Hello, this is Zeyno Dodd. I'm here representing a small team of data scientists and software developers, software engineers. I'm a software engineer myself, even though I do a lot of architecting for cloud deployments. This is actually one of our more open source experimentation in the R&D. Basically, we're trying to see what kind of graph-based inferences we can have within the Kubernetes environment, dealing with several different cybersecurity scenarios. So this is, I mean, kind of an interesting landscape. As you see on the left, it is all cheerful looking with the infographics. In fact, those are kind of verisome facts in this displayed in kind of a caricaturized fashion. That is basically kind of telling to go that there are two hand-to-hand development, one on the cybersecurity. And obviously, a lot of digital assets being available in the cloud, a lot of types of new attacks coming up, especially after COVID. We have ransomware and a variety of sort of techniques being developed. On the other hand, we have obviously a very sort of promising rate in cloud data technology adoption. That landscape, actually, you can see there's a big growth in the security and sort of compliance area, and associated with also the observability, because they kind of go hand in hand. As new things become available, people are eager to kind of adopt in terms of their modernization, digital transformation processes. But maturing takes a little bit of time. And in the process, that's a great opportunity for hackers or attackers to make some creative ways, just like people come up with creative ways of improving the performance, having increased capabilities and ease up certain processes. They have a creative way of finding new vulnerabilities, new exposures, new weaknesses, and exploit them. This is obviously some kind of a it's not a mystery if everybody is seeing this. Therefore, you would have some global industry and government and agency and institutional level cooperation. In terms of several agencies and institutions, first of all, publishing standards, specific cloud-native technologies, securing the cloud-native technologies. There was an executive order, I think, 2021, like October, that basically started a whole slew of hardening, Kubernetes hardening guidelines. And there were a lot of benchmarking and best practices that were published. CNCF just recently also, I think, beginning of the June, they are publishing machine-readable, fully compliant, well, at least translatable to NIST 800 to 18 standard, I guess, for compliance assessment. So there's a lot of work in that area. And then, on the other hand, you also have security experts and sort of folks individually or smaller platforms providing OS intelligence, open-source intelligence, in the sense that people report. There's Hacker News attacks are reported there. Vulnerabilities, man, they discovered their sort of, I think Hacker one collects the vulnerabilities. And there's all these individuals, SMEs, they basically make these available as RSS. So this is actually a nice place to monitor the activities. Oh, and why GNN, why graph-based? This is a complex, obviously landscape, right? There are many moving parts. Even though cloud-native sort of deployments are kind of exciting, there's a lot of complexity in maintaining the lifecycle. Observability is a huge issue, many moving parts. So it is kind of crucial to be able to represent the problem in a most realistic and dynamic way and not sort of be stuck in hardened frameworks. And what I was thinking, the inference is actually a lot more natural than you think about in terms of graph models. And graph models are not new. Back in my time, there's knowledge graphs and graph-based inference. It was big then, it was forgotten. Now, it's together with the deep learning making a comeback. And they have very impressive success stories in terms of drug discovery and other kinds of complex pattern discoveries. So within this, there's also, in the landscape, people are trying to coordinate, right? They're trying to wire these sort of SME-driven, vetted, curated networks released on maybe once, twice a year into sort of more dynamic databases like the CVE Common Vulnerability and Exposures and the National Vulnerability Database. They're all trying to sort of make some kind of mapping. But you can see from the release frequency I mean, you might have, I don't know, maybe at least five updates to your attack framework or any kind of framework that any kind of graph model that you're trying to capture sort of the types of techniques that are evolving. But at the same time, when you look at the vulnerabilities, it's like one published pretty much every day now. And this is the reason it slows down in 2020 because I think COVID affected everyone and the approval process slowed down. I'm pretty sure it's gonna make a big comeback and you're gonna have more and more sort of vulnerabilities hitting. So you cannot have this manually vetted and you cannot have these mappings done manually. There has to be some AI initiative to dynamically associate these vulnerabilities and weaknesses with the sort of existing frameworks. And Mitre Attack is one of the most promising ones and everybody's talking about it. They will try to capture different aspects of it. So for graph inference, then I started to think, okay, then we can have basically several scenarios. There are knowledge graph driven scenarios. So we can have threat exploration, right? Given the Mitre's capacity of identifying intruder profiles and agents that do the attacks, malware, software. And then the other side of it you can have if you can ingest the OSINT intelligence feeds in a reasonable way. If you can actually read the bad stuff, useless stuff or misinformation from that and capture together with your sort of data feeds from the databases. You can actually have an impact analysis on variation of vulnerabilities and how they may actually enable certain variations on techniques that you know. So that's impact analysis. And another obviously recommender action type, use of the knowledge graph is already explored by Mitre. They in addition to have an attack model, they're building a defense model. So it used to be that you just have based on the detected technique, you would have a course of action to mitigate. Now they have a full blown sort of set of techniques that you can use in combination to address the attack that you recognize. So all these things are not new. And there's a lot of sort of activity in many respects. But we want to start with threat detection and we want to start with Kubernetes. And because we thought the state Kubernetes is a organism and let's get a lot of information from it as frequently as we can. And not only look at things that we can measure but try to capture as much information as possible. This cannot be done with the thresholds. Your Kubernetes environment will have different diagnosis state. If you're in a production environment, development or test environment. Even the behavior will change from day to day, weekly or for certain seasons. So everybody will have their own baseline. So we wanna be able to capture that first of all and then establish a baseline and then being able to express this in open metrics. We can issue queries and we can look at the rates of changes that are critical in our environment in that they're pointing at some kind of technique in action. So we took the Kubernetes site is completely us trying to merge it into the knowledge graph. And we have a minor attack on one site but as you will see the minor technique is kind of generic. It doesn't really cover anything Kubernetes specific, very high level. Then we looked at the Microsoft security threat matrix which is far more Kubernetes specific to the extent that we can actually identify what to measure, what Kubernetes resource to go after and what to watch for. And we wanna also make sure that we don't have a fixed model because we can introduce different kinds of measures, different kind of resources and we wanna make it as dynamic as possible. Possibly employ some kind of online training with little batches and do online training as it comes and making sure that it doesn't forget what happened. So it will be training on small batches with the data flowing in streaming in and it will be making inferences as it learns from various patterns of activities. And for this we use the DGL graph library excellent sort of library with a lot of examples. Some of some are more sort of mature than the others for instance the heterogeneous graph that we're dealing with the link prediction wasn't very strong to be honest. I mean it just illustrates one particular scenario. So the sort of our experimentation is available on that particular website. Feel free to go look under heavy construction but what we're looking at is a full vision is having first of all some scenarios identify our Kubernetes agents and the types of inferences that we wanna tackle and we wanna basically not only publish the models that we develop for this specific also full pipelines of how we are gonna train and to end implementation as an example and probably try to contribute it into open source libraries like that because without anybody else's contribution I don't think we would have made any sort of progress. It is time to a lot of people implementing these approaches and algorithms that can get really complex that sort of helped us putting together our own examples. The other very helpful point would be not only the graph models sort of shared but the data sets specific to the libraries PyTorch or DGL for that matter TensorFlow whichever way we wanna use it. What we wanna do is we wanna basically capture some business as usual like healthy diagnostic states with some measurements in open sort of metrics format and also we wanna capture some data in terms of simulated attacks and how you're maybe if not lucky but if you get to sort of get an attack we may actually capture that information and we may encounter measures that we never thought would be related from that information so that will be a much kind of richer way to contribute data for people to take over the benchmark their models play with different variations in their sort of approaches to convolution however they wanna sort of proceed with it and also for validation and testing it would be extremely helpful. So that is kind of what we had in mind in this experimentation and that pretty much completes I hope I'm not, I didn't even see the sign but I hope I'm in time. Okay. Yeah so I mean and I hope too many images I hope nobody gets a stomach upset right before the dinner but I just wanted to finish with more images from OpenAI just playing with it and getting some random generated art using the keywords for my presentation. Anyway that's probably slightly more interesting than our experiments. So hope this is inspiring or just interesting and I'm happy to have any suggestions and so that we can sort of explore anything that you would think would be relevant we can explore that area so I'm open to any feedback questions if not I think it's dinner time. Yeah actually the slides should be in the schedule so you can pull up from the slides and you can, it's there. I put the latest and greatest version so update. Thank you, thank you for giving the opportunity.


Yeah, you ready? Yeah. Okay. Hi, I'm Judy Strayer and as chair of the local historic district commission, I'm calling this meeting to order at 304 p.m. On Monday, June 6 2022 based on Governor Baker's executive order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law, general law chapter 30 a section 20 signed Thursday March 20, March 20. March 12 2020. This hearing and meeting is being held virtually using the zoom platform. Meeting is being recorded and minutes are being taken as usual. So I'll take roll now. Hold them. Yes. Jim Lumley. I'm here. Peggy Schwartz. I know she's here. Rita Wilcox here. Here. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. I'm here. Well, Justin. Oops. No, that's not. I'm here. Thank you. And I'm Judy Strayer and I am here. So we just have one. Application today. For 46 sunset. Is that correct? Yep. Yeah, exactly. So we're actually going to start with Shannon. Yeah, just because, um, and then at around three 30, the folks from Amherst College, you're going to come. Yeah. Good. So I'm going to bring Shannon Walsh in as a panelist here. That works. Here we go. Hi, Shannon. Hi there. Can everybody hear me okay? Yes, I can. Yes. Great. Thank you for having me today. And I appreciate you having me go first. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. My daughter has a three 30 appointment that I tried to reschedule, but it would have been like two months from now. So. Yeah. Thank you. So as, as Ben had mentioned, I'm here to talk about the update to the Amherst historic preservation plan. And thank you for having me as part of your meeting today. I just wanted to first introduce myself. I'm Shannon Walsh. I'm the historic preservation planner for the Pioneer Valley planning commission. I've been working on some different plans and more recently, resilient master plans, historic and cultural resource chapters. And I'm very excited to be working with Amherst over the next year. So I'm meeting with you and I'm meeting with the other commission, Amherst historical commission, and then meeting with various groups over the summer, doing a lot of fact finding. So I had sent Ben some kind of preliminary questions. If anybody had a chance to look them over, but just trying to kind of get a sense of, of where your commission is at. So my first question was, what are your commission's main goals and expectations for the updated preservation plan for Amherst? And I'm just going to type if that, if you don't mind, just to make sure that I have everything accounted for that we discuss. Anybody, or do you have no thoughts or expectations? I can also provide a little bit of background, just the, the, the utility, I guess, of the preservation plan. I think Shannon. So there's a 2005 Amherst preservation plan. I think that is. We've picked and shoot over the past 15, 17 years. Now we've picked and choose different recommendations from that. Preservation plan one, one of which was to establish local historic districts and Amherst. And so we've, you know, this commission now exists because of the preservation plan. That was a recommendation from the O5 plan. And so the goal for the update to the preservation plan is basically to take an inventory of where we're at. And, you know, progress from the 2005 plan. And then, you know, meet with different commission staff members, constituencies in town to get a better sense of goals and. Priorities for the next, you know, call it 15 years. And then Shannon will develop an amazing set of recommendations and implementation. Matrices kind of thing to better understand how we can, what are the goals and then how we can establish and implement those goals. So we're, you know, hoping to come away with a very useful, you know, document that we can kind of guide the work of the, both the historical commission, but the local historic district as well. Yes. And most recently I am somewhat familiar with Amherst. I've worked on the East village inventory form, updating it and expanding the East village national register district. And we've also been working on the depot district update and also the expansion to the Dickinson district. And I did a historic district appeal decision, which you might remember. So yeah, I would just love to hear your thoughts if you have any thoughts about this plan, if you. Have any expectations or things that you want to maybe move to the forefront as we get started and we will revisit this as we go. This is just kind of a first pass at talking. Well, maybe I'm going to go ahead to my second question, just maybe to get started. So has the role of your commission evolved since the 2005 plan? Now your commission was actually created in 2012. Is that right? So it's certainly evolved. And because you're newer than the plan. But how would you say your commission has evolved since it was created in 2012? Well, it's expanded in. At least the. Jim and I are the longest serving members currently, the six of us, but neither of us was involved. Well, I can't speak for you, Jim. I think I'm correct, but, but I wasn't involved in any of the run up the work that was done several of the previous members. I think Jennifer, if not Jennifer, her husband, certainly Morian. So the earlier members of this commission were people who had worked hard to establish the, essentially the, the bylaw or the, the commission itself. And had done a lot of individual work to validate the need for, for this, but by researching specific properties and so forth. But that was not true of me. So I really come on with a view of just continuing the, or representing the discharging the goals and objectives of the commission. Without knowing too much about how it was established in the first place. But I do know that it was established initially at the Dickinson historic district on the other side of. On the, on the eastern half of our district and then was subsequently expanded to the Dickinson, to the Lincoln sunset. And there is currently a deliberation as to whether it would be, whether the sunset Lincoln, the, the, the eastern edge of the sunset Lincoln district as it about's Kendrick Park. And perhaps a little north up north pleasant street would be expanded because those properties were not included. Because I think it was just deemed to be a stretch politically to make the argument. And now that we've established the district and it's, and people can see how the, the commission is behaving. Hopefully, responsibly and reasonably diligently and so forth that they think that now it's a good idea to expand it a little bit because we can be trusted. So that's the notion. So, but that's my sense of how it's evolving. If that was your question. There's one, there's probably other people. I know the spreader's got a hand. Thanks, go ahead. Shannon, I was going to say we also made it slightly easier for people say that wanted to put a mini split in to do it without going through us. So we streamlined some of the decisions. And I think that's a good point. How did you do that? It's a good point. Just discuss them and vote it on it. We did it was to establish. Certain. Certain types of applications that were. Like not applicable. Well, they were applicable, but they're there.  You know, five applications related to heat pump exterior, compressive, a density units. And we established after doing that five times that there was certain criteria that we would always look at. And we established that we could stipulate what those were. And if the building commissioner. Was agreeable. He could just see whether those criteria applied. Then the, it saved everybody time. It saved the applicants time. It saved us time. And, and so the building commission was willing. So part of it has to do with the building commission and being willing to. Do us to take a small amount of, I guess you call it responsibility for this. Based on. A directive, if you like, or an agreement or an understanding. That we develop with him. Would that be an accurate reflection, Ben? Of the main way in which we. How we did it. We did it by just. Passing off some of the. The, the, the, the. Responsibility on to the zoning on to the, on to the zoning. Building commissioner. You set forth what the criteria were it now the building commissioner has it when the application goes before the building commissioner, it can get decided there. Without having to come before a year. And they're very similar. Okay. Things like caps on chimneys, for example, was another that we did. And there's a couple of. It's in the rules and regulations for the local. That's great. I'm going to pass that on to Springfield. Yeah, there you go. Oh, sorry. No, go ahead. Okay. Hi, I'm Judy Stryer. I had a question about, you mentioned a few other districts you're working on in town. And is that something that. You know, town. Citizens are working on and then bringing it to you, or are you as the commission. We were, I think this goes back to 2015. I think it's been a while and it was a CPA funded. I believe. So I'm not sure if the historical commission, but it was actually my predecessor. The contract originated with her. And it's from us. From myself and Bonnie Parsons, who used to be my job at PVPC. If any of you ever came across Bonnie. We submitted. To the historical commission. Well over a year ago. So we were not working on it with, with residents. It came through the Amherst government, through the historical commission, CPA funded project. But that's just my way of saying, I, I'm not just, I am somewhat familiar with Amherst. And I've been working on documenting Amherst, including I walked almost the entire length of Bay Road. I'm not familiar with Amherst. I'm not familiar with Amherst. I do have some, no, I just, I was trying to document. You know, a lot of the buildings along the way. So. Yes. Well, my, my question about your question. Go ahead. That's great. And the reason I asked that question is because I'm. One of the newer member, actually, I'm probably the newest member of the commission. And I do not live in the historic, either historic district, but I live in a district that. I think should be considered to historic. And I, as I'm going around town, I see other districts that for various reasons, I think. Would value from being considered. And not even necessarily. Old historic, maybe there, it's a, it's a neighborhood of mid-century houses or something. But, you know, I'm just wondering how do we start that process of looking at other neighborhoods because. Yeah. Like Greta brought, you brought up like overhead power lines. And I thought that's an issue. And I know it's an issue for where I live too, that people. We're in the right place because that is something that we could look at in this plan and identify neighborhoods that, you know, would be something that should be considered for either. It's always starts with documentation. Right. Future documentation or updated documentation. So that, that's a very helpful thing to know at this stage. Okay. Thanks. Yeah. Thank you. Go ahead. Shannon, when you asked us to think about things, one of the things I thought about were visions of what I'd like for the district and underground wiring is one of them that jumped to mind because they're really, we're on the way to UMass. And every time UMass needs more technology, they run it through down Lincoln Avenue and they're really large, unattractive power lines. And is that something that. That you have advice on how to go about having the district have underground wiring? That's a good question. I think, again, that's something that we should take a look at in this plan. If it's something that, that you feel we should be considering for the future, who the stakeholders would be, what the action steps would be. If it's possible, how, if so, how we get there. Right. And how funding might be available. Yeah. Yeah. Did you have something to say to that, Ben? You're just nodding. Yeah. So these are all the points that things that, you know, weren't brought up in 2005 because there were other focuses that we should definitely be looking at as we're kind of developing the framework of this plan. Is there, is there a place for us as we kind of, you know, develop ideas to like kind of send them to you or. Yeah.  Yeah. Yeah. This, this I think is just a first pass of introduction. So I'll definitely come back to you, but I think that it would be helpful. Maybe you could have it on your agenda. I could send questions to you or through Ben. And at the end of a meeting after you've done your regular applications, we could consider continue to refine what you're thinking about. And then I kind of, we have, we have a general timeline for the way that's planned. This process is going to go, it started May 1st, and it's going to go through April 30th of 2023. So we do have a good amount of time to make sure that we're getting everything that we want to get into this plan. But we, I will work on that with Ben, the best way to refine how you could communicate with me and I could communicate with you, but I do think it makes sense for you to do it as your, as a group public discussion. And then the notes could get sent back to me. I'm going to make a note from myself too. I'll say something if I know Peggy and, and Jim, I think Karen, I would defer to anyone of the three of you because you haven't spoken yet, but I'll go ahead. Speaking as the, the person on the committee who's the architect, the way this committee is structured, and I guess that was done from the beginning and it wasn't changed, but there's a, there's a representative from the real estate professional community and there's a representative from the architectural community. Both of those positions at the moment, well actually I'm not sure Jim's, you're not retired really or you, you might not have been when you started, but the, the, the situation is of course that trying to make professionals onto these bodies means that they is hard to do if they still want to conduct business around town because you know a lot of two or three occasions or in the past six years or five years that I've been on projects from my former office have come forward. Now if I was still on, you know, working there, I would, I would probably say no, I'm not beyond this committee because it's going to interfere with my job. So I think the first thing is that it seems to work to try and get retired professionals on. And, and, and we really should make sure I think that the, the, that that the, the requirement for an architectural representative doesn't require them to be registered in the state.  I was registered in Massachusetts and all of the other New England States and New York, I was really fully, firmly professionally anchored credibly.  So they let them go, but I'm still very capable of, of, of performing this role. But if it wasn't clear and we had a rendered decision that was controversial in some way, the, the whole process could be jeopardized by somebody, what's the word, appealing based on Bruce's not a real architect because he let his registration lapse. And given that the kind of people that will want to come on to these committees really are going to be people like me. And given that people like me will let their registrations lapse, we should be very clear that an architect for a position on this board does not require that they are currently registered just that they have been previously registered in the State of Massachusetts. I think clarity on that point, if it isn't already would be ultimately helpful because I can just see a problem coming down, not just with us in this town, but you know, any other towns ensure. That's number one comment. Number two comment is when I first was approached to come on and I was being interviewed, I said, I said, here's my view of what historic preservation means. And my view is that it's not the goal of this commission. That's not my goal on this commission to lock the, the district into its history from 2012 backwards that there will be, you know, the story of, you know, the way in which the community grows and so forth in 50 years from now will have history that relates in the, in the 50 years to come. And so I don't take the view that we are necessarily maintaining literal faith with forms and so forth that are, you know, are historic back from 2012. This is a bumbling explanation. I'm there, not everybody on this commission, I think, would agree with me. We would have, but they might agree in principle, but the way in which this discharge might be refuted. But the thing is that there's a tension, I think, in these commissions based on how much of what people are doing should we applaud and approve as appropriate. Let's say someone came to us with a really novel, a new original architectural design for a house on a lot or an addition on a house that was completely out of, was killed with the historic, with the, with the context, the current context, but that it seemed to speak to an original architectural solution based on, you know, recognizing the current needs of changing with new materials these days. There are new circumstances associated with energy use and so forth. There are new circumstances associated with family size and how people raise their kids and where grandparents live and all these things are changing all the time. And my view is that we have to move with it and that the appropriateness of what we are saying is, tracks this and will mean that we will make decisions about things that are in some people's minds, kind of at odds with the so-called historical context. Right. Appropriate as it could be a very subjective thing. Yes. And so the, so I would think if you're writing something in the last year of guidelines for people like us and others related to that. If I can just interrupt you real quick just because I want to make sure we get to all of our questions. Amherst does not currently have design guidelines. Is that right? Okay, so that's something that I think would be a little bit of a recommendation just because. I know North Hampton, for example, I, I, I did a historic district appeal in North Hampton. And I relied heavily on those design guidelines that they had. And it's really coming up with language about additions, new construction, being compatible, not to put a false impression of something that's older when it's newer, but it having that to point to when you're trying to make those difficult decisions. I think it can be very helpful. It's true, but you know, to take a hypothetical. Frank Lloyd Wright in 1920 might not be able to have done all sorts of buildings that we would die to preserve now. Yep. Oh no, I understand what you're saying. The only thing that's different though, is if it's in a local historic district, you do have to follow the secretary of the interior standards. So I think the design guidelines that you come up with, and that Amherst votes on, would be something that would at least, you know, give, give it an easier place for people to go when you're trying to decide these difficult applications. I understand what you're saying about, about. I've worked on Nantucket where the design guidelines are possibly as stringent strict as any precise. That's why they're unique as the community that creates them. So, but Jen Doherty, who's the new Chris Skelly, was the former local government recording. So Jen Doherty, we were just talking about this in Springfield because the McKnight local historic district, they have an empty lot. And there was a lot of disagreement about should the house that's going to go there really look like it. Really matches the houses next to it. Or it just was a very interesting conversation, which again, Springfield, they have eight or nine or 10. They have so many individual building local historic districts, but they have at least seven large local historic districts. And they have no design guidelines. And it doesn't come up that often. But when it does, if you don't have design guidelines and you're trying to work with a property owner, it can be difficult. So I think that that would be something that we should definitely discuss as a possible action step to have something like that in place for when you're trying to make those decisions. Let me see. One other thing. Oh, go ahead. So long as there is a preamble of goals and objectives that would allow these commissions to exercise some degree of discretionary. Well, that's why you're all sitting here. All different different voices and opinions, but just to have kind of a basis of, you know, like you said, with the chimney caps and things like that, what, what is the baseline of what is okay and not okay? And then the discussion evolves from there. So are there any major concerns that I should know about at this point that you're seeing from where you sit related to historic preservation and Amherst? We talked a little bit about electrical lines. And, you know, a lot of applications coming into you, but realizing that there's a lot of applications coming into you. But realizing that there was a more streamlined way to do it and also make homeowners happy. What were you, what were you going to say? I'm sorry. You just had your hand raised. Oh, I was just going to say. Oh. In our part of the district bordering the university. So we're also. Hoping that landlords keep their property property up because that's what we're doing. Yeah. We talked about that a little bit. Gave me a tour and we were talking about a lot of absentee landlords. Yeah. Yeah. I'm sure that's a tricky thing when those houses also are under ordinance. Yeah. Go ahead, Judy. Yeah, I would say that. I would say that's an issue in a lot of town, but also I think the pressure on downtown. For. Being used for student housing versus. You know, retail restaurants. There seems to be, there's a lot of tension, I think. Between, especially the area. No, I guess is it north of Kendrick park? You know, and part of that I think is being driven by the development that happened on the other side of East pleasant, the huge buildings. You know, I think that's a good point. What's your opinion about that stretch? Is that one of the stretches that you said wasn't included in a district that. No, across the street. The part where a group of us are looking at now is what was not included. It's adjacent to the Lincoln sunset district. Yeah. North, north pleasant. But not wanting to see what's on one side mirrored on the other side of the street. So, you know, it just in terms of scale and use and, you know, just being inappropriate and having that put pressure on. The buildings as historic buildings, you know. Okay. Thank you. Okay.  Does anybody else have anything to add at this time? And this is just a real brief introductory. Discussion. Okay. I'm going to go back to the outline for the plan already that Ben modeled on a mass historical commission plan. So as we refine it, we will definitely revisit and ask more questions, but we'll then and I will come up with a good way with. If you have your weekly meetings and you have just on your agenda. Discussion about the preservation plan. And then if anything comes up, it could be conveyed to me and I'll make sure that it gets in our notes. Does anybody else have any comments? Monthly meetings. I'll go ahead, Jim. Shannon, do you have any materials that, even though they're in draft form that you could send us to give us an idea of what. Some guidelines. Sure. Okay. Let me just, I will send you. The outline that were, that is kind of the framework. I also am going to send the Amherst historical commissions and sample plans. I'm going to take a look at some of the design guidelines. I'm going to take a look at some of the design guidelines from other communities where we're working on fine. They didn't have any that they had off hand that they wanted us to model this on. So I'm going to try to find some. So I'll send that to your group as well to take a look at. Also, including maybe design guidelines, because we could take a look at some of the design, like I know Salem. Just helpful. Yeah. So we'll just take a look at some of these model plans and some of the design guidelines. And then we're going to send them to the commission. To do an Amherst. That sounds good. But I'll send you a draft of what the overall outline is. And as we work on drafts, because I have a schedule of when we're going to be submitting the drafts, we'll send them to your commission as well. If you'd like to take a read and give any feedback. I have a question. Go ahead. In terms of the number of the members of the commission, I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I just live in the historic district. Some of us don't. Does that have any bearing on the makeup? Other guidelines for how many members. Of the commission should be. Would be. Acceptable or. Set on your commission. Yeah. Yeah. I don't, I'll have to look at your ordinance. Uh-huh. Look at what the state says. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. People live in the district would have one sense of what, what might be suitable as opposed to people who are passing through for one reason or another. Yeah, that's a good question. Okay.  Does anybody have any more questions or comments? Okay. All right. Well, thank you again. I appreciate you letting me take the time to speak with you. Thank you very much. Bye-bye. Bye-bye. All right. Thanks everyone. Yeah, so we'll, uh, you haven't seen the last of Shannon. We'll have a few more, uh, meetings, uh, or many more over the next year. And we'll definitely, um, you know, keep drafts flowing and information flowing between the commission and Shannon and put together a good plan. So I look forward to. And just for clarification here, when you, uh, you know, I said, I'd never heard of the preservation plan. I didn't know we had one, uh, and, and it wasn't given, uh, you know, it wasn't discussed or referenced or delivered as part of a package of based documents for us. That leads me to imagine or wonder whether it's, it's, how relevant is, uh, I haven't read it yet. I've opened it. I've scanned it, but I haven't looked at it closely. Um, is what Shannon's, uh, doing or advising, um, is, is the updating and redrafting of this plan or if you're doing something different. Yep. Yeah. She's up updating the plan. Basically. Um, You know, Taking inventory of what's been done since the last plan was developed and then setting the goals for, you know, the next 10, 15 years. Um, I think the current plan that was developed in 2005, um, is a little bit just, uh, I want to, you know, there is still some relevance, but I think a lot has changed in 15 years. For example, CPA was just getting started when that plan was written. So like there's now we have a much more important and useful tool for historic preservation in the community preservation act. Um, that's one example, you know, now we have two local historic districts. So how do we build on that now? So I think there's the current plan just isn't that useful to us anymore. So the goal is to kind of get a plan that provides guidance for the next 10, 15 years. Um, and that will be useful, hopefully. Um, so yeah, I think maybe in 2000, you know, in the early days of the, in the early days of the year, um, once the preservation plan was developed in 2005, I'm sure it was shared widely, but it's kind of fallen out of, you know, it's not as. Reference reference as often anymore. I'm just looking at the master plan and trying to find any reference to it in the master plan. And, uh, um, which was done. Um, around the same time or at least started. Um, in the early days of the year, it was just master plan effort. That I suppose you would have to say ended in failure. Um, Yes, it's, it's, I'm looking at the natural and cultural resources section of the, uh, of the master plan. And it's. As far as I can see, it's, it's not even referenced. So yeah, I mean, um, so, so that being the case, uh, we, one would hope that it would be, uh, elevated in its, uh, prominence. And certainly, uh, when the next, uh, draft of the master plan or the next update of the master plan and so forth, it should be folded into that because that thing is a 35 page document with a, about another 50 pages of appendices. So it's, it's about the same size document as the master plan itself, but it doesn't even, it, it's unreferenced.  I'm not sure how that happened, but, um, okay. Yeah. Um, so we have, uh, guests in attendance for the, um, public hearing. So do you want us to get started with that? Uh-huh. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So let me bring Seth in. And then Judy, if you just want to call the public, I'm not going to recall to order. Or yeah, just open, I guess open the public hearing. That's the. Term. Yes. That is, um, is Stephen Baker. In the, in the room. Yep. Yeah. And there's anyone else from your team. And then I don't know if Tom Davies is an attendance. I'm actually not, um, in Amherst right now outside of Baltimore. So I'm not anyone. Um, and, um, Do you see a Rachel Bellender? Yep. If you could elevate her as well. And Tom, if he happens to join, I know he has a four o'clock. So. So we have to formally open the. Yeah. Are we, are we ready? Yeah. Okay. Great. Okay. I'm Judy Strayer and it's chair of the local historic district commission. I'm calling this meeting to order. At. Three 40 on Monday. June 6th, 2022. Based on governor Baker's order suspending certain provisions of the open meeting law, general law. Chapter 30 a section 20 signed Thursday, March 12th, 2020. And the meeting is being recorded and minister being taken. So we only have one. Presentation from Amherst college. Or sunset. Um, So Seth, do you, are you going to present or. Stephen Baker is going to. Okay. And I share my content. Yes. Okay. And just, uh, uh, I want to just make sure everything got kicked off. I'm actually going to be getting on a plane to come back to Amherst, you know, entirely. Uh, so we're leaving for the airport. So I'm going to have to, uh, jump off in a few minutes. Um, but just as a, as a brief overview, um, the college did purchase 46 sunset at the end of last year. And it is intended to be the residents for the incoming year. Um, Um, And, um, And I'll let Stephen, uh, take the presentation away, but suffice it to say that house, um, Needs a whole lot of work. And so it is our, it is our, um, endeavor to provide it with all new mechanical, electrical plumbing systems. Um, almost a complete gut demo on the inside. Um, in order just to bring it. It's gotten on into wiring. Most of the stuff that I know is not under your jurisdiction, but suffice it to say we're attempting to, uh, you know, give it the renovation that it has really needed for, for some time. Um, and then the exterior and, uh, in some cases in pretty poor disrepair. So, um, you know, new new gutters and new roofing material to manage the existing, but still, um, it needs a lot of, uh, assistance that's way overdue. So I'm going to, um, I'll hang on for as long as I can, but I will let Steven Baker, who is our illustrious architect. And then also from my team, Rachel Bollinger, she's a new project manager for Amherst college. So if there are questions from that about, about that need to be go to the college and not to Steven, Rachel will hang on for, for the rest of the meeting. So good afternoon. Has everybody had a chance to, uh, did everybody receive copies of the submission? So are you familiar with what we're doing? Yes. Okay. Fantastic. So I will then just lightly, uh, raise over the surface of the mechanical systems that are on the exterior of the house. Uh, we're, we're either trying to eliminate them or tidy them up. Um, and so you can, you can, uh, There's an emergency generator, which exists currently. Uh, it's all shrouded in plantings right now. Both, both the, uh, both sides of the house have, uh, significant enough landscaping that you can't even see the mechanical systems. Um, uh, but there is a transfer switch on the street side that we're taking away to put inside the house and clean up that whole area. Uh, with that, I will move on to the elevations in the elevations. We're going to be trying to replace in kind for the most part on the front of the house and the right, the left sides, uh, with windows very much, uh, matching the look and feel what's there now, but now insulated. Uh, and, uh, uh, Um, Nicely operating and such. There was one small, uh, modification that we were, we were hoping to make here is that for some reason on this facade, the front facade, this window that goes to the living room is of size X. And the one to the kitchen is four inches smaller in height. And we just thought as much work that has gone into this elevation, it seems that it'd be nice to, if they were, if they were, if they were, if they were, the kitchen area could have as much daylight as possible. So that was one of the, uh, requests that had, um, any, any questions on that matter? Not for me. Okay. Uh, and then on the, on the, um, at some point in time, probably in the late later sixties, there was an addition put on the backside of the house, uh, that didn't keep to, uh, architectural style of the windows. You can see it here. Uh, and our hope is to come up with a window style that matches the original, you know, in a way that makes this addition when we, our goal is that when we get through with the renovation, that you'd actually assume that this addition portion might have been part of the original home. Uh, and so you can see here, these modern sort of, uh, split windows and through here bypass would be exchanged for these double hunts. Mm hmm. And then as we move forward, you can see the back has some very large picture windows, which we've tried to break up in a module that was sympathetic to the lines of the house and, uh, uh, foreign character with the original architecture of the house. Same with the, the, uh, the hip roof up in through here, dormer, we would change it as well. Um, and then on, excuse me. Uh, and then you can see here on the side, again, the modern windows and then the, uh, traditional to look more like the original. And in the house, this is a passenger elevator in here. Uh, and instead of being, being these larger windows here, we thought it would be more appropriate to create something smaller to let daylight in, but allow for privacy, uh, without having to introduce curtains or window treatments. Okay. Yeah. And just to be clear, from members of the commission, this, this rear side actually doesn't face the public way. So, and it's not visible from any public way. So it's technically out of the, the jurisdiction, but, um, obviously appreciate Stephen sharing the full, full scope of the project. So then for clarity, the rear side is the north side. Is that correct? North elevation. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Okay. This is the street elevation in here. Yeah. Um, just a quick clarification on that. The street facing elevation is East. These are, um, mislabeled because of the orientation of our, our drawings being different than the Cardinal direction. So that's where I was headed. So thank you. Sorry about that. What you're seeing at the bottom of the page here labeled as East is the north elevation. Yeah. What you're seeing at the bottom of the page here labeled as East is the north elevation. Uh-huh. All right. Yeah. I was a little confused in the head, but I trusted you guys. So the North, the bottom elevation on this page labeled East is really the rear. Oh, hold on. No. Uh, no, I beg your pardon. The, uh, the, the, the South elevation is the East elevation. Is that correct? Yeah. Okay. Yeah. That's correct. That's correct. That's correct. That's correct. That's correct. That's correct. This is the elevation that faces the street. Yeah. Are we ready for questions? And then I want to talk to you about one more point. So what we had discovered, um, was this, this fireplace here, um, didn't have a flu coming out of it. And so we were wondering what it was for. And it turns out it's a completely ornamental. Uh, and there's been no attachments to it whatsoever. Uh, and so, uh, we're suggesting because of the way the kitchen wants to open up into the living room that we might get permission to take that away. This would be the look of it after the other, the fireplaces removed or the chimneys removed. Um, and so for your consideration, this is probably the most major, uh, change to the facade of the house. And it was, uh, it was, it was never. A functioning fireplace. Your, your view is, but I guess that it was put there to. Somehow balance, but it's not even symmetrical when it is there. Exactly. So we're a little questioning. Just why the hell. Yeah. So, uh, so yeah, we, we, uh, we've broken the fireplace open to find out that there is a flu to make it be less expensive to build. Um, but it never had anything attached into it. Golly, what an amazing, what was supporting it? Uh, it goes all, it goes all the way down to the basement. Oh, it does. Oh, I see. Yeah. Oh, well, I can see why you want to get rid of it. Uh, We appreciate that. Um, Yes. Yeah. In, uh, I, I, well, uh, we'll, we'll, we'll talk about that and so forth. But I, at least I understand what you're trying to do. And certainly from a common sense point of view, why? Um, I had a question just, uh, looking at the drawings, uh, the, is it, uh, are these, uh, woven corners of the, uh, not woven, are there, are there no cornerboards on the building or are they just not? They are woven, they are woven, woven shingled corner corners. And then there's also, uh, stucco corners. Yeah. So it's. So it's stucco below and shingles above. Is that? Yes. Yes. Okay. Thank you. And to that, to that point real real quick Bruce, we are proposing, um, replacement frames in order to the way that the stucco is, it was applied, it's applied over the existing frame. And to get the existing frames out, uh, would require that we take about six inches of stucco around every window. And, and it's a real, um, for lack of a better word, it's a real odd textured stucco. It's, it's got a lot of texture to it that there have been historic patches to it that are quite noticeable. And so we're trying to avoid, uh, any more noticeable patches, especially a ring around every window.  We did not consider that. Because it was, I can see, I can think of reasons why you, I mean, it's, it's a brutal piece of work. You might not be able to resurrect it, uh, satisfactory because the stucco might chip out. You don't know whether you can do it. Um, and you know, yeah, I, I, I think this is good to know that you're basically inserting, um, um, new, uh, frames for the windows, sorry, sashes for the windows units inside the existing. Window frames. Um, and that's true of the top as well, or just the, yeah, it wouldn't have to be, but, uh, and a desire to make every window appear the same. Uh, we are proposing replacement frames, but for I think the back, that maybe the back, um, the back windows are the only windows, right? But most of those will be replaced. Yeah. And from our point of view, uh, as a historic district commission, we would probably prefer that. Um, uh, I would think because it's, it's, it's less intrusion into the existing building. I'll let others on the commission, uh, ask questions related to that. I think I understand what you're doing fairly well, but I'm not sure that others necessarily would because this is a rather technical piece. And so let's help make sure that folks understand what we're talking about and, and, uh, they're able, they're unable to render a decision. Is everybody clear about what, uh, what we're talking about? Yeah. Yeah. Steven is. No, I'm not. Um, Steven, let me explain what I think you are. And then you can say it is. But, um, Karen, the, uh, of course, you can't see my, uh, my cursor that I'm wiggling around here, but the, the cursor is being white. It's untextured, no horizontal lines, just blank. All of that is stucco. That's the existing stucco. And above that, the horizontal lines are existing. The shingles. Uh, the lower window, the stucco, the original stucco goes right up against the original frame and is nicely locked. The stucco and the frame are presumably more or less nicely locked. Um, let's say, so what the applicant wants to do is to retain that. Um, that satisfactory, uh, existing situation. And so that means they're keeping the frame and the stucco in. They're not changing the stucco. They're not changing the frame. They're just working with the, uh, the windows sashes, you know, those things that move that hold the glass. Um, they just working with those. They're not changing those inside the existing frame. And that's what we're being asked to consider. Okay. Because we feel like the alternative. But what you said is exactly right, but we feel like the alternative would produce results that are. Counterproductive to the intent of trying to retain such an original character. Because we would either have to do something like was just suggested and trim out every window. In wood, which that trim doesn't exist right now. So, um, I don't know, I don't know. Or we'd have to attempt to match the stucco, which, um, I'm not convinced we can do. Well. Yeah. My point of view was the architectural representative of the committee. It seems to me, I'm speaking now to my commission colleagues. It seems to me that that is. The prudent. Course of action. So I would, I would counsel that we should support that approach. I apologize. I have to leave, but I'm sure you are in great hands with my colleagues. So. Safe travels. Thank you. I would just say if there's a. Did we, did we lose Greta? Greta. Let me bring her back in. If there's any, if there's not any more commission or comments, we can open it up for a public comment. Um, let me make sure. Does anyone else on the commission have questions or comments for the. Architect. I guess there's a question. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Stephen, when, when you've where you're patching the. Roof where that existing chimney was right there. Yes. Um, I imagine that you're therefore having to take off all the shingles. You're putting a new roof on. Is that correct? It's, it's time. Yeah. So we're, and that, that new roof is, is more or less matching what's there. Yes. Okay. Yeah. I think that's it for me. I think, uh, Ben. Oh, Jesus. I'm sorry. Anybody else. Um, can we open it for public comments now? Yeah, sure. So, um, any member of the public who's in attendance, you can click the raise hand button at the bottom of your screen to make a comment and. We will call on you. It looks like we have one with Mr. Ken Rosenthal. Um, Ken, you should be able to unmute. Yeah. Yes. Thank you very much. My name is Ken Rosenthal. I live at 53 Sunset Avenue, which is almost across the street. From this subject house. This house was purchased by professor. Amherst college physics professor Bruce Benson and his young. Right. Lucy Benson. About 70 years ago with a loan from Amherst college. So it's rather poetic that it's come back to Amherst college. Um, died some time ago and Lucy lived in it until she died last summer. So for 70 years, it's been occupied by essentially the same couple. And while Lucy has done a wonderful job, had done a wonderful job of maintaining it. It certainly needed upgrades as the college has discovered. And so I want to go on record of supporting what the college is proposing to do here. Um, and I'm going to go on record. Um, as well as Lucy did, but it's going to bring the character. Uh, May improve the character. It's going to improve the appearance. And, um, I can tell the commission that the work that the college has been doing so far. Which is mostly interior and then some landscaping. Has been very respectful of the Navy. Um, I think the, the plans that you're seeing, I think are very consistent with what the neighbors would like. At least this neighbor, speaking to myself would like. And so far the college is, uh, handling its renovations in a very respectful way. So I want to go on record, supporting what is being proposed to you today. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Any other members of the public who wish to make a comment. Looks like we're good. Thank you. Thank you. With that, I suppose I should move to close the public hearing. Is that the next appropriate step? Yep. Yes. Okay. So moved. Thank you. Thank you. So, uh, We have to vote on that, right? Yes. Do we have as any, um, any more discussion or, um, Comments. I just want to add that I think it definitely the, particularly the windows, but pretty much everything the college is doing is a, is an upgrade in appearance. And bringing it back into the style in which it, uh, it deserves. Great. Thank you. My only concern is that the first house that we lived in here up and tell them was about. Um, Was it the cottage ish house. And the store, the, um, The storm windows. Replaceable. Really. They, they wouldn't have matched. If it were an old house, it wouldn't have matched. These looks are similar to me. Uh, what I'm looking at here. I'm just. I'm just, I'm just trying to get odds with the historicity. Of the house. I'm not sure if any of the architects would have a better sense of. Of that, then. Then I'm such an LA person in terms of how, how these details play out. So, uh, Bruce or Jim. Any thought about the windows. Well, uh, point of order on this one, I think, uh, Peggy is that I moved to close the public hearing. I think that's successful and we vote to do so. Then we have discussion amongst the. The commissions. So we, we shouldn't, but if we need to, uh, ask more questions of the architect, we could, but, but typically we've, uh, You know, the architect would stay. And if we simply have questions to ask, I'm sure we can do it after the public hearing has been. Uh, closed. Okay. I just didn't want to have the, the motion to close the public hearing sitting on the table while we did the, did the next thing that we do after we closed the public hearing. Uh-huh. I'm sorry. Uh-huh. My apology. Um, so we have closed, we have closed the public hearing. Um, so we didn't, no, we didn't vote. He just got a call to vote. So. Right. Yeah. So I'm, um, are we ready to follow up on this? Yep. Bruce Holden. I approve. Jim Lumley. I approve. Peggy Schwartz. Rue. Rita Wilcox. I approve. Uh, Karen winter. I approve. And I'm Judy Strayer and I also approve. All right. Now, if anyone, um, wants to. Respond to Peggy's comment. I think we can have that discussion. Well, if it's approved as submitted, that, you know, then I, I certainly, uh, respect, respect that it's come to a vote and. And it's not, it's, it's not a huge point of, uh, of contention. If it's not a point of contention at all, it was more. I think this is, uh, This is the kind of thing that for a building of this, uh, This type and so forth. Uh, that we like to see, uh, the idea that the building is being. Preserved in a way that's consistent and considerate of, of its existing condition. Uh, that is that the, um, the addition that was done subsequently is, I think arguably being made more consistent with the original, uh, building than the original extension addition was made to the original building. So I think it's, uh, it's, it's, it's not just appropriate in that regard, but it's more than appropriate. It's, uh, it's, it's better. It's a better, uh, piece of work. So, um, and, uh, and, and what's being done outside is, is, um, seems to be fairly minor compared to what's being done inside, which of course it's not our purview. So we, uh, it's, I would, uh, think this is, um, uh, thoroughly deserving of, uh, of our support, uh, of, uh, granting a certificate of appropriateness. Um, If, um, if others agree or disagree or, um, you know, I think Bruce could, uh, I could frame emotion. I think it's also, uh, thank, can, uh, thank Ken Rosenwald for, for putting, for adding, uh, some additional information of this, um, and, and, and voicing his support. It's nice to know that the neighbors are not just tolerating what's happening, but, uh, outright, uh, uh, endorsing and, and, and advocates for it. It's always lovely when that happens. Um, not always, but mostly. Uh, so, uh, I, uh, move that, uh, we grant a certificate of appropriateness to the project, to private residents of 46 Sunset Avenue. Uh, in the, uh, Sunset, uh, um, Lincoln, this historical district finding that it's consistent with the, uh, the, the, uh, objectives voiced in section, in section 8.1 and 3, uh, I believe, uh, and that it's consistent with the, uh, with the, with the buildings in the, in the district. Um, the, uh, condition only being that it is, uh, that the, the work is based on the, and the plan submitted by Baker design group for dated, uh, May 17th, 2022. I think that's the motion. Uh-huh. Second. Second it. All right. So if there's any, unless there's any other discussion, you can call the meeting or call the. Motion to vote. Oh, I thought we did vote already. No, that was just. Earlier. Oh, I'm sorry to quote. Okay. Um, yeah. So let's go on the motion, uh, Bruce Calder. Uh, approve. Jim Lumley. Prove. Peggy Schwartz. Prove. Rita Wilcox. I approve. Car in winter. I approve. I'm Judy Strayer. I also approve. So. The certificate is unanimous. Unanimously. Yeah. All right. We'll just have a quick question. If you know who the original architect was. That is a good question. I have the macros. Listing up here. Um, but it does not list an architect. I don't believe. Okay. Thank you. There were no original drawings. You had to go and do major drawings. Yeah. So all right. So for, um, Steven and for Rachel. Um, and pass the message onto Seth that obviously we'll get the certificate of appropriateness signed and stamped and then your hands. And then. Um, I assume some of this will need a building permit if you haven't already applied for that. So we'll, uh, We'll link up the local historic district certificate with the building permit and then that'll be your ticket to move forward. Fantastic. Thank you, everyone. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you. Very nice. Thank you. Thank you all. Thank you. How do I leave? You cannot step in. You're here forever. Because you're sharing your screen a few maybe end share. Then I have no idea why my, um, Computer cut out and then it came right back on. I wasn't out of batteries or anything. Oh good. Yeah. All of a sudden they realized you weren't in the meeting. Yeah. All of a sudden my screen went blank. I, um, looked at the batteries and then it came back on. I'm on my phone now, but anyway, it was nothing that I knew about. Okay. Do we have on the business. I had one more agenda item was just to just because we went had that executive session meeting last month. So I was just going to make a few comments about the Amherst media lawsuit just for the benefit of the public. Okay. And then we can, we can say that we agree that you've accurately deliver them or something like that. So it's. Yeah. Our comment, not your comment, I guess. Oh yeah, exactly. Yeah. So. Essentially the. Amherst media. Had. File litigation against the. Local historic district commission. Claiming that the certificate of appropriateness granted was. Not done correctly. For various reasons. The lawsuit had been. Pending in court. For. I want to say almost a year. About a year. The. Amherst media then. Agreed to. Drop the lawsuit. Dismiss the lawsuit, essentially. And in talking with our town's attorney, we confirmed. That the, a few things. First of all, that the. Claw had not been tolling on the permit. The entire duration of the lawsuit. And also because the state of emergency was still in effect. Between the time the certificate was approved and the lawsuit was. First filed that the. Permit has not told at all since the certificate was granted. So Amherst media at this point has. A lot of. Construction on their project. And they are eligible to apply for an extension beyond that, beyond that year. If, if, if they have not commenced construction at that point. So that's kind of the point number. One of the main points and things we discussed at the executive session was just confirming how the clock. And that's what we discussed at the executive session. I think that was the case has been dismissed Amherst. Or Amherst media is not able to sue or file litigation. About the same certificate again. Because they, you know, they've dismissed the lawsuit on that ground, on those grounds. So. That's what was discussed at the executive session. I think hopefully that was an accurate. Description. If anyone else has anything. Else to add. This time. Good. And. All right. Well, that's the case. The only other agenda item was just. A general public comment period. In the newspaper article about the, about our meeting. It wasn't the Hampshire. Cause I can't remember the name. Yeah. So it was the, there was. Yeah. Reminder. Yeah. Reminder that was just a mistake on their part or Amherst media is a part. Yeah. So I, I came across that as well. There's an article in the reminder, which is kind of a local independent newspaper. And it had some quotes from Amherst media's representatives and. And also just some statements of fact that did not seem accurate based on my. You know, just. Yeah. Exactly what we've heard from our lawyers. So. Yeah, it's too bad that information got out there. I'm not sure where it came from. I'm not, not a very glowing. Not a very glowing review of the. Work of the commission at all. So. I was saddened to read that. Does this reminder have. Corrections column. Like. If they've said something that's inaccurate, they should be. You know, They should be able to hold over the calls and who's going to do that. Ben, can, can, can you. Write the editor a note. Asking that they correct the mistaken information. Yeah, I'll look at it closely again, because some of it's. Some of it's, you know, quoted from someone or from the Amherst media folks. I don't know if, if they're just reporting a quote, that's one thing, but other. Facts that they were reporting seemed. Like they were just. Incorrect. So yeah, I'll look closely at it again and then. Just make sure that they are aware of. Some of the mistakes. Ben, I also have an unrelated question. I was wondering about the house on McClellan, the yellow house that put the. Built an extension and back. And I wondered if we had most of the. Windows look great, but one of them I wondered if we had approved. And that's because I actually talked with Jennifer. That was her question. Okay. So I can look at it again. Or the windows been installed already. I think some of them have. Yeah. Okay. Okay. So I heard that somehow the price of the windows had gone up. So terribly that the owner of the house actually went. Driving around to get used windows to put in. Oh, so that's a good, that's a good answer. Karen. Yeah. I would love it if they had used. Could have find some use windows. Yeah, they did. They had to apparently the, all of a sudden, I think that's true with building supplies. Right. And we're okay with them. I mean, is it, is it the minimum exchange? Do you think. Or do we just let people. Freelance. That's a good question. Jennifer asked me to check. I haven't actually walked by that house yet. I drive and walk by it every so often. Just because it's a pretty substantial project and it's been, it's been maybe two weeks since I've gone by. And so I haven't noticed windows yet, but. I'll, I'll take a look and then compare it to the drawings that were submitted, which I'll be, well, actually it's not the drawings that were submitted. Because if you remember those were just. Right. But he did, they did submit a schedule. Of windows to us as a, after the, as a condition of the permit. So I'll compare. The windows. Yeah, I do like that they could use recycled windows. That's a nice concept. But maybe it's a temporary solution for them too. I don't know. Right. But generally speaking, I think even if, even if we would say this is actually less than the minimus, there's actually an improvement or something like that. However we would judge it. I think we should. If it is a change, I think we should challenge them on it just so that.   Made this window and I changed it and that we wouldn't want folks I think that's a better solution. We should tell them so. And perhaps, you know, tell them that they really should come and talk to us about such things. Rita, how much does, does it look, do you know if it looks a lot different than what was proposed? Judy, I actually, this was a letter asking me and I haven't been by the house. Oh, okay. I'll take a walk by it. I actually agree. I mean, I, you know, I, I, I get that window prices have gone up, but also when they, when they first talked about it, my question is they, like, why wouldn't they have ordered their windows right then? So why all of a sudden did the windows go up so much that they had to completely just toss that idea out. And so I agree with Bruce that we shouldn't just say, okay, sure. And I think it's just one of the windows. Yeah. And I think it's just conformed to what. Conform. Okay. Yeah. So I would. I guess it would matter. I guess it would depend on what it, you know, is it within. Reasonable. Yes. Of what was proposed or not, I would think. And your letter. Greta came from Jennifer, right? It wasn't. So it came from somebody who knows what we're talking about. It was Jennifer. I sent Jennifer. I sent her a letter. My idea about this. About the wiring and ask her an opinion. And she had some great ideas, which was to get the university when they build the apartments. The university village. And that village. Lincoln Avenue. To do underground wiring and make commitment to underground wiring. But she also mentioned that house and asked me if I remembered what I was talking about. I don't know what I was talking about. I don't know what I was talking about. I don't know what I was talking about. And I actually walked, it was just this morning. Okay. I think Karen's got a handle. I know that this couple is doing everything that they can to make it environmentally. You know, sustainable. They're all, that's the field that they're from. I know that they're stretched financially. And they have a deadline. So. My feeling is they're probably. They're not going to have a lot of time to get them done. And yes, I do think we can challenge them on it, but I think we do have to. This, this is one example of where the commission has to. Not seem like we're putting. Roadblocks in front of people that are, are doing something we have to be careful because I think that particularly. not so easy going. I mean, he could be, he could be kind of explosive in his anger if he felt that we were putting up a lot of obstacles. So I think we have to be careful. And I do think they're not worried about that. People who are explosive have to learn not to be explosive in the wrong places, which is almost everywhere.  Exactly. You know, instead of just going ahead and doing it. Yeah, you know, that's to me, that's what bothers me about it, I guess. And if he's a if he's a troublesome guy with anger management problems, I think is all the more reason that we, we hold him to account. Well, maybe we should start off by looking and seeing if we did approve the window or how different it is. Right. I do think we should hold them to account, but I think we have to do it in a very diplomatic way. I think how we do it is going to be important. I think yes, he does. They're very concerned about fitting into the community and making it aesthetically pleasing. So I think they, they're more likely to respond positively if we just kind of listen to what's happening. If we really do see that it's very different from what we approved, then listen to their side of it and Yeah. How we do it is what I'm saying. Okay. Jennifer sent me a picture of it, but I don't know how to show you the picture. I would really love to be able to go to calls. I need to deal with if I could just about still got time to get down there before they shut. If we're done. We just have one hand up for public comment. If you need to run you can but I'm just going to hold that here. I will be very quick, but there's one issue which I would like very much you consider for the preservation plan update and it may be in the old one but I like it Bruce I never saw a copy of the original preservation way. And that is. And this is related to the town hall building behind you when that was preserved I believe around 1993. There was a lot of public discussion because public money was used to the restoration and the updating of town hall and the issue, which was approved and implemented was even the windows and all the interior woodwork was prevert preserved or replaced with what was there. And I bring this up for two reasons now that the building that I guess it was the historic commission approved to be moved over to Baker Street is being to the north, a building that was an older classroom building I presume was historical I don't know where they got a preservation permit for that one or do I do whatever for that. That building when I drove by a couple weeks ago was totally got it except for the brick exterior. So what I'm asking you to consider for the new preservation plan is that historical interiors like the town hall. Be preserved in public buildings you can't make a private person do something they don't want to do, but certainly in public buildings, we should have control over, particularly woodwork that cannot be replaced number one because the materials that it was made with are no longer available, like Philippine walnut and imported mahogany and the type of craftsmanship that in particular went into the woodwork inside of Jones library. And that is a public building and public money is going to be used and that what whatever goes in that material should match or be compatible with what's what there and what brings this up as I went to the Holyoke library a few weeks ago with some of other people interested in the same issue. The stairway that connects the 19 to chest not woodwork that was saved the stairway looks like a rusty fire escape, and then I looked at the pictures of what they're proposing for the addition of Jones library, and it looks like the same material that's going to turn into what a rusty fire escape. So I just hope that there's some way that this can be considered in the new present preservation plan that interiors of public buildings can also be historical and worthy of preservation. That's my my diatribe for today. Yeah, I, that's interesting. The public probably recognizes that we might not be the primary instrument for advocating that although we, we, we, we couldn't show be one of them. But I don't think we have any public buildings in our historic district. Do we doesn't mean it. No, you're right this but but I'm just, I'm just trying to see where we where our points of leverage are here. It doesn't mean that wouldn't change over time as the historic districts, you know, expanded or what have you. We couldn't have an opinion on that, because I know that we're supposedly not suppose we are mandated to be interested in the exterior is not the interiors, but he'll this point is that this is a maybe we could be interested in the interiors of public buildings that would be difficult because they would mean that suddenly on our build if we had one bill one public building in our, in our district. The commission would suddenly be interested in interiors for that building if if the, if, if, if the mandate of the historic district commission change, which is not to say that the preservation plan would necessarily change that. I'm just trying to get my hand around this because when when I was listening to who the first I thought, you know, this commission might want to advocate for the expansion of its jurisdiction to the interiors, the public buildings. So assuming that we ever had any in our district, but that would be difficult for us, because we would be occasionally maybe once every 10 years or more, having to look at interiors where we really had no experience so it might be. It might be very difficult for us to do this. And I know that you weren't advocating that that become part of our mandate you're advocating that it be considered the preservation plan. But I extended your observation to whether or not, because we were talking earlier with Shannon about how the, what how what we do might evolve or change. And that was one. Exactly why I brought it up. Exactly, because I saw what happened in Holy Oak. And when you walk in the door of the new building and you're looking up at the old one you expect to see something like when you walk in the front door of the Boston Museum of Fine Arts for example and see a Renoir at the top. Well, here you see the room were at the top but you got this rusty staircase leading through it. But I'm also worried about losing all of that woodwork that the original design was to make this into a manor house. And that whole ethos is going to be gone if we don't crack. And but we did crack down on the town hall and we made them do it. And it worked. And that's the interior of a public building. I mean you can't tell what's old oak in there from new oak. Because it was all made to look like it was always there. I don't know were you around them, Bruce? Oh yes, I remember.   So yeah, I remember the town hall. Yeah, and it was Vince O'Gon, actually, who won that battle. Vince did win a few battles. He won that one. Yeah, a small proportion of what he started. But that was because he had his finger in a huge number of them. So a small proportion is still a significant number. But I mean the windows, the windows look like the original windows. And that would have, all you have to do is go look at the courthouse in Northampton and see the difference in the demonstration with the big glass.  The old stone core house. But I just want to bring it up as an issue because a lot of us are trying real hard to preserve some, at least some, if not all of the woodwork inside of Jones Library because it's irreplaceable. Because of the word and the craftsmanship is, if anybody has that craftsmanship, it's going to be very expensive to replicate it over and once it's gone, it's gone. And I got people lining up at the dump for when it gets there so they can take it. I'm not joking. I hope they're the right people that I hope it doesn't get to the dump. You can just salvage it right there and in place with a contractor. But as I say, it's nice to, it's nice to preserve that stuff and reuse it strategically, or even keep it for future bashing. Well, thank you for listening to my diet rather than my round, the daily round. If you're thinking that way, I think it's a nice. It's wonderful for the town. Yeah. Thank you. Well, I spent at least the last 62 years thinking that way. And I inherited that when I got married. I grew up with some of it. Okay. Thank you, Hilda. You will make sure that that gets to Shannon right that that suggestion of help us. Yeah, I just made a note and then into the into the thinking for the new preservation plan. Exactly. Yep. Fried saving the woodwork for the North Amherst library to recycle it. And they said no, I lost that one. Gonna be cherry. It's not going to be just not, I don't mean just no. Um, I think we just need to set our next meeting date. I don't have any pending applications right now so we can. Okay, that's maybe do something for early July, maybe. I think the fourth is a holiday. Is that on a Monday or no we celebrate.  You don't want to do it then. It wouldn't be many applicants. That would be cool. Be very quick. Yeah. Okay, but we could say maybe July 11th. Yeah, I'm good. I'm good for the 11th. I think I might be away but I don't have, I don't have that calendar here. But my guess is that at any time someone will be away over the summer so right. I can send you a note when I check it. Okay. Okay. Judy, does that work for you? That works for me. Yeah. Okay. And I also just realized I'm saddened to say it, but I'm sorry, I didn't realize it sooner, but I think this gym that is this is your last meeting with the commission. I think it has to be unfortunately. Oh, right. Because he's replaced usually. Well, no, we've we've lost folks before they got replaced. But it does mean that in order to have a quorum, if Jim's no longer on four out of five of us have to be available. It's going to make it more difficult. And what do you want to say that it's really been great working with everybody and I'm sad to see that, you know, I'm not going to be able to join you anymore. But at the same time, I know you're going to continue on with a good work. Then do they have a replacement? Yeah.  And we, we have a few names of people who are interested and then I think of those few people, only two submitted activity forms. So then we're kind of waiting until there's. Two potential realtors and then hopefully we're just also want to. We have another vacancy to fill from Jennifer C as well. So we were waiting a bit to, to hold the interviews. Just ask a question. Does it have to be a realtor or a licensed real estate person by the state. Does not have to be licensed. I mean you have to be a licensed real. It's all licensed. It's just realtor is a professional association, but it doesn't include all the practicing agents. Okay. Now we just wondering if that would broaden your search a little bit, because I know there are a number of agents working in the local area that are not realtors. It's not going to be recommended by Pioneer Valley. Like I said, I'm looking at the bylaw right now it says one member from the board of realtors cover covering Amherst so. Okay, what one member from a nominee from the board of realtor right. I don't really know what that means in terms of licensing, but I think well, Jim what does it mean. Amherst by law the state law. That's the town's bylaw yeah I will I will just interpret it to me and like I reach out to the whatever the local chapter of, you know some realtor group but so I assume that was the Pioneer Valley Realtor Association. It's going to cover the majority of agents but not necessarily all. Okay. Yeah. But once again, if we, if we don't follow the letter of the bylaw and somebody at some point wants to challenge a decision we've made. They're very good at finding ways in which arguably one of us might be an illegitimate post and and and you and I are the ones that have obviously more vulnerable to that kind of challenge. I can understand the council's position because I was in live and tell them and it really should be of course an Amherst person preferably somebody that lives in the district. Apparently doesn't have to be. Yeah, I mean there's supposed to be at least one person from each district so we meet that threshold at least. I ask everybody what I guess, as somebody who doesn't live in one of the districts. I don't. Yeah I know you don't but you're here because of you're the architect representative. Oh, that's true. You know that. I just guess I, to me it smacks of almost elitism to think that other people in town don't have the same.  I don't I just I guess I just thought I this is the first time I felt on this committee that not being from the district mattered. And, but I think Ben you said we need one person from each district that's what the bylaw requires right. Yeah, yeah. So, so that's that's so it doesn't, it doesn't matter beyond that I don't know it doesn't matter but but it does does somebody who's not in the district. Do you take their views as seriously. Yes, my question. Yes, I'm sure we do. Absolutely. So otherwise my views are not being taken seriously as seriously and neither. No, I think there's an argument for having people. I've perhaps felt that it's there's an argument for having people who are in the district, simply because they're more readily able to go and look at and report on, on what's going on. But yes, that that means that means one or two which is, at least in the past we've had. We've had up maybe five, I suppose, but certainly no more than that and now we've got three and three out of six, which is a healthy spread. I don't think that you should feel in any way diminished by living outside the district. Because as you said, you've got, you're the, you're the, the, the spirit for expanding the district, you know, you've got a role in beyond just being a member of the commission, put an interest in other parts of the town which may want to be included at some point so I think that's, I don't have a, I don't, I don't think it matters. I think it's a plus, as you said, other views. Thank you. Well, Jim, thank you very much. I've really enjoyed the friendship that we've developed in the six years that we've. And Jim and I occasionally before COVID would sit and have coffee before the meetings, you know, when we actually used to meet in town hall, and I would bring my sketchbook or he would bring because we both draw things. So I missed that over the past couple of years. But it was very enjoyable to be serving on this committee with you. Thank you, Bruce. Will said. And, and we look forward, Jim to continue to work with you and the study group. So we'll keep that going so we can still be a part. We can keep you a part of our group. And hopefully we'll see you Thursday. Yes, great. All right. With that, perhaps move to adjourn. And until the 11th. Oh, there is one other thing that's probably should be said on that. Because by, if the town votes, as we expected, well, the council that Karen and I will be appointed to the planning board without our terms will start in July. If we were imagining that we would get off this commission as we get on to the planning board. That would leave this commission unable to function. So I think I will at least commit to staying on this commission as long as I am necessary to create a quorum. Thank you. That crossed my mind as well too with even Karen joining the planning board. So yeah, I think we'll double down on recruiting members for the vacancies so we can get those spots filled. Yeah, please. With that I move to adjourn. Second. I'll vote by clicking the red button. All right, thanks everyone. Thank you. Thank you. Bye everybody. Bye bye. Bye.