Yeah, typically I reboot my computer before these things. Okay, here it is. All right. Okay, so, Jack. You are. Yeah, I'm good to go. You are good to go and I forgot to mention to you. We should have that timer capability. Oh, back. Okay. Back. I, I'm, I think, I think I can manage it for you. Awesome. Okay. All right. So welcome to the planner. Welcome to the Amherst planning board meeting of August 4th, 2021. My name is Jack jumps like an as the chair of the planning board. I'm calling this meeting to order at 636 p.m. This meeting is being recorded and it's available via Amherst media live stream minutes are being taken. We're going to go through it to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 this planning board. Meeting including public hearings will be conducted via remote means using the zoom platform members of the public who wish to access the meeting may be made do so by following the link shown on this slide. This link is also available on the meeting agenda posted on the town's website calendar listening for this meeting or go to the town's website calendar. The meeting will be made on the town's website calendar. You can click on the board web page and click on the most recent agenda, which lists the zoom link at the top of the page. No in-person attendance of the meeting will be permitted. However, every effort will be made to ensure the public can adequately access the meeting in a real time via technological means. In the event we are unable to do so for reasons of economic issues. We are unable to do so for reasons of economic issues. We are unable to do so for reasons of audio or video recording, transcript or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible at the meeting.  And I believe, yeah, I'm just looking at our roster here. Andrew McDougal will not be here. So Tom Long. And Doug Marshall. Present. Janet McGowan. Present. Johanna Newman. Present.  So that's five of the seven. We have a quorum. So board members, if technical issues arise, we may need to pause temporarily to fix the problem. And then continue the meeting discussion may be suspended. While the issues are addressed in the minutes, we'll know if this happens, please use the raise hand function. To ask question or make a comment. I will see you raised hand and calling you to speak after speaking remember to remute yourself. Opportunity. For public comment will be provided during the general public comment period and is reserved for comments regarding items that are not on tonight's agenda. Public comment may also be heard at other appropriate times during the meeting. Please be aware the board will not respond to comments during general public comment period. Please indicate. You wish to make a comment. By clicking the raise hand button when public comment is solicited. If you have joined the zoom meeting using a telephone, please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing star nine on your telephone. Please identify yourself by stating your full name and address and put yourself back into mute when finished speaking. So residents can express their views up to three minutes. And at the discretion of the board chair, if a speaker does not comply with the guidelines or exceeds their lot of time, their participation will be disconnected from the meeting. So, Pam, we don't have minutes. Is that correct? You are correct. I think we have Chris here too, which is. Good, good. And then so. Public comment. I'm looking. Within our, you know, attendees and. If there are any hands raised and we will definitely. You know, hear your comments. And I see none. Okay. So let's get into this and we have a number one on our agenda and 634 is 640. And this is, you know, 635. So we're, we're, we're good to proceed with this as it's as PR. 20, 22 dash zero one 10 of Amherst sweet Alice trail. They wrote request site plan review approval under section. Section is 3.335 7.9 and section 8.5 of the zoning bylaw to construct a new 20 space parking area, including one accessible space. And adjacent loading zone and to install appropriate signage for access to the suite house trail recreation area, which is not 25 B parcel 55. And it's an RO zoning district. So, Rob, are you going to make a presentation on this? Okay. Yes. I am. And Pam's going to help me out by bringing up the couple of plans if she can go ahead and do that. So I'm Rob more a building commissioner. I worked in the conservation and development department and insisting Dave Zomek, the director of conservation and development with improvements to a number of. Trail parking locations across town. So this is the first application for that type of project coming to the planning board. This is a parcel of land just east of the roundabouts on bay road. It's a one acre parcel. It is surrounded by a number of other parcels owned by the town. But this is the one that's been under city control for over a year. They're 50 acres or so. And then it also that abouts Commonwealth of Massachusetts. 220 acres or so of property that has this Alice. Sweet house trail. Running through it. So this is the site here shown on the plan. Like I said, just east of the roundabout. If you want to go ahead to the next sheet, we'll get right into the proposal here. Rob, just so you know, they're not in any order. So if I don't pick the right one, just let me know. Okay. Nope, this is it. There's only two sheets. So this is the proposed parking layout on that parcel that was shown on the last page. We're looking at 20 spaces, which by the way is a maximum. There's a potential and Dave Zomek did mention in recent days that there's the potential to reduce this by a few spaces which would pull the, the back edge of the lot to the north, but otherwise be the same design but perhaps a few less spaces. But this is a 20 maximum 20 space lot. There, the, the finish on the lot will be all gravel TRG finish with just with a paved apron at Bay Road to, to comply with the curb cut standards that the public works department would require up close to the road there'll be a parking identification sign and I'll talk a little bit more about that in a minute. And then there's a working our way on the the west side of the lot. There's what's shown there's a new stone dust, dust path. Now that path is for future connection to a trail system that's being proposed right now through the conservation commission to run west to the Kester Land Trust and the property around the pond and connect into that larger acreage that I mentioned earlier so that's just an access point that we're just kind of prepping for off of this parking lot. That will be part of a future project. Both sides of the parking area will have a split rail fence. That's a detail that the conservation department is looking to have at these locations. At the back south side of the lot were proposing three large boulders just far enough back in case the staff decides to plow this in the wintertime, leaving enough room for snow storage but preventing vehicles from driving off of the gravel parking area. You'll see on the south side that there's another area shown in stone dust material, which is the going to be the new access to the sweet house trail just showing way down on the bottom right corner. The existing trail just right through there continue straight out to the Bay Road so we're going to tie into that connect into that around that point there and create a fairly level but solid firm surface to connect into that trail. Back at the parking area. I don't know if you want to zoom in a little bit Pam to that, what where the kiosk is down to the south there to the bottom of the page. This is a standard kiosk that the conservation department is installing at all the trail and recreation locations for get right there for various signage or notification or information about the location that that you're visiting. Just behind that there'll be a couple of our standard 24 inch bike loops steel bike loops set in a concrete footing. Right there. Thanks, Pam. And then you'll see that right at parking space number 10 is the accessible parking space that'll receive a sign with the loading zone just to the south of it. This proposal is made under section 3.335 of the zoning bylaw. This is our section for public parks and recreational areas. And we are going to be asking for a number of waivers. So if you could kind of stand over scroll over to the side, Pam, please to the to the pitchers. So, there are two signs. One being the kiosk if that's considered to be a sign it will have notifications posted on it that could change. But the backside is intended to have information about the location. This is a kiosk that was recently installed at one of the other trail locations on Stanley Street. The second image there in the middle which is just showing a signpost. That's the just showing an example of the signpost that the conservation department would like to install out by the road to identify the parking area and the trail. And in the bottom two images are the same image just in different colors. So this is a sign that would be proposed to be hung from that wooden post out by the street. Two sided sign and you can see they haven't made a choice of color yet so I put the two of them in there. They, the bylaw allows for one sign. I'm sorry allows for two signs, but up to a maximum of 12 square feet. So what we're proposing here is going to require a waiver because of the size of the kiosk and the size of the sign out by the road combined will exceed the 12 square feet. We're also asking for a waiver for that sign post, although it does say four feet high there. It's actually going to be six feet high or would like to be six feet high after I discussed that further with Dave Zomek. The top of the sign would be proposed at six feet. So we have a waiver request for signage under article eight 8.5 and specifically it's section 8.101, which has the maximum 12 square foot limitation, and we're proposing up to 24 square feet between the signs including the kiosk. And section 8.103 is the, the provision that limits the height of the sign to four feet off of the ground. And we're asking for that to be increased to 60. Back over to the parking pan, if you would scroll back. We're asking for waivers on the parking area as well. So section 7.9 waiver request will include three, three specific waivers. One is under seven section 7.104 for parking space delineation. So like I mentioned, this is in gravel trap rock finish some stone dust where it needs to be, you know, smaller aggregate and smooth around the accessible spaces and the walkways. It's very difficult to maintain striping in this type of material, although we do intend to paint it initially, hoping to establish parking patterns and we're going to test that out over on Stanley Street and see how that works. But it will only last a month or so, maybe a little bit longer before it's worn away. But it is something that we're not necessarily looking at maintaining. It's a long term. The second waiver request is under seven point is because of 7.105, which is the lighting requirements so we're not proposing any lighting to these town trail head parking areas. So one would be 7.112, which is the screening requirement for from the street. This is a wide open clear view from the street there's no no vegetation out there that will be blocking the view at all. We are, let's see. I think that covers what I wanted to propose so I did have. There was, I think Tom might talk about this but the DRB comments were received and I was able to incorporate most of them, which included relocating the access to the trail in a location further to the south back to the parking lot. So I asked for a place to leave a bicycle so we did go ahead and add a couple of our 24 inch bike loops. And at that time when I was discussing this with the DRB I really didn't have any details about the sign. And there is a very small wooden sign that marks the trail location now which is very difficult to read and it was a recommendation to put up a more visible sign for those passing by and trying to find it. And this in fact what the images that are on the plan that we looked at is what the conservation department is is looking to do at all of their locations. Any other recommendation for collecting trash and recycling. This just isn't a location that at this time we're interested in having the receptacles there we're hoping to encourage people that bring any trash with them that they take it away, so they're leading it but you know this is one of the locations as you know all of them through town that are managed and visited regularly by our conservation land manager, his assistant and the various seasonal staff to to maintain and keep the area clean. So that that's all I have for the presentation and happy to answer questions. Chris, did we did we get the DRB. Yes, you did it was emailed to you. I'm sorry. Okay. I think it was emailed either yesterday or today. Okay, we'll let Tom cover that and then we'll also have the site visit. Recap by Debbie Doug. So maybe we start with Doug. Okay. Chris and I ended up going to the site separately so I can tell you, I saw the, the, where the sweet alice trail came out to the road. I saw the area of the shoulder and beyond where the vegetation has been worn away because there's a lot of parking that's going on just along sort of parallel parking along the side of the road. And I agree that it's a quite an open landscape. I did see a sort of a moan old farm road that was a little bit east of where the sweet alice trail came out. I wondered whether that was part of the site. And I wondered also, I've never been on the sweet alice trail. And I don't know how far back, how far it goes or where it goes. But I was kind of interested to think about how large this parking lot would be in relationship to the, to the property. So anyway, that's kind of what went through my head when I was there. I didn't see anything like steak or anything like that. I didn't see, I didn't see anything. Okay. All right. So I guess, is this connected at all to the project. That is, you know, the market of the best sale property of a, of Ackens that they forget which development that is Chris. Because there was another trail head over there that we were talking about. It's a thank you. You're talking about the Epstein property. And we saw the Kestrel land trust was relocating their offices onto the onto that Epstein property, and they're hoping to have trails there. So the piece that Rob showed you on the plan is going to connect to the trails that go through the Epstein property, but that connection hasn't been made yet. I was thinking about the subdivision like there were like eight lots. Little bit south of. Oh, no, it's not connected with that. Okay. That's farther to the south. Yeah. Okay. So, hey, Tom, would you be able to download the DRB report? Yeah, I mean, I think Rob did a great job of summarizing it as well. So I don't really have much to say other than that. If you had seen the plan previously, you would see all the changes that were actually made, which I think the DRB was really happy about the concerns that were were raised were, you know, mainly in regard to what was presented last time which you guys didn't see this time so it's hard to really talk about them other than the improvements that were made. So going through the list, obviously signage was one, those little white with red etched that that was the sign that we saw, we were asking for something more broad that can be seen perpendicular to the road so people can see that as they drive by. That was one of the main requests the other one was about safety within a lot. The current or the proposed access to the trail at the time was on the, that would be the east side. Yeah, that was facing north that's the east side. And we felt that people would be more inclined to walk to the south and enter the trail through the bottom of the lot. So it's changes like that. The bike rack was a request which is present. And as Rob said, which we thought would be great because people will ride there, hook up their bike and then go for a walk and we thought that was a great add on so thank you for doing that. And then the marking of the parking lot is something we tried to talk about having options for but that's really a challenge which you're clearly asking for a waiver for, because we do want this to be a permeable surface. So that's a real challenge unless there's some innovation in that area. I think our biggest concern was for the ADA spot and making sure that that was well marked in some some manner to make sure the space was was always ready. And obviously the trash versus carry in carry out and that's just really a matter of what what the town prefers for this particular site so so those are the recommendations and I think, you know, this looks great as a response to that so we appreciate it. So, Chris, I know this probably dovetails into this initiative. I believe the chamber, the bed, you know, in terms of like promoting tourism within Amherst and now, you know, obviously having parking at these trailheads is important.  I'm familiar with that initiative I know that the bit in the chamber have been trying to promote tourism. All along, it could be that as a result of their recovery grant that they received that they're putting an extra, you know, effort into that but I'm not personally aware of that. I'm sorry to say. Okay. So thank you and so we can take plenty more comments I see Janet. So I, the first thing I wanted to say, I think these are very appropriate waivers, you know, the compelling reasons of site design. When I was just looking at the sketches I was like this seems really intense for a trailhead but the design that you've put together is a trailhead it doesn't need lighting. You know it needs a good sign but not, you know, a lit sign because you know you don't want to encourage people to go at night. So I think I think the waivers make perfect sense I think the sign is beautiful like the either color. I did have a question about the number of spaces because it seemed like a lot and I just, you know, is it does this trail get a lot of use or is it expected to as it ties into kind of a larger network. And I also think like the spaces, it's not going to look that big from this from driving by or walking by because it's kind of in not super wide on Bay Road but I just I just wondered about the thinking of the number. Rob.  And Dave Zomek did mention that, and this isn't this is being done in cooperation with the Kestrel land trust managers there. Because I think there's, there's not only the potential for the use for the sweet house trail but there's also the potential to go west and connect to what they have planned for future programming and activities, getting into their So it'll serve both functions long term. So the maximum of 20 spaces is, you know, I think what was originally envisioned for that. I can say from my experience which is not a lot at all for these trail locations. This is a very busy location. It's not unusual to see cars line both sides of the street and if you've been by there you'll see how it is worn, even on the north side of Bay Road. So I'm hoping to clean that up and make that, you know, grass again and less look less desirable for a parking, or likely to be used for parking so this is really taking David Zomek's recommendation of a 15 to 20 lot parking space need here. It also seems much safer to be larger than having cars parked along Bay Road set that makes sense. Okay. So the other thing I was going to just comment on that that as you drive along Bay Road, you'll also see other smaller parking lots along that way, because the sweet Alice trails actually just, you know, one end of an access point to a whole network of trails on the lower end of throughout the range so from that point just like you would from the visitor center which is a lot that, you know, at 10am on a Saturday is full and that has me I don't know maybe 4050 spots that you can imagine if you want access to that main trail network would also find this is a really safe and nice place to park because the other spots are always overloaded and only two or three spots to park there so so I think it's convenient and I think it really serve access to a wide range of trails there. Great. So we have Doug and then a Johanna Doug. Okay, yeah I had. I guess a couple of questions and one comment or suggestion. First of all, I'll just make all my comments and then probably you can respond to whichever's first was, why would the kiosk be counted as a sign. Maybe I don't understand the signage bylaw well enough, but you know it seems really far set back from the street it's not really part of your perception as you drive by. So why would that be included in the in counting square feet. And then the second thing was if this if the approach you're presenting with the six foot sign. Maybe the kiosk is the first installation of a whole series of installations. You know, should we be talking about this as approving a system to be applied in multiple places in town. So you don't have to come back for every single one of these and, you know, have this conversation. And lastly, I was just a little bit puzzled whether the gravel surface is is allowed by ADA or mass access board. And, you know, what the what the situation is with that. And then the comment I had was, I have seen gravel parking lots where at the sort of edge of the lot at each of where there would normally be a stripe. And then you will put a like a short granite post or a little wooden post to just give you a sense of the nine foot spacing that you're using and and and sort of encourage give people a guideline, a guide a marker to encourage them to efficiently use the lot. So I wondered if you'd thought about that. That's all thank you. Rob. Yeah, thanks. I wanted to be as careful as I could with the kiosk. It is in plain view from the road. And it as they're being installed are just a blank backboard. So I don't really know exactly what potentially it could be used for messaging or whatever could be put on there possibly could be viewed from the road. This is a little far away, but another locations that I'm seeing. You probably could read it from the road. So, you know, based on our definition of the bylaw really is anything that's trying to provide some sort of a message or in invitation to the area or location of some sort. So I just wanted to be, you know, make sure I had that covered just in case. It turns out to actually be more of a sign for advertising purposes for the location than possibly not. I do know that on the backside which would be away from the road. The intent is to have some information about the location, history and some some information for people visiting. The surface, the gravel does comply with a AB standards. So, you know, we're using a small three, it's aggregate that is compacted rolled and becomes very tight and firm. It does meet that standard. I'm looking at probably doing a little even a smaller aggregate at the parking air the handicapped parking area and the access to the trail out of stone dust material just to finish that off. It is, it is used, it's commonly used for rail trails and a variety of uses for for public use that can meet accessibility requirements. The conservation department knows that it's a maintenance item. So it isn't just, you know, something that's going to be good to go for year after year after the winters. It will be touching it up. You know, every year and making sure it's in compliance. So that's the AB. The last. What was the last. Well I had the suggestion about the post at other posts nine foot spacing and then I also had the question whether we should be thinking of this signage as a system. Approved for multiple uses throughout town. Yeah. So the, the, the, the system for multiple uses would be probably a good way to approach it. The sign designs just came in a day ago, when I received them. So I think we're still, you know, I think they're still refining that and finalizing it. I think they're, they're firm on that. I think the goal would be to take it to at least the DRB as a system signage program. And then, you know, we'll have to decide location to location. You know, it may or may not need planning board review if it's the only thing happening, there could be administrative approval of the signage in certain cases. But I think, you know, when I understand that better and how many locations and we can, we can think about what the best way or efficient way to approach that this just came up at this time of the application. In fact, when I made the application initially, I didn't have any of the signs included because I didn't, I didn't have that information I was just going to ask to come back later, but they, but they did just come in. So the markings at the, the parking spaces I've seen a number of attempts to do something with a gravel parking lot none of them seem to really work too well. What you're talking about something very low, you know, that's at the head of the space concerns me a little bit because it's, it's possible that the department the conservation department want to plow these and maintain them in the wintertime and have them. So that's certainly something that's going to be difficult to work around or they're going to get damaged. I was thinking more like if the first of all, if there's a problem. And like I said, we're going to test this out at another site with putting the paint down, letting people, you know, hopefully get used to it or see how parking is is happening. And see if we need to do something more permanent but possibly using the fence posts as those indicators, you know would be a way to go about it here in another location I tried spacing out rocks boulders at the head of the space but it didn't really work out too well because they were, they were so different in sizes that it didn't really accomplish what we're looking for. So it's something I was still trying to figure out what's going to be best, but I'm hesitant to put something into permanent that will cause you know more work for the maintenance staff to repair and possibly be damaged from solar with. Thank you Rob. We have you Hannah. Thanks Jack, and thanks Bob it's exciting to see these plans. Okay, I guess I have a couple of comments and then I have one question. So, on the comments. I've seen the kiosks kind of pop up in different conservation areas all over town. And I think that consistency is really great and like, you know, signals to residents like hey there's a public resource here that you can go check out and you know I've seen them at Stanley street and that co on this park and other locations so I think the consistency of that is going to help with the just overall wayfinding for residents and potentially for tourists so those are exciting steps, and then I think the signs fit into that category to and, you know, I think the sign that you showed us is consistent with the signage and some of the imagery that we approved for Kendrick park playground and that you know we've seen and other signs so I'm just excited about the direction that that's going in. And in general I think, you know the other day I drove by sweet Alice and suggested to my kids that we go for a walk and then we're like, where do we park and they were like, you know, no mom like we don't want to go on an adventure. So I do think that there's something about legitimizing the parking area that is going to make access that much more available to people and that's really exciting. The next comment is, I'm excited that you're doing the painting experiment at the Stanley street parking lot. I, it's, you know, continued to be kind of willy nilly there and I think, you know, probably 80% of the users of the parking lot are frequent users so if you get them doing the right pattern, I bet you can help create the culture that then kind of become self perpetuating so I'm excited about that process. So my last question, or my last my question is, you had mentioned fencing on both sides of the parking lot, but in the schematic that Pam pulled up I only saw fencing on the west side. So did I miss that or is it, is there, are you planning on doing fencing on the east side to. Yeah, and I don't care if you want to bring it back up but it is shown, it is shown on both sides. If you can grab that plan. Try and hold on. All right, so is it this one. Yes. Yeah, so, so, yeah, if you could zoom in a little bit Pam anywhere in the middle we find okay. So it's about it's about five or six feet off of the edge of the parking spaces on both sides. I think if you look further to the west that other line is erosion control limit of work so it's that that thinner line with the with the circles spaced out every eight feet or so. Yep, I read the map wrong. Thank you. Okay. Here in here. We're good. We're good. Thank you for answering that question. So I'm wondering in terms of access to the Mount Holyoke trails from the Amherst side. Will this be me other than the notch.  So this is going to be the down Bay Road but that doesn't seem. You know, like a formal parking area so I'm just trying to get the lay of the land here in terms of access to the range there Rob. Yeah, so this is going to be the first formal parking area so I mean just so far what I've been asked to look at, you know, they're all pretty rough.  The parking area that's further to the east on Bay Road that has a very steep incline off of the road. I might know the the the trail that the location that that is called but that's another one we're looking at doing an improvement to with a much smaller a lot you know maybe six or eight spaces. And then as you mentioned Jack around the corner at the, at the new subdivision that's another small parking area that is being provided to us given I guess set up by the developer of that. That project and all of those have this connection so the sweet house trail. If you go to the GIS just see how far it actually expands and it's you know there's a couple hundred acres of state property that butts the 50 acres of town land and connects to the Robert Frost trail and others in the area so it's a really. This is a really has a lot of potential for a access to a big network of trails. Yeah, and I know our master plan. This was a focus to increase access to the, you know, wonderful trail system that we have in town so this is great, I think. Any other comments from the board. I see none we can open up to the, the public. The attendees have any comments. I see none. Anybody want to. I'm going to move this forward. I will so move to. To approve the SPR 2021 for the sweet Alice trail.  Yeah, some of the motions here. Would you like to close the public hearing and I think that this application meets the relevant criteria of section 11.24 of the zoning by law, along with the approval and also approve the waivers. And do you have any conditions that you would like to impose. I will move to close the public hearing step one. All right, your honor. I will second. Okay. So, for the discussion. The liberation period here doing when apply any additional conditions to what was stated it looks like the waiver was Rob was with the height of the sign. Is that it. Oh, sorry. Yeah. Okay, there's so there's two sets of waivers for the, for the signage it's the square, the total square footage between the two signs. And the height, increasing from four feet to six feet to the top edge of the sign. The waivers for the parking under seven. Article seven include the parking space delineation, lighting and screening. Okay. Any other discussion from the board. Any motions. Don't meet a state of motion and someone can say they move what I said, that would be wonderful. I would want to move to close the public hearing and to approve the application and to find that the project meets the criteria of section 11, the relevant criteria of section 11.24 of the zoning by law, and that you approve the waivers requested, and that you don't impose any conditions. I think that's it. All right, Janet. I'll second. Any other discussion. I see none. So we'll do roll call here. Doug. Hi. And Tom. Hi. Janet. Yes. And myself as I and Johanna. I. Okay, so that's five zero. The guard to Approving this proposal. Great. So, next we have a continuance. SPR 2021 11 greenfield savings bank. At university drive. We discuss this previously on July 7 2021. We also request for site plan review approval under section 5.043 drive through facilities of the zoning bylaw to install an ATM as an accessory accessory use to the existing bank. Authorize under section 3.358 of the zoning bylaw, including minor grading and paving with the within the existing parking area. This is map 13 B parcel 20 and it's in the BL zoning district. Do we have a presentation? Chris, we have Mr. Loined here from the greenfield savings bank, Jim Loined, and I think maybe joined by Tony Gleason, who's one of the owners of the property so Pam may want to bring him over as well. So, we'll do it. Doug, did you do a site visit? Yes. Chris and I met out there yesterday evening. Okay, so we can do that later than Chris. Okay. All right, after the after the. Hello, Mr. Lloyd and, and the Gleason, you can unmute yourselves and I'm not sure if you have slides or what but. So, Hi, good evening, folks. Also, I believe in the waiting room was Tony Wonsecchi, who is representing the bank as our site planner. My last communication with him. I believe he was also here. I don't see his name nor a telephone call in.  Okay, we have to kind of refresh it July 7 seems like a long time ago. So I guess where we're all picked up is, as I mentioned July 7, the bank wants to install this drive up ATM. In addition to the convenience and 24 hour access for people. Our customers as well as the community. We also, in the beginning phases, thought of this as an additional way for people to do their banking while maintaining safe social distancing with the pandemic still not over and unsure of what different variants of we're going to face. We'd like to proceed with this. So that again there are some folks that just aren't yet comfortable coming inside and would like to provide them with the additional opportunity to conduct banking. So the questions that were brought up that I've done some research and I've tried to address the concerns. The one of the questions was regarding the illumination at night. I would like to provide some pictures. While we don't have another drive up kiosk that will mimic this one. We have a walk up ATM in Greenfield. And the good and the bad is the only evening after dark that I had free in the last month that seemed to be raining. I did just bite the bullet the other night and took some photos in the rain which they do provide. And I submitted the pictures, but there is a lot of glare that shows and I think it. It makes the illumination look even brighter than it is so I guess with pun intended and say what I'm presenting doesn't put the, the lighting in its best light. But that means to bring those. Yes, if you please. Okay. So, yes, this is, this is our location at the rotary in Greenfield where 91 and route to a intersect. And I thought it was a fair representation. Because the, the location that we're looking for at the intersection of Amity Street and University Drive. There is also street lights which illuminate the area as they do here. And as I said this, this is has a lot of glare because of the rain that was in the air. So, pursuant to that I also talked with the manufacturer of these units, which is heritage. And I believe they're out of Nebraska but the first answer I got was that with the concern of the brightness they could, they could adjust the intensity of the light by controlling the opaqueness of the vinyl. Over the sign. And I actually did here today they had a follow up question with an engineer who did indicate that they could in fact install a dimmer. So the lumen, the lumens and the brightness can both be controlled to, to bring that down. That's what we needed in the future and for for a small additional cost. It'd be my recommendation to the bank that we have that dimmer installed, because in addition to the convenience and the safety measures we, you know, would like to maintain that we're a good neighbor, and we're a good part of the community so we'd like to make that feasible. And through the other images that Mr. Lines sent. There are a number of images. Thanks. So, the other question that was brought up was they wanted to, there was a question if I could have a computer model made up of how the kiosk would look if you could just back up to maybe one slide. Thank you. I did check with both our site planner and with the manufacturing company and a few other resources and I wasn't able to get a two scale rendering or a computer simulated model. And I apologize for the crudeness of this model but I wanted to at least provide something to the board. So, I'm not the most creative person in the world but with some furring strips and contractors paper. I did make this to scale. And this is from the corner closest to Amity Street. And I also had it from the northeast and northwest corners of the intersection. So that you could get a feel for how it would look in relation to the grading and the mounds that are there. So that the structure itself, this, this does account for the six inch curving, as well as the height of the unit and the height of the election panels and the sides on the top. And if we could just go forward. This is a representation of drive up kiosk that we have as part of our North Hampton King Street location. And this was just recently reskinned with new vinyl that does have our new logos in the lighter shades on it and I wanted just to provide you with an additional understanding of, you know, what it would most likely look like. Now of course, you know, in consideration of sign restrictions and everything else, obviously, the graphics with our marketing department there. They're adjustable and nothing, we don't have a finished product on what the final graphics would look like other than they'd incorporate our name and our logo. And at the last meeting, Tony one sec he did provide some cut sheets of what the proposed unit would look like. So, I guess the last thing I want to point out is the reason that we chose that location in the parking lot was for safety. We did look at some other locations but in terms of access and egress in and out of the drive up. And this provided, it was the most out of way location with regard to the rest of the parking and the rest of the tenants, and also had the best sight lines for egress. When vehicles were leaving the queue. I believe those were the other question that was brought up. Doug did bring it up at the last meeting and we got a little bit off but he did ask about security cameras for the safety of people in the area and there are designs to have in in the machine itself there's a camera that would look at the person using the device and as well as camera overhead that gets a broader overview picture, as well as the license plates the vehicles you know should somebody approach the the kiosk with some ill intent would be able to gather information from the vehicle for evidentiary purposes later. So for the safety of our patrons and the community that there are plans for security. And can just run through the rest of these pictures because I think it shows it from different angles. Thanks. So, Jim, is there going to be a canopy. As part of this. Yes, if in the last. In the last meeting we did have some cut sheets and I don't know. I have the paper in hand now and I believe Tony one sec he had provided on the meeting of the seventh was showed there is an overhang to this particular kiosk in North Hampton doesn't have the overhang or the canopy, because it's already sheltered with the rest of our drive up lanes. I see. But there is a canopy with the clearance for height, which it looks like you have a height clearance is eight feet and the canopy height and additional 20 inches which are the Lexon Lexon panels overhead. Okay, yeah, I'm not seeing that on your site plan but are you looking at documents from July seven because I have those if you need to bring them up, I can give it a go. Yeah, I'm looking at the July seven package. And yeah, it doesn't look like there's a canopy. So, perhaps, you know you provide that, you know additional detail. Can you show the image Pam from July seven. I can try. Say, share. I need to take this share down. I'm working on it Chris. Yeah, I have as page 12. There you go. Right here. Yeah. This doesn't show the canopy though so if you continue to scroll through you can see the canopy. Okay. So that overhead section that is indicated on the left by says it's 20 inches in height is the canopy and I believe if you scroll down one more. It shows the side view. Yeah. Okay, so I'm not really considering that as like, I can't, you know, I was thinking, I was looking at the photos that you presented for the Greenville for example. And then looking at this, but it's going to be as we see right here. Yes, and not with a real like, like where you go in a gas station you have 30 feet of roof over. Yeah, okay. I apologize now it's enough to sort of shield the user from the elements and I believe it shows on the screen that the overhang is 36 inches. Okay. Gotcha. Thank you. Sure. So our. Should we open it up to the board if you're if you're a complete Jim or yes, well. Yeah, I was just going to say that Mr. Gleason is here as well. I know that the board had requested his attendance. They had some questions that were they wanted direct to him. So, I saw if the board has any questions, I'd be happy to try and answer them. Very good. So, open it up to the board. General questions. Doug. Yeah, I'm Chris and I did do a site visit there yesterday. Yeah, please. Yeah, so please give us a site. And, you know, we met with Jim and with Tony, his and his engineer had, I think Jim accurately conveyed the conversation we had. Tony had marked the curb locations on the pavement. So it was clear where the kiosk would be. And it fits very nicely into the existing, you know, extent of pavement. So, you know, it looked like it would work well. One thing I noticed is that at the July 7 meeting, several of us had looked at Google maps, the street view to see what that site looked like. That must be an old, old photo because much of the vegetation between the kiosk and Amity Street has been removed since that street view was taken. So it's very open and visible from Amity Street, which, which I think it was Jim that said, they thought that was a good thing so that if there was any, you know, would discourage people from, you know, having any sort of ill intent in the vicinity of this machine that dispenses money. Otherwise, I guess I don't really have anything else to add. Chris, if you have anything go ahead and I'll stop there for the site visit. I know I do have a question or two so I can go on to that if Chris doesn't have anything. I just wanted to mention that the tree that is existing there will not be disturbed. There's not going to be any excavation done around the tree other than replacing the curb. So that that was something that came up at the site visit. And also for Mr. Gleason and this is a little bit outside of the realm of the application but Mr. Marshall noted that there were some invasive exotic plants on the site, particularly because of you want to miss a lattice which is a plant that is considered to be invasive exotic so he was going to recommend I think that the owners of the property look into removing those plants at some time but that's not something that Greenfield Savings Bank has any control over. We would be agreeable to that. Thank you. So, Doug, I let you continue. We, Chris, spoke about the question I had, which did did concern the, the, the, the uonimus also known as burning bush. I saw, you know, some of those had shown up in the Google Earth view, right next to where the kiosk was to go and I see those have been removed. Obviously, a number of other specimens of that, of that species on the property. And I know I've had a lot of personal experience with digging up volunteer burning bushes and so I would, you know, encourage you to, to think about taking those out. You know, on whatever timeline, you can manage. Otherwise, I don't really have any comments.  I appreciate us continuing the hearing and I appreciate having the site visit. Oh, I was just going to say that we're happy to remove the burning bushes on a relatively short timeline. You know, in general, the removal of shrubs and bushes are sometimes frowned upon. So, you know, your suggestion to remove them. We share the same opinion and we're happy to do it. We were just treading lightly with that. So we will get going on that in short order. Any other comments from the board, Janet. So at the last hearing Doug had raised the question about the light being the sign being very bright and prominent on that corner and so I did drive by there at night it is kind of very a dark kind of corner and so I thought the idea of maybe more opaque on a dimmer might be good and not have such a kind of blaring kind of white light, you know, it's kind of the beacon of new market center might be a good suggestion, just to kind of tone it down. So the sign is visible but it's not, you know, kind of flashing at you or the thing that you see and nothing else around it. So I'm not sure how that would work. But you know, maybe like making it less bright white and maybe not as bright would be a little more in tune with the, the, the vibe of the whole corner the whole thing at night. Yeah, so maybe Rob, I mean I know you guys talked about a dimmer but how does that, you know, and practice how will that get resolved that the lighting is, I mean, wanted to be right. Well, let me call on Rob, if you can speak to that. Yeah, so, you know, there might be ways we could do it that, you know, don't involve complicated controls, you know, maybe it's simply the fixture, the, you know, the wattage the color, all of that could be looked at first to see if there's something that wouldn't be as glaring bright white. But I think without any specific, you know, measurement or guidance on that and really kind of be in the field, turn it on and, and start making adjustments, probably with the fixture itself. So, yeah, so so the dimmer aspect is something that is, you know, acceptable to I'm not sure that would be a condition, but it sounds like it's, it's a something that we're concerned about. If I may just, I do agree with Jan's comment that, you know, especially when you look at the photos from our greenfield location with, you know, with the glare from the rain and everything else. I even I agree that it would, you know, it would be obnoxious for lack of a better word in the in the moment. And that's, I'll go back to my point that we want to be good neighbors and good community members we don't want to stick out like a sore thumb of being a beacon, so to speak. And I thought it was a good potential answer when they heritage talked about adjusting the opaqueness of the vinyl to dim it down. But like what I was told today, LED panels you do have the ability to adjust the lumens to adjust the intensity. And by installing the dimmer switch, sort of, I think, if I understand what Rob said, sort of an in the field thing, we can work with it and make adjustments as necessary to find a level that's satisfactory. Okay, so perhaps we can make that a condition that Rob Mora, you know, eyeballs is, and, you know, works with Greenfield Savings Bank in terms of the intensity with regard to the dimmer switch. So something like that Greenfield Savings Bank will work with the building commissioner to adjust the level of brightness of that canopy. Yeah, so that's it'd be, you know, acceptable we can trust Rob that it's appropriate but yeah. If I can. Just to for, you know, full transparency and I don't want to be thought that I intentionally left something out but there's two comp two lighting components there's the Lexan panels that have our logos, which are the outward. There is also some recess downward lighting. We can show on the vehicles at night and illuminate the area and that and those the downlighting is fixed and that's for security and safety purposes. Yeah, that seems reasonable. So it's more the, you know, the horizontal panels that you have so anybody on the board have other comments in that regard. Let's open it up to the public. Any, any comments from the public I don't I see none. So back to the board someone I want to make a motion with one condition that we mentioned. Close in the public hearing. Doug. We close the public hearing that we accept the, the applicants application with the additional consent condition that they work with the building commissioner on adjusting the brightness of the canopy to to where it's a sensitive element in the in the on the site. Are you going to find that this application meets the relevant criteria section 11.24 of the zoning by law. Absolutely. Thank you Chris. Johanna. I'll second that motion. Okay, any further discussion amongst the board. I see none. So let's just do a roll call. Doug. Hi. I'm staying. Janet. Hi. Johanna. Hi. And I'm an eye. So that's four zero with one absination. So thank you, Jim and Tony. Thank you very much. Yeah, thank you. So next we have a zoning by law. It's a continuance for the changing of the official zoning map for map 14 a parcel. The city of North Prospect Street to see if the town will vote to amend the official zoning map to extend the general business district to include a vacant parcel of land owned by the town of Amherst and the vicinity of North Pleasant Street, North Prospect Prospect Street cows lane and Amity Street currently located in the general residence district RG. So who, who do you have presenting this Chris? George Ryan is here. He was one of the proponents. So I think he intends to speak to you. Okay, George, you have the floor. Right. Thank you. Good evening to members of the board. I don't know if you've had a chance to read it, but we've provided a series of responses to the questions from the last meeting. We tried to cover all the questions that we felt we could provide reasonable answers to. I don't know if you want me to go through that I think that is hopefully something that you have access to. I wouldn't, I wouldn't mind if you did George because it's just a refresh. We've had so much going on the last month. It would definitely help me personally. I know you only got it today so, and I apologize but just as you, so we too, Evan and I, but that's no excuse. So yes, I'd be happy to go through it briefly. I just want to, before I start through this, I want to just reinforce what I hope we made clear last time that again this is just the very, very first step of a long and complicated process. But without this first step, nothing else can happen. And so we would like something, Evan and I, and others, particularly principally the business owners in the downtown business district the bid would very much like to see something happen. It's driven really by a sense of the changes that have occurred recently in the downtown are occurring right now, and will be occurring in the next few years. So this is not so much about what is right now and certainly not about the past. It's about what is coming and will be coming and it's part of that sense of a vision and a sense of a future coming out of coven and, and so that's what's driving this is that the parking area as we envision it would be a key piece of that much larger vision and a much larger set of events that are happening around us. I just sat down before the meeting and just started listing. The downtown particularly today, it's as much about experience, people come downtown for experience and not just, you know, for one particular thing. So I just made a list of just briefly for a second, the kinds of things that right now are there and will be coming in our downtown. And that a parking garage would be a place that would people would know that would be a place where they could go. And then there were many, many other things they could then do on foot as pedestrians, etc. And that of the Jones library that that we hope soon will be renovated and expanded the Amherst history museum of world class independent cinema. There's a music venue that is planning to open above the high horse in October called the Drake, obviously very famous Emily Dickinson museum homestead. The summer comment concerts they're taking place now in the South Common, a plan for ban shell a performance space that hopefully in the next year or two would be built in the South Common. Kendrick Park playground is going to be opening soon and there's more developments planned in that area for that space. The college museums, the Pratt and the Mead outdoor dining was mentioned last time and the thought that that going forward post COVID, we would like to encourage that more but to do that would require the loss of parking spaces. But people coming downtown. So it's a park. And then really thinking far ahead the fire station, we dream someday will no longer be a fire station and what might become of that but that become also an experiential place where some say for performance space for for theater or such. So, and then just the developments that are going to be happening in terms of housing in the downtown so there's a lot that has happened is happening and will happen. And we see this as part of that larger series of of happenings and a key part of that. So that's that's with driving this. So in the memo memorandum, we basically address the whole series of questions first of all, why this lot, as opposed to say the amity street lot or the boltwood lot. And I don't think there's anything terribly new here, but essentially we just go over the specifics the amity street lot is much too small. The neighboring lots are owned by other entities, and would be prohibitively expensive to acquire and I don't think too many of us actually would like to see a parking garage right on Amity Street opposite the library and so forth that so that was within the The boltwood used to be a place that I think some people think of but things have changed in terms of physical location. It still seems to be clear that it's not something that really can be built up on. And so it's also not a site that anyone has expressed any interest in actually developing whereas the, the North prospect street lot is one that, in fact, people have expressed interest in developing. It's about the current situation how many spaces they're currently 72 spaces in that in that lot that the town has. We list the revenue that is provided. And thank you for putting that up on the screen. And then I think something that that everyone needs to think about it's just the cost of maintenance. Soon, a very substantial maintenance bill is going to come do, and that will fall to the town. That was an estimate done not too many years ago, where the town estimate or town share was over $300,000. And that's an ongoing expense that will always be there into the future. So when we think about weighing costs, that's something that needs to be considered in the overall calculation current usage of the lot is provided in the next bit in terms of day and time in utilization. Okay. So if we just scroll down a bit. In terms of use. Again, pre covered. I can think of many times when I've come to use that lot on a Thursday Friday or Saturday evening. And it's been full. Obviously in the last year and a half it's been a very different story. But these are some figures from the parking study 2019 pre covered. And it gives you some sense, some sense of some of the utilization of that lot. The next section of the memorandum deals with the proposal itself and how it would go in terms of the process and where the public would be involved at every stage in this process. And so it lays out the various steps that they would be a part of that. The next deals with the need, which I sort of introduced already at the very beginning sort of my preamble here. Stress is some of the things that I think are important. In terms of just the perception with this is not driven by some sense that there's a there's a parking crisis in Amherst that we need to address. There's a perception crisis or perception problem and it's been true for very, very long time. And this is something that we hear from constantly from business owners in the downtown that that people who come to their businesses come to their restaurants come to their events. Always lament that it's a struggle for them. Yes, they do find parking and there is parking but it's a struggle. And so often they will say I'm just not coming back. And so we know you use Northampton as an example. We all know that you're going to an event a music event, whatever it is for dinner, you know there's a place you can park.  But you know you can go to the municipal garage, and your car staying care of and then you can just walk around and do what you need to do. And right now Amherst really unfortunately doesn't seem to have that. And then the rest of the of this paragraph really picks up on some of the themes that I have already introduced that we're thinking about the future this is not about the present. It's not about some heart parking crisis that we need to solve. It's about a perception and a future and a vision of what is coming to Amherst and that this would be a key part or could play a key part in that in that change and development. And that also mentions as I said, we mentioned last time, the idea of dining on the street. So, this is something that's become popular and people are using it. But once we go back to just putting cars in their usual parking spaces that goes away. So the attraction again, part of the attraction is something like this is the cars are all in one place. And it opens up the street in the back. And it opens up the street for all kinds of possibilities. So that was the idea of why is there a need for this. What about other options presented in the party studies. Actually, many of those are excellent suggestions. We're certainly not opposed to them. I believe Sean mangano has been given the task of seeing if he can help implement some of those. They should be implemented, but they don't address what we feel is the most important part of this, which is the perception issue, and the idea of what's coming in the future. And the demand that we hope will become increasing for people coming for experiential events in our downtown, whether it's art or music, or dining, or just walking around in the green spaces that we're creating, not just Kendrick Park but in front of town hall in the north common, and of course the south common and streets apart. Is it premature to resume doesn't really make sense to first have a project and then and then resume. It sounds eminently reasonable but as the this paragraph tries to explain. No one is going to take the expense in the time that would be involved to see to come up with a proposal, a real concrete proposal that we could then ask the kinds of questions that were asked last week, or last time last meeting in terms of, you know, look and size and traffic and entry egress and so forth. No one's going to do that. If the parcel remains RG. Okay, that's that's the bottom line. No one's going to take that time or expense. And we don't want the town doing that. The whole point behind this is that it would be a public private partnership where the town expense basically nothing. The risk is taken on by the developer and the town provides the land and maintains ownership of the land and and writes at the RFP and has final say on what it will be. So that's our advantage to us. And then expecting that somehow someone is going to do all this without having some assurance that the zoning would allow it. I think it's just unrealistic. The town wants to take that expense on and we certainly don't want that. So we show how many spaces again that's a guesstimate depends on the design but we as we said we're looking at something three stories. That's it. We're not interested in five story structure that would not be anything that we would support, and we would withdraw. It's not something that would be in the RFP. So you're talking about a three story garage and given the slope of the site. It's very likely that the first floor with a good portion of it would be would be underground. So it is over 120 say 123 spaces. But again without an actual proposal. We can't say for certain. And I don't think you're not going to get a proposal, unless we take the first step and rezone. Then specific concerns are addressed in terms of traffic height. And so forth. So all good questions. We're not dismissing them. But again, we're not bringing a concrete proposal to you because there isn't that. But if you imagine what might be the case with traffic that that's a very good question. I think that has to really be looked at closely and the concerns of the neighbors and would have to be taking very seriously. This would be something the ZDA would be looking at it would depend on the proposal. Hi. As you said, yes, the BG does allow up to five floors, but that's not what we would we would support that would not be in the RFP. And also the expensive it would be prohibited. Three floors is more than adequate. And would also I think be in keeping with the homes across the street and with the, the buildings that are adjacent to it. Other uses. Again, the question is, well, you know, what if the parking garage, you know, no proposals come or we go through the process and we don't like the proposals and we say, okay, it stays it stays a parking lot. Well, then now it's BG, it could be anything could happen to it. I understand that concern. But first of all, remind everyone that it belongs to the land is still in the town's possession, and whatever would happen there could only happen with the town's permission and ultimately with the permission of the town council. But we also was raised the notion of what's called contract zoning. And we looked into that. And I think in the next part of the, the next paragraph, I believe, Evan addressed that or somewhere he addresses that. Maybe it comes a little bit later, but we looked into contract zoning. It is legal in Massachusetts. It has been used. And yeah, there it is near the end. Yeah, sorry. So it's certainly something that we would support. We would be perfectly happy to include that as part of the of the zoning bylaw. And apparently the lows and Hadley was done under some form of contract zoning. And it's, I think, Evan here mentions one case in particular so it is perfectly legal. It has to obviously address something that's some common good in the in the language it has to be providing for something that is that is a truly beneficial to the community as a whole which we think this would be. But we would certainly be open to that. So it would be explicit in the language. This could only be used as for the purpose of creating a garage. And that would be it. And so we'd obviously have to do some more homework there but but that is a very real possibility and one that we would support. Then up above, we go back up we just we look briefly at traffic height, other uses, the viability impacts the CDS. Basically none. They still have their lot. Again, if this ever if we did rezoned it and people did come forward and did take the time with their lawyers and conversation and doing their due diligence. They would have conversations with CVS and they might be able to work out something more than just an overhang I mean one suggestion is just overhang over the CVS spaces that CVS would keep their lot. Unless they chose to enter into some agreement that they would see is advantageous to them but they may very well not. So the impact on them would not be any as far as we could see an impacts to other businesses again is described here. They would work with their own parking. And again, maybe they would work something out or maybe they would just keep the parking they have, but it seems the impact on them immediate businesses would be, but again not be significant. And the impact on all the other businesses in the downtown would be very positive. That's something we hear a lot. And then again as we said is there any way to guarantee and that's that's kind of a jump ahead there but that deals with the issue of what couldn't it then become, you know, once it's rezoned it can become anything. And that paragraph attempts to address that and contract zoning is part of that. So that's in some what my colleague put together for you. And it gives you some clear sense of what we are hoping to accomplish long term and how this is just the first step. And again I just wanted to begin with that preamble of what drives this is is a sense of a future excitement. What's happening in our downtown and what's going to be happening in our community over the next few years. It's, we want it not to cost the town it's not something where the town would be spending any money. And the, you know, the phrases of win win for the business community, which will be taking on the risk, and the town, we should be providing a space that we draw people. They would know without that they have a place they can come and then they can go up and do whatever they want to do. And as you can see there are many, many, many things now, and even more to come. And you can do it in our downtown. Thank you George. I'm not sure I've heard you give such a presentation and all your weeks and months of on the town council. It was very nice. Thank you. Very clear. Thanks to Evan Evan is he's can he's at a wedding at that young man. I don't know he just he needs to go to less wedding. I don't understand. He was out yesterday getting a tux. He can't fit into mine I couldn't mind. Anyway, he did the lion share here. Thank you. I'm sure. So, so we need to be clear that we're not, you know, talking about a parking garage but we're talking about rezoning for this particular hearing. But just being transparent that, you know, a parking garage proposal would be in, you know, in the offing there. So I, before I open up the board, I have a few questions that maybe Chris. Or Rob can help me with but I saw the graphic that the parking revenue was decreasing from 2015. It was early on and George's slides but I can try and bring that back up if you give me a second.  It was low but it just seemed. I was curious what, what with. This one. There you go. Yeah. So yeah, 1819. I'm wondering what the town's perspective on on that decrease from, you know, subsequent to fiscal year 17. Like, that's a big drop I just, I'm just wondering, someone can give some perspective on that. Chris, I don't know anything about that I'm sorry I can't. I don't have any information to share perhaps Rob does. I do not either. Okay. That's fine. And then also just to get some more history perspective. Again, because this is, you know, prior to every member on the board. You know, joining, we had both with I understand why both would parking end up being, you know, subterranean, but no, no stories above ground floor. Can we get some perspective on that. Can you get me to answer that? Yes. So there was a lot of objection from the residents of Clark House and and will and apartments about having a structure in the middle of that open space. People seem to really like the idea of having the open space, even though there were cars there. So that was the primary objection and there was also an architect who was involved. His name I can't remember but he spoke very passionately about maintaining the open space there and not filling it up with a building. So even though a second story was for a third, a third floor was planned. Initially, it was determined that that wouldn't happen at the time that the garage was built but here that the garage was designed to accommodate another story if the town were to decide to put one there. I don't think there would be that many spaces that would be gleaned by doing that. I'm thinking around 80 or 90, not exactly sure Rob may have a better idea. And I think if we were deciding to pursue that as a possibility, there would need to be some studies done about whether the structure, you know, meets today's code because this was designed back in the 90s so Rob probably has more information about that. Yeah, I just, yeah, I'm curious about that because I always thought that was a missed opportunity for the town to make that a larger structure, but and then I totally agree with with George with, you know, going to Northampton. You can like hunt and peck for a parking space but you know you always have that parking garage that you can go to. And it would be wonderful, you know, have that same feeling comfort level. You know, given whatever time constraints you have that you know you're going to find a parking place. You know within a within a parking garage but again, that's, we're not talking about a parking garage we're talking about a zoning change but I just wanted to say that and then Chris I'm wondering in terms of a condition can we can limit this to a three story versus a five story, you know, with regard to the approval of this and, you know, putting in some sort of, you know, kind of overreaching a little bit but you can make the recommendation the planning board can make that recommendation if the planning board decides to recommend approval of this rezoning that would be that could be part of your recommendation. Yeah. Right. But when the RFP goes out, whoever is in charge of that can also make that a stipulation in the RFP that the town wants no more than three stories here. So that would be something that the staff would put together and the town manager would release that is an RFP for the town. Okay. That's all I had so I open it up I see Doug. Yeah I had a couple of I guess a couple of questions. One is I guess at this point we're just doing a record. I mean we're going to make a recommendation to counsel, and then counsel is going to decide whatever it decides. So my first question is, what was the vote of town council to refer this to us? How strong was the support on the council to refer this proposal to us? And the second question I had was if this proposal is rejected, I guess. Isn't there maybe a two year period during which it can't come back? So if we kill, if we contribute to killing this, are we in fact killing it definitely for two years? I think that the rule is that if the planning board puts it forward again, then it can come back, but it has to be the recommendation has to come from the planning board to bring it back. That's my understanding. Thank you. George, you have your hand up and then Janet. My recollection and it's rusty, so maybe I should not say anything, but my recollection is the vote was eight to five. It was not like a unanimous or anything like that. There certainly were some objections, but my recollection was eight to five, but I have to check. I'd like to think it was higher than that, but I think it was eight to five. What was it, George? You think? Well, I'm nervous here. I was not unanimous. I know that. Okay. And so maybe I should just say I should say to Doug, I'll just find out and I will tell you that's the safest. Thank you, Janet. My concern, I have a few concerns here. One of them is that zoning change with very little information. And so instead of planning first and gathering information, and then zoning, we're being asked to zone without information or planning. It just seems at a minimum to get to get some drawing some diagrams to show us the capacity of each of the parking lots to sort of compare them and to see how many spaces they could have given the setbacks in the different zoning things. I mean, it seems like you've already have some by an architect. And I would hope that you would share that with us so we could at least see, you know, you're going to have to 20 foot setbacks on the north and south side because it abuts RG. You're going to have a 10 foot setback at the rear. I don't think you're probably going to build right onto the street onto North Prospect Street. And so to me it looks like those option, the size of the garage can get smaller and smaller. And you're hoping for like 100% lot coverage. It sounds like no landscaping it's just, you know, a brick there. So I would like to see, you know, what's possible and what how many spaces are possible. I was looking at the, the study from 1990 that compared the Amherst parking facility study from 1990, and they had drawings of the possibilities on all three town lots. They found 240 spots on the CVS lot, but it was a CVS plus the town lot. And that seems sort of like a threshold number. And even at that number, you know, they were barely making money. And they were kind of different parts of the financial analysis and of course the numbers are different now because 30 years have gone by. They might be worse because everything's more expensive and our parking rates aren't very high. They thought that basically, you know, monthly monthly parking people were the best way you know people who rented by the month would be the best way to make money. So I would, I would hope that we would see some diagrams on each of the lots. I would like to see a diagram combining Amity Street and the Bank of America lot because that's a lot of space.  And throughout the parking study, they were talking about doing a line of shops in the front to kind of fill out the street, like retail shops, and making that attractive and throughout the parking study, every lot that they were looking at they were looking at making it attractive and appealing and things like that. And so I would love and I don't think it's super expensive because I know I mean, yesterday at the site I asked Chris Breastrup. Can you do that? Can you do those because we've seen the planning department do it, we've seen Doug do it. And I, you know, the response was there's just planning department has no time but it seems as a proponent and you have an architect that that wouldn't be hard to do. Also this is a public hearing in the public it's I mean if I feel like I have a little information I'm sure people paying attention to this feel the same way. So, you know, diagrams to illustrate the capacity of each lot and the setbacks because I think you might wind up with a much smaller parking garage given the 20 foot setbacks because it's BG adjoining RG. The other question I have a lot of questions but one of them is it's like, has anyone gone to the tack the Transportation Advisory Committee there are people on that committee who have expertise in traffic and parking. I don't think it's a small thing to have all the traffic coming in and out off of North Prospect Street. I'm not sure it's going to be obvious to people but I know that's a lot of impact and I was running at the tack with all their experience some feedback from them. I think I would like to have that before I make a recommendation. I mean, do you I mean do you want to respond to that way. Well respond to which all of the back or which one do you want me to start with. Well, the tack is the easy one but the diagrams that I think really important. Well, let's start with the diagrams. We don't have an architect. We don't have a plan. I think I said over and over again. No one is going to do this the town's not going to do it. No architect no, no private entity is going to do this. If it remains RG. And I've just explained in detail how we have protections here. So if this does not work, then it goes back to being what it's and it goes also goes back to a spending another 300,000 or 400 whatever it is to patch it up. It seems to be of Lin lost in the shuffle. So the risk and the cost falls on the shoulders of the private entity, and they will only do this if they see that it makes sense. I'm not sure they're about making money obviously they want to break even, but the driving force here from the bid, and from those who probably would take the risk would be that would have described from the beginning is a desire to create a place that people don't want to. It's not about making yourself rich on a parking garage. You do want to make break even, but I don't think they that's not the concern. So, yes, it would be nice to have all kinds of things like this but the planning department can't provide it. I can't provide it. What I'm asking the planning board to consider is whether they think this is makes sense in the big picture. The appropriate protections which I think are here on the zoning really carries very really no risk at all, but then allows and encourages private part entities to spend the time and money to come forward that and then all the questions you ask and tack and all the rest of it comes into play. And it could be as it sometimes is, you go through all of this you spend all your money you do right and it just doesn't work. And if that happens that's what happens. And so at this stage, to demand all that would basically mean that it stays what it is it stays as a kind of dilapidated and poorly lit parking space parking a lot, and we'll shell out another 300,000 in a year to patch it up. And in 20 years we'll do it again, and so on and so forth. Janet, am I going to give you a pause Janet just, but I just I want to make sure we don't put the cart in front of the horse. We're really just talking about a zoning change and as George related. There's so much more that has to happen for this for this for this concept so I would like to see if anybody else wants to speak on the planning board and then Janet you can. I would like you to come in after that but I just want to make sure that we get everybody opinion. Doug. Yeah, I guess. I think I'm not sure I agree with George about the fact that the town couldn't do some of the work that is needed to develop a vision for this area. So I guess my question for George and and Evan is, why did you put this forward as a straight zoning change as opposed to a motion that directs the town manager to have planning staff spend some time of their own, you know, the staff who are already paying just put this, this concept on on a higher priority in terms of their task list so that, you know, we might have some conceptual ideas for what you would do before we talk about the rezoning.  You know, have you built consensus for this. You know, and so, you know, it just, it's just weird and it's so it, we're accustomed to having the planning staff kind of come to us with some work done for consideration and comment. And, and you're, you're kind of out here coming in from left field. And so it's just a little bit kind of hard to wrap your head around. George you want to respond. Yeah, no, I hear that and maybe that will be the decision of the planning board they simply want more information and I can't give it to you right now and I can't speak for the planning department I think that the approach is obviously different than what you're used to. I was driven largely by the business community and I apologize they're not here. The bid executive director was here, but she's just gone. So she could speak much more eloquently and forcefully and I can about the business community interest but Yeah, I think that the planning department is already up to their eyeballs in in in work and projects. And I think the feeling of Evan and myself was this is something that we knew there was interest in the private sector to do this before cove it. And our understanding is there's still is interest, but no one's going to touch it. If the zoning stays or G. So if the planning board is willing to do something a little bit different and take that. I consider really minimal risk. That kind of work will be done not by our planning staff that yes we do pay. But probably not enough, but we do pay them and they work very hard and they are as you know they're obviously up to their right so it would basically go on the back burner and Paul is got 5000 things to do it go on the back burner. And I think if that's what the planning board is comfortable with and that's what will happen and it will go on the back burner, and it will stay what it is probably for a very, very long time. So I also hear that I would like to have the bid executive director here I'd like to have a few more members for the business community here. But the night they're not here so I can't I can't answer that. But yes the approach is probably not what is usual. And we're asking you to consider it and think about it in terms of the broader vision of what's happening in Amherst and it's going to be happening. And we will do obviously, we will follow your guidance. Great. Thank you. Good comments. George, thank you for the response Janet. So, so I appreciate, I appreciate the pitch and I, I'm not against the idea. What I hoping for is some information that we regularly get, which is just some sketches of the different you know like the comparison between the three lots it's not super expensive it's not super hard to do but somebody can do it. And I do agree that the planning department is beyond stretched out. So when I read your, you know supplemental thing it said that there is a preliminary analysis by a potential bidder, working with an architect with experience in parking garages and did show that the space could support a parking garage if 100% coverage was allowed. And if you look at the 1990 report they do a super extensive drawings for this lot, including the CVS lot but they also just did sort of, I don't know I'm not using the right word but they just they looked at the other two lots and they drew around them and I don't think it's particularly expensive but it's very, very useful to see what can be done and I would love to see even just a basic schematic of what can be done. We obviously someone has already done it, and did they get the setback so what's the consequence of the zoning of BG. And so I would love to get that information which is the information we normally do before we make a recommendation to rezone something which is obviously a very big deal. The other thing is there is some deal there are some bidders. The bid is interested. So I would love to have them come here and make the proposals and saying this is our vision. Here's some drawings. Here's why we picked this. Here's what's possible. It's interesting to me that the Bank of America lot sits, you know, it's, it's a big lot they only use it during banking hours and they given permission for Amherst Cinema people to use at night. You know, seems very possible to me that that would be a site for parking garage combined with the town lot and I think, you know, you're, you're making a proposal very specific proposal and we're a planning board and we sort of sit back more, and collect information looking at the bigger picture and so that would help me to see the picture and no more some more detail. I understand your urgency but I think you're looking for a recommendation and we, we, I need more information before going forward. I did. So that's one thing and so I don't, I don't think what I'm asking for is very expensive is what we normally see. If there's a bidder and an architect, they'll understand that they could provide that pretty quickly, especially if they have experience with garages to the other, the other thing. But I do would like to go to the tack and get their input or even have someone from the tack invited to look at this. The other issue I see is, you know, going over three stories and I think I sent an email to Chris is that I think that in the youth table, one idea is to say that, you know, to change to add a sentence to the youth table, basically in any public or private parking garage she'll exceed three stories or 35 feet in any zoning district no waivers or exceptions she'll be allowed. And that would just put the kibosh on, you know, going over, you know, to three stories for the parking garage.  Maybe the lot isn't turned into a parking garage. The town would like some money, it has a valuable lot now zone BG. They could sell it for, you know, whatever, you know, five stories something and I think that's a great concern of the neighbors. And, you know, there's no, how do you, you know, that concern I think has to be addressed and not by saying it's not going to be in the RFP, but once the zoning is there it's there. And it can be, you know, the town could say let's sell a lot for something, you know, building it might be, you know, some of the lots in town are worth millions of dollars now. And that is a very valuable asset and people on North Prospect Street are going to be looking at a five stories something. And so, I don't think it's, I think we have to look at the long term consequences to and discuss those also. Thank you Janet. Without any other hands on the planning board let's open it up to public. And I see two hands raised Pam. Excuse me. Harry helps. And then Pam Rudy. Oh, there's a third. Ronnie Parker I'm not, I'm not sure I'm saying that correctly and then Jennifer Todd, Kathy Shane, and then Dorothy Pam. So we have, well, and then Susanna most perhaps so we have over half dozen. And I will watch the three minute timer here, getting set up here but please Harry, you will be first, you know, say you're, you're, oh, you've got to go on there. Thank you. Thank you. So first be Harry, you know, just state your name and address. And yet, three minutes. Harry is muted. Harry, can you unmute. I see a mute button. Can you hear me now? Yes. Thank you. My name's Harry Peltz. I live at 32 North prospect street and Amherst. And I attended a community commission meeting a few weeks ago when this was adjourned this this particular meeting tonight was adjourned at that time the planning board told me. And there were a number of people there. I mean, the, the, the cart is being put before the horse. And we don't know what the horse is going to be once it comes in. But let me be use my three minutes productively. I believe that Mr. Ryan indicated there'd be a not that many more spaces created by this endeavor. I would like to point out that if you look at the maps, the only access to this lot is off of North prospect street. And as this McGowan indicated, the neighbors and the people, and there are about 10 or 12 of us who were present at the commission meeting a few weeks ago, are very concerned about that. North prospect street is immediately to the west of this. It is the only access to that lot from any direction. It is a two lane road. One lane is dedicated during the UMass school year to residents who live on that street. And it is a one way street headed southbound from it has to be entered from the north to come down how you're going to get access to any structure there is going to be very, very difficult. It's going to create a traffic problem that is going to be enormous and immediately to the west on the other side of the street where I live along with my neighbors is a historic district designated historic district. And it's not going to do anything for the property values or for the ambiance in that area. You indicated that this project may not be profitable and break even because only if it break even then it benefits the town. But what private entrepreneur is going to want to invest money in building a parking lot that only breaks even and how do we even have that there. And I mentioned that I was before kept saying oh we're not going to have a parking lot that we're just going to do this to to explore things. Where are you. I made it can. Highway department request for them to look into the dangerous condition of exiting driveways on North prospect Street now headed southbound out of the residences, when the traffic coming from UMass comes down there at excessive speeds and the view is that they are not headed northbound of making some accommodation that request was made nearly six months ago, and I have yet to get a report which was supposedly being written three months ago. I believe this is a very poorly conceived way to approach things you have studies from 1990. I have been here for a number of years only residing physically here but I've been in this area, and that lot is not use that much at all. You can go by on almost any day and I know recently, only a few seven cars or so are there maybe because of COVID, but it has never been an overuse lot, you can see the percentages that Mr Ryan presented in his presentation, which were very very great. I'm sorry my time is out but I am very very opposed to this believe my fellow neighbors are here you know Harry you can ask for more time, but you, you, you're over three minutes but if you want another minute or are you good. He's good okay. Okay, so, so we'll go on to Pam. Pam runes that your name and address thank you. Hi, Pam rune. I do appreciate being allowed to speak. I, I hope that at some point. The board will actually listen to the folks that show up and speak about concerns. We really just want a healthy vibrant and and exciting town center. All of this is said in that light. There's a couple things that I strongly agree with, and that is, let's plan first, and then let's zone let's not put the cart before the horse, and change the zoning in the hopes that maybe something can work in the future. I think if a, the, the, the request for diagrams for all of the different parking areas should be part of this conversation before the planning board takes a vote to recommend this this zoning change zoning changes are a big deal.  Let's get some diagrams let's see what the capacities of the different sites are. People can do this. I see three planet three architects on the planning board, and they themselves could do some simple diagrams the planning staff we absolutely maxed out, and is trying very hard to push things through the system. So let's see some diagrams let's see if it makes sense. There are a number of unanswered questions, even though this is supposedly just to reason, we all know that the intent to reason is to encourage construction development behind CBS. In the garage, who, who would reap the benefits of it. Would the town have to purchase for instance, the easement or the access way between CVS and the side gone building. So I, I don't fully believe that once the site is rezoned to be G that there could be any restriction in place on the height of a building, because in fact, the dimensional table will allow for more than three stories. So I disagree that that oh we can deal with that later. So I think the planning board has a really big responsibility in front of them to have the facts in order before you recommend a rezoning change. The BG is definitely not even the right zone. The BG district backs up with backup immediately against a an RG neighborhood and in fact, it's really imperative that there be a buffer so before you do anything. So if you look at the facts, compare the, the options compare the main district, the various zoning districts that might apply. Don't just, don't just move ahead and and push through something that isn't completely thought through. Thank you. Thank you, Pam. So next we have a hope I pronounce this correctly Ronnie Parker. Yes, this is Ronnie Parker. Okay, stay your name and address. Yeah. Ronnie Parker new to the neighborhood soon to be resident of 24 North prospect. I'm so grateful to my neighbors who've spoken because a lot of what I feel has been expressed, but I will and I've written to Mr. Ryan not realizing he was the advocate for this arguing for all the reasons why it shouldn't happen. And I'd like to address his question of his focus on how this is really about Amherst of the future, because it is about Amherst of the future is Amherst of the future going to be bringing in or trying desperately to bring in hundreds more cars. What is it going to do about making it a sustainable place with more trees more bicycle traffic, and of course access to cars nobody saying no. Are there any EV charges on these proposed parking lots. I feel like if we're going to go this route we really need to think about the future in a more comprehensive way. And I would say to Mr Ryan that it's not at this or nothing. You can consult with us, and I think you'll find that there are lots of options, not just the technical options that others have alluded to that the planning people will come up with. But there's a lot of opportunity for vision among the people who live there. So I think there are other options. So we're really rushing into this I would urge the planning board, not to to put off whatever decision you're going to make about this. That's not for that reason. I also, I'm a business owner so I'm not opposed to economic development, but let's not fool ourselves about business business private sector does not get into things where they don't make money. That's, I mean, no private sector is going to step in and do things for Amherst good alone. I had one other comment and this has to do with the condition of the road. Since I do also work in industry where construction happens. I can tell you that if the Department of the Transportation Office in Massachusetts probably will not allow that road to be used in the ways we're talking about, even for construction vehicles that are projected to be there as a site for the building of the library. It is a tiny road. It is a week week road it doesn't have the structure underneath to support the kinds of traffic we're talking about. I think that we do need a lot more research to undertake this. And thank you for letting me speak and I really look forward to meeting these neighbors who have spoken up today in person. Thank you Ronnie. So we have Jennifer and then Kathy and then Dorothy and Susanna so Jennifer pop please state your name and address. Yes, my name is Jennifer towel that 259 Lincoln Avenue, and I actually wrote something because I wanted to be sure I got it into the three minutes. So, when the town establishes only it determined that there would be at least a certain number feeder blocks which would serve as a buffer between the general business district and the general residents neighborhoods, and that buffer is the business limited So it would be one thing to rezone the town's portion of the parking lot behind CBS from its current RG designation to business limited, but to skip over the BL all together and rezoned to be G denies north prospect street as well as some other streets that feed into it. It just denies them any buffer between it and the business general district district. So among the protections that the BL designation provides to the adjacent residential neighborhoods is that the buildings in the BL will not exceed three stories while in the BG they can be five stories. And again from the beginning of zoning it seems up until this moment or maybe it was just four to six weeks ago we even heard that there was even an idea that this rezoning would happen, or was that we even be thought of happening. And the town planners a degree that five story buildings were really not appropriate next door, you know, to single family and multi unit dwellings which is what's in the adjacent RG neighborhood. And I kind of feel confident that another planning board members would also, you know, appreciate a five story building going up across the street from them or our next door. And just to rezone the CVS lot from our G to BG seems especially confounding like others have said before me since it's not at all clear that it's even feasible to build a parking structure and the location being discussed. Yet once the town's parcels behind CVS to rezone from RG to BG, the universe of what can be built on the east side of North pleasant vastly increases. I could live with us, you know, there was some sort of could be a guarantee of that anything built there wouldn't be more than three stories and that it would be, you know, sort of screened with trees but I for what I'm hearing tonight is when the chair says that we're just talking about zoning that there couldn't be any sort of what they call it contract zoning or any kind of rider attached it would just be rezoned to BG that there couldn't be anything specified that it would only be a three story parking structure.  And it's the parcels been rezoned to BG and then they're, you know, nature and out of parking structure is not feasible there for all the other reasons that others have discussed. So that there's an application for a five story apartment building or office building in that location. And if the residents say well in 2021, you know, our councilman promised us that that structure would never be built there. I can't imagine that that argument would really get us very far with the future planning board. So I echo what's already been offered in public comments of, you know, please don't skip over BL and and rezoned from RG to BG. And of course I would ask if, you know, rezoning not be done before the feasibility study has happened to determine if the purpose for what should result be rezoning. Because of me the parking structure is even doable. And I still don't understand why there couldn't be a feasibility study before the rezoning. Thank you. Thank you, Jennifer. Kathy and then Dorothy and Susanna so Kathy Shane state your name and address again. Hi, I'm Kathy Shane I live at 519 Montague Road, and I'm speaking as a resident. For those of you who do or don't know Montague Road that's 63 going north and we're almost at the north end so we frequently drive downtown. And I experienced the various lots. So I actually wrote up comments and sent them I sent them to you Chris but I didn't get them before this meeting so you can have other other comments that I did in writing. And I just wanted to make some points that haven't been already made. So the question of YBG why not BL, we could think of why not be and because BN, at least allows you some dimensional waivers. So some of the issues are a lot coverage, but something that's a buffer Joan. I worry that this looks like spot zoning to me. We're planning to do the whole street this way spot zoning is not legal in Massachusetts, where you just pick a little piece out. So the lot next to it is still zone the way it's owned, and this little so the CBS slot so we're cascading along all of it so I think we should avoid doing something that's illegal. There's a loss of 70 spaces George talked about an addition. Yes, we might need to do repair sounds like we'll need to do repair the roads. We don't have any linkage fees for developers. These are legal, and I gave you a citation of some towns that do it when a development goes up they contribute to a parking fund, for for example to help build a garage, and we could put those on the books. And I just, the whole issue of scale is a real one that people have already asked about but getting some sense of what, what could you build on two thirds of an acre. In 1990 study was done they were assuming an acre, and they came up with 240 spaces. So I'm not really sure you could get 190 out of it and they were going underground layer, and then a rooftop layer so staying within. They weren't rezoning for that lot, by the way, they were designing it. And just so people don't get excited about the idea of the North Hampton lot that's 400 spaces. It's really big. So, just to be able to think about it the access to this is horrible. Now, and that's one of the reasons it's less use the signage is really bad you don't even know there's a lot back there, but you go through that tiny era alleyway. So if you're coming in the middle of town or you have to know to go way up north, and, and come back in it's hard to get to it's hard to leave. So the preferred lot is the North Commons parking lot, they're full all the time. And you can look at I can send you the revenues that's the big money winner. It's just hard to get to. So I think that's all I want to say now but the one other concern I have. And publicly, there've been some statements, and I think it was the BID who made this that one of the developers interest is potential long term lease to the tenants. We might not have very many public spaces, if we give away this land. The underground garage is already long term. So you might, we might really lose control so I think some design concerns do we really have public spaces what's the price to park there. If we no longer control it are big ones, and I'll stop. Thank you. Thank you Kathy. Dorothy and then Susanna Dorothy state your name and address. I'm Dorothy Pam 229 Amity Street. And again I'm speaking as a private person as a town counselor. I do agree with George and Evan on the question of certainty of being able to park. And that's why the idea of garage has some attraction. But I think that there have been so many good comments made both by planning board members and the public as to the various problems with this particular lot. I don't think this is the place to do it. I am definitely in favor of having a detailed study of the boat would lot and the Amity lot as combining the Bank of America with the town lot. What's wrong with this particular spot is, it is not visible. Access is very difficult. And it just, it just won't work. I mean the idea of certainty of parking means you know where the garage is, you know how to get there, you can get in and you can get out. And that there would be spaces always be some spaces available for people. So the whole long term parking thing is not really a good idea. So I, I second some of the ideas that George brought up, but I do not think that the North prospect lot now that I have had a chance to learn more about the size and what could be built there and have thought about the access more. I don't think this will be the place that will give us the certainty the assurance. Yes, I'll be able to find a place to park. So I do hope that you will set some kind of study going to look at other areas for this. Thank you. Thank you Dorothy. Susanna, state your name and address. Chris, do you want to speak now. This is on mute. I said Susanna just unmuted herself so I think she'll be able to speak now and then I would like to speak after that. Very good. Thank you Susanna. Thank you for your address. Susanna must spread 38 North prospect Street. I wrote to you on July 2 with many concerns about this proposal to rezone for a parking garage and it was in your packet for the July 7th meeting. I will read my memo before you make your recommendation. I don't want to take up time tonight by repeating my concerns. But as planners certainly you understand the importance of careful planning before any zoning changes are promulgated. I would second what other speakers have said about the importance of doing that kind of analysis, comparing all the various lots. I have a point of clarification I'd like when George when you talk about three levels of parking. And Evan's memo mentions the top level is an open air parking deck. Is that a fourth level of parking or a third level. That's a fourth third. Well then the math just doesn't add up. I don't think I don't think you can get that many spaces on each level. I also feel that it's really important for the people in the town to know more about how this garage would be operated before it all takes place because we have rights under the charter to try to oppose things if we understand what they are. But we can't do that by just going to the ZBA at the end and I don't think that the traffic analysis should wait until after the potential partner has gone to all the trouble at the expense of designing the garage and whatever the traffic analysis isn't is something that should be done at the beginning before you decide you want to do this and it is really a problem on our street. If you end up having to take away all the street parking on Coal's Lane and North prospect to make this garage work, you're not going to gain very much in the way of spaces so that has to happen first I don't think that's really the, of the private partner but if it is it still needs to happen before this rezoning is is undertaken. I think we need to understand how the revenue would be apportioned is it all going to go to the private partner. We definitely want to understand whether this garage is for short short term parking for visitors to town as your memo kind of or whether this is really just a way of providing long term reserve parking for the inhabitants of the big buildings downtown who aren't having to pay to put in parking in their buildings and I just don't think that it's legal to take taxpayer money taxpayer land bought with taxpayer money and give it away to a private entity for little or no revenue. So that they can take the revenue from the garage and at the same time, give another bone to the developers I'm sick and tired of this and it just isn't right. If you're an honest government you need to be square with the citizens about what the intent is of this garage. And if you want us to trust government you the planning board need to not move forward with this until we get some answers. Thank you. Chris. I just wanted to clarify something and I think Rob and I both spoke to this at the July 7 meeting that this is not a case of spot zoning. It's an extension of an existing zoning district and Rob actually had a word for it which doesn't come to mind right now to me, but it is legal and perhaps you'd like Rob to say a few words about this. Rob. Yeah, I'll just add, you know, there's a lot of case law on this and it's considered a boundary parcel because it's right up against the BG district so it's not isolated in any way. So there are the majority of the cases in fact there's very very few that have been overturned but almost all the cases would find that this is not an example of spot zoning. There are different criteria that's used when when assessing that as well, including whether or not it serves a public good, but I think it's our opinion at this point that it would not not constitute an example of spot zoning. Okay, so no spot zoning alright. So, I think that's what we have from the public, and we can open it up again to the board. Janet, and then Doug, I was, I was wondering if a we could take a break and then I realized I was looking at my notes and that Doug and I met with Christine for a site visit and so there were some questions and answers from that. I was surprised from looking at that. So, did I skip over that I'm sorry. Do you want to speak to that or Doug, but I kind of wanted, I wanted to know if we could take a break also ever. Yeah, I kind of wanted to speak to that as well because I didn't think we'd be going long tonight. And so we just not Tom long but I thought we would not have, you know, 1130 whatever. So I apologize for that and, and if we certainly could take a break, because it's back in our court. So, good idea, Janet. So let's take it like a five minute recess, just take a video off and, and, you know, mute and we'll get back at around 905. Everybody back. One, two, three, four, five of us. I got a text from from Maria she's she's in the car coming back from New York. But obviously she won't be joining us but so we want to get us back engaged here Pam. Okay, you're good Jack. Alrighty. I think we're back at 905. Okay, so I think we're back to, you know, we heard public comment. I think we need, you know, additional discussion from the planning board. And, you know, looking for, for any put input from, you know, the five of us that are here. So, Johanna, and then, oh, Chris first and then Johanna and then Doug. I wanted to note that I got in touch with our town attorney, Joe Bard about the voting quantum that's required for recommendation from the planning board and even though this is a zoning amendment that you're voting on the recommendation only takes a majority of those present and voting, rather than a two thirds majority as it does for the town council to vote so I thought you might want to know that. Thanks Chris. So we have Johanna, Doug and then Tom Johanna. Well, I will say I feel a little bit like we're stuck in a chicken and egg scenario, where people are thirsty for more information, but from what George and what others have said we can't really get that information until we open the door to the media because then, you know, a developer who actually has viable skin in the game will put in the energy and the work to do it. And so, one of the things that I keep coming back to is the finances of this all and what that means for the town and for taxpayers so it seems like if we don't open the door to this, you know, kind of other use. We are stuck with the parking lot basically as it is, and it's already dilapidated and it's going to cost the town roughly $300,000, if not more, because costs likely have gone up to make it usable for its current use. And, you know, and like is that the best use, you know, I don't know, I don't really know, but, you know, my guess is probably not like if we want, if there's if people feel there's a strong need for parking, you know, we could maximize this would be a site where we maximize and it seems like boltwood isn't as good and amity street is an option but it's too small and then it would cost like $265,000, roughly took, if they were going to acquire the Bank of America lot. So just like I recognize the chicken and egg nature of it, but just from a pure financial standpoint my thinking right now is open up this opportunity to explore this so that we can get the information that we need, whether that's the parking or the design schematics and kind of all the stuff that we want. And then I don't quite know what to do about the three story versus five story stuff and how to make people feel like there are assurances on that. So those are my thoughts. Good ones thank you Hannah. Doug and then Tom, and then Janet. I mean I several things that I heard in the public comments. You know, I do have comments about I, you know there was comment that this site is not particularly visible. And I think of the Northampton garage behind thorns which you could drive around and on the main streets of Northampton for a while and never know it was there. I'm not sure I buy that argument. And then the folks who are saying you know nobody's going to build a parking garage that is only going to break even. I don't buy that either because the people that are going to build this garage would be people that own other property in town, and want to make their other property more valuable. So, you know, they may break even on the garage but they're going to have a benefit from having a more attractive downtown for people to park in and or shop or live or whatever. So I'm really torn about this, you know I don't want to vote against it, but I'm not really feeling particularly enthused about voting for it. You know, the people that want more, more information and floor plans. Sure I could go ahead and draw you a parking garage on that site, and the plan that I drew would look pretty much like the parking lot that's right there right now. So, you know it's going to be two tiers of 60 feet with a parking spot on each side and a 20 foot travel lane in the middle. It's going to be buried one story into grade because of the slope of the site. And yeah, you know you could either access it through the existing alley or off of North Pleasant Street. So I'm not sure it's really worth anybody's time to make a drawing for this hearing and what we're about right now. You know, if folks want to continue the hearing again, I'm not sure there's any particular deadline that we need to do this by, you know, we could continue it until November. Just, just to just for the heck of it just we didn't kill it but we didn't do anything with it. And, you know, in the meantime, Town Council could, could change and become more enthused or maybe the planning board would have time or the planning staff would have time to work on it. So I'm, I'm, you know, right now I'm I'm almost an abstain vote. But I'm, I would like to hear from Tom and anybody else who hasn't spoken much. Very good Doug I mean I express your sentiments there. So we have Janet and Tom. So, um, everything happens in context and so right now we have like 18 or 19 zoning amendments, kind of in the hopper I've lost kind of track. And, you know, one of our jobs is to do analyze and review them and make recommendations and, and I'm wondering like what an intermediate step could be, because right now I couldn't vote to recommend this spot, this rezoning I couldn't vote. I'm not going to vote against, you know, a parking garage on this spot I just don't know enough stuff. So I'm sorry I have like a whining dog in the background but so that could be just our emotional state after five weeks of meetings but anyway so Daisy is expressing something. But anyway, so I'm wondering if I'm looking for like an intermediate step that doesn't shut the door on this idea for two years because that doesn't seem right either. You know, like, if, if, you know, say we recommend not to or whatever or the town council votes against it that kind of dooms the idea for two years unless the planning board wants to bring it back. I do think we need more information I don't think it's super extensive or super expensive. I do, I do worry about these 20 foot setbacks, I do think I'd like to see more stuff I'm wondering if the proponents of the counselors that propose this could withdraw this zoning amendment, and then like request what I think Doug was saying earlier as the town manager to start a process of analysis, and not just put that on the planning department. People in the planning board would be happy to, you know, do a little task force or something or, but also the bid, you know, has skin in the game and they have resources. There's a bidder or some people who have an architect already done some drawings and I just wondered if the intermediate move would be just to withdraw this zoning amendment and start kind of a more usual process to consider this and so I don't have, you know, I just need more information and I don't want to kill it and I don't see myself going forward with this without more information.  Why is CVS habits parking spaces on town land, you know, but, but I do think it will just give some breathing space and some time and we need some breathing space right now we're doing too much, and I don't want to give something short shrift but I feel like this is just not enough stuff so I wondered if people would think about an intermediate step and we could continue it and talk about it in another month or so and hopefully get that information, or, you know, kind of put it into the usual process for a little more. So that's my idea. Just if it's withdrawn and comes back in in the more usual way of a little more analysis and building on past work. Thank you, Janet. Tom. Sure, so as of now I can't vote on this but I did I mean I've been listening and I have some really interesting sort of reactions and I like the way. Johanna framed it and it was similar to my thoughts I also think that both Janet and Doug are sharing a similar kind of feeling in the sense of not knowing where we are and as of listening to just this hearing I wasn't at the last one but I'm really sure what we're what the risk is right and I think Georgia mentioned it's a low risk proposition to just rezone this with conditions, and if we do so, what are we risking by inviting that and I think that's what I want to know. Most of all before we go forward like I'm not worried about what comes after because we'll get to look at that again and have to approve that before it gets built right or before it goes to the next steps. As part of the planning process but I'm I'm interested in what people's perceived. Because I've been reading and or listening to all the comments from the public as well as the planning board and I'm, I'm trying to get a feel for what those risks are. So I think that would help me better understand what's going on and maybe the public better understand how we get Janet as you're saying, from here to the next step, right that what do we need to know in order to make this so what are the risks we were taking and opening this up to, you know, an outside firm to come in and make a proposal. I don't feel like I know that answer yet, but maybe other people, you know, have jotted down a list or I just didn't hear enough of them. Chris, you know, you've heard from, I think all of us. And I don't know if you know you or George, or Rob, want to follow up, but you know, they're definitely are some, you know, concerns.  So one thing people used to do during town meeting time was to recommend referral back to the planning board for further study. So that's one option that you could recommend to town council that this would be referred back to the planning board, and that would be to ask town council to ask the town manager to direct the planning department to work on this. I mean that's, that's a possibility. But sending it back to the planning board and the planning department for further study is one option. Thank you. Thanks, Chris. George, and then I think I saw Doug's hand up so George, and then Doug. Thank you so much. You're on mute. Thank you. Sorry. I'm going to suggest. I hear that the question of risk needs to be clarified. And I feel very strongly that we need to hear from bed. And I'm well discouraged a little bit tonight that that there were not members here from the business community speaking so I think you really need to hear from them and if you don't hear from them, then that raises red flags in my own mind, quite frankly. So I would suggest, rather than referral to the, to the planning department, and have them work on it or to the time manager, both of whom are extraordinarily busy that that if you're willing to do this in a month I mean again there's no rush here but within a month or two we've never given her schedule, which is, I know it's difficult, but we come back, address the question of I mean, and there may be some other questions you want that you'll know but address the question of risk, and have here from the business community. We're hearing from the residents appropriately, but we need to hear from the restaurant owners the shop owners from members of the bid, just about why they want this, because that's what's driving it for me. I think it's important for the future of our downtown it's important for the future of what's coming but, as you can see tonight I'm one voice. And so I think the other thing that I would expect at this if we did a continuance is that there would be voices from the business community that would show up and tell us what they think I would like to hear from them myself actually. And if there are other things. I can tell you this, they're not going to be studies of other sites the interest is in this site. And if you are, if you share with me the sense that this has some legs and it's worth looking at, then let's look at it, but I'm, you're not going to get somebody looking at boltwood or somebody looking at, you know, amity and giving you options that's not what's going on here. So, if you are open to that, looking at this site, getting a clear sense of what the risks are, and putting the burden on really on the on us the presenters, not on the planning staff not on, not on the town manager, and continue it for say a month or whenever in the next month or two. That's what I would suggest. Yeah, I feel like we're having a hard time on hitching the zoning change from the, you know, ultimate, you know, proposal here which is, which is, again, you know, everything's above board here does, you know, full disclosure that sort of thing. Yeah, I'm not suggesting that we're going to present a set of grants or a plan. Right. Oh, I understand but I just but we're locked into what this is all about. And so it's very challenging I think for us so. So we have Doug and Janet. I simply raised my hand because I was not sure did Chris Chris did you mean to say that we could recommend that this be referred back to us as a planning board or did you mean to say the planning staff. I meant to say not that it would be referred back because it didn't come to from the planning board to begin with but that it be referred to the planning board and the planning staff for further study. Thank you. Janet. So, I was, I would add to that. I don't know if the tack has time to do it but I know there's people in the tack who are transportation people who would be helpful to get them to come in and talk to us also. And then I was interested in the idea of the BN zoning. I just hadn't really thought that through I knew there were other zoning options and that would give you flexibility about lot coverage, and then limit to three stories, and you know that providing that buffer to the RG that that we do. I think that's it. The other thing is is that when we talk about a diagram I don't, I'm not talking about something super extensive in fact a lot of it is in that 1990 report which would have to be updated and maybe stuff I don't think it's super complicated so that would maybe, you know, if we refer it back to us there's time to do that. If we continue the hearing. There's time to do that I would say a little bit more than four weeks because I think that time will go fast in terms of what we're working on now. So maybe a little bit more. I'm open to both. Yeah, so that's, I mean I, I'm wondering if anyone's to move. Yeah, we continue this hearing to set, you know, a date in September.  I just wanted to let you know when the dates in September were. There's one date, which is September 1, and you will be hearing a presentation about an Amherst College way finding sign project on that night and we don't really have anything else we have a minor thing for the survival center so September 1 is a possibility and September 29 is a possibility. There are no dates in the middle of September, thus far because of religious holidays. So, you know, is it seems like we need a little bit more. You know, work done to I think to satisfy some of the concerns that I've heard. I'm wondering if the September versus is too soon, but Doug, your thoughts. I'd like to move that we continue this hearing until September 29. Okay. I will second that. Yes. Any discussion. I'm not on the board. I see none. Okay roll call. Doug. Hey, Tom. Hi. Janet. Yo, Hannah. I, and I am an I as well. So that's five zero for a continuance of the hearing to September 29. I think we should state a time also. So let's say seven o'clock on September 29th. The Amherst College project will probably take longer than a half hour. But if you say seven o'clock, then people who are interested can arrive at that time. Okay. Amherst College is on September 1st. Sorry. Oh yeah. So we have, so we may have another project that night. But so you why don't you say 635 on September 29th. All right. Thanks 35. 35 September 29. Thank you. Very good. And George, any closing?  Not so much closing remarks, except thank you to all of you. It's taken longer I know than we hoped. But I think this has been very fruitful. It's been very helpful to me hearing from all of you. And so I appreciate that. Just want to be clear. You are expecting I believe a presentation from us on the 29th. That would address I have five items here that you would like us to address. The risks what they are exactly if you just rezone what would the risk be to the town. I would expect a presentation from the bid or from the business community, maybe a number of people, but at least someone speaking to that request the attack look at this and provide some sort of input. And that we look at the BN zoning option. And that that's what I have now. Am I missing anything? Well, I guess they're looking at like a maybe a conceptual site plan. Again, you're just looking at a zoning change. But I guess, you know, seeing seeing this thing. Again, it's really hard to unlink the zoning change from what the intended purpose is down the work and down the line. But so I got asking, what do you as a group, what do you want from us?  Is that fair to ask Chris? Well, if the bid is involved, the bid has members who are architects and if they think this is a good idea, they may be willing to do that. I can ask them and urge them to consider that. But I guess I can't I certainly can't promise it certainly not tonight. But I would ask in the presentation that they would they would consider that. So we have Doug and then Janet, Doug. Yeah, I was just going to say, I don't really need to see a concept design. And I think if there's going to be a competitive bar of P process that comes out of this at some point, the the people that might enter that may not want to show their hand. So I think you are in a bit of a rock, you know, in a hard place. But I think some support from the bid would be would be great.  I think you're absolutely right. Thank you, Doug. Janet. So I would like to have information on the other two options. And so, you know, if combining the Amity Street lot with the Bank of America lot gives you 400 parking spaces and an attractive storefronts, you know, that might be gold compared to, you know, just an extra 123 spaces. And so, you know, if you look at the 1990 report, it's a little bit out of date, because I think it's a little out of date, but it's it's not they don't have super complicated drawings of the Bank Center lot or the Amity Street lot. And so and actually there's a house in the Amity Street area that is no longer exists in the Bank of America, the People's Bank came in. So things have changed a bit. But I don't think they're they're not super complicated drawings. And so I think if you have some bid architects, they could just put us some some stuff together and estimate like, oh, how many spots they can do if they can't do that, then we're sort of left kind of looking at this one option wondering what else is out there. Well, that's what I've said that this is one option on the table. But if the board wants this, then I would have to. But at this time, what I'm offering or what I'm willing to do is bring forward, you know, people speaking on this site, that's it, not looking at other sites, not doing comparative analysis, nothing like that. They would be speaking on why they think this site is is good for the town, good for business, why they are pushing it, and why they think that if you do resound, there will be interest in doing something. That's what I can offer you. That's it.  And it's like, it would be, I think, a shame, you know, not to really work with the butters to make sure that this thing is fully, you know, evaluated versus like, you know, shoe-horning into the town-owned portion of that. Because it is, you know, if we're going to have a parking garage, it seems like, yeah, that