ally in the site plan review criteria and it says it's 11.2414. It says provision of adequate landscaping including the screening of adjacent residential uses provision of street trees, blah, blah, blah. When a non residential use adjoins a residential district. An uninteracted, I actually think I'm getting it wrong. An uninterrupted vegetative buffer shelf the extent be established and maintained between buildings associated with the uses. I'm wondering if that's, I think I read that is saying that all residential building should be screened but I think the non residential adjoins a residential district. So this is considered on the property with the non residential use right. It wouldn't be on the residential use property. Is that right. Well, mixed use building is considered a residential use. Okay. residential use. I think this puts the onus on a non residential use when I'm reading it residential district, then the non residential use has to provide a buffer against the residential use. Okay, I think I see that too. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Okay 11.2416 adjacent properties will be protected by minimizing the intrusion of various nuisances. I'm sorry, I'm back on the other page. Nope. Let's see 11.2434. Not applicable. There's no new driveway proposed for this project. The existing access easement on the adjacent property to the north will remain open. 11.2435 is not applicable. Joint access driveways between adjoining properties is not an issue since the adjacent property has an existing access easement which will remain open. 11.2436 the requirement for submittal of a traffic impact statement is requested to be waived. And there is no traffic expected to enter the site. 11.2437 is not applicable because no traffic impact report will be required. Now the developer did present a traffic impact report. During the first go round, when he was expecting traffic to enter the site. So if you wanted to look back to that you could do so but that would probably be in your packets from. Oh, I'm going to say May 5. But in this case I don't think that's applicable because there will be any traffic entering the site. So what do we think. Yeah. Seems like on target there. Most part. Okay, so we had a problem with 11.2403. And I was going to combine what Johannes said with what Doug said and create some language to that effect. All right, so that is the findings for the site plan review for 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street. Now, Jack could read the findings for 15 East Pleasant Street which is the construction project. Okay, construction site. Access and storage. And do you have that in your packet Jack. I do I have it right here. It's like a half page. Correct. All right. Jack. Yes. Sorry to cut you off, but the, did we get the, the sidewalk with I know I heard Maria mention it, but I'm not sure whether that was captured. Where's the feet feet. Where's, where's it 16 feet. No, from six from six to eight. Yes, we did. Okay, thanks. Sorry. All right. So Pam help me out if there's any hands up here. But this should be short. So, again, these are draft findings for archipelago thing East. The board found an article five accessory uses section 5.0 general of the zoning bylaw as follows, the site plan review application was filed in a section 5.0 of the zoning bylaw as an accessory used to the construction of a mixed use building on the adjacent lot on 7 and 13 East Pleasant Street. The successor use is found to be customary and incidental to the permitted principle use of a mixed use building and that it will provide a place for access to the site temporary storage and lay down of construction equipment and materials and a location for a construction trailer and limited parking for contractors during the course of construction of the principal use. This accessory use is found to be located on a lot adjacent to that of the principal use in the same ownership. This accessory use is found to be not detrimental to the neighborhood or the property in the vicinity. The principal use that of mixed use building is allowed by site plan review under article three use regulations section 3.325 mixed use buildings of the zoning bylaw. Therefore, the accessory use may be reviewed under a site plan review application. So there's that. And then there's a special permits one special permit findings and I am not finding it in my packet. I am to bring it up. Because which one are we looking for, just for the special permits, we're looking for the special permit findings. Okay, here they are. Shall I go ahead and read them Jack. Yeah, I have it up as well but if you want to go. That's, that's fine. Half of them and we could read half of them. So for special permit number 2021 dash o2, which is a request of us for a special permit to modify dimensional requirements for height side and rear setback under footnote a of table three section six of the zoning bylaw. We found under article six table three footnote a as follows for height that the new building is proposed to be 57 feet in height that article six table three dimensional regulations limits the height of buildings in the general business district to 55 feet. Today authorizes the special permit of granting authority to grant a special permit to modify the height requirement, if it applies for the, if it applies the criteria established in section 10.395 of the zoning bylaw, and considers the proposed modified dimensional requirement in the context of the patterns of the same dimensions established by existing buildings and landscape features in the surrounding neighborhood, which have a functional or visual relationship to the proposed building that the nearby buildings at 57 East Pleasant Street which is Kendrick place, which is 56 feet 10 inches in height, and at one East Pleasant Street, which is a 60 feet in height. It has a 55 foot height limitation in the dimensional regulations that the designer of your board has reviewed the proposed building and has applied its standards and conditions in article three sections 3.2040 and 3.2041 of the zoning bylaw, one through nine to evaluate the design of the proposed architecture and landscape alterations, and that the DRB has recommended approval of the proposed building. I just, I never understand this and I've heard people say this over and over again. So, the chair the design review board said this thing will this building sticks out like a sore thumb and so here's my question. Why are we only looking at the height to the tallest buildings in the area because there's a lot of one story buildings and two story buildings. And so, when I look at 10.395. It talks about not creating disharmony with respect to the terrain and to the use scale and architecture existing buildings in the vicinity, which have a functional or visual relationship to there too and so we have the Greenfield Greenfield building, we have the Jones buildings, we have everything across the street. And so, you know, you may think that's harmonious but I think we should also list their heights to and not pretend they don't exist. And then there's the but I think of the Petrucci's building but it's going to be a Mexican restaurant so there's a lot of very low buildings nearby the toy shop buildings over there a little bit high because they're high in the street. So, I would, I would love to just put in the surrounding buildings not just the tallest ones we can find. And I don't know people will object to that but I just think let's just be, you know, factually accurate about what's around us. So that's that would be my add to that. Yeah, people have mentioned to this me over and over again we're sort of cherry picking, you know, downtown and ignoring the whole, the whole gislaus or something. May I say something. Sure. So the, the zoning bylaw allows the height to be 55 feet in this area. And that does not necessarily comport with one and two story buildings that are around it. The intention is that this area be developed with taller buildings. So, to compare what's being proposed to a one or two story building is, you know, not really looking towards the future so that's, that's just all I have to say about that but I will certainly list the heights of some of the smaller surrounding buildings. I don't know if that's what the board like would like me to do. Well, it seems like we can get into Mootra like there's, there's parking lots, which, you know, and which it's not, you know, I'm not sure it's adding value. No parking lot is creating harmony. To be honest, what's there, you know, and if you feel like that's harmonious then stand behind it but not to, I think we should say those buildings are there. Okay. And that would be added to paragraph four. All right. I think that the proposed height of 57 feet does not create this harmony with respect to the terrain and to the use scale and architecture of existing buildings in the vicinity, which have functional or visual relationship. Okay. Okay. You want me to go further than that shall I read side setback also. I'll give you a little break I'll do that. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, side setback north side that the new building setback from the northern poppy line is proposed to be five feet. That article six, table three dimensional regulations requires a site setback of 10 feet of a side setback is provided that article six sections 6.132 states that in general business. It will all be at least 20 feet when adjoining a residence district, otherwise sideyards are not required, but if provided shall be at least 10 feet that the site setback on the north side is not adjoin a residence district and therefore is required to be either zero or 10 feet. Today authorizes special permitting grant authority to grant a special permit to modify the site setback requirement in the bg district if it applies the criteria established in section 10.395 of the zoning bylaw, and considers the proposed modified design review board has reviewed the proposed building and has applied its standards and conditions in article three sessions 3.2040 and 3.2041 and the zoning bylaw one through nine to evaluate the design at the proposed architecture and landscape alterations, and that the design root board has recommended approval of the proposed building. The site setbacks in the bg district vary some examples of site setbacks in the vicinity the pose buildings are 3337 East Pleasant Street the spoke has a size side south side. This is a tongue twister. Okay, south side setback appears to overlap property line 15 East Pleasant Street the pub. 15 East Pleasant Street the pub former north side setback appears to be four feet 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street the mercantile building former has a north side sits back appears to be six pairs to be zero feet. North Pleasant Street, which is a Unitarian Universalist Church south side setback original building appears to be seven feet new section appears to have zero setback north and south sides. 103 North Pleasant Street, which is where painted East is and men bards and other things. Peter pocket my favorite south side setback appears to be three feet. Those setback of five feet does not create disharmony with respect to the train and to the use scale and architecture of existing buildings in the vicinity, which have function or visual relationships there to the request to modify the rear setback under footnote a has been replaced by the following requests. Shall I. Shall I read now. Okay. Okay, special permit 2021 dash oh three request a special permit for a non conforming building to be structurally altered in large to reconstructed under section 9.22 of the zoning bylaw for a mixed use building proposed under section 3.3 25 of the zoning bylaw. The board found under article nine non conforming lots uses and structures section 9.22 as follows that the existing building at 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street formerly the mercantile cousins market and airwaves is closer to the rear property line with the cemetery than allowed by the zoning bylaw that the existing building at 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street about the rear property line and its closest point at one foot and seven feet closer than the allowed 20 feet at section 6.141 of the zoning bylaw states that the general business district where the property is located the minimum rear yard should be at least 20 feet when joining a residence district. The property at 11 and 13 East Pleasant. But the general residence district RG at its eastern end and that the property that it abuts is the west cemetery that the existing building at 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street is one story tall that the proposed building will be five stories tall. That the proposed building is proposed to be set back from the rear property line by 10 feet. Can you can Pam scroll this up a bit. Thank you that historical commission in its memo dated June 24 2021 expressed a strong preference for a minimum of a 10 foot setback and could support a 20 foot setback that the historical commission recommended other work to ameliorate the impact of the new building on the west cemetery, including relocation of the fence and nutrient planting. But the alteration enlargement or reconstruction of the existing building and 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street, formerly the mercantile cousins market and airwaves to create the proposed mixed use building is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood than the existing non conforming building. Thank you, Chris. Thank you for your findings. Now we have conditions. Okay, we have two sets of conditions for the new building. And the other one is for the site that's going to be the construction. Yes. Do you want to read some of the new building conditions. I have, I have a fifth file. And it says just possible draft conditions that you sent. But it doesn't say, you know, location. I'm wondering if it's. That's the one for 11 and 13 East Pleasant but I think it's actually been superseded by a new list. Yeah, so that's 723. So that's old. That's old. No, that's actually new. That's fine. Okay. Yeah, that's a good one. Wait a minute. This is a new one that was just reviewed by Nate Maloy at about 430 this afternoon and he added a few things about affordable housing because Nate is our housing expert. So this is exactly the right list to read from. Thank you. So I'm not sure I have the right version then. Well, but Jack, I'm sharing my screen. Can you see it? This is okay. Let me exit. I'll put up a little bit. So we have a document. This is a new document. I'm sorry confused. Yeah. I don't think this has been emailed yet right Chris. You're on mute. I came in very late in the day. I asked Nate to take a look at the specific find as conditions related to affordable housing and he's done that otherwise everything is exactly the same as what you have in your packet so we can go through Nate's changes when we get to them because he's done them in track changes. Okay. Andrew, you're good. I think the track change. Yeah, I just wanted to see what had actually changed. Okay. All right, so these are the draft proposed conditions for 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street. Number one development shall be built substantially in accordance with the plan submitted to planning board improved on. And number two development shall be managed substantially in accordance with the management plan submitted to the planning board improved on a change of ownership that the property is no longer managed by archipelago investments. And we'll see the new owner and or manager shall submit a new management plan to the planning board at a public meeting for its review and approval. The purpose of the meeting shall be for the board to determine whether conditions of the permit are being complied with and whether any modification to the site plan review approval, or management plan is required. I'm just wondering if you have your hand up. I'm, I'm, I'm not, do we have a specific management plan other than the application report like the original application. You received a management plan. The application probably back. When would that have been. It would have been in before the June 30. Okay. Before the June second meeting, that's right. That might have received another one before the June 30. So it looks like we want to renumber these because I'm jumping from three to five here, but. Oh, yeah. So no problem changes to the project and or substantial changes to any approved site plan, or to the exterior of the building shall be submitted to the planning board for his review and approval prior to the work taking place. The purpose of this middle shall be for the planning board to approve the change and to determine whether the changes are de minimis or significant enough to require modification of the special permit or site plan review approval. I would like to, I would like to point out that Kyle has. Okay, Kyle. Just a quick question on. Yeah, as it's listed five. The, the determination Chris you can correct me if I'm wrong of de minimis or non de minimis proceeds that through the building commissioner. He brings things to the planning board when he thinks that they need to be looked at by the planning board if they're really insubstantial then he can make changes. Then he can approve changes but he often brings what are considered to be relatively minor and could be construed to be de minimis by the planning board but he gives the planning board the chance to make that determination. I would only seek to define the first word in number five as changes because that could be a change in nail versus a change the color of the building. So, is there a way to define changes so that it's not a change. Changes the project then I guess. Add the word substantial. Yeah. Is Rob Morris still here. Yep. Yeah, so I don't see any issue with that proposed change. The bylaw does allow for the bylaw calls it a minor change as an administrative approval to a previously issued site plan and that's usually what I'm looking at first. This condition would be reviewed for the board to decide whether or not the change was large enough to require modification of the permit or something they could just review and approve or reject in a public meeting setting. Andrew. Dumb question. I probably missed this earlier, but this is all in regards to like the 90 unit plan right not the original. Yes, the odd units. Okay. Thank you. All right, so number six landscaping shall be installed in the court. Sorry, just one more question. Our management and for this is for number three. Our management entity is Amherst innovative living. So maybe it says archipelago investments LLC or affiliates. So you, the board received the management plan on for the June 30th meeting. When you change to your 90 unit building. So they do have the management plan. And if they still have their packets from June 30th, it's in there, but it's pretty much boilerplate. I'm just, it's, it's insignificant Chris, I probably don't need to bring it up. It's just a, it's, it's our management entity. Can you stay with it again? Amherst innovative living LLC. Would the board like me to put that name in this condition. Sounds appropriate. There's a paper trail. Okay, I will do that. Okay. Number six landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the landscape plan prior to the issuance of the certificates of occupancy and once installed shall be continually maintained. All disturbed areas shall be loomed and seated unless otherwise specified. I think continually maintained kind of sounds like someone's going to be out there as needed maybe maintained as needed. I'm fine with it. Yeah, okay. All right, no mind. As amended zoning by law amendment as amended with the publication date of 76 2021 and 714 2021 and referred by the town council on 728 21 regarding mixed use buildings is adopted, unless the bylaw provisions do not apply in accordance with jail. Section six. The applicant shall submit to the planning board of site plan review amendment application along with updated plans and document for review and approval of any changes necessary to satisfy the requirements of the new bylaw provisions prior to the issuance of of any building permit so the strike the the there so that's, this is an interesting one. Doug. Yeah, I assume that we will Chris could explain what this means and maybe I'm thinking of that news she gave us at the last meeting about the submission of a subdivision application. Yes. Chris. The board and and CRC and town council are still working on zoning amendments and one of them is for mixed use buildings, and we have not hit on final language yet. The board will be the board had a public hearing, and it will be deliberating and voting at some point in the future and we don't know exactly what that is going to end up as. We're putting in this language because we're saying it's possible that this project may need to comply with that new zoning amendment that was advertised on these two dates. On the other hand, the applicant has submitted a preliminary subdivision plan, which if he follows through and submits a definitive subdivision plan would give him protection from changes to the zoning bylaw. So the board has not heard anything about this preliminary subdivision plan yet and you haven't held the public hearing or anything about that so we don't really know how that's going to transpire or have an impact on this project so we wanted to go back to our bases and say, if the project has to change as a result of the mixed use building bylaw coming through, then the applicant needs to come back to the board to get approval for the changes. On the other hand, there may be a chance that he doesn't need to comply and that what he's showing on his plan is what he's going to be permitted to build, and then he wouldn't need to come back. So that's what this is all about. Janet. Sorry, this is off my very tired head. So, this is a half acre lot. Is it possible physically possible to have a subdivision and a road around it I mean can you submit a subdivision plan on something you actually can't ever build under the code. Is that just or is that a question for another day. That's a question for another day but there is another property included in the subdivision. So it's not just the property that's being considered for the building it's also the property that is directly to the north of it, and then maybe something else involved as well but Okay, I'm just wondering. Okay.  It really has to do with the publication date of the, of the zoning amendment when the zoning amendment public hearing, the planning board public hearing for the zoning amendment is advertised. That's the date when the applicant needs to comply with the new zoning amendment if it were to be adopted. And we don't know if it's going to be adopted and we don't know if it's going to be adopted and exactly the form that you saw it at the public hearing. And this, this condition is trying to embrace all of the possibilities. But if the applicant is going to be required to comply with the mixed use building standard that is different from what he's showing on his plan, then we want him to come back and show it to you and get approved for it. Yeah. Just quickly, I think the one thing that is left out is if this project meets that zoning bylaw amendment. Yep. Right. So I think I would, if we could have language in there that says if that's the case then then it meets the zoning bylaw amendment and we obviously wouldn't have to come back for the planning board. The number is this. This is number seven, seven. Okay, we can put such language in. Please thank you. So we're on number eight. The building shall meet all required energy efficiency codes and the regulations of the stretch energy code. In addition, low flow coming fixtures shall be installed throughout the project. Next, the site plan review approval shall expire within two years of the date that is filed with the town clerk unless has been both recorded that the registry of deeds and substantial construction or use has commenced within the two year time period. Number 10 construction shall be completed within 24 months from the date of issuance of the building permit. The items needed the applicant shall come before the planning board and a public meeting for a review and approval of an extension of time. Yeah. Doug and Kyle both have their hands raised. Okay Doug. Yeah, I was curious whether the stretch energy code applies to this project. I guess I, I thought that that was for projects permitted as a residential under the residential state code. And if this is permitted under the commercial code I'm not sure it applies. That would be a question for Rob Mora. Is he still here. Doug, the, the stretch energy code does apply to these buildings for the residential units and are subject to the performance testing and hers rating on all that comes along with the stretch energy code. Thank you, Rob. Kyle. I like to request 30 months instead of 24 months on number 10 please. I don't want to handle winters on either end a bit better. Just the board, just the board agree with that. Yeah, I don't see any objections Andrew, Janet, Andrew. I'm supportive of that. Okay. Thank you, Janet. I've only seen 24 months and so they're saying is that you have to substantial, you know, it's like you have to really get into the project and so I don't, I've seen that over and over and over again in Amherst and it seems like there has to be a reason for that. So 24 months usually relates to how long the site plan review or the special permit is good for start construction, but if you start construction, normally we don't put a limit on how long construction can take. For some reason, we have recently decided it's a good idea to put that limitation on so we don't have projects that go on and on forever. That's what this is about but usually the 24 months relates to how long you have for your site plan review or your special permit before you start construction. So, so there is so the reason for the 24 minutes completion is making sure it gets done. Is that, is that what you're saying. That's right. Okay. So, project use residential the total number of drawing units shot to be constructed the project shall be limited to a maximum of 90 units 30 studios, 36 one bedrooms and 24 two bedrooms. The building shall not exceed a maximum of. Oh, are those residual hands up or. Oh, sorry, yes. Sorry, and Andrew. Mine wasn't just I'm trying to remember whether it mentions the affordable units elsewhere in here and if not, should we have it in line 11. Yes, it does. It does further down. Okay, thanks. Okay. The building should not exceed a maximum of five stories and a total of 57 feet measured from average finished grade on the street side of the building to the highest point of the flat roof, excluding any. How do you say that word. Parapet or other rooftop equipment as outlined in section 6.17 the zoning bylaw 13 the principal use shall remain mixed use building a shall not be changed to any other residential use including private dormitory 14 the property shall not be used for temporary use and 12 months short term housing, short term lodging or advertise as such in print or electronically apartments shall meet all apical a AB a ADA requirements within with 5% of the total units being fully accessible and all units. Visitable. I don't know if you want to scooch up scroll down Pam. Yes, do we want to, I'm sorry to check you modified to be want to require that the accessible units be on the first floor because that was a point. Yes. Or that the first floor units be accessible. And then update. I don't think that's set. I think that the units that are designed on the first floor now are primarily studios. There may be one two bedroom unit at the far end. So I don't know if that's a reasonable thing to request because there may be other more luxurious apartments up above that would be suitable for a da units. I just thought the whole point was that people who are with disabilities prefer the first floor or people using meal chairs. I think it should be good that those units can provide them with units on the first floor. The building would need to be excuse me. I'm sorry, raise my hand. Yes, Chris, the building would need to be reconfigured in order to accommodate that so I don't know if that's something that you want to require now. I've heard that people with disabilities prefer to live on the first floor but there is an elevator in the building to provide access to other units. I'm going to jump to Kyle, and then Andrew and Doug. Thank you relative to the apartments on the first floor. There's six apartments. There's 11 affordable units. Our intent was not to make those six all affordable. The intent was to as we'll discuss later on in this, you know, spread those out throughout the building. As it relates to the number 15, the 5% of total units being fully accessible and all units visitable. Those are building code requirements. I'd prefer if the building code ran it rather than a condition. If the building code. And that may be fine and I would defer to Rob more on that but I wouldn't want a condition and a building code to conflict on something like that. And the last was number 13. The language that says including a private dormitory. I think a private dormitory is defined in our bylaw. And I don't think there's any opportunity for this to be one so I don't think that needs to be required or included. Okay. Andrew and then Doug. Thanks, Jack. Yeah, I wonder if there is some what if 15 said like including or it just had some reference to some units on the ground floor that I know there's varying degrees of disability and for some folks, they may not necessarily care what floor they're on but we did hear it. I think it would be I think it would be worthwhile to put in here to say that, you know, at least some of them are on the ground floor. I, so that's that's that's kind of piling on with general saying I was also, and again if this is in here later as well. Would any of the fully accessible units be part of the the affordable house. Sorry. It may be it may be right now it could or couldn't be right. It could be or it couldn't be depends on who needs the units. So I guess at the same same side. This is this is just a question for the board is would we want something in here that would indicate that there needs to be at least one unit that is both affordable and fully accessible. And that number could be whatever just a thought.  My hand up for. Oh, my hand was up about having units on the ground floor. I really feel like that's maybe we should add words if you want to put that in. You should say if feasible, or as as much as possible or something like that but I feel like it's going to be hard to do that in the current, the current floor plan. Maybe some language that he could offer that might make sense. We can defer to Rob and then and then Doug and and Janet. Rob, do you have any comment on that wording. I get my only comment is that the building code doesn't really prescribe that they have to be on a particular floor. Ideally we would like to see them offered in various locations throughout the building, just like the affordable units will be spread out. I don't know the floor plan of the first floor layout well enough to say that it could easily be accommodated so I think that question would have to go to Kyle if they could offer a unit on the first floor as a fully accessible unit. Okay Doug and then Janet. Yeah, all I was going to say was typically are often some of the accessibility codes require that the accommodations be distributed through the space or through the building so, you know, language like that might be consistent with some of the other codes. You know, if Kyle says it's not a hardship to specify that at least one such unit is going to be on the first floor then I have no objection to adding that. Okay. Chris is your hand up or. Yeah, it had to do with requiring that one of the affordable units be accessible. And I think that's another question for. Nate Maloy is still here. Let's see, is Nate here. Nate is not still here. That may be a question for Rob. Is that a reasonable thing to require, or should they be distributed as, as to the need. I think it's reasonable to, to require it, if the, you know, if the need is there I guess, you know, what I'm guessing Nate would say is that, you know, there comes a time where the building operator has to fill the unit, and that, you know, depending on what the need is will have will address whether or not it's an accessible unit but we have heard. I think recently through the disability commission conversations about how affordable units have not been found to be accessible in in the various apartment complexes and talking through that with Nate and others, you know, we felt like this is the issue with that on a permit condition by the board not in the bylaw. So I think it's, you know, it certainly is a valid request if the board thought it was appropriate. To require that one of the units that's affordable also be accessible. Not accessible, but maybe not strict language that there isn't an alternative. If they're all the affordable units are otherwise filled, you know, without a request for an accessible unit. Maybe we could work on that language. Okay. Thank you, Janet. I think that there's a lot was made of the fact that people in wheelchairs, or have other accessibility issues really like to be on the first floor and now we're whittling it down to one unit on the first floor so I find that a little hard to make, partly because my parents were both are both handicapped and so it seems like it seems almost like you're using that as a justification for something you wanted so I'd like to see an effort towards universal design if somebody's blind, or, you know, in a wheelchair, and they're going to feel more comfortable in the first floor I think they'd like to have more than one possible unit. And so I, you know, I think we should move towards inclusiveness and the needs of people with disabilities and health care, but not historically I find that a little much so if it's, I'd like to see more than one unit on the first floor that's accessible or universal design. So some people will feel safer. Yeah, yeah, I'm, I, I'm not, I guess I'm not totally aware of that the first four. I mean with the elevators being present like like Chris said that that does up when at the whole, you know, building to accessibility, but Do you want to look at a first floor plan. I mean, my, my, my reading of the way in which accessibility is is treated and should be treated as yes I think you want to accommodate the first floor but I think as Doug noted that distribution is actually an important part of that that being relegated to a specific place is also not valuable, right. Maybe people want to view from the third floor or the fourth floor and also have specific ADA needs. So I think allowing for distribution throughout the building in whatever capacity as Doug noted is valuable whether we want to mandate one on the first floor. I'm not sure. But I'd rather be more inclusive in the sense that people have the option to, to make a choice about where they want to be in the building and not be relegated to a specific place. Comment Tom. Did Oh, Kyle, and then maybe Rob. Sure. So the next two pages all go over all the requirements of how you place units and, and what type of units and the number of units that need to be studio the number that need to be one the number that need to be to obviously on the ground for we only have a certain type of unit we have no problem putting an affordable unit on the ground for this building will be, you know, the Massachusetts a b requirements mandate, a number of these 90 apartments to be fully accessible. I have no problem allocating as many of those as we can, as the puzzle allows trying to accommodate these to be affordable and we have no problem doing that. If that works so different things to juggle in terms of building code in terms of affordable requirements in terms of accessibility requirements. So I would just ask for we're open to put things on put affordable units on the ground for I just asked for some flexibility so we don't get caught between three, you know, one of the different five different criteria we're trying to meet. Thank you, Rob. Yeah, I just wanted to read the code language really quickly here because there is a distribution requirement that both Doug and Tom mentioned and it reads that the unit shall be proportionally distributed across the total number of units according to the number of bedrooms size quality price and location. So when it does get down to the time when we're reviewing the final layout and you know we'll talk later about the affordable units, and we do ask for a very specific plan and locating those affordable units will be doing the same for the accessible unit. So I think the condition as it reads, you know, adding the language that including at least one unit on the first floor would probably work well with what we'll have to do to ensure that they are spread out appropriately to meet the code. Thank you. So, Chris. So are we talking about at least one affordable unit or at least one handicapped accessible unit on the first floor, or one of each. I believe the discussion was about accessibility. Yeah, accessible unit of thank you very much. Kyle. I was going to ask the same. Is this for an affordable unit on the ground for or an accessible unit on the ground for or an affordable and an accessible unit on the ground for Chris. That was my question. So you've answered it. That it's for a possible unit. Doug. And I can I interject that I believe we were talking about article 15, which is concerning accessibility. We have not gotten to the ones to the articles about affordability yet. Yeah. So that would be accessible. Okay. I get it. Yep. So this is about adding some language on article 15. And sentence 15, which has to do with apartments, she'll all access. You fully accessible, including one unit on the first floor. Okay. That's right. So I'm just saying the units of the project shall be registered and permitted in accordance with the Amherst residential rental property bylaw. Laws of suspension of a rental permit shall constitute a violation of this condition. Project use commercial retail non residential tenant space. This is any use authorized in the commercial retail non residential tenant space at this project side shall be you shall be uses allowed by right or permit permitted by the site plan or by special permit and then general business BG zoning district. Marketing and lease agreement. Lee shall be a minimum duration of 12 months. 19. Andrew. This is not commercial leases. I'm presuming 18. Yes, I assume that's residential leases. I think it's, I think it's supposed to be residential leases so I should add that word. Okay. Janet. So one condition I would add is it cannot, you know, apartments cannot be released, leased room by room. So I would add that but I wonder if we can, we all seem exhausted and kind of stumbling and I see pages and pages is your way we can just continue this till next week and fit you in early I'd be happy to meet at six. Just to finish this up but I'm completely exhausted and it seems like we're going slower and slower and stumbling a bit. I mean, you know, we're at hour four. Yeah, what's on our, what do we got on the docket for. August. Greenfield savings bank. That's a continuation of the public hearing. You have a new project at Bay Road. It's a parking lot for a trailhead for sweet Alice. Yeah. A, the continuation of the public hearing about the rezoning of the lot behind CVS so you could conceivably continue this to, to that date. And it would be just for the purposes of going over the conditions and voting. Is that correct. Yes, Doug. We have not closed the public hearings, right. So you'd have to continue the public hearing to that date. Does that require advertising or. No, but I wanted to say that there aren't that many more conditions left because I was going to suggest that we not go through the construction conditions. I've already done that a million times and, and I think people find it tedious and they all say the same thing. So the conduct the construction conditions are sort of boilerplate. But it's up to you as to whether you want to continue this to next week. Okay, Kyle. I also say that the great number of these are affordable units that are, you know, Nate Maloy worked in because he's the affordable professional and so I don't imagine that we're going to be editing elements that Nate put on when he's not on because there. So I would, I would absolutely ask if we could finish this tonight I would greatly appreciate that. Check. I got Maria. How are you doing? Yeah, you guys talk about tired you don't know tired. I was hoping we could wrap up tonight because I'm not positive I can make some next meeting I will be in transit and I said to Chris I could probably call in but I would have to call in late. And I'm not sure when you would be voting I definitely didn't want to miss it so if we can just push through what number we're on 18 and there's how many. There's 4050. Oh, we're not going to 55 so we'd be stopping at. You stepping it for is that what you're saying. Yep. Okay. I'm fine to keep going. I'll let the other board members chime in but I was, I've had so much coffee I can keep going so you guys decide, but I can keep going. Alright Andrew. I'm okay going, although as I say that I just want to respond or think about Janet's comment I was going to say number 18 how I'd said residential. As I read it again maybe we actually don't include that residential language as a go back because I think they would probably make sense to have 12 months beyond for for residential and commercial. However, if we feel like there is a need to be able to do pop ups and then maybe we do keep it as residential. But in any situation I'm, I would love to power through as well because I may have limited availability in the next meeting also. Do you want me to pick up reading Jack. I'm good. So we're 19. 19. Yeah, any substantial modifications to the lease agreement which may impact tenant oversight as determined by the building commissioner specifically excluding minor updates such as pricing date. Communications clerical areas or language updates required by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts or other government they shall require the applicant to return to the planning board and a public meeting. Okay, so now on to affordable units. Chris is your hand up. No. Okay, affordable units at least 12% of the dwelling units which would be 11 units shall be and remain affordable and shall be marketed. Whoops. Should be marketed to eligible households whose annual income may not exceed 80% of the area median income adjusted for household size as determined by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. The affordable units and subject to approval by DHCD, the affordable units and the remaining shall be eligible to be included in the town's subsidized housing inventory as maintained maintained by DHCD, additionally in accordance with article 15 inclusionary of the zoning bylaw most 20% of the affordable units to shall be affordable in perpetuity in perpetuity to households earning 60% of the AMI or less as defined by article 12 divisions or definitions of the zoning bylaw affordable housing units are units which may only be rented or purchased by families or households whose annual incomes adjusted for a family size do not exceed the limits for the maximum annual income for low income families or households. 80% of the median income for Amherst as calculated by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development or any, or any successor agency and are eligible and countable for the purpose of the Commonwealth's 40 B subsidized housing inventory, or its successor. With a total of 90 units proposed a total of 11 units shall be affordable units as defined by article 12 definitions of the zoning bylaw these affordable units shall include three studios at 80% AMI one studio 60% AMI one bedroom at 80% AMI one bedroom at 60% AMI and three bedroom three two bedrooms at 80% AMI as listed in the management plan. If the total number of units changes the applicant shall require to be ready to return to the planning board for review and approval to change, including in the chains, including, how does that say, including in the change in the number of affordable units. There's something with that sentence I think, including in the number of affordable units if the total number of units changes the applicant will be required to return to the planning board for review and approval of the change, including a change in the number of affordable units so in change to a. Okay. Affordable units and ADA units shall not be segregated from the market rate units and in accordance with article 15 inclusionary zoning of the zoning bylaw the affordable units shall be dispersed throughout the development and shall be comparable to the market rate units in terms of quality design materials and general of the architecture and landscape so there's there's the statement that we were prematurely addressing earlier. 23 is your 24. You scroll up him. Yeah. Okay. Are we on 23 or 24 24 24. Okay, there's 24. Okay, the applicant shall submit a local action unit application to the DHCD under the local initiative program into into a rental regulatory agreement with the DHCD and the town and comply with all DHCD requirements. So as to ensure that the affordable units will be included in the DHCD subsidized housing inventory for the town. 25 the affordable units are to remain affordable and perpetuity subject to the DHCD approval this requirement shall be included in the regulatory agreement the affordability requirement shall remain in effect and perpetuity even if the requirement is not included in the regulatory agreement or if the regulatory agreement is terminated. 26 affordable units shall be marketed and rented to income eligible households in accordance with the DHCD regulations and guidelines for the local initiative program. Guidelines which require the approval by DHCD of an affirmative affirmative fair housing marketing plan, the cost associated with the development and implementation of the marketing plan including advertising and processing for their affordable units for the applicant, subject to the approval of DHCD, a qualified agent shall be engaged by the applicant to administer their initial marketing and lottery for the affordable units and to maintain a waiting list for subsequent rentals and compliance with the income eligible eligibility requirements for attendance of the affordable units and 28 you want to move that up a little bit pan. The applicant has allowed under application law and for no more than 70% of the affordable units, the applicant shall provide a local preference category for those eligible for local preference who in the initial lease and the initial lease up Liz in the community is a municipal employee works at a business in the community or has children in the schools of the community or other category of local preferences as defined by the state agency providing financing. In 2019 affordable units shall be identified and exhibit to the DHCD regulatory agreement thereafter, if an affordable unit ceases to account, ceases to count as an affordable unit due to increases in tenant income, pursuant to DHCD regulations and the provisions of the regulatory agreement, the next available market rate unit with the same number of bedrooms as the affordable unit in question shopper rented as an affordable unit. The regulatory, Kyle. Yeah, quick question on the 70% and 28 has that been used elsewhere in Amherst that number. Yes. Okay, it's only for the first lease up. Thank you. Okay. The regulatory agreement number 30 regulatory agreement shall be approved by the DHCD and recorded at Hampshire County registered deeds prior to the issuance of any certificate of occupancy with the copy provided to the building commissioner. The affordable units shall be designated and shown on a floor plan provided to the planning department prior to the issuance of any building permit. To the affordable units shall be available in the tenant selection process shall be in in process at the time of any full or partial certificate of occupancy for completed units. However, at the discretion of the building commissioner, a certificate of certificate of occupancy may be issued and exclude the affordable units until the tenant selection process has been completed and inspection services has been provided has been assuming and inspection services has been provided document documentation of the completed selection process. Sorry about that. The affordable units shall be occupied at all times only by qualifying tenants in accordance with the regulatory agreement. So this next section is that construction. We should probably go through that next section. Do you want me to read it. Okay, so number 33 outdoor bicycle storage shall be incorporated into the site improvements that the applicant proposed proposes in the town right away. Indoor bicycle storage shall be located inside the building in the room labeled bike as shown in the submitted plan of the first floor. The town engineer and building commissioner shall inspect the construction of the entry driveway and all on site paved areas for conformance to the town standards. All on site utilities shall be underground. All exterior lighting shall be dark sky compliant exterior lighting shall be downcast shielded and she'll not shine and unto adjacent properties or streets. And I think let's see from here. Let's see. I think that these are mostly related to construction so I think we can dispense with these I assume that everybody has read it or read something similar in the past and is fine with them do you want to just sort of skim through them. Yeah, I'm skimming. Yep. Can I jump in here. Yes. Okay, I'm kind of remembering Pam Rooney's comments about safety for people walking along pray street, and that she wanted to have construction vehicles enter and enter and leave the site on from East, East Pleasant Street not pray streets people walking along there. And then she also asked for like I guess a temporary pedestrian crossings marked from the Jones buildings to the north side of pray street so people would be, you know, say walking along the Jones buildings, direction right south, and then they'll hit the construction site at 15 East Pleasant so they have a crosswalk to go, you know, kind of where they normally wouldn't go towards the banking and escape. I don't know if anyone had an objection to that because both of those things sort of sensible to me. I think we've discussed these in the past I think that our intent is to make sure that the bank tenant has as much accessibility as they possibly can so we want to be very conscious of that so that's why we've done the construction plan that shows that pray street and using that spur after you come across the sidewalk there and get into pray street to manage the construction coming and going from the site. So we'd obviously prefer to not put additional load on on the bank and try to keep that on pray street. We are willing to, you know, accommodate if there's the need for a temporary cross on pray street there which I don't think there would be, but if there was, we'd obviously be willing to work with the town on that. So, may I say something that the town is working on a project we could just got mass do to financing to enhance the sidewalk and the crosswalks on the north side of pray street so we're hoping that most people will walk along the north side of pray street to get to East Pleasant Street. So we're going to be showing that plan to the town council on Monday. Will that happen in time for this construction project. Yes, I believe it will. It'll happen this fall. Maria Andrew and then Doug. Thanks, I think for either number 46 or 48. It doesn't need to be written but just to remember that we wanted to widen the sidewalk so that whatever the approved plan is or are shown plan to town council incorporates that wide into foot sidewalk in the right of way. But I don't think wording needs to be added, but just if, if Kyle can alert his landscape architect. Thank you Maria. Andrew. Yeah, I think Jenna, were you saying just like to have essentially a painted crosswalk across pray street just to make that more visible to folks walking by the Jones buildings. Jen. I agree. I agree. I know I just want to make. Yeah, I would agree with that fall asleep. That's right just I mean to paint a crosswalk over pray that's got to be pretty easy to do whether that's something that the town does or Kyle does. So I think what Kyle saying is he doesn't want to put construction traffic or the easement, which is off of East Pleasant Street. I want to limit that as much as I can to reduce the impact on the bank. Maybe we're thinking, maybe I'm thinking of the wrong spot. I thought you're suggesting Janet that it'd be sort of pray street the old laundromat over towards the spoke. Yeah, so I'm on pray street wouldn't impact the easement at the bank. It would pull folks away from that and should make it easier for the bank to operate. I have no problem painting a crosswalk if if DPW wants us to that's fine. Okay, Doug. I was going to say I kind of would defer to Rob more and the DPW and their review of the construction plan for for all of these kinds of things. You know, I would imagine there's more pedestrian traffic on East Pleasant Street than there is on pray street. So getting the construction traffic off of East Pleasant Street might actually be more beneficial to more pedestrians, but as I said, I would, I would defer to Rob on this. I agree. Any, any more conditions. Yeah. Okay, so we can move on to conditions for I have one. Sorry. Okay. 51 the management plan Chris. I'm addressing Chris but the board all snow plowed within the project area shall be promptly removed from the site as part of the clearing process. I think that, you know, there'll be there will be snow banks at some point in the winter, we're not going to just go and pick up all the snow on the site and take it off. I'm trying to imply that I'm going to be picking up snow off the site, vacuuming it up and taking it somewhere. Trying to remember what this related to. Yeah, the words all that it's that's dangerous. Maybe there's some ameliorating language that we can put in where is it again. 51. I'm, you know what happened Chris I stopped sharing my screen so I'm trying to find it hold on my back. We see it. All snowplowed within the project shall be promptly removed from the site as part of the clearing process. To the extent possible. Is there some wording we can put in there that I think if you got rid of all and put to the extent possible. I think that would be fine. Okay, how about that. Okay. Any other comments on the boilerplate section of this. Again, we have a copy of this that you emailed, you know this part, I don't think it's changed so. No. Okay, so we want to go through conditions for 15 he's pleasant, which are shorter. Right. You want me to read those. Take turn. Okay. Yeah, I want you to start. I'll start. Okay. So this is for 15 East pleasant for the accessory use. Number one construction staging and access plan for 15 East pleasant shall be built and used substantially in accordance with the plan submitted to the planning board as follows. The management plan prepared by SVE associates dated March 17 2021. The site plan prepared by SVE associates dated April 7 2021 and approved on whenever you approve it. Number two construction staging and accents plan shall be managed substantially in accordance with the management plan submitted to the planning board and approved on whatever date you approve it. Change of ownership or if the property is no longer managed by archipelago investments. The new owner and or manage manager so shall submit a new management plan to the plan board at a public meeting for its review and approval. The purpose of the meeting shall be for the board to determine whether conditions of the permit are being complied with and whether any modification to the site plan review approval or management plan is required. The changes to the project and or substantial changes to any approved site plans shall be submitted to the planning board for its review and approval prior to the work taking place. The purpose of the submittal will 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. In this case, it's just site plan review sorry for leaving in that extra word. I think this site plan review approval shall expire within two years of the date that it is filed with the town clerk, unless it has been both recorded at the registry of deeds and substantial construction or use has commenced within the two year time period. Does Kyle want to move change that to 30 months like did. He has to file his permit with the registry of deeds and start construction within that two year period. And if you can't do that he can come back to you to ask for an extension. I'm fine with that. The only comment is on five the same language to changes as previous. What did we say substantial changes. Yeah. Number seven within 60 days of the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for 11 and 13 he's pleasant street, the temporary construction staging use shall cease. The site shall be cleaned of debris grades level between this concrete surface and fencing installed as per plan submitted and approved. Upon completion in accordance with the final landscape and site improvements plan for 15 he's pleasant, the site at 15 he's pleasant shall not be used for parking, or any other use prior to the applicant receiving site plan review approval or special permit approval. Site improvements number nine the town engineer and building commissioner shall inspect the construction of the entry driveway and all onsite paved areas for conformance to town standards. Number 10 all onsite utilities shall be underground. Number 11 all exterior lighting shall be dark sky compliant exterior lighting shall be downcast shielded and shall not shine on to adjacent properties or streets. Number 12 completion of work. Number 12 the applicant shall provide as both plans that show pavement and fencing location grades access ways. Sidewalks walkways curbing. Stormwater management lighting utilities to the building commissioner town engineer and to be placed. The thing with site plan review files. So these are from here on until 16 is kind of boilerplate. So then we'll skip to 17. The same wording that Kyle wanted to have changed. So this 17 instead of saying all snowplowed it would say snowplowed within the project area shall be promptly removed from the site as part of the clearing process to the extent. What did we say to the extent feasible and I would I would even ask about that I mean this is, I'd like to obviously have some snowbank there. I don't want to remove it. I think if we have to plow it. I wouldn't want to have to pick it up and take it off of this site. It's different than the site next door. So this is a staging site so yeah, I don't want to have to. That snow can be remain in place on the staging site. Just so everybody knows no is very difficult to move around. There's a lot of regulations about moving snow off sites so it's not an easy thing to do. So does it make sense to strike this number 17 for this particular site. I would like to ask for, please. And you're the one who has to move on that side, Johanna and Doug. I'd be comfortable with that for the site. And Doug. So what I. Okay, should be fine. Okay. Number 18 all trash pickup deliveries and operation of construction maintenance machinery and landscaping. I don't think there's anything that's all about construction. So I don't think we need to number 19 is the project shall comply with and be managed in accordance with all terms of the management plan. Any alterations to this plan shall be approved by the planning board at a public meeting. The new owner shall meet with the planning board at a public meeting to review the management plan and to determine if it is still applicable. And to decide whether or not to hold a public hearing to review and approve the new management plan. Number 20 demolition permit shall be issued prior to any demolition on the property taking place. And then the other conditions are all having to do with construction. So the findings and the conditions for the two site plan review applications and the two special permit applications. We still have a site plan review application hanging out there that hasn't been acted on, but perhaps the applicant will request withdrawal of that. The board votes on the other items. So what you would want to do now is take each item individually and close the public hearing and then vote as to whether you're going to approve the application with waivers and conditions and findings as listed or as reviewed. Doug. I was going to make a motion to that effect. Move that we close the public hearings and accept the findings and conditions for the 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street and 15 East Pleasant Street as we've reviewed and discussed this evening with the edits that were discussed. Okay, and that's, and that's, that's SPP, 202103. And then SPR 202109, which is 15 East Pleasant Street. And, and then SPR 2021 12, which is 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street. So would people comfortable doing that this way or would they prefer to do, perhaps the site plan review reviews first and then do this special permit separately. Because if you do it this way, then you're sort of asking people to vote up or down on everything. Right, let's let's do the site plan review first, I guess. So. So I'll withdraw my motion and let somebody else make the motion in a way that's more acceptable to you guys. I think it would be exactly the same way that you said it except to just list the two special permit or the two site plan reviews. Yeah. Just want to amend that. Sure. Okay. We got a second Maria. Okay. So any further discussion and I've seen on. So we can do a roll call I guess so. Maria. I'm sorry can we clarify, are we voting on the SPR. Okay, for East Pleasant Street or 11 East Pleasant, we're going to do those separately or. We were combining, we're combining those two, both of them. So the, you know, the 11 and 13 East Pleasant Street is SPR 2021 12. And then the 15 East Pleasant Street is SPR 2021 09. And we're voting to close the hearing, right. For those. Okay. So we're going to do the two site plan review. I just. Those together. Okay. So with regard to closing the hearings for those two site plan review hearings. Maria. I think. Made the motion initially said they wanted to accept everything, not just close the public hearings, but to accept things. So is that what you're voting on? I think the initial motion was to close. Except the findings and conditions. And then I believe he was saying to approve. All of the. Permits for. Okay. And I stepped back and said, don't do that because. I'm not sure that everybody's going to vote in favor of everything. I, I would guess that you would probably get a positive vote for the site plan reviews. And so I suggested that you close the public hearing. Accept the conditions and findings for the two site plan reviews and approve those two applications. And you are correct. I think that's, that is what. Was amended. And so sorry about that. Sorry for the confusion. So everybody clear on. On what we're voting on here. I think, I think we just said Chris's. Nailed it. So. All right, I'm Maria. Oh, yeah, you, honey. Okay. All right. I am not totally clear. Are we. Is this for the whole enchilada? Or is this just to close the hearings? And then a whole enchilada to whole enchilada. Yeah. No, it's not. Let's do it one, let's do it one at a time. How about if I make a motion and then somebody else says, I move that. How does that work? Is that good? Okay. So. This is putting words in somebody's mouth, but this is about. 11 and 13, he's pleasant street. This is a site plan review to close the public hearing. To approve the application. With the findings and conditions as written and the waivers. Has written. As, as amended. Okay. So moved. Yeah, the second. Second. All right. Second. I'm sorry. I did not see who did the first two. I moved it. Jack. Jack moves. Mr. Marshall to. Yeah. Okay. So this is on the. 11 and. In 13 site plan review. Any discussion. Okay, let's go to vote. Oh, Andrew. Yeah, I just want to make sure as. I still need to abstain from this Chris since we're talking about. The closing with. The approval. Yes. Yes. Which is fine. I'm just.  We discussed these in their entirety today. I still can't vote on them. Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you for clarifying. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you for clarifying. Alrighty. So. Let's move the vote, Maria. Approve. And. Andrew, you're abstaining. Correct. Yes. All right. Doug. Hi. Tom. Hi. Janet. No. Okay. Johanna. Hi. And I'm an eye as well. That's five one. Great. So. Okay. So the next one would be the. Site plan review for 15th pleasant street. Which would be to close the public hearing for. 2021 dash 09. For 15th pleasant street. And this is for the accessory use of that property. And you're closing the public hearing. You're accepting the findings and conditions as. Discussed and as amended. And the waivers as requested. And approving this. Site plan review application. Okay. Okay. Tom. Yeah. Okay. So we want a second. I can. We can as Doug. Any further discussion. See none. Okay. Roll call Maria. Approve. Andrew. Okay. Doug. Approve. Tom. Group. Janet. Is this for 15th pleasant or correct? Correct. Yes. It's fine. Okay. Yohana. Approve. And myself is an eye. So that's six with one abstention. Yes. Next one is. Special permit for. Site for. Setbacks site setback on the north side of the building. And the height. So that would be the special permit. SPP. 2021. Oh, too. Then you're closing the public hearing. You're. Approving this special permit for. A five foot setback on the north side of the building. And you're not going to be allowed to go up. You're not going to be allowed to get to the site. And you're approving the findings and conditions. And waivers and approving this. Special permit application. Is the rear setback included in that? No. It's written here on the agenda, because it was initially asked for that way. But we discovered that he needed another special permit. the rear setback. Okay. So understand. Initially he applied special permit for site setback height and rear setback, but we determined Rob Mara and I afterwards that he needed and a different kind of special permit for the rear setback. So you're not, you're not approving that part of this under this item. So we would exclude the rear setback from this vote. Rear setbacks next item. That's right. So, oh, that's, that's 2021. That's O2. 2021 dash O2 as we're putting on now. Right. But you're excluding the rear setback. Okay. Because the rear setback is taken care of under a different special permit application. Which is O3. Yes. Oh, three. That's right. Yeah. Yeah. Oh, two. You're just proving the side setback of five feet and the height of 57 feet. Okay. I'll second. Any discussion. I see none. So we'll do a roll call for. For this Maria. And Andrew. Doug. Hi, Tom. Hi, Janet. No. Uh, you're hot. Hi. And I am an eye as well. Okay. So you have one more. And this is special permit SPP. And it is a special permit for a non-conforming building to be structurally altered in large or reconstructed under section 9. 22 of the zoning bylaw for mixed use building. And you are closing the public hearing. And you are. Approving the findings and conditions. And approving the special permit. Anyone. Don't move. Okay. Tom. And who's seconded. Oh, yeah. This is Maria. All right. Maria second. Okay. Any discussion. What's the board. I see none. We'll do roll call. Maria. And Andrew. Staying. Okay. Okay. Okay. Tom moved and who's seconded. Oh, yeah. This is Maria. All right. Maria second. Okay. Any discussion. What's the board. I see none. We'll do roll call. Okay. Doug. Hi. Tom. Hi. Janet. No. Johanna. Hi. And I am an eye. So. Okay. Kyle with us as you want to take care of the one. Please. I'd like to. I'd like to use whatever language I need to use to withdraw. Without prejudice. So I guess it's, I'd like to request to withdraw without prejudice. That would be. The application that is listed as SPR. 20, 20, 107. Okay. And to close the public hearing. All right. Okay. So. No. I might as well. So. So someone should move to close the public hearing and approve the withdrawal. Okay. I'm moved. Second. And. Doug second. Any discussion. I see none. Maria. Approve. And Andrew. Hi. I can go for this one, right? Oh, good. Yes. Doug. Hi. Tom. Hi. Janet. Hi. And Johanna. Hi. And I'm an eye. Thank you. So. All right. So. I think we. I think we can. I can go for this one, right? Oh, good. Yes. Doug. Hi. Tom. Hi. Janet. Hi. I think we. We're meeting next. I think we just go the end of the agenda because we're meeting next week, right? So. That's right. Report to the chair and none. For the staff. Just meeting next week. Thank you. A lot of hard work. Okay. I'd like to thank everybody. I appreciate everybody. Thank you. Thank you all the time. Good night. Yeah. I hope, I hope I broke our world record. Traveling. I can't believe it. It's 5 a.m. here. Yeah. I've done all nighters in design school. So this is normal, but let me know if you need me next week, but hopefully not. But if you do, I can call in late. Okay. Thank you. All right.


The next thing we'll do is a little bit more setting up of the scene to get the planets to orbit around the Sun a little Bit easier than they commonly would So to do that we're going to click on the first planet which is this one here And if I just put the rotate tool on You can see that it wants to rotate on its its own axis like that Which is not Really useful because we need it to rotate around the Sun So to do that we're going to use a little cheat and the way we're going to do that is to press In fact, let's get it from the proper menu. I won't use the keyboard shortcut yet We'll go to edit and group and as soon as I did that you should notice that the pivot moved from The center of the planet to the center of the Sun and you see now that when I rotate It wants to go around the the Sun, which is very useful. There it goes And the reason for that is that when you've got something parented and then you group it The new group takes the center its pivot position from the parent Which is very very useful for what we want to do So what we need to do now is repeat that for the rest of the planet So click on that one. I'm going to hit ctrl and G which is the keyboard shortcut That one there ctrl and G and the final one ctrl and G So now they all have a pivot at the Sun which is spot on To double-check That it's working and to make sure that you understand which bits you need to select We're just going to click on windows and outliner here it is again and Let's just expand. Oh, it's a bit big. We're going to expand the Sun group and you see now it's a little bit different because we've got these four groups and Each group has got one of the planets in it And you need to understand how that works if I click on this planet here You can see I've got the planet selected in the outliner and the pivot is back on the planet But what I actually wanted to select was the group click on group two Which the planet belongs to the pivot is now in the Sun and it will rotate around the Sun So that's the way to do that the little kind of cheat way so that you don't have to keep selecting new groups from the outliner Is to select on a planet and then if you press the up key on your keyboard That jumps up one level in your hierarchy and it will then select the group for you So let's keep that in mind when we get on to animating those. I'll just close the outliner quickly Okay, so what we'll do now is get some animation done on this first planet So I'm going to select it and then as I said previously I'm going to press up on my keyboard and that's going to take me to group one and I can now animate with the pivot that is set to the Sun, which is exactly what I want And what I'm going to do is make sure that I'm on frame one And I'm going to set a key just on the rotate y attribute now I could if I pressed s that would key everything But unless you really need to key all of your channels, it's not a good idea to just press s It's actually better to just key only the challenge you're going to be using and because these are just going to rotate on one axis That's the only axis that I want to set any keyframes for so make sure I'm on frame one I'm going to right-click rotate y and you can see this menu pops up and the option I want is key selected And you can see that's gone red now. I've still shows me a keyframe down here But only rotate wires got a key sound and that's a much cleaner way to work Then just set keyframes on everything if you don't need to the next thing we'll do is move the play head to frame 20 and Then we're going to up the value of rotate y and I'm going to type in 50 You see that's now rotated part way around and then I'm going to right-click on rotate y and I'm going to do key Select it again If I just scrub between those two frames you can see that the animation in there, but it stops after that doesn't go any further Which is exactly what I want to see at this stage So now I'll repeat that for the next planet. So let's go back to frame one and I'm going to click on My next planet out press up on my keyboard to get to the group I'm going to key selected on rotate y to get the first keyframe of my motion setup Straight on to frame 20 and this time instead of rotating by 50 units I think I'm going to go by something less because I'm not like an astrophysicist or anything But I believe that the further away the planets are from the Sun the slower they go around it I could be wrong and I'm willing to be proven wrong I'm not really I would actually rather people just told me I was right and But let's basically the point I'm trying to make is I'm using a smaller number. So I did 50 last time. Let's go 41 Spot on and then right-click and key selected Okay, so There we go. So that one's going around but not quite as quick What I'm going to do now is I'm going to leave you to do the other two planets. So select a planet Go to the group set a key on Frame one move to frame 20 change the rotate y value Key that make sure it gets smaller as you get further out And then I'll meet you at the next stage to look at how we get those planets to keep going around the Sun at the rate that we've set up