I'm trying to find an updated piece, but I mean, I could always leave those and keep them installed. I mean, they're not rotted out. We could just reinstall those just the way there are, if you guys prefer to have them for the historical value. Okay, I see just they're separate from that, right?  So I'm not touching that ceiling or roof that we're not proposing to do anything with that at the moment. So those could be reattached to the new post I put in. Do you guys prefer to have those there? I think they're beautiful. They really add to the house. I agree. And there's not much updated stuff I could change it to that would look the way that does. Yeah, well, that's good to know. I agree, Greta. I think that kind of gives it the look. Are the colonial poles the same size as the poles now or are they bigger? They are the same. They look a little different because the railings existing, as you can see, they're only I think it was like less than 30 inches tall. So the square part on the bottom of the posts continues up higher so it can accept regulation railings that 36 inch railings into it. But you're keeping. Wait for me for the news. Oops, Peggy here. And you're keeping the the current railing height, is that correct? I mean, the building code, if it were more than 30 inches from the deck to the ground, would ask you to make that porch railing higher. But it looks like you might not be let's say that you can be 30 inches. And so you can keep the railing height as it is and not make it higher. Is that correct? No, that's not what I was trying to say. The railings that I'm proposing come there 36 inches tall. What I believe maybe what I was trying to say is the colonial posts that hold up the roof, the square part on the post itself on the new ones continues up higher to accept updated 36 inch tall railing. Yes, but you could posing taller than is existing because it's not code what's existing. Well, but it could be if it's less than 30 inches. If the if the if the porch is 30 inches or less above grade, then you don't need to have the high railings, which I would encourage you not to have. Okay, I understand what you're saying. I do not have that exact measurement on hand. I would encourage you to bring some dirt in if you don't. Okay, so you guys would prefer you would prefer to have the shorter railing? I would. I honestly never considered that portion of it. I know. I see it. I see the lack of that consideration all too frequently. Yeah, and then the and then the pole could be slender further down and that makes the whole look different. Yeah, well, I think what he's saying is the pole would have to be the same because otherwise he has to go and have it turned and everything. So I think that having the post with the square base section going up about 36 or 37 inches is probably something that I think I could live with. But the problem with lifting those railings up, which is not what we have. And this is right in the front. And of course, the windowsills are low as well. All of this is working together. And so if we were to have a code compliant, shall we say for where the drop off was more than 30 inches, it just looks awkward. It makes the porch front porches look smaller. It conflicts with the windows there. It just looks silly. And I think we should obligate the applicant to do what is necessary to achieve code compliance with the railing that is currently there and install the new one to the same dimension. I would agree. Yeah, I agree. So we can keep the same spindles. Oh, Jim, do you have? Jim, did you want to say something? No, I mean, I agree with what... Oh, okay. Your light went on, so I didn't know. Yeah. The question though, what about the hand railing down from the top of the porch steps down to the ground, the entrance walkway? Is that being changed, Jamie? Yes, I was proposing to continue the tracks, transcend hand rails right down the sides of the stairs. With the height, I have to renegotiate the plan there because I guess the height of the hand rail would be pretty low if I do lower railings. Has nothing to do with the stairs. We'll meet in a post. Could you not use the railings that are already there? Are they metal? Yes. Well, I think it would look nicer to have the wood. Yeah. Composite, yes. Yeah, I don't think those hand railings are so beautiful. It should be a round piece of metal. I don't think that's like original. No, I'm sure. No, I actually think it would look much better if you could continue the same railing going down at the lower height or maybe it's or no, it doesn't matter. Couldn't you have a higher height? Yeah. I mean, so just that the post on the left at the top of the stairs where it goes from the railing to the stair rail, I think would have to be a little taller to accept a hand rail at the proper height there. Yes, it would. Can I mention that when I visited the property, I felt that the top of the porch floor was more than 30 inches from the ground level. That's going to trigger that, as Bruce brought out, if the railing is changed, maybe it will need to be higher. We've got one, two, three, four and a half rises. If they're six foot rises, if they're six inch rises, then we're under 30 inches. Well, there's five if you count. The one that goes to the porch, right? One, two, three, four, five. That's right. I believe the left side of the deck might be a little higher than the stairs are off the top of my head, but I didn't want to weigh in on that because I do not have the exact measurement on hand. But I've done this before. I just bring a few inches of mulch in to make up the difference so that the inspectors can, with clear conscience, approve the installation. Okay. Yeah, I agree with that. Bruce, we're learning your tricks. So this is Nate. Everyone's for people who haven't introduced myself. I think the commission could have a condition in the permit or certificate that if building code allows that the lower existing railing remain, and then if it needs to be changed by code, it would be. Otherwise, like the Nule post at the top of the stairs would have to be higher to accommodate a railing for the stairs. Yeah. Peggy, did you want, was that Peggy the one to say something? Ask? No. Oh, okay. No, not me. Yeah. Well, so I do have a question. This, so just maybe a confirmation that this, these metal banisters will not be there. That there'll be wood. There'll be PVC. Right.  If Ben could scroll down a little, I have a picture of, it would look like that, but her proposing, well now to shorten the height of the actual deck railing right there, which we should order. But that post would have to be about that height to accept the railing. I don't think we can drop the height of the railing. I think you're right. I think it's probably, I mean, it's often done, but it's, it's, it's, it's probably not something that we want to get institutionally involved in stipulating. Yeah. I know by code, there's a minimum and a maximum, which we would not meet the minimum if I, I stayed with that same height of the existing railing. That's it. And that's the different part of the code that has nothing to do with whether you're 30 inches above grade or not. Right. So, so basically we would have to put a railing in like this if we put a railing in. And then we would accept or not, depending on how we feel about changing the height of the existing enclosure. I still feel that that I would, if it were my house, I would put the railing at the, maintain the railing height as it is notwithstanding that there would be a new post and a higher handrail that goes down the stair. But if everybody understands what I'm talking about, we can decide whether I'm a minority view on this or not. No, I agree with you, Bruce. I think architecturally it, it takes a way to have it be higher for all the reasons that you mentioned the windows and just the size of the porch. I think it would look more harmonious. And yeah. So I think you, you worded it very well that we would accept it to be this size if the code would allow that. And we strongly prefer that. Yeah. Okay. The lower rail. Yeah. So I'd like to try and clarify real quick with everything I gather. So I guess what I'd be proposing now is to maintain the low height of the railings using the trex composite railings and updated colonial columns to replace the existing columns. With that trim added. It's a bracket. To save the top historic and reattach onto the new posts. Right. And then the trex transcend handrails on the stairs, which I believe that, like I said, that left post at the top of the stair would have to be a little higher, but the railing would still be lower. Yeah. So that's where, from what I gather, where we're at. And I'm happy to do all that if there's anything else. Okay. Thank you. That's good. Is there anything anyone would like to add or ask or No. Okay. Move to close the public portion of the hearing. Second. Second. Thank you, Peggy. Okay. All in favor. Yes. I know. My computer has gone to sleep on me again. Well, I think that was a terrific. Yeah, it was a good, good discussion. Yeah. No, we receptivity of the applicant. Are we, are we ready to consider a motion here? This is Nate again. I just, before we leave this, as Jamie, you mentioned before that you're not touching the roof or the ceiling, but so where the vertical soffit on the on the beam or the fascia right on the porch and picture with the stairs. So all of that just is going to remain. Right. That the owners weren't interested on touching that part at the moment. I think that's definitely would be a future project, but they wanted that the deck is getting pretty rotten. So I think that's what has right now. And are you re-roofing the porch or is it the roofing? The ceiling, roofing, fascia, everything. The top of those posts, beyond that, I'm not touching anything. I'm just going to slide a new post in where those are. And then, you know, for the deck, the lower part, I'm going to put temporary support to remove the whole existing deck framing and everything put in new sauna tubes or, or to like and new framing and then, you know, decking and everything else we discussed. Yeah. I ask because it'd be easier just to wrap it into one approval, you know, if you're planning on it and coming back, but it sounds like you're not. So No, I'm not sure when I kind of through Kendrick said, this is what they want done. And that's the job I signed up for so far. So Okay. Are we ready? I think we're ready. Yeah. Okay. Move to approve the granting of a certificate of appropriateness for the project at 19 McClellan, is it? Based on finding that the proposed work meets the review criteria expressed in sections 8.1 and 8.2 of the local Amos local historic district bylaw and that the proposal is compatible with the overall appearance of the neighborhood and will not have a negative negative impact on the prospect link in the sunset local historical district. The work shall be executed in accordance to the documentation submitted dated, well, I guess it's dated July 15, 2020. And with the following two conditions, one, that the existing brackets be removed and reinstalled as they currently appear. And second, two, that to the extent allowable by code, the new railing, the new porch railing, be retained at the current height, notwithstanding that the new stair balustrade and nule will be installed to accommodate a code compliant stair railing. I second the motion. Thank you, Karen. And I was going to say, thank you, Bruce.  So thank you. You always get everything in. So we appreciate that very succinctly. Okay. So we'll start on Karen. Yeah. So let me see at the top. Yeah, I have Karen first to find winter and I approve. Thank you, Bruce. First call to my approve. Thank you, Peggy. Peggy Schwartz and I approve. Thank you, and Greta. Greta Wilcox, I approve. Right. Jim. Your mom, I approve. Thank you, and I'm Jennifer Taube. I approve. Okay. Well, thank you, Jamie. We really appreciate your being so receptive to all our suggestions. Thank you, everybody. Yeah. And good luck. I think it's going to, it's really going to, you know, it's going to be a great facelift for a charming house. I have one thing I was thinking of real quick. I'm sorry. What if when I do measure that from porch and we're like 40 inches off the ground, just in case, what should I do at that point? Well, that's why the motion was, the motion, the certificate, the wording was to the extent possible under the code or whatever, exactly what I said. But the thing was that we've given you a way in which you could satisfy the objective that we have by putting a few inches of soil or something close to that. And but if it is, as you say, significantly higher than that, then you would comply with the code so far as the height of that rail was concerned, which is to say you would lift it up. The wording of the certificate does not preclude you from doing that. Yeah, Jim. I'm sorry. Jamie, since you're a contractor, you probably have a construction supervisor's license and it's clear in your manual what you actually have to do when that occurs, when that's more than 30 inches. Right. Yeah, exactly. That's what that's, I just know as part of you guys that you really wanted to keep them shorter for the historical value. That's why I said, well, what I, you know. Yeah, but we can't go against what the state is on construction code. Yeah, I just wanted to bring it up so we're all on the same page and I didn't want to just go ahead and make them taller because I had to and blow off what we just discussed. I have that license, so I'm aware that you're going to have to follow that code. And, Jamie, we're aware that you've heard what we've had to say and that you know what our preference would be and we'll cost you to deliver that if you can. Great. Appreciate it. Thank you. Okay, thank you. Okay, this was, we had a long item. Sorry, I think, did we, sorry, just did we vote on that? Yes, we did. Karen seconded. Yeah, then we all voted by voice vote. Ah, okay, my notes. Yeah, long meeting. No, and then we have to question after we. That's what it was. Okay. Okay, so I think that we're, you know, unless there's any announcements, I think we've concluded the agenda. Do you have any announcements then or or Nate? I don't have any announcements offhand.   But, you know, you're, you're, you're still bona fide members of the commission. Yeah. That was all I was concerned about. I didn't want to sit through two hours of deliberations to find out that it was invalid vote. But, but since they're in their first term, if they want to continue serving, they can't. Yes. Yep. And they're also representatives from required groups. So, you know, we're, as we see new, if we see new members, we're required to first, you know, work with the local chapter of the AIA for architects and, you know, for realtors as well and Jim and Bruce meet those categories. So they would be, if they would just be reappointed, if they, and I think they both indicated they would. Okay. So that would be a simple procedure. Do we have to do anything formal with the town manager's office, Nate? It seemed like they would reach out to you individually if they, but I, so I haven't, you know, they said it was fine now. So I, Angela and the town manager's office said they're actually looking at it last week. So I'm assuming shortly we'll hear, I'll let you know if I hear anything. Okay. And thank you both for your willingness to continue. Cool. And we, I guess, are looking for a new seventh member. Would that be correct? Yes. Yes. Oh, Greta. I wondered about, so I was thinking about new members too. And I remembered Peggy O'Brien came before us. So delighted with the committee. I just wondered if she might be a nice person to suggest or nominate or whatever. Greta, I think that it is a town manager appointment, not the count. Therefore, might want to let, let town manager make that recommendation to him. Right. But people on Greta, if you even wanted to reach out to Peggy, because she can fill out an application for the town manager. And it's right on the website. Okay. I forgot what it's called. Nate or Ben, it's called a CPA or something. Is the citizen activity form or citizen? Something like that. Yeah. Enthusiastic she was. And she also just lost her husband. So maybe she's not interested in doing it now. Remember, she was building the ram. I didn't know that happened. Yeah, it just happened. There was just an obituary in the deeper. Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't know that. You might welcome something like this too. I just remember she was very enthusiastic. Yeah, she was. Would you want to reach out to her, Greta? I'll do that. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. It's a community activity form. It's online. Yeah. That's sad news. I didn't realize that her husband passed away. Oh, I'm sorry. God. The obituary was just in the paper. Thank you. I'll look for it. I'll send her a card. Okay. He's a different last name, but his first name is Wynn. I can't remember his last name. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So do we have applications for a next meeting? Are there any that have come in? Yeah, there was an application actually that came in today for new windows somewhere on Sunset Ave. I didn't have a chance to fully look at it, but so there is then schedule a November meeting. Yeah. Yeah. I think that would be a good idea. And let's see Monday. Did we usually do the second Monday of the month? What can be November 9th? Yeah, I just want to make sure. I would need time for the legal ad. Well, we could go up to the 23rd if that's, if you need that much time. 16th. I don't want to do that that week. That's Thanksgiving week. Yeah. Well, I prefer to leave that open. Yeah, the 16th would be doable. I would have to, I would do the legal ad at the end of this week. Is the 16th good for everyone? Yeah. Yeah. It's okay for me. It's not a good week. It's the historical, so Monday the 16th? Is that what we've come up with? Okay. At four o'clock. Yeah. And as of now, it's just that one application, but I'll check in with the permit administrator in town to see if there's anything else kind of close to coming in. And that's a Zoom meeting again. I would take it. Yeah, sure. Until like next year this time. Oh, Lord. Well, I'm just seeing everyone up close and personal. I do, too. I have to say in that my phone keeps buzzing and it's all political. Yeah. Yeah. So we will be past the election then. Okay. Well, I just wanted to see if we do have one motion to close the meeting. Yeah. Just briefly, if there is one member of the public here, Hilda, if she wanted to make a comment, raise your hand if not. Okay. I'm not just saying this for Hilda's benefit, but I actually, it jarred me that I did want to say if any of you were walking or driving by peace place, the house that came before us that we approved is almost up. I think it looks really good. So I do, too. I walked by it and I was really, that was before I came on board and I said I didn't have anything to do with this to my husband. Doesn't it look nice? Yeah. And I, anyway, so it's good. And, you know, I also walked by 100 Fearing Street. And when I think of what was originally proposed and then what is, you know, we're definitely. So we're not wasting our time, huh, Genevieve? Right. Positive impact to the Amherst. That's good to know. Because you guys walk through all the time, but Jim and I, where we're further away, so we don't see this on a weekly basis. Yeah. But yeah, go by and look. Yeah. So thank you everybody. Okay. Well, it was a long meeting. Is there a motion to adjourn? So moved. Okay. Thank you. Peggy, did you check it? I just wanted to say I had nothing to do with that building on Peace Place. I'm only here to write this up for the Amherst Indian. I know. I know. I'm good to know. Okay. I was trying to show you my yellow pad. Yeah. Okay. Why don't we look forward to your articles? Can you see me? No, we can't see you. No. Oh, that's good. That's good. Okay. I didn't know what came through on the other end. Well, if you've clicked your video, we can see you. And if you choose not to, we can't. No, I don't have the video. I don't have that control. Okay. Then you definitely can't see. Thanks for covering us. Okay. So we had a second to close the meeting. I'm second. Okay. Thank you. Okay. All in favor. Yay. Everyone have a good few weeks. Yeah. Vote. Yes, I already have. I already have two. Okay. Thank you for your time.