Hello, hello everyone. My name is Laura. This is my channel Laura's Little Library and welcome to today's video which is my very late December wrap-up. But the December was quite a bit of a slower month I, you know, we moved back home for the holidays and then and I mean that's why I'm currently filming this It is the middle of January and we're about to head back to Minnesota But I wanted to try and get this video filmed and edited as quickly as possible So in December, I only read eight books, which I'm thinking of last year That's still a good number, but looking back on how much I read per month this year It's probably one of my lowest numbers, but that is perfectly okay. That's perfectly fine I still beat my reading goal, which is great And like it was just kind of a mediocre month But I was just so busy with catching up with family getting ready for the holidays There being a blizzard and then driving through the blizzard and then having the blizzard again So and I've done a lot of baking since I've been home So it's just been busy and wonderful. So I'm still gonna talk about the eight books that I read though in December Starting with the one and only five star read of this month Kingdom of the Wicked by Carrie Manus Calco It took me a very long time to read this book And that is because when I first heard the book I was like, okay, I think that sounds interesting But I'm not super into it.   I really liked the Stocking Jack the Ripper series I love the writing and I love the character. So I was like, okay You know the premise is interesting. Maybe I should just give it a try because I like the author and I'm so petty you guys I am so incredibly petty because I love this book. Like I said, it was a five stars I cannot believe I forced myself to wait this long to give in to finally reading it. It was amazing I love the characters. I love the Italian influence the magic so basically what happens in this book is yet you have these twin witch sisters and You know, they're just happily living their life in Italy until one of them actually ends up Murdered and so the other one our main character decides that she needs to solve her sister's murder because no one else is gonna do it And so in order to do so she ends up summoning a demon to help her but After she completes the summoning she realizes. Oh, this isn't just a demon. This is one of the seven princes of hell She summoned Prince Rap. Then they have to go solve her sister's murder. I love this book so much that in January Snake Peak I read books two and three immediately like I actually loved this book so much that I prioritized finishing the series which says a lot if you are familiar with my channel, you know that I am absolutely atrocious at Continuing on series even if I love them. So the fact that I sat and binged this series Means a lot. I was constantly Intrigued also. I just have to say the audiobook for this is Phenomenal there are sound effects. There's music background During the book when a prophecy or something is being read out They do a sound effect on the narrator's voice or when it's a important or intense moment though They will add in little bits of music. So I highly Highly recommend the audiobook because it just elevated the reading experience So much and I am so glad that I own this. I do have the dust jacket for it It is in Minnesota when I travel with hard books I don't like traveling with the dust jackets because I don't like them getting like Wrinkled or ripped or anything like that. So this was a five-star read above and beyond my expectations. I Was just so thrilled the whole way through the next I had three four Star reads which is it's pretty good And I think most of these were pretty shocking that they were four star reads So the first one is these witches don't burn. I've got a couple of like Halloween leftovers in December which is like December is when I want to be reading Christmas books not spooky season, but you know I'm glad I read them and Uh We can move on I read them pretty early in the month so that I could transition into Christmas reads even though I think I read more Christmas reads in November that I did in December Anyway, not the point these witches don't burn this one Surprised me how much I enjoyed it. I felt like this book was a crescendo It started off like good kind of where I expected it to be and then it just got better and better And I was like all my word. This is getting really good. Wait, is this getting really good? Yeah, this is getting really good. Why why just wasn't expecting it from this book It was so surprising. So it was like a four-star. I liked the romance. I liked the mystery plot There were some red herrings in there. There are just these strange witchy things happening around town in Salem so the real witch needs to go and Figure out what's going on. It's YA to the point of like I Was I was almost annoyed that it was YA that was like, oh my word I roll, but By the end of it. I was like wow this character is like grown up and there's maturity happening here and Yeah, it was just really satisfying weirdly enough to read I may or may not read the second book We'll see then there was also the monarchs and this is the second book in the duology The first book was the Ravens. I read that a couple years ago And this one too. I Enjoyed it so much like it the first book ended the plot on its own So it's not like a continuation or a cliffhanger So I didn't know what to expect going into the monarchs But I like I said I enjoyed it I liked the relationship with the characters and the characters relationships with each other there are lots of twists and Like the background we're getting so much more background on our main character So this if you don't know the Ravens follows a sorority That's actually a coven of witches and there are some pretty spooky things happening on Campus that these witches need to figure out without exposing that they are a coven of witches and everyone who's been in this sorority Are all witches like it's like kind of a generational thing. And so that was a really interesting Way to read about it And then the final four star read was not a book that I was expecting to pick up My co-worker picked it up and she was like oh my word. I love this you have to read it And so I read it for her and that was the silent patient By you know Alex Michael ladies Michael ladies Michael whatever however you say that I was surprised that I liked this one It's so it takes a while to to build and I was like I'm getting so much on the main therapist That like what's gonna happen blah blah blah But then as a twist like right before the twist was revealed. I was like wait, what could it be? No, that's not what it's gonna be and then they revealed the twist and I was like Oh my word. That's exactly it Uh-huh Uh-huh So it made me just want to start the book from the beginning again. This book follows this therapist who Wants to talk to the silent patient. This is a woman who murdered her husband and hasn't said a word Since and so he wants to be her therapist and try and get her to open up Etc and so forth like I was I was a little torn off with the ending just I was like oh I wish it had ended like this this would have been a little cooler If they could have extended this certain aspect a little bit longer like it wasn't perfect, but it was pretty good I don't know if I want to read the maidens by this author because I heard a lot of people love one book but not the other and the maidens didn't really capture my interest, but We'll see We'll see next spooky season how I feel moving on to three star reads I had three three star reads and the first was the witch haven So this was a really hyped up book It is about a woman who kind of gets into a little bit of trouble and instead of getting arrested She is taken to the witch haven where she can learn about her magical ability She's safe from the fact that she kind of murdered this dude with her magical power She didn't know she had is the first book in a was a duology trilogy Hmm, I don't know. There's another book, but this book was just super hyped up. Everybody was loving it, but honestly I didn't love it. I didn't love it. I didn't hate it, but I didn't love it I think it was overhyped. I think my expectations for it were too high the school I wasn't super thrilled with it didn't feel like anything Unique or like rich in its own magic system or anything like that. I was like Okay It's happening and the main character kind of felt like the same way of like this isn't really what I wanted to learn But the way that they go about learning what they want to I was like Don't really care. Can something happen? Please and there was just a lot of various things that were happening and I was like Not super thrilled by it. Not near as good as I expected it to be so I was I was quite bummed about that one But like it was still a solid book. Honestly, I think if it wasn't hyped up so much No, I actually don't think I would have liked it more other two or three star books were also Halloween witchy books So I have not the witch you wed by April Asher and This book I was expecting it to be one thing because the title is not the witch you wed So I expected it to be like they got married and they didn't and it bummed me out so much So it follows our main character who is a witch but doesn't have any actual like magic so because of that she will not be inheriting the like High like leader of the witches that her grandmother is it's gonna go to her sister But she is still required to mate with an either another supernatural creature Walk in our werewolf male main character and now these characters have Previous history and it didn't end well. I'm not normally one for second chance romance I mean, I felt like that element was meh, but like I was told this was gonna be a fake dating and It just I don't know it didn't feel like fake dating But it also just wasn't anything else You know like I thought and it was well written and I did like the characters and kind of the chemistry What happened between them? Like it was a solid book I think I just had my own vision of what this book was gonna be that they were going to be Fake dating getting married and then falling in love and it just wasn't that and I don't know. I just didn't enjoy it as much as I had hoped but it was still really good I would still recommend this definitely and then the last three star book that I read was paybacks a witch I feel like it lost sight of what it was partway through the book You know where I feel like the whole premise what the summary tells you this book It's gonna be about just kind of disappeared partway through and just didn't reappear at all So paybacks a witch is about this Witch who finds out, you know her boyfriend was like cheating on her and was not Very good. And so she kind of gangs up with these other two women that he had romantic history with and they all decided to Do some payback, you know get a little revenge scheme going at the same time that the major families of this town the major witch families of this town are having this like competition of Who is going to be like the top? clan for the next X amount of years and the thing is is that again, it was a well-written book. It was a good book But it lost sight of itself because it was like, okay, they're gonna get revenge on this guy But basically how they're gonna do it is by not letting his family win the competition which is like Kind of how competition works and Then it was more focused on our main character Falling in love with one of the other girls and their romance rather than actually Payback revenge on the guy And I mean the love story was cute and I liked the characters and they had decent chemistry But I wanted more revenge. I want a more payback. I wanted more like bad-ass. You're not gonna mess with us And I just felt like that was lacking, but it was still like a solidly written book So it was a three-star, you know, it was average and the eighth and final book that I read in December Was window shopping by Tessa Bailey and this was a two-star book This follows two main characters. We have Stella who was very recently released from prison And she is standing outside of this Super big department store that is like the number one department store. Oh la la and she is Criticizing to this stranger the window display because that's where her passion is. She loves window displays Little does she know that he is actually the manager of this store and he invites her to apply for the job of being the window dresser This is grumpy sunshine workplace romance and I was not thrilled with this at all. I loved the premise I thought the window dressing was super unique and I was excited for just money Christmas vibes and I didn't like the chemistry The the guy is the sunshine, but I feel like he just wasn't Sunshine-y like the only sunshine thing about him was his appearance like how he would wear these Christmas bow ties But other than that, he was just constantly like worried about her Annoyed with his family Figuring out like he didn't seem very sunshine-y and then Stella was like not Grumpy either. She was just like Nervous about everything because she had just got out of prison and she's young She didn't think she would find a job let alone her dream career. And so she's not grumpy She's just cautious on how to re-enter the world and like I wish it was more grumpy sunshine You know and she you can't be a grumpy Grinch if you're like Decorating windows for Christmas, you know, let's just not How that works and so I was definitely Missing that and the chemistry between the character was kind of good kind of not like It was a little just not quite there Like it was very clear that this was an earlier written novel that of this author like she she had she has Growth to go from here and I read her other book my killer vacation and that book Was much better. So I can definitely see the growth between this book and Those were the eight books that I read in December the final month of 2022 Thank you all very much for watching if you like to give it a thumbs up Feel free to subscribe as I post videos on Sundays and Wednesdays Theoretically January is a little bit of a mess. I'm just kind of Editing videos and posting them as soon as they're done So you definitely want to subscribe and hit the bell to be notified when those videos are going up But come February, I hope to be getting back into my regularly scheduled Postings also, I have social media linked down below You can see what I'm reading as I'm reading it in my kind of more immediate thoughts on my Instagram And I post book reviews there as well Comment down below how your last month of 2022 when were you able to do a lot of reading because of days off for the holiday or not so much because you were Visiting and hanging out with family like me. I would love to hear from you But until I see you all in the next video, I wish you happy reading


highlights a comprehensive summary of the representative promising applications of metal halide perovskite materials, including traditional optoelectronic devices, solar cells, light-emitting diodes, photodetectors, lasers, and cutting-edge technologies in terms of neuromorphic devices, artificial synapses and memristors, and pressure-induced emission. For each application, the fundamentals of the field, the current progress and the remaining challenges are provided, based on the up-to-date works.


s the conservation commission reviewed and approved the project and plans on May 11th, 2022 and will issue an order of conditions with requirements to protect the wetlands. 11.2420, the planning board did not choose to refer the design principles and standards at 4th and section 3.3040 and 3.2041 of the zoning bylaw because the product is within a limited business district and was found to have a significant impact, was found to not have a significant impact on the surroundings. The product was found to be well-designed and fit into the surrounding vicinity. 11.2421, the development is reasonably consistent with respect to setbacks, placement of parking, landscaping and entrances and exits with surrounding buildings and development. The applicant has proposed two curb cuts to accommodate one-way traffic with a perimeter drive aisle and parking. The drive-through aisles are at the rear of the building and the building is centrally located on the site in order to meet all setback requirements. 11.2422, building sites will avoid to the extent feasible the impact on steep slopes, flood plains, scenic views, grade changes and wetlands. There are no steep slopes or flood plains on the site. There are no severe grade changes proposed. There are no scenic views within the property and although there are wetlands, the applicant has received approval from the Conservation Commission. 11.2423, it's not applicable. There is only one building proposed on the site. So this finding was if there were multiple buildings. 11.2424, screening has been provided as appropriate. All trash and maintenance equipment will be stored within an enclosed area while utilities next to the building will be screened with vegetation. The solar panels on the roof will be flush mount and not visible from the road. And a few more to go through. 11.2430, the site has been designed to provide for the convenience and safety of vehicular and pedestrian movement both within the site and in relation to adjoining ways and properties. One way traffic into and around the site makes it easier and safer for vehicles and pedestrians. A new sidewalk along the road is proposed to connect to sidewalks or walkways on the site that bring customers to the main entrance and the parking has been designed to reduce pedestrian vehicle conflicts. All right, 11.2431, the location and number of curb cuts will be such as to minimize turning movements and hazardous exits and entrances. The two curb cuts in one way traffic are part of a strategy to streamline traffic patterns and make it safer to enter and exit onto the one way traffic onto Northampton Road. 11.2432, the location design of parking bicycle racks, drive aisles and sidewalks provides a safe and convenient use of the site with parking spaces adjacent to walkways. Crosswalks are provided where necessary. Essential drive aisle is separated from the pedestrian walkways and the bike racks can be accessed by the walkways. There are no loading areas on the site. All right, 11.2433, not applicable. There is no access to adjoining properties. 11.2434, not applicable. This section of Northampton Road is a divided highway with a central median that separates Eastbound and Westbound traffic. 11.2435, again, not applicable. There is no joint access, driveways between adjoining properties, which would not be appropriate for this project. 11.2436, requirement for the submittal of a traffic impact statement is requested to be waived. The applicant instead submitted a traffic evaluation letter prepared by Berkshire Design that found the proposed use to generate more traffic than the existing uses would have a minimal of 1.6% increase in traffic volume on Northampton Road. And 11.2437 is not applicable as no traffic impact report will be required. All right, thank you. Did we miss anybody's comments or questions on any of those? Don't see any hands.  Sure, so waiver's requested. We'll go through the, there's a traffic impact statement as was just mentioned, a construction logistics plan. This will become a condition. So it's not submitted now, but will be part of, required to be submitted before it gets started and the pollution and hazardous materials plan. So the demolition permit will deal with any materials on the site. What I have here are three bullets. I just wanna update the font just to make it consistent. There, this is something that the planning board have to vote. It's not waivers necessarily from the application requirements, but we had discussed there's a sign waiver because of the size, right? So the location of the monument sign in the front is larger than was required. So under 8.5 of the zoning bylaw, the planning board can agree to waive that size and location requirement. The dumpster location still requires a modification of setback to 6.29 to modify section 6.24 and 6.25 because the fence height is closer than, it's almost 10 feet and it's about seven feet from the property line. So given that height, when we talked about the fence and the retaining wall by the dumpster is considered one height in terms of setback, one structure. And Tom in his response today and he noted in his discussion that a waiver under 7.9 because of the grade change upon entering the site. So within the curb cut and then within a certain distance from the road, the drive aisle on the site is gonna be steeper than what the bylaw requires, but it can be waived. And so for that waiver, it kind of acts as a traffic calming and it also brings the grade up to make the site work. So those are the three other waivers that the board would need to vote on as part of this project. Okay. So would it make sense for us to vote on those now or should we go through the conditions and then come back? I'm not sure. I would ask Chris what she thinks about voting on the size of the monument sign and the setback. I think, well, you're gonna have to vote on all the findings and all the waivers. So you can do it separately. You can vote on the findings and then vote on the waivers and then vote on the conditions and then vote on the whole thing. Or you can, if people are comfortable with what's said here, you can do the whole thing altogether. It depends on if there's going to be much discussion. Okay. Janet? So I would be uncomfortable voting on findings in terms of sort of pedestrian safety. We had talked at the first hearing or concerns about people parking on, I believe it's the east side and then walking across to the bank when that's where all the cars are pulling in. And so saying, the applicant saying they're gonna look at that and think about it is different from us saying that's not really safe. Why don't you put the employee parking there that's much more static, fewer people going across. And so I don't feel like that's, we have really a safe plan yet. And then the traffic coming when I would like to see a change in service but I could see how going up the hill would slow people down so I can accept that. And I do think this issue raised by Andrew, we just need more information on it. I don't know what two weeks with the difference it would make but if it turns out to be a serious issue and we wanna require that the design be changed to keep people safe using it, that's one of our charges is to make sure we have safe projects. And so I am uncomfortable voting for these findings saying, yeah, everything's fine, pedestrian movement is fine, everything's located in a safe place. And so I would just love to wait until next hearing to get more information but I would like to see maybe a condition or having the employee parking in a place, near the entrance thing. And then- Thank you Janet. So I get, I think at some point and probably soon we're gonna need to have a motion to move the, to vote to approve these findings and Janet clearly will object to that or vote no. And so I'd like to find out what everybody else thinks too. So let's continue the discussion however long it needs to go and then have a motion for these findings and then find out where we stand. Okay, so are there other board members who wanna make a comment or questions about either the findings or the waivers? I think since we've had both of those read to us, I'm not seeing anyone. Since we are in a public hearing, I will ask if there are any of the remaining attendees from the public who wanted to make comments at this time. I do not see any hands from the public either. Okay, so does, I think we should find out where we stand on these findings. So does anybody wanna make a motion to let's say move the findings so that a yes vote means you are in favor of the findings and a no vote means we need to either adjust them or we need to go through them one at a time and or figure out how to get through it. Thank you, Janet. What if we just go through the conditions and then vote it as a package? That's fine with me.  So I thought we should deal with those first. Well, it's sort of if there was a condition that said X, Y, Z, I feel sort of more flexible in the findings. Okay. I don't know if that makes sense. Okay, well, it's 20 minutes to 10 and we've got several pages to go. So Nate, you wanna continue? Sure. Draft conditions, they've been categorized a little bit by general conditions and by the use and site amenity. So these dates can be adjusted. But so starting off, number one, the development shall be built substantially in accordance with the plan submitted to the planning board and approved on June 1st. That can be changed. I guess that it is June 1st. So if we wanna say, I think that might cover all the plans. The development number two, the development shall be managed substantially in accordance with the revised management plan. I guess there wasn't one submitted. So let's say the management plan submitted to the planning board and approved on June 1st. Number three, changes to the project and our substantial changes to any approved site plans or to the exterior of the building shall be submitted to the planning board for its review and approval prior to the work taking place. The purpose of the submittal shall be for the planning board to approve the change and or to determine whether the changes are de minimis or significant enough to require modification of the special permit or site plan review approval. Number four, landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the landscape plan prior to the issuance of a certificate of occupancy and once installed shall be continually maintained as needed. All disturbed areas shall be loaned and seated unless otherwise specified. Number five, the building shall meet all local required energy efficiency codes and the regulations of the stretch energy code. In addition, low flow plumbing fixtures shall be installed throughout the project. Number six, the site plan review approval shall expire within two years of the date that is filed with the town clerk unless it has been both reported at the registry of deeds and substantial construction or use as can commence within the two year period. Number seven, construction shall be completed within 30 months from the date of issuance of the building permit. If more time is needed, the applicant shall come before the planning board at a public meeting for review and approval of an extension of time. Number eight, one hard copy and one digital copy of the final revised plan shall be submitted to the planning department. And so those are the general conditions. Yeah, can you tell me why number five is necessary? Wouldn't that be just a part of the building permit issuance? Yeah, I think it is. I think sometimes these general conditions have been kind of, honestly, legacy conditions. And so we just want to, sometimes it's nice to call it out, but it is somewhat redundant. Well, like we're having to read through these tonight. So wouldn't we want to streamline that process in general for the future? Sure. So if we want to, and I guess if there was no management plan submitted, why do we have number two? Well, so there is a management plan that was submitted. So there is a management plan submitted with the application. Okay. I thought I heard otherwise. Sorry. Well, I was expecting a revised management plan, perhaps submitted tonight, but it was, you know, they just submitted kept the original one. Okay. Okay. Number five to be removed. All right. So project use, office banking professional office, condition number nine, any use authorized in the building at this project site shall be allowed, shall be uses allowed by right or permitted by site interview or by special permit in the limited business district. You're missing the word review from site plan review. Site plan, by special permit. All right. Number 10, you know, this gets to the back deck, which is something we might want to discuss. Public use of the building and site shall be as customers and patrons of the bank and for special events associated with the bank use. There shall be no use of the site or back deck for such things as events not associated with the bank office use. So I was thinking you should remove the words for such things as so that there shall be no use of the site or back deck for events not associated with the bank. I thought that the bank was opening that was, we'd like to open that area for community use. I didn't know why this was even sounds like it's always going to be something that's associated with the bank business. And it's a good condition to discuss if Tom thinks it's too limiting. You're saying that there is nothing that would be considered an accessory use, right? So it's, we're not saying like, oh, you know, this is gonna become a space that's rented for, you know, fundraisers for some other purpose, right? Like, I mean, if it's the chamber of commerce, it's because they're part of the chamber of commerce. If it's the, you know, the association of Western Massachusetts auditors, it's because those auditors hang out in the bank. Yeah, and I think we would also allow, you know, a nonprofit to use it. Who was a bank customer? Likely, yes. I think there would have to be some nexus with the bank. That's, so it's associated with the bank. Yeah, I think then that's, yes, then that's fine. Why do we want to limit it like as a board? Is there? We don't want to be causing a lot of parking issues that the bank isn't prepared to manage. Okay. I think at this point, if it were to become say an event space that was used weekly, that's something that's not being proposed or discussed right now. I think that would, you know, if that were to happen, I feel like we don't want to have a better, a bigger discussion about what kind of, you know, noise attenuation, for instance, or what's happening with the budding properties. And that's not what they're proposing, but I think this condition, you know, would capture if that use changed. I agree. All right, number 11, the hours of operation shall be substantially similar to those described in the application. I, Tom, I changed it at 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. Monday through Friday and nine to noon on Saturdays with the ATMs in the front vestibule and drive through aisles open 24 hours per day. Should those be ITMs? No, so ITMs actually have the interactive teller and they're only from what bank hours, so 8 to 6. And then after hours, they switch to the ATMs. Okay. Yeah, I learned that through this application process. So conditions for building exterior and site improvements. Number 12, the town engineer and building commissioner shall inspect the construction of the entry driveway and all onsite paved areas for conformance with town standards. 13, all onsite utilities shall be underground with the exception of the transformer, generator, and HVAC units located toward the back of the building and shown on the plans. These utilities shall be screened as shown on the plans. Does this apply to the pole-mounted lines that are running across the north end of the site? Okay. Oh, I'm Russell Street. Those are in the right of way. They're not on the property. Okay. Number 14, all exterior lighting shall be dark sky compliant. Exterior lighting shall be downcast and shielded and not shine onto adjacent properties or streets. Number 15, which is maybe one we need to talk about, all exterior lighting shall be dimmed from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. in order to help reduce light disbursement onto adjacent properties, particularly the residential units at Hawkins Meadow directly to the east. And so Tom noted that, you know, they wouldn't be dimmed. And so, you know, Janne had mentioned it and it was something that had been discussed. So, you know, I'd like to know if this condition should remain or be removed. I guess I'll venture to say that I think we should remove it. I think we should allow the bank to illuminate during the hours they think is necessary for security. And we have other conditions related to screening, which ought to be able to mitigate the issue, the lighting with the neighbors. Condition 16, the 34 parking spaces, including three HP spaces, shall be constructed and maintained by the applicant. 17, the applicant shall provide an annual report to the town to show proof that the property, including the permeable paving, rain gardens and grasses are maintained in accordance with the operations and maintenance plans. Is that a standard condition? It's one that- If so, you know, who is at whose full-time job it is to review the reports that come in every year from every business? Yeah, isn't that a terrible thing? No, so a lot of times the ZBA and Conservation Commission will have a similar condition, right? So it's something that comes to staff to make sure that they're following it. So it's staff, whether it's planning staff or inspection services, honestly will be kind of the last line of defense to make sure these conditions are followed. And, you know, Chris, as our handrails, I will say that the town is hopefully implementing a new permitting software where these types of conditions will be put into a workflow system where it's actually will be monitored easier to follow. So conditions like this will be putting it on a calendar and then, you know, it'll be something that it can be alerted to staff as opposed to us digging through permits after permits. Oh, well, I don't know. I guess even if you have an improved workflow, wouldn't it be better for us to say the applicant shall maintain the property in accordance with the operation and maintenance plan period? And then, you know, if there's a complaint or, you know, an inspector drives by and it's deteriorated, then you just deal with it as it's noticeable. Yeah, I mean, the only difference would be like the permeable paving, for instance, you know, they require that it not be sanded and it be vacuumed twice a year. And so I think there's a little bit more detail there than say a typical mowing maintenance plan or, you know, stormwater management. So, you know, for that reason, you know, there's a suggestion here of an annual report to the town just to show that they're doing that. Well, I mean, the report could be limited to the maintenance and upkeep of the permeable paving. So I don't know, I'm, you know, I just don't know how much we all wanna have a report that takes energy to generate and it takes energy to review and then follow up on just as a part of is that how we wanna spend our lives? Tom? I would just say if you do decide to include this condition, just the date by which the annual report needs to be submitted. So oftentimes we don't know if it's the date of your approval or some other date. So you just put in December 31 then we're, so we know what our responsibilities are. Okay, Chris? I think we should have to whom the report goes. Does it go to the DPW? Does it come to the planning department? Maybe it comes to the planning department and we send it off to somebody, but just to say to the town that isn't really helpful to the applicant, so. Okay, well, I'm not hearing anybody else questioning the need for the report other than me. So I'll drop my comments and we can leave this in, but sounds like we ought to put a date and we ought to put a department. You say by December 31st, let's do the planning department. Okay, Rachel, I see your hand. Yeah, I'd like to add some comment. First of all, the conservation commission has jurisdiction over the stormwater management for this parcel because it does, I'll fall into the wetland area eventually and they have their own review process for the stormwater features on the site. So that's one point. And another point is sometimes we'll say require an owner to keep on record the previous three years of maintenance at any point, at any point or request or visit to look at those maintenance logs that they'd be available to the town. And that might be a way if staff and review is a concern within the town, that might be another mechanism to have oversight. Sure, so to Rachel's point, condition 18, which we haven't read yet, is a standard condition that would be in the order of condition. So it is redundant. So I don't know, Doug, going back to 17, would we say that the applicant would maintain it? And of course, with the operations and maintenance plans. And then, as Rachel noted, would keep three years on file or is it fine to keep that? Well, I mean, you guys review these, do you find it useful to look at these reports? So for every affordable unit in town, we have to get an annual monitoring report. For a lot of projects, we get annual monitoring reports. It's not, to me, it's kind of a, it's just part of the job. It's not a, it's not a... Well, I mean, I'm just glad I don't have to do it or read it. Well, it doesn't have to be a big report. I mean, it's just a, it could be a checklist. Okay. Well, if that's the practice in town, I guess I'll withdraw my, you know, I'm not going to make a big point out of it. And, you know, 18, I'll highlight again as something that could be removed. Because like, you know, this is probably would be a word for word condition and the conservation commission approval, if that's acceptable. I would just say leave it in just because it's going to be standard operating procedure in all our permits. So, you know, the fact is that the concom will be on top of this is great, but I would just leave it in because it's not, it doesn't, it's just, it's four more sentences, you know, for all lines. I don't know if we have to like tailor every permit so well. Right.  The applicant shall provide a concrete pad for a bus shelter as shown in the plans and shall coordinate these efforts with the Pioneer Valley Transit Authority. Number 20, there shall be no LED lights or illuminated signs above the drive-through aisles. So, you know, they have painted aluminum signs that say like drive-through, but you know, they had mentioned there's no illumination on those facades of the deck. Well, so why don't you take out LED so that, because right now I could put an incandescent light anywhere I wanted. Oh, unless it's illuminated. Yeah. No lights or illuminated signs. All right. Isn't that your intent? Yes. Okay. To the extent possible, the applicant shall undertake efforts to reduce bird strikes on the large blazing windows located at the front of the building. You know, it's not a prescriptive condition, but the solar panel shall be installed parallel to the roof with a low profile as shown on the plans. The applicant shall work with green leaves to prune trim trees on their property, which abuts the applicant's property. And then traffic calming, we'll get rid of that. These last two are ones from Tom's email, which I haven't quite incorporated, you know, in the event that larger trees must be substituted. The owner may add permission and review with the abutter plant larger substitutions within the adjacent property to fulfill the screening requirement. If substitutions are proposed, they must be locally adapted to the climate zone meet the evergreen requirements and considered within the context of the adjacent plantings. I think it's am to be considered. And number 26, if the applicant causes any of the hedge, let's say I'm in the Hawkins Meadow property, you die, it should in wood. If you just say it will replace it. Yeah, it will replace it. So if the applicant causes any of the hedge on the Hawkins Meadow property to die, it will replace it. And so those are the conditions for the building exterior and site improvements. Mr. Chair, could we just look at, I think it's 23. And if you can, yeah, so just so it's clear that I think it's at the time of construction, the applicant shall work with Greenleaves to prune trim trees on their property just so it's not an ongoing UMS 5 College will perpetually maintain Greenleaves property. So we were just, thank you. Sorry. Yeah. Can I make one comment on 20 or a clarification? The sentence, there shall be no lights or illuminated signs above the drive through aisles. It seems to say that there are no lights above the drive through aisles. I think the intent is that there are no illuminated signs, correct? It's not, we need to light below the... So it's really like on the fascia, right, or the side of the deck. So when you're approaching the drive-out. I just want that, right, clarified. So obviously we'll have lighting above the ITMs. Signs, yeah.  I mean, is that like what, you know? Well, can you just say you don't want any illuminated signs, right? So if we, I was gonna share my screen. Well, so the idea is, you know, if you're approaching the drive-out, the deck goes above it, right? And on above each drive-out, there's aluminum, you know, lettering that says like ATM, ITM, ATM, and those aren't illuminated. And some, you know, some banks have like an LED script there, right, or something that's pretty bright. And the idea is that there's not gonna be any type of illumination on that. And so I don't, I understand what you're saying that the way it reads. Just on the signage. You're saying just the signage cannot be illuminated, but we're allowed to have lights that... Right. Or illuminating the aisles. Right, but not, right. Trying to get the plans pulled up. Well, it's the vertical elevations of the deck that you don't wanna have illuminated. Right. So can you say that? No lights on the vertical elevations of the deck or illuminated signs above. The vertical, is it side? I mean... I guess, is there any reason why you can't strike the word lights?  I think he's concerned about more than that. Right, so... You just don't want any light on those sides of the deck, is that right? Yes, I mean, if we're looking here, you know, on these drive aisles right here, you know, for a, is this visible, the plan visible? Yes.   And so... The light of the signs, right? Yeah. Or just... Because the railing above on the deck is illuminated. So let's go back to... As long as it's clear that we can have light in the aisles. Light under the drive aisle canopy, right, is what you're saying under the deck. And then light on the deck railings, but none on that... Vertical side, yeah. Correct, yes. I think we're all in agreement that that's what we're looking to do. Yeah, if that's, dog, if someone else thinks this is, you know, clear enough, I just... It's clear. I mean, I think it's clear enough at this point. Yeah, that's fine. All right. I guess the last one that was added just tonight, the bike rack shall be covered. The applicant... I'll say we'll present plans for a view and approval at a public meeting of the planning board. So, you know, we don't know what that, you know, what it looks like now, but the applicant will return to say that. Prior to what? Prior to issuance of the building permit? Yeah, come on, say that. I mean, I'd just assume have it happened before, you know, before, so that it happens in a timely way. Yep. All right, is that, are we... All right, move on. Jack, I see your hand. Yeah, I just wanted to check in with some of the other board members about their concerns with the drive-through ATM and hours of operation and the lighting and all that, and the fact that there's a vestibule in front. I just want to double check that everyone's, you know, cool with, you know, what is being proposed here, because, you know... Well, I'm not sure that everyone is cool with it, and that's part of why I wanted to have a vote earlier, but, you know, we decided to go through all of it and then have some votes. For me, I mean, you know, it just seems like the drive in the back at night seems superfluous if you have the vestibule in front, which is, we know is going to be safe.  Who uses an ATM at midnight?  But I just, I heard some board members and, and I'm just checking, I'm just checking. Okay, Chris? I just wanted to observe that in order to use the vestibule, you have to get out of your car. And if it's rainy or snowy or really cold or windy or something, you might want to stay in your car and use the ATM. So it's not clear that the vestibule would be the primary choice of people at night. Okay. Thank you, Janet? I, you know, I think this, I do think this is an important issue. I think it could be important to the business to have, you know, 24 seven ITMs or ATMs, especially in a college town where people go to bed quite late or, you know, have, want to go to the diner across the street. I just think that we need to see where the, if it's not a safe location, if it's the industry discussion that it's best to put it on the side, not to have them in the back, we need that information. And so I'm also completely exhausted and would love, I can't imagine going through the rest of this, you know, the rest of our agenda. But I do think we should just wait on this, get the information and decide it next week. I thought Jack's idea of just shutting down at night would make perfect sense. And then I'm also thinking the other side, you know, college students might want to do that. So I just, you know, I want it in a safe place that it's usable and it works for the bank and it works for people and not put them at risk. I don't think we're going to answer that now. You know, I don't, you know, Andrew raised a great point and he works in this industry. I like to me it's a very valuable issue. If Scott Livingstone says, you know, it's really not safe. We've had incidents to be better on the side. What have we just voted for? You know, are we going to vote conditions that if Scott says it's not okay, we'll switch the whole design? I don't know. I just think two weeks would be really helpful. Then we could just maybe wrap this up, you know, at this point, I think we're in good shape, but I don't think we have a final answer. At least I don't. All right, thanks, Janet. Are there, are there board members that would like to sort of second what Janet is saying? You know, I'm going to be looking for some cues from you guys on do we plow through this and vote or do we stop and continue? Does anybody else want to make a comment about that? I think we had several members earlier who said they were fine if the bank felt that the bank was satisfied with the conditions it was creating. So that's why I thought it would be worth finding out kind of where we all stood on this. I appreciate that it's late and it's, you know, we've got people waiting for the next item on our agenda. And frankly, I'd like to ask if they'd come back another time at the moment. So does anybody want to make a comment about where we're headed? I think Andrew was trying to get in. Oh, okay. Thank you. Yeah, yeah. Again, apologies. Yeah, I mean, I agree with what Janet said. I think that there, you know, just the hour for one. I think that there are, it should be clear like this design is not standard. It's divergent and I understand like the design purposes why they want to pursue that. You know, as I was thinking through all of this to me, like the, my primary ask would be that the management plan reflects some semblance of active monitoring and security. That said, I'm happy to share to Janet's quest. I'm happy to share certainly observations I've cleaned along the way, maybe not data, but I can certainly bring some additional commentary to what the industry standards would be if folks find that to be helpful. I also, you know, I get to being totally candid here trying to read the room. You know, it seems like there's probably a quorum that sounds like they're in favor of doing this regardless of any concerns I may have raised. And so, you know, I guess continuing conversation for hours on this, if we're not achieving a different result. Okay. Thank you, Andrew. All right. Doug, I have my hand raised. I guess you can't see me. No, I can now see it. Oh, okay. I can see your hand and I see Janet.  I appreciate Andrew's input, but I do feel like as an architect, I don't know if people understand the process that it takes to design a building, where architects don't design in a tower by themselves. They talk and consult and work with the client, they work with people who know how banks work, they work with a multitude of consultants. So, I feel like a second guessing of process that's already happened through the architecture firm and the various consultants seems, I mean, it's good to play devil's advocate, but I also feel like this is all phase ended and I don't think that moving the ATMs is something that's worth doing. I also don't feel like discussing it more, but I don't know that you can all just take a straw ball. I mean, I just, I do appreciate you trying to move it along and that's going through all the conditions, but I also feel like to Andrew's point, maybe it's worth just testing the room and seeing if we can get a decision rather than continuing for however many more pages we have three or four more pages. Yeah. What's the thought? All right, thank you, Maria. Chris. I wanted to note that the rest of these conditions, I think many of them are the building commissioners suggested conditions and we have sort of skimmed through them in the past, so you may wish to do that. Condition 28 may all relate to construction. I'm sure Nate will know better than I do, but if that is the case, in the past you've just approved them as boilerplate. Right. All right. Yeah, go ahead, Andrew. Yeah, hey, I'm sorry. You know, Maria, I actually raised an interesting question, which might help is just, I guess how many branches has the architectural firm designed before? And maybe that could help get people comfortable with their approach. Hang on. I mean, the firm has been around since 1988. I can think of about a half dozen banks. Personally, I've worked on three or four in the last six years. So I guess that's one reference point. But I again echo what Maria said, we went through an extensive design process and we did look at various locations. And based on where UMass 5 is currently located and their experience being in a fairly isolated location, especially during nighttime with very little traffic and where we are in this particular valley and having the conversations with the security team from UMass 5, we felt like this is an appropriate design for this location and this population. All right. And was the conversation with the security team during the design process or after I requested it? We had conversations during design with the internal team at UMass 5 and then because of this request, we went back and had an additional conversation with the security team. Andrew. Oh, sorry. Yeah, great. No, that's very good to know. Thank you. All right. I'll also add that we spoke with the security vendor for UMass 5 in the process, not just UMass 5 staff. Okay. And it is a security team that works with financial institutions. So that's not limited to the five college credit union. Correct. They have experience with other locations and other firms and their preferences. Okay. Janet.  I personally haven't worked. I've worked mostly in downtown locations which don't have a drive-through personally. So I can't speak to the other banks that have been designed in my firm. Okay. All right. All right. So I think we have a choice. We could continue the hearing and ask at least that the design team and the applicant consult with the police department. We could go ahead and vote these findings, waivers and conditions and see if there's a majority that wants to approve them as they are with whatever amendments are offered. Those are the two choices that are obvious to me. Jack? Yeah, I mean, we're asking some tough questions of the engineers and architects here on experience and I'd have to question, Scott Livingstone, how many of these situations has he addressed? I would say zero. So I just don't think that's really helpful. And yeah. All right, so you might have one kind of motion if you were actually to make it. Janet, can I see your hand? Yeah, so I like this project. I found everything about it appealing. I did have questions about where the parking should be and people walking across because others raised it. This seems like a really important issue. I don't know why we didn't wait two weeks for more information. I know there's always pressures on people but I've been on this board for three years and we're always being pressured to issue permits and then nothing happens on a site for a year or two. So I just think let's wait two weeks, let's go to bed. I'm exhausted but if people wanna vote, that's fine but I do think this is an important issue and I wanna keep, I want this project to go forward but I also don't, I just don't feel comfortable that this is a safe situation for people using this at night. So I'd like more info. Okay, all right. So Jack, I assume your hand is a legacy and Janet, I assume the same about your hand. I thought I took it down, sorry. And so is there any objection to us not reading the conditions that start with number 28 and concern construction? Yeah, so I just went through them, right? So there's completion of work, construction, logistics and they're all, they're really pretty standard and they relate to, as Chris mentioned, work with the building department or public work. So there's really nothing that is so much related to the site plan in terms of the design that they're showing. It's really about coordinating work with for instance like Mass DOT on route nine and following all permit fees and fees. Okay, so there's not a lot of provocative things for us to have lots of conversation about. No. Okay, Jack. I disagree with Nate on this. I remember this is a lot of boilerplate, maybe there's a couple of unique things because it's on route nine, but it's never been anything we've ever offered. The planning board has ever offered any sort of added value as far as- So you agree? I agree with Nate. Okay, all right, thank you. All right, so we've basically gone through the findings, waivers and conditions. Does anyone wanna make a motion in any direction about this? Maria? I'll move we approve the project with the proposed edits that were brought up tonight, which I did not keep running with stuff and with the findings that Nate put together and waivers that he put together. All right, thank you, Maria. Jack? I'll second. Excuse me, did you include conditions in that, Maria? I believe she did not. Oh, I did? Okay. No, I think you didn't. You said edits. Okay. You meant conditions as edited, is that right? That's what I meant. Yes. Thank you. So the findings, waivers and conditions with edits. And Jack, that was your second on that motion. Now that it's clarified. All right, any discussion from the board about this motion? I don't see any hands from the attendees. The public has any further comments? All right, so we'll go through and have a roll call vote on this motion. All right, so I seem to be doing this alphabetically this evening and I'll stick with that. Maria? Approved. Jack? So this closes the hearing as well as approving all these findings and conditions? Yes. Well, that wasn't part of the motion. We would need to close the hearing at some point and we haven't done that yet. So we probably need a second vote. Okay. All right. Yeah, this is about the findings, waivers and conditions as edited. Yeah, I'm good. I. Tom? I. Andrew? Nate. Janet? Sorry, no, no. Thank you. Johanna? I. And I'm an I as well. So that's, I think five votes in favor, two opposed. Um, so now I guess I'll make a motion to close this hearing. Does anybody want to second that, Tom? One second. All right. Anybody want to make any further comments? I don't see any. Maria voting to close the hearing. Approved. Jack? Just a small comment. I saw a bunch of these five college. Employees at the local chamber event and they seem pretty happy about this project. Anyway, I approve. Thank you. Thank you, Jack. Tom? I. Andrew? I. Janet? I. Johanna? I. And I'm an I as well. Thank you very much. Thank you, Tom. And thank you. Your design team. Thank you very much. Thank you. We wish you well. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So the time is 1025. We had the next items on our agenda were two site plan reviews related to 463 West street. Chris. Do we really want to start this this evening? You could continue. You could open and continue the public hearing to. June 15th. There's only one other thing on the agenda for June 15th. Well, there are three other things, but this one could be continued to. Six 45. I would apologize to the applicant. I thought about it earlier. Didn't realize how long this was going to take until it was already late. So. All right. So the time is 1026. We will open the public hearing. This is for. Let's see. Get my. All right. In accordance with the provisions of mass general law, the public hearing has been duly advertised and notice thereof has been posted. And it's being held for the purpose of providing the opportunity for interested citizens to be heard. Regarding site plan review 2022-10. And special permit 2022-04. Regarding Amherst office park LLC 463 West street. The proposal include. The property to review. Approval to rebuild a retaining wall. Deck and walkways on the south side of the building. Resulting in increased lot coverage. Property or the project also includes new plantings and new pole mounted site lights at the front of the property. The special permit is to request. FY84-00085 and ZBA FY85-00094 as the zoning has changed and mixed use building is currently permitted by site plan review. That's both of these are on map 19D parcel three in the B-V seed zoning district. So having open and open to this hearing, I guess I'll ask if anyone wants to make a motion to continue this hearing to June 15th at 645 p.m. And if we get that motion, we won't talk more about this this evening. If we don't, we will talk about it. Tom? So moved. Sorry. Okay. Anybody want to second that? Second. Second by Jack Gemsec. All right. Let's see. I know we have or we did have Mr. Lavertier and probably one other person representing his design in our attendees. But I don't see them. Oh, there's Ron. He's in the panel already. Okay. Mr. Lavertier, is there anything short you would like to say to us this evening before we see you in a couple of weeks? I do apologize for the way this has gone this evening. Oh, it was an opportunity for Kyle to see his, see public public town, public government at work. So and that was your nephew, Kyle. Yes. Thank you so much for watching, move through many, many different projects tonight and so, you know, we'll just, we'll go for it at 645 on the 15th. That'd be great. Okay, I thank you very much for your understanding. And a problem. Thank you for your all your hard work. Okay. All right. So we have a motion on the table. Why don't we go ahead and vote on continuing the hearing to June 15th. Maria. Thanks. Aye. And Tom. Aye. Andrew. Aye. Janet. Yes. Johanna. Aye. And I'm an eye as well. Okay. Thank you all for that. Thank you. Thank you. That concludes our primary business this evening. The time is now 1031. Chris, do we have old business we want to talk about other than the calendar? Or do we want to even wait on that? We can wait on that until. You know, you might be able to send it. Send an email to everybody about that. Yes. Let's do that individually. Okay. So board, this is about Chris's email to us. I don't know a week or more ago. About what, when we want to meet this summer. So, you know, whether we could have three meetings in June and only one meeting in July and that kind of thing. So. Assuming you keep some of your emails. If you could look back at that and get back to Chris, if you haven't already. I'll be back for the next two days. I'll be back on Monday. Okay. Yeah, Monday. So I can send an email to you on Monday. All right. But essentially we're asking if you can meet three times in June, including June 29th. And then not meet on July 6th. But I will resend that email. Okay, great. So we have no other old business as far as I know. Any new business you wanted to bring up Chris. Nope. Thank you. All right. Any form A and R. Sub division applications. It seems to me I did see some. Yeah. We need to discuss them tonight. Yes, unfortunately. They have a limited timeframe. But I think if you, if you don't ask too many questions. We can get through this. So here you go, Chris. Here's the first one. The first one is Ellen Keckley. And she owns the property outlined in green. And the plumbers. Wendy and Wendy plumber and her husband own the property outlined in brown or red. So what's happening is the property outlined in green. And the way it's shown on our GIS. Plans is that it's all one property. But as it turns out, when we look back into the history of this, they actually had the property combined via an A and R way back, but then they never recorded the plan. So they're going to have to get. An A and R plan signed to. Combine those two lots. And then the property outlined in blue. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's on the east side of town heading out towards Pellum. Anyway, the blue is. Currently two lots. One is this landlocked lot that Pam is running her cursor around. And the other one is a. This kind of rectangular piece that goes out towards the road. So the idea here is that the rectangular piece is going to be divided in two. So the idea here is that the rectangular piece is going to be divided in two. And the upper portion is going to be attached to the larger blue lot. And the lower portion, which is outlined in red. Is going to be created as a tiny little lot. And eventually the people who own the property to the south that Pam is outlining right now. They're going to have to attach that little sliver to their lot, but they can't do it now because. Their property hasn't been surveyed. So they're going to have to come back with a survey of their property. Showing that little sliver attached. So the question before you tonight is, will you authorize your chair? Doug Marshall. To. Endorse this plan. I think it doesn't need to go through the subdivision process. And I would say, yes, you have every reason to do that because these properties are both frontage lots. And they both will have the appropriate amount of lot area. Lot area required in our end zoning district is 20,000 square feet. So the red. Larger red lot. Has 36,000 square feet, I think. And the blue lot will have 45,000 square feet. It's required to have twice as much. Lot area because it's going to be a flag lot. And the little sliver lot doesn't have any requirement, but it is 2664 in case you're curious. So do you authorize Doug to sign. This plan for Ellen Keckley. As I recall, Chris, we don't usually do a formal vote on this. We don't. Just for anybody who objects. Anybody objects. Janet. I would be happy to authorize it. I don't quite understand it. So the. Is. Or. Is this one lot, everything that you put in color. Like, okay. So we're talking about two different properties, or they both owned by the same person, but they're different things because I missed the whole first part. Like, I understand the blue lot. You can see down in the lower right hand corner, the properties are owned by two different entities. One is Brian and Wendy plumber. And they own the area in blue. And that little red triangle down below. Rectangle, rather. And then Ellen Keckley owns the property in. Maroon. Okay. And so she is. She owns the property in blue. Combining. Actually, that's not true. I think, I think. I think she owns parcel B and parcel C. What is called parcel C, but that's the parcel in purple. But she also owns. What is labeled revised lot two. And she's going to sell that to. The plumbers, I believe. Is that right, Pam? Well, whoever. Whoever owns the properties. Some of it's owned by the plumbers and some of it's owned by Ellen Keckley. And what they're trying to do is create a flag lot. That will be owned by the plumbers. And to create this green lot, which as I said had been endorsed before, but the plan was never filed at the registry. And I think this. The blue lot is owned by Ellen Keckley and that she's going to sell it to the plumbers, but I'm not absolutely sure about that. I think you have that backwards to be, doesn't it say to be conveyed. Or to, to be combined with land of Wendy. Plummer. The parcel and Jank Street owned by Plummer and a parcel to the rear of Plummer owned by Keckley. So Keckley owns. Keckley is this. I don't know who we're just doing this because it needs to be filed at the Hampshire County registry of these, if I remember correctly. So we're actually doing two things. That are not actually related to each other. Just because they're adjacent and show up on the same plan. Well, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. In the, in the big. Section of the blue lot. Revised lot two is actually owned by Keckley. It is. It is owned by Keckley. Yeah. The plumbers only own this little rectangle that goes out to Jank Street. And that's going to be divided in two, but the plumbers are going to buy the bigger blue lot from Ellen Keckley. That's what I said in the first place, but I doubted myself. So. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Okay. Janet, your hand is still up. No. Okay. All right. So any objections to my signing this as an a approval, not required for subdivision plan. All right. I assume you're all awake. I can't see you all at once. All right. I think the second one is going to be easier because you've seen it before. It's two properties that are owned by archipelago. They own the property. They own the property in blue and purple. And that's the property where 11 and 13 East pleasant street is going to be built. And they need to combine that property into one lot. In order to get their building permit. And then the green lot is the, that's a good view of it. So the purple lot is the place where. The new building by archipelago is going to be built. And the green lot is the adjacent property that they're going to use for staging area for their construction. So essentially what they're doing is they're combining all of the lots that make up this purple lot into one lot. And they're acknowledging the existence of lot two as a separate lot. So that's what this is about. And there wouldn't be any reason for this to go through the subdivision plan. Okay. So that's what we're trying to figure out. And there wouldn't be any reason for this to go through the subdivision control process. All right. Again, any objections? All right. Let's consider that. Approved. Approved for no approval. Okay. Okay. ZBA applications. I'm not familiar with it today, so I've only looked at it briefly. I know Chris and Nate are both a little bit. I'm familiar with it too. But so this, this project is going to come to the ZBA on June 23rd. It's for property at 80 pine street. And they are hoping to get approval for a non owner occupied. Doplex. And pending that approval. So if they get that approval, then they're also going to. Seek a special permit. To distinguish any previously approved. ZBA special permits. So this is the actual property. This is 80 pine street here. And this is from their property card. I only looked at it briefly and I couldn't quite get a handle on it. So this, this is currently a duplex. And it is owner occupied. So they're hoping to expand just a little on it. And, and what they're really seeking is to have it be non owner occupied. Okay. Does anybody on the board feel we should see this. Presentation from the applicant. I don't know if that doesn't, doesn't sound like it. No. Okay. So I think we've got a couple that we asked for last time that I assume we'll see next time. All right. So we'll pass on that one. Upcoming. BP. S UB. SPRs. We have the dog park. Which is coming back to you because there have been some changes made in the. In the last couple of months that we're never acknowledged by the planning board. That's, that's all that I know about right now. All right. Well, we'll be happy to acknowledge them. Okay. Planning board committee and liaison reports. Jack anything for PV PC. Yeah. The last meeting. Yeah, nothing. All right. Andrew for CPAC. We're meeting tomorrow. Six o'clock to hear about the track project. All right. All right. Tom DRB. No. Janet solar bylaw. No updates. I hope my committee forms. Okay. Seems important. And Chris CRC. We talked about the. Flood mapping project last Thursday on May 26th, and they had a similar session to what you had tonight. They got an introduction to it and they discussed it a little bit and continued their public hearing. And then we talked about the rental registration bylaw. And that was really the bulk of the. The meeting. Okay. CRC is also interviewing for the new planning board members. Right. They are. And I think they're doing that on the ninth. June 9th. All right. Johannes hand is up. Yeah. I'm just curious how many applicants there were for the seats. I've heard second hand that there were three. But I don't really know very much about them. It must be. Is it published maybe on the agenda for the June 9th meeting? I don't know if they've published that yet, but you could look on the town website. Okay. Do you think people know how long our meetings are? We only got three applicants for two positions. Okay. Report of the chair. I have no report. Report of staff, Chris. I have no report except to thank Pam, who isn't feeling well tonight for sticking with us this whole night. Yes. And also to thank Nate for his rendition of conditions and findings. Thank you both. You really are good team members. And thank you all for. Following us through to the end. Okay. I have to thank Chris Brest of our fearless leader. On through everything. Everything. All right. The time is 1046 and we are adjourned. Bye. See you all in two weeks. Bye. Bye. Good night. Hope you feel better, Pam. Thank you. I hope so too. All right. Are you sure you have to stop?


Thank you very much.ен Question 1 Finlay Carson So on p receipt, y Scottish Government is preparing to promote economic growth in the South of Scotland. Governing imitate The Scottish Government is committed to promoting economic growth in the South of Scotland. Our substantial investment in infrastructure, regeneration and business support helps to deliver inclusive growth and economic resilience, creating and retaining jobs and communities across We are building on our commitment to the area by establishing a new enterprise and skills vehicle for the south of Scotland, which will drive economic growth. Finlay Carson. I thank the cabinet secretary for that answer. My colleagues and I have long campaigned for a south of Scotland enterprise agency, and this must be well-resourced, robust and autonomous agency. Only with a fully autonomous board like that of the Highlands and Islands enterprise will my constituents of Galloway and West of Rees fully benefit from the opportunities that such an organisation would present. Unlike the SNP Government's obsession with centralisation, the Scottish Conservatives will always make the case that decision making should be made as close to the source as possible. The Conservatives manifesto has made a commitment to bring forward a Borderlands growth deal, including councils on both sides of the border, to help to secure prosperity in southern Scotland. Does the cabinet secretary welcome such a proposal that would bring much-needed growth and investment to the south-west of Scotland? I find it ironic that a party that is closing job centres across the country and closing military bases talks about other parties being centralising. It is also true to say that the Borderlands initiative was first proposed by the SNP Government in 2013. It is also true to say that its constituents can rely on the fact that the Tories might talk about doing this. It is the SNP Government that will establish a vehicle for the south of Scotland through economic enterprise and skills review. As we have taken other actions, such as the establishment of the border trail and as we have taken action in relation to regeneration, it is our view that the agency that is established in the south of Scotland should be one that is autonomous, as Finlay Carson describes. I have given that commitment previously that it will be analogous to that for the Highlands and Islands enterprise, but it is quite clear in this area, as in many others. It is the SNP that is delivering in those areas, where all the Tories have done over many years. Colin Smyth The cabinet secretary will be aware that the Borderlands initiative has been taken forward by Dumfries and Galloway and Scottish Borders councils in Scotland, working with Carlyll, Cumbria and Northumberland councils in England. However, today, there has not been a single penny from either the UK Government or the Scottish Government, and it has been left to local authorities to pick up the bill, despite both Governments claiming to support the Borderlands initiative. The cabinet secretary therefore tells us exactly what support the Scottish Government intends to provide for the development of a Borderlands growth deal, and is he aware of any funding that is coming from the UK Government for this initiative? Colin Smyth No, I am not aware of any funding coming directly from the UK Government, although it is true to say that the Edinburgh city region deal will include Scottish Borders councils, so money will come both from the UK Government and the Scottish Government in relation to that. Yes, we did establish the Borderlands initiative, and it was for local authorities to take these things forward. We would just be falling into the trap of being told that we are centralising if we were to decide exactly what initiatives should be taken forward. We will rely upon the representations made to us and the proposals made to us by local authorities, and we will seek to support those. It will depend exactly on what those proposals are, but whether it is in terms of the Scottish Borders council and the support that they have had in terms of the Borderlands rail, or in the other infrastructure and regeneration investments that we have made across the south of Scotland, including Dumfries and Galloway, the Scottish Government will be supporting local communities across this area, and we urge the UK Government to do likewise. Neil Findlay To ask the Scottish Government for what reason it does not keep minutes of all meetings between stakeholders and ministers. I can confirm that the Scottish Government proactively publishes all ministerial engagements with information on the date, purpose and attendees and the subject of the engagement. Formal minutes are taking where there are discussions on substantive government business, where policy decisions arise or where there are significant action points. Neil Findlay Why does the First Minister and other cabinet ministers meet with corporate lobbyists, including representatives of Charlotte Street partners, such as someone who chairs the SNP's growth commission, Mr Andrew Wilson, but fails to publish any agenda or any record of this meeting and others? Does that not breach the ministerial code or does it breach the civil service code? Neil Findlay To be clear, the Government takes minutes as appropriate in line with the ministerial code and in line with the civil service guidance, and that is what we have always done. It is also worth saying that this Government is far more transparent than previous Governments and that this Government proactively publishes when those meetings are happening and where our meetings are happening. That is not something that happened under previous Administrations. Alexander Stewart The lack of minute recording of key meetings, combined with journalists from across Scotland signing an open letter raising concerns about information requests being repeatedly delayed, emails asking for updates on answer requests repeatedly ignored, that surely gives rise to the Scottish Government having a transparency problem? Neil Findlay The Scottish Government takes our responsibility under FOI very seriously. In fact, the Scottish Government has a far better record than the UK Government at releasing information. Where in 2016 85 per cent of valid responses requests resulted in information being released by the Scottish Government on a similar basis in the UK, only 63 per cent of requests resulted in information being released. The Scottish FOI regime is far more robust than the regime that reflects elsewhere in the UK. If the member wants to look at how we can provide more information to journalists than perhaps he should be speaking to his colleagues down south who, rather than looking at how they can improve the FOI regime, are looking at how they can tighten up and make it more difficult for journalists and others members of the public to receive information. Johann Lamont Can I ask if the minister has read the letter from the journalist criticising the Government on FOI? If not, maybe you can get back to me with a minute that proves that it was handed to you. That is really serious. It is unprecedented for journalists to feel obliged to produce such a letter. Will the minister come back and give a more serious response to the challenges that that presents to us all? Johann Lamont I can confirm that I have read the letter and we are looking at the matters. One of the issues that journalists have raised was our timeliness. We are working with the Information Commissioner to improve our response times in response to that. It is worth looking at the facts of the matter. The facts of the matter is that we have a massively increasing number of FOIs that are being answered, more being answered on time than ever before. In 2016, prior to this Government, there were only 684 FOI responses answered on time. Last year, the last full year, this Government answered 1,557 responses on time. That is going from 61 per cent of responses under the Labour-Liberal Administration up to 76 per cent under this Administration. That said, we are determined to continue to improve our performance and look at how we can make this Government, which is already one of the most transparent Governments in the world, even better. Liz Smith To ask the Scottish Government what steps it is taking to encourage young people to study medicine at university. Young people at school are provided with experiences and careers advice to raise awareness of a range of degree opportunities available. There are also targeted schools programmes to encourage young people into careers in health and medicine in particular. We provide additional funding through the Scottish Funding Council to universities to help to improve access to high-demand professions. There is a reach programme linked to each medical school in Scotland to support young people from low-progression schools who wish to study medicine. In March this year, we also announced funding of £330,000 to deliver pre-entry courses to medicine that will be used to support secondary school students from socially deprived backgrounds to better prepare themselves for undergraduate medical education. Liz Smith With regard to medical undergraduates, the Scottish Government announced for this academic session an increase in 50 places. I understand that there will be another 40 places for academic session 2018-19, but that still does not make up for the reductions over the previous 10 years, nor does it match the 25 per cent increase that has been announced for south of the border. Given the current chronic shortage of GPs in Scotland, will the Minister tell Parliament what advice she has received from the medical undergraduate group? Does she believe that the capping system on places for domicile Scots is really working? Liz Smith is correct to point to the increase of 50 medical undergraduate places targeted at students from the most deprived areas. She will also be very well aware of the workforce planning requirements that go into the analysis before any decisions on medical places are taken for universities. I have to correct her about this cap for a university places for domiciled Scots. There is no cap on places. The setting of medical student places is based on the workforce planning needs of NHS Scotland, which I have previously mentioned. While we set the annual intake into medicine, the selection and recruitment of individual students admitted to study medicine is, of course, a matter for individual universities, which Liz Smith correctly points out to me on every occasion that universities are independent organisations and it is not for the Government to decide which places are given to students within each year. Clare Haughey To ask the Scottish Government what support and encouragement it is given to universities to offer places to study medicine to students from less affluent backgrounds. I have already mentioned and replied to Liz Smith around the 50 medical undergraduate places for the 2016 intake, which universities will use to support the widening access aims of the Government. We also have the pre-medical entry programme, which will be used to support secondary school students from socially deprived backgrounds to better prepare themselves for undergraduate medical education. The reach programme, which is established to link with each medical school in Scotland, will ensure that, once again, we go out through this outreach programme to aim the S4 to S6 pupils, including Edinburgh and the Lothians. We have a slow progression into higher education in medical careers to give them a greater insight and encourage them to offer support in their application process. Mark Ruskell To ask the Scottish Government how many professional veterinary bodies have indicated support for its legislative proposal to allow the amputation of tails in healthy puppies. Only one response from professional veterinary bodies was received to the public consultation held between 10 February and 3 May 2016. That was a combined response from the British Veterinary Association and the British Small Animal Veterinary Association. Those organisations were not in favour of the proposal to permit the shortening of the tails of spaniel and hunt-point retriever puppies, where a vet believes that they are likely to be used as a working dog and risk serious tail injury in later life. The Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons did not tender a response to the consultation. Mark Ruskell I thank the cabinet secretary for that very straight and revealing answer. The reason, cabinet secretary, that organisations such as the British Veterinary Association are not supporting the statutory instrument is because it is fundamentally anti-science. Why does it make sense to amputate the tails of hundreds and hundreds of puppies at under five days old, just to avoid the amputation of one tail in an adult working dog? Mark Ruskell I look forward to appearing before the committee next Tuesday morning. The Environment, Climate Change and Land Reform Committee is in the progress of dealing with this particular statutory instrument. While the veterinary organisations that I named do not agree with the proposal, it is of course the situation that prevails south of the border. The member is probably very well aware that not all vets are of exactly the same opinion on this matter. We did do research, there was research published in 2014, which persuaded us that in limited circumstances covering only two breeds of dogs and dealing only with the one-third tail tip of the animals, this was an appropriate way forward. As I said, I look forward to appearing before the committee on Tuesday morning. Jamie Greene To ask the Scottish Government what action it is taking to protect low and middle-income earners from negative growth. Derek Mackay The Scottish economy has been resilient in 2016, growing 0.4 per cent, despite continued headwinds from the North Sea industry and the uncertainty caused by the European Union referendum vote. Scotland's economic fundamentals are strong, unemployment is down and employment is up in 2016. We secured more foreign direct investment projects in any other part of the UK outside London for the fifth year in a row, and independent forecasters are predicting growth in the Scottish economy in 2017 and 2018. As well as our actions to support economic growth, we are continuing to help low and middle-income earners. For instance, we have frozen the basic rate of income tax in the current tax year and are committed to no increases in the basic rate subject to parliamentary approval for this term of this Parliament. We have also capped increases to the council tax, 3 per cent, and we have made it a requirement in our public sector pay policy for employers to pay the living wage. We are continuing with our policy of no compulsory redundancies in the public sector, so the real risk to Scotland's economy comes from a hard Brexit and the continuation of Westminster's austerity agenda. Jamie Greene I am sure that the cabinet secretary will be pleased to know that it is the Conservative Government that has taken 113,000 Scots out of tax altogether at the lower end. We are finding out just yesterday that Ernst and Young's Scottish item club report is quoted as saying that the Scottish economy is stuck in the slow lane. Last quarter's GDP figures show that we are ready halfway to a recession and we are shortly to find out if that is the case. Given that all of this has happened under this SNP's watch, will the cabinet secretary take personal responsibility for the stagnation in the Scottish economy? Will he today apologise to the people of Scotland for it? Jamie Greene I think that I should apologise for once again talking down Scotland and undermining. As do all Conservatives undermining Scotland when it comes to trying to attract foreign direct investment and other investors to live, work and invest in Scotland in which we have had a great track record. Jamie Greene also mentions taxation. It is really interesting that the Tory party manifesto, or what is left of it, lasts the eye check. It does not refer to tax rates and we all know that the Tories propose tax cuts for the richest while hammering the poorest in our society. That is what the Tories are all about. Scotland's economic fundamentals are strong. We are saying that employment is going up and that unemployment is going down and that improved performance on productivity is better in comparative terms than the rest of the UK. More registered businesses, more investment, research and development and record achievement on our exports. We have an economic strategy that will support the Scottish economy at the same time as the UK Government through the Tories and the Scottish Tories are trying to undermine it, and they should take their responsibility seriously as being part of the current governance of Scotland and the economic strategy. Maybe that will change shortly, but the Tories should take some responsibility for their inaction to support the Scottish economy since their time in office. 6. Johann Lamont To ask the Scottish Government what funding it has provided to third sector organisations to tackle homelessness in Glasgow since 2007. Since 2007, the Scottish Government has funded a range of third sector homelessness organisations through the housing voluntary grant scheme and other schemes, with more than £11 million made available to homelessness projects across Scotland, including Glasgow. In 2017-18, that includes continued funding for a Glasgow homelessness network, provided since 2008 to help to improve the involvement of homeless people in the delivery of services across Scotland. The vast majority of funding provided by the Scottish Government to tackle homelessness is through a block grant to each local authority who have the statutory obligation to address homelessness in their area and who will use those resources to fund third sector organisations involved in tackling homelessness. Despite on-going cuts to the Scottish budget by the UK Government, Glasgow City Council continued to receive a fair share of this overall funding of more than £10.4 billion in 2017-18, which means that Glasgow will receive £1,369 million. Johann Lamont I do not know what the minister's definition of fair is, but it is certainly not fair to Glasgow what has happened over the past period at the hands of your Government. I am sure that the minister will acknowledge that the scourge of homelessness in modern Scotland shames us all and trusts that he recognises that it is important to tackle homelessness not just by building more houses and sustainable houses, but by understanding the causes of homelessness, whether that be abuse, addiction or family breakdown. Would the minister agree with me that the role of charities in homeless organisations is absolutely crucial in ensuring the right support for those vulnerable to homelessness and to help to sustain them in tenancies? Can he ask what assessment he has made of the impact of sustained cuts to local government on the ability of those organisations to deliver the services that homeless people so desperately need and deserve? Johann Lamont Thank you, Presiding Officer. I note that Ms Lamont has not taken cognisance of part of my question, but the fact that the Scottish Government's budget has been cut year-on-year by the UK Government. We have done our very best to ensure that we provide moneys for front-line services to local authorities. We have strong rights to housing for homeless households. Our recent focus on the prevention of homelessness through the housing options approach has led to consistent falls in homelessness applications in Glasgow, including from those who have been rough sleeping. I recognise the value of third sector organisations in delivering services. The council, which receives funding to address homelessness from the Scottish Government, is best placed working in partnership with local third sector organisations and other partners such as Health to make decisions on the appropriate level of funding to organisations based on the local profile of homelessness. I welcome the fact that the new SNP administration in the council has recently stated its intention to hold a homelessness summit in the city, including with partners from the third sector and housing associations, to agree a joint approach to tackling the issue. I only wish that Glasgow had done that previously under the previous Labour administration. Dean Lockhart To ask the Scottish Government when it will publish the findings of phase 2 of the enterprise and skills review. The final report on phase 2 of the enterprise and skills review is to be published in late June. Detail regarding the new strategic board, which will co-ordinate the work of the agencies—Scotland Enterprise, Highlands and Islands Enterprise, Skills Development Scotland and the Scottish Funding Council—was announced on 30 March. Significant progress has also been made across all other work streams, including recommendations regarding the new data and analytical function, an improved approach to the development of regional partnerships, multiple actions pertaining to enterprise and business support, innovation and internationalisation, the latter linked to the trade and investment strategy. Specific plans for the alignment of skills planning and a full programme are under way regarding the 15 to 24 learner journey. The review will now enter its implementation phase with the report outlining initial delivery plans for projects. Dean Lockhart I thank the cabinet secretary for his response and I look forward to the publication of phase 2. With the Scottish economy heading towards recession, enterprise policy will play an increasingly important part in turning the economy around. Can the cabinet secretary therefore confirm how many businesses in Scotland have received assistance under the growth scheme that was announced by the Scottish Government last September as a central part of their programme for government, and what level of financial assistance has been granted to businesses so far under the scheme? I note first of all the increasing willingness of the Tories to try to talk up a recession in Scotland. That is beyond being an opposition party. That is their liberty of trying to undermine. I have heard this from the CBI and other business organisations saying that they are psyched to the back teeth of Conservatives talking down the economy in Scotland. In relation to the Scottish growth scheme announcement, we made on that imminently before recess and full details are made known at that time. It is also important to recognise that, in the Scottish economy, the Tories are boasted about holding most of the major tools in which to influence the economy. Why do they never ask themselves if they think that the economy is doing so badly what the culpability is of the Tory Government did at Westminster? Who can control the majority of functions? Despite the neglect of the Tory Government at Westminster, we have seen record FDI investment once again this year. We have seen lower unemployment in Scotland than we have in the rest of the UK. The UK Government has an increasing balance of payments deficit, and it has a £1.8 trillion debt, adding £100 billion every year since the Tories came into power. I know whose record is more impressive in terms of the Scottish economy, and it is not the UK Government. That concludes general questions. We turn now to culture, tourism and external affairs.