{"citations":{"3e957494-9dad-4401-a0e9-8386cafb2c95":{"num":1,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"01967daf-be99-4607-86d7-99cefc3283e8":{"num":2,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"38edfb99-2710-4133-ace4-9bf1f1d5820d":{"num":3,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"d0672b8d-1663-4ccb-993f-d20b975a5ea0":{"num":4,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"904203b8-f9c4-4ed7-b6ff-cdaf79e87851":{"num":5,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"8591da8d-97d5-4f8a-bee6-0ce4f653904d":{"num":6,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"c02c3164-e065-4cc0-a764-62eb14e56bcd":{"num":7,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"64d4c904-7f39-44e0-9453-fe101a7880e4":{"num":8,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"1c08881d-353c-45e7-a25f-31a1a918dada":{"num":9,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"13703b9b-7423-48be-9aac-97ddb2a80751":{"num":10,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"f6a8625f-e244-4b99-b446-d4c0f0374a6e":{"num":11,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"f0bd58ce-02a7-48f6-8498-341bf4957e91":{"num":12,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"67bdfbf6-be5c-44b6-b7f0-3a252f0232fc":{"num":13,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"16692df4-0748-4bcf-9753-7969a9c92557":{"num":14,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"33401bd4-7f76-479d-8e62-44195d7049db":{"num":15,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"0342e2f8-a6ef-4e81-b894-041d8aa6a6c5":{"num":16,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"8c5db343-ab66-4d9b-ab9a-6d43ded8ab90":{"num":17,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"59aca61b-a890-456c-a4be-7386d57b9f2a":{"num":18,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"55600d12-c6fc-4ec7-81f2-d6b265eb074c":{"num":19,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"5df04c0c-4934-4eef-b2a2-5cb121ae4a9e":{"num":20,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"84afdf3f-4b04-428c-adce-b0c33f4c3722":{"num":21,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"f60902bc-1ca8-4905-a82a-d47d0f4f1eb3":{"num":22,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"02deadbf-8394-47e1-bf44-53f833cc9d03":{"num":23,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"4b928bd0-2b5a-4ce5-82c2-a555b831a738":{"num":24,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"28ac07a9-c70c-4ae8-a6b7-9589a07bebb7":{"num":25,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"bf7b7b93-9d72-4dc4-ba08-26e7d1efa4f2":{"num":26,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"7489e2c3-9f71-4001-af31-9a4d8829eef9":{"num":27,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"dc926956-cd93-4c4c-a8bc-43f3c2b45c7f":{"num":28,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"e1b7a188-8a6e-4670-9c7f-780c3aae3f4f":{"num":29,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"850077ea-0916-40f8-81ce-e92024c5cfd6":{"num":30,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"d1519ea7-23ec-4b5c-8dda-a24cbf45feb8":{"num":31,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"ffe8b495-1849-4a93-8bba-4539a37227e2":{"num":32,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"2273e551-40ec-4f9b-9135-6a5a990c7f06":{"num":33,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"a751605b-3c02-414f-be97-5fa8d5553193":{"num":34,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"b28b92c3-2f0a-437c-91cc-ec974af8f482":{"num":35,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"fc89172c-29f0-409f-aee0-c2296667f2e0":{"num":36,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"f070965a-54c4-4bec-a447-6995fe7a5ba5":{"num":37,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"703eb547-6cc9-406d-a726-f29e015fec39":{"num":38,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"4ac3703b-8e1f-4bef-951b-b996dd148232":{"num":39,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"6473828e-f10b-4cf5-ab56-a58187a53bb3":{"num":40,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"da6a8cec-8ce3-40a1-8e4e-fa931d0f3786":{"num":41,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"cc8856d4-9f1e-4d38-93db-2c5c3ff55946":{"num":42,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"96fee08f-c365-4c22-8c18-125dc8b73bcb":{"num":43,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"f19ae731-a589-41db-90ad-f7b86910fad4":{"num":44,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"aaababb8-d620-4cb7-8933-15080d29f9a5":{"num":45,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"3dffb5b9-9326-4b9f-9453-6004bd3ba652":{"num":46,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"0dcd1e7c-3ae2-47c8-9c4e-14d861230c9c":{"num":47,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"2c5e2360-9dd6-4d9b-85c6-30d6231acc3c":{"num":48,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"72d21aed-dd14-4b7b-ba9a-fca5a9b62348":{"num":49,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"07803ea1-d2e6-46a4-a485-0f6b7c3d997e":{"num":50,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"ee072d68-1ad4-4c74-8ae4-10077be44211":{"num":51,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"bd00f3c9-ea4f-4aff-9ac1-3f7e7c6c825c":{"num":52,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"b1b3c2d0-706e-4e56-a3b8-36831c2ddae0":{"num":53,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"216e90c7-fce6-4498-b445-0f63300aa4ef":{"num":54,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"09bc32e9-a1d6-492b-88a3-77f77d702d69":{"num":55,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"1ff9f780-9c65-4b55-904e-79095a997b18":{"num":56,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"f61f6f3d-6e25-4ac2-a3fc-5cfa8cf293bc":{"num":57,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"441c61f2-a27c-4951-bc90-ddaebffaf15e":{"num":58,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"5f98911b-554d-4a1c-be06-6ac74ec62cb9":{"num":59,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"67050d71-2d71-42fc-98a6-d780400fa8c5":{"num":60,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"376d026a-aaeb-43db-a631-d5aaf79b3bbd":{"num":61,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"969d92f7-2f97-473e-a5f2-7524a5ba1440":{"num":62,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"ab025e6d-2126-4b25-a4ea-fe1208466729":{"num":63,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"4bdfabc8-5839-418a-9816-ebae848c5542":{"num":64,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"40def29b-1af0-48a7-a06f-c50a459a0193":{"num":65,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"e96f779b-c226-46b8-864f-8a748168102c":{"num":66,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"2edc4cd7-54ab-440d-a2b4-ef59b7710fd5":{"num":67,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"431df6c5-90d2-473f-97ad-729e38269277":{"num":68,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"00fb2bb6-2ad7-4a08-b400-d34df3102241":{"num":69,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"365e0c49-aaf3-4790-b6e3-f5b5810b8877":{"num":70,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"76a7b60d-d92b-4938-8ee4-e9e6fb647d6b":{"num":71,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"f5b053db-7209-4224-bcbc-a39e0cd0b7ce":{"num":72,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"df87cda0-205d-4b5b-bff2-b9967e228bc2":{"num":73,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"6865d6c7-5f0c-4192-9555-ca4f47ae0b89":{"num":74,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"52cf054d-15fc-4d25-9319-c6e5fdab2d5d":{"num":75,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"a94cddfa-62f8-49b3-b680-bd908362da52":{"num":76,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"0ec839b7-90a8-41fb-b1f3-74c1b83730ce":{"num":77,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"cf3b8ca3-e95c-460d-bf2a-1ab006d46ba0":{"num":78,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"},"7fcd2d87-11f8-48e7-95c2-57a2d5d82c3b":{"num":79,"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea"}},"sources":{"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea":{"sourceItemId":"ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea","title":"Redevelopment Board — 2026-01-12","videoUrl":"https://dkjpoal1tejoa.cloudfront.net/sites/a1000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001/source-items/ea284ec1-f8bc-4ad9-93ab-aedc7ad498ea/Redevelopment_Board_Meeting_-_January_12_2026.mp4","chunks":[{"id":"3e957494-9dad-4401-a0e9-8386cafb2c95","content":"Speaker 1: \n\nSpeaker 2: All right. Good evening everyone, and welcome to the Town of Arlington Redevelopment Board meeting. Uh, this evening is January 12th, 2026, and, uh, I'd like to call this meeting to order. My name is Rachel Berry. I am the chair of the redevelopment board. Could the other members of the board please introduce themselves?\n\nSpeaker 3: Steve Ack, Eugene Benson,\n\nSpeaker 4: Ken Lau,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, and, uh, Shana Corman. Houston is unfortunately unable to join us this evening. Uh, we do have joining us tonight, the, uh, director of the Department of Planning and Community Development, Claire Ricker. Thank you. Alright, uh, let's move right into our first agenda item, which is the organizational meeting, um, which is the election of the chairperson and vice chairperson. Um, Shana is not here this evening. Um, we could certainly, um, move forward with that, or if the board would prefer, we could, uh, defer that to January. I am fine either way that we decide to go. Steve, your thoughts?\n\nSpeaker 3: I'm fine\n\nSpeaker 5: Either way. I don't,\n\nSpeaker 2: Jean,\n\nSpeaker 3: I mean, technically we should do it tonight, but I don't care.\n\nSpeaker 2: Must go ahead and do it tonight. If, if that's good with you, Ken.\n\nSpeaker 4: I am fine either way. I am no rush to do it.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. No way. Alright, well, why don't we go ahead and, um, have our organizational, um, meeting. Um, I think the, the first, um, what's that Jean?\n\nSpeaker 3: I was talking to Steve,\n\nSpeaker 2: Sorry. Oh, sorry. Um, yeah, the first, uh, order of business is to elect a chair. Is there a nomination for, uh, for the chair?","timeStart":0.085,"timeEnd":117.005,"chunkIndex":0},{"id":"01967daf-be99-4607-86d7-99cefc3283e8","content":"Speaker 3: I nominate Ken Lao.\n\nSpeaker 2: I would like to second that nomination.\n\nSpeaker 4: I accept.\n\nSpeaker 2: Fantastic. Uh, any other nominations for chair? Fantastic. Um, I, uh, appreciate your willingness to take on the role and I've appreciated the support of the board over my period as\n\nSpeaker 3: Chair. So now we have to\n\nSpeaker 2: Vote. We have to vote. So now we do have to vote.\n\nSpeaker 5: And, um, may I just say that we have appreciated your leadership? Madam\n\nSpeaker 2: Chair? Thank you. Yes,\n\nSpeaker 3: Thank you. Absolutely. Terrific. In the job.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you very much. Um, uh, is there a, uh, uh, so we seconded? Um, so let's go ahead and take a vote, starting with Steve. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 3: Jean? Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Ken.\n\nSpeaker 4: Um, do I vote myself?\n\nSpeaker 3: Yes. Uh,\n\nSpeaker 4: Yes. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: and I am a yes as well. Congratulations, Ken. Thank you. Um, so I will hand over the gavel at the end of the meeting and really look forward to your chair of the board.\n\nSpeaker 4: Thank you half as well as you did. I'll be doing well.\n\nSpeaker 2: Very nice. Thank you. Um, is there a nomination for vice chairperson?\n\nSpeaker 4: Yes, I would like to nominate Steve.\n\nSpeaker 2: I'll accept I second. Alright. Uh, we will take, uh, any other nominations. Alright, we will take a vote, um, starting with Ken.\n\nSpeaker 4: Uh, yes.","timeStart":118.095,"timeEnd":197.975,"chunkIndex":1},{"id":"38edfb99-2710-4133-ace4-9bf1f1d5820d","content":"Speaker 2: Jean? Yes, Steve? Yes. And I'm a yes as well. Congratulations, Steve. Uh, looking forward to having you on the role of Vice Chair of the Committee. Of the board. Alright. Uh, so that concludes our organizational meeting. Uh, we will now move to agenda item number two, which is a review of the meeting minutes. So, uh, the meeting minutes that we have to review this evening are from December 15th, 2025. Um, are there any additions or corrections starting with Ken?\n\nSpeaker 4: Uh, yes. On page four, I just wanna make it a little clearer. Um, on the top of the page, uh, there's a section saying, uh, it's a section regarding the two-way traffic applies in this case, uh, well driveway, and it being, it must be 20, 24 feet wide. And, and then this seems to be, to me a confusion between, um, drive aisle and driveway. I want to make sure it's clear that when we talked about it and voted on it was that, um, a drive aisle, which means the space between two park spaces or parking spaces is what we're talking about reducing. Mm-hmm . Not the drive lane. Getting to the parking lot. Okay. So that, uh, has separate dimensional all requirement. So I just wanna make sure it, it's clear. It's, it's kind of to me a little fuzzy on, on the, on the notes there, on which way we're we're going. Alright. So if we just clarify that.\n\nSpeaker 2: Anything else, Ken?\n\nSpeaker 4: Uh, nope. Um, I, Claire was gonna\n\nSpeaker 6: Yes, on object your record. Yes. Thank you. On page 12, um, there is a note about a project, the project at 8 82 Mass, I believe it's on page. Yes,","timeStart":198.605,"timeEnd":311.215,"chunkIndex":2},{"id":"d0672b8d-1663-4ccb-993f-d20b975a5ea0","content":"Speaker 4: It is At the bottom\n\nSpeaker 6: Page. At the bottom, that's right. Um, outstanding issues regarding 82 to 8 92. Massive. Um, I stated that I was going to write a memo to the board that would share the information, um, about materials that had been submitted, uh, for this project. Um, I got this project mixed up with the project at one 90 Mass Ave. Um, we do not have a materials board for 8 82. We will reach out to the applicant again, um, to have them provide physical materials rather than just cut sheets, um, of, uh, storefront and, um, other items that you're looking for. But I think we should strike this, uh, from the minutes, uh, about the information about, uh, the memo and the receipt of the materials.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. And that is on, um, page nine, excuse\n\nSpeaker 6: Me, page nine.\n\nSpeaker 2: Nope, that's fine. I just wanted to make sure that we, um, cut that in the recording. Uh, Jean, do you have any additions for corrections?\n\nSpeaker 3: I have one, uh, correction at the very top of the minutes where it says it start started at 7:30 PM It started at 7:00 PM\n\nSpeaker 2: Oh, thank you very much, Jean. Steve, any additions or corrections? Uh, none. Madam Chair. Okay. Uh, uh, is there a motion to approve the meeting minutes as amended? So\n\nSpeaker 3: Motioned second","timeStart":311.215,"timeEnd":395.285,"chunkIndex":3},{"id":"904203b8-f9c4-4ed7-b6ff-cdaf79e87851","content":"Speaker 2: We'll take a vote starting with Steve. Yes. Jean? Yes, Ken? Yes. And I may, yes as well. Those meeting minutes have been approved as amended. All right. Uh, let's now move to our third agenda item, which is a discussion of 1306 to 1308, uh, Massachusetts Avenue. And this is a continue of the discussion. Um, the board started on in our meeting, um, on December 15th, and I'll turn it over to Director Ricker. Great,\n\nSpeaker 6: Thank you. Um, we began this discussion last meeting, um, regarding the, uh, plywood that had been installed at the, at 1306, uh, to 1308 Mass Ave. Um, the, uh, the board recommended, uh, that that plywood be, uh, painted, but also requested that the owner of the, um, uh, uh, the, the owner of the property, uh, attend this meeting to explain, um, when, uh, uh, the storefront windows will be installed. And I believe the board, um, was looking for a 60 day timeline, um, for that to occur. Um, tonight, uh, with us, we have a representative from, uh, Farina who, uh, is available to answer any further questions or to further the discussion.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you. Um, could I invite the, uh, representative from Farina Roofing to join us at the microphone over here, please?\n\nSpeaker 8: Oh, but that\n\nSpeaker 2: Yes, please. Thank you. I thought\n\nSpeaker 6: The\n\nSpeaker 8: File November oh, barn.\n\nSpeaker 2: That's okay.","timeStart":395.575,"timeEnd":487.205,"chunkIndex":4},{"id":"8591da8d-97d5-4f8a-bee6-0ce4f653904d","content":"Speaker 8: Okay. Good evening for everyone. So, uh, could you please, uh, explain me what kind of description for the materials you're looking for, what you gonna put on, like, because I have here on the, uh, plants, we got like a glass for the windows, for the doors front, you know, exactly on the same place where the plywood are.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yes. So, um, the board's concern, if I can summarize from our, from our last meeting is, um, that the project started construction, the existing windows were removed and there has been plywood in the windows for, for some time mm-hmm . Um, which is in violation of our, um, store storefront bylaws. So, uh, our question for you, and hope that it is soon , is, uh, when are you replacing those, those storefront windows and moving forward with the, the special permit that was granted?\n\nSpeaker 8: Yeah, I spoke with the owner and, uh, I mean, by the way, IAH the one who's called the permit for this company. And, uh, he told me very soon, you know, we have a difficult, kind of a difficult financial, uh, situation with, uh, the new government. And, uh, we are not blaming him, by the way. So, but the thing is, uh, another investment he did another companies to try to become bigger. So, but as soon as possible, maybe, yeah. Is that 60 days? I, on the beginning I heard something about 60 days","timeStart":488.715,"timeEnd":585.565,"chunkIndex":5},{"id":"c02c3164-e065-4cc0-a764-62eb14e56bcd","content":"Speaker 2: That, that is the board's, um, that is the board's timeline that we would like the owner to, to, uh, make every reasonable effort to meet. But again, what we were hoping to understand this evening was a more concrete timeline, um, because it's a, it's a safety issue, it's mm-hmm . Um, it's an issue for Arlington Heights in terms of, um, having that, not only that vacancy, but also the, the, the plywood, um, at, at the storefront. So is there any more specificity that you can give to the timeline for when the storefront will be installed? I would\n\nSpeaker 8: Say about a couple of months. Yeah. All having those windows installed, you know, especially all the, the entire front.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, Ken, did you have any questions for the applicant?\n\nSpeaker 4: Um, yeah. You guys are a roofing company, right? Yes. And that's all you guys do? No,\n\nSpeaker 8: We have, like I said before, we did the, uh, you know, the owner, he did another investment in a different company like, uh, construction demolition, and the, actually, I don't know, but usually we have the same, uh, registration on the Arlington City Hall for this kind of business. And, uh, yeah, we, we do other stuff.\n\nSpeaker 4: The reason I ask Okay. Is on the plywood board up, you have a plumbing company labeled right on the, uh,\n\nSpeaker 8: Oh, yes. It's a's my son-in-law. He, he did some work over there, .\n\nSpeaker 4: Yeah. But you can't just put up signs. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 8: Okay. We can remove. I didn't know that. So, uh, nobody told me about that. Anything, I didn't realize that this is gonna be a problem.\n\nSpeaker 4: It is.","timeStart":585.795,"timeEnd":697.615,"chunkIndex":6},{"id":"64d4c904-7f39-44e0-9453-fe101a7880e4","content":"Speaker 8: Okay. We can remove tomorrow.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. And, um, right now, um, would you be interested in also putting a temporary light in the vestibule? Okay. You know how the entry comes in and recess in a little bit. If you put like an open light above there at least, so there's something there that keeps\n\nSpeaker 8: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 4: Um, you know, makes it look like it's a little bit active. Right. Okay. Um, and you'll say, you say that within 60 days, two months that you'll have the plywood down and the storefronts installed. Is that your guarantee? And\n\nSpeaker 8: You confirm 60 days for install the frontal windows and the door?\n\nSpeaker 9: 90\n\nSpeaker 8: Days. He is the owner. You asking for the representative? He pushing me to come by . 90 days. 90 days? Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 9: Okay. Have to make a special order in all that frame. Special\n\nSpeaker 4: Frame. That's why I'm asking right now. 'cause I know the, uh, um, storefront right now has a lead time. And if you haven't ordered storefront yet, it takes a time. It takes time. Yeah. Especially what, so you're saying right now you have not ordered anything?\n\nSpeaker 9: No,\n\nSpeaker 4: Because at one time you guys did pull a billing permit and, and the billing permit now is no longer valid. So are you gonna reapply for a new permit? So my request is that you, again, within the next two weeks, reapply for a permit and make sure the permit is granted\n\nSpeaker 9: for the or project again,\n\nSpeaker 4: For the project that we want the project to either say you're, you're going on or you're not going on. So you","timeStart":698.085,"timeEnd":791.375,"chunkIndex":7},{"id":"1c08881d-353c-45e7-a25f-31a1a918dada","content":"Speaker 9: \n\nSpeaker 2: I I'm sorry If, uh, can I, can I ask you to, if, if, um, to, to come to the, the site over here so that the microphone can also pick you up? Thank you. And we'll get you a second. Um, oh, thank you so much, Sarah. I appreciate it. We'll get you a second chair.\n\nSpeaker 9: How is this? Good evening. How are you?\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Could you just introduce yourself, um, for the record?\n\nSpeaker 8: Your name,\n\nSpeaker 2: Your name, please.\n\nSpeaker 9: My name is, uh, Ricardo Basta.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you very much. Um, so Ken, back to your questions.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. So lemme start with the beginning. Okay. Do you still plan to follow through with the plans that you got approved to, uh, to fed out that space?\n\nSpeaker 9: Yeah. The same plan.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. So nothing's changed.\n\nSpeaker 9: Nothing's changed.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. And right now you do not have a valid building permit on, on\n\nSpeaker 9: The process. Yes, I think it expired.\n\nSpeaker 4: It it has expired, yes. So you will re you, you would reapply for the same permit?\n\nSpeaker 9: Yes. The same plans? Yes.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. I'm asking you that within the next two weeks.\n\nSpeaker 9: Yeah, we can do tomorrow. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 4: This, I'm, I'm not trying to be unreasonable, sir. Sure. Okay. Um, so you'll, you'll get that within two weeks. You say you're gonna, uh, install per the approved drawings in the next 90 days.","timeStart":793.975,"timeEnd":878.495,"chunkIndex":8},{"id":"13703b9b-7423-48be-9aac-97ddb2a80751","content":"Speaker 9: Okay? Yes. Let we check for us. Um, how long is the, uh, the lab, the manufacturer come to us and can make a schedule for set up for the windows framing?\n\nSpeaker 4: Can, can you send that, can you make that schedule and send it to the community development department? Sure. And, uh, inform them what that schedule will be. Okay. Okay. And then you will install a light in the vestibule? Yes.\n\nSpeaker 9: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 4: Like, you know, one that's, that's, uh, censored on, uh, daylight, you know, so it's not on 24 7.\n\nSpeaker 9: Okay. Then we can do tomorrow.\n\nSpeaker 4: Within reason. I'm not, I'm not asking you to do everything tomorrow. Okay? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. No, no, that's me.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Jean, any, any other questions?\n\nSpeaker 3: So I, I, I just wanna see if I understand you're, are you gonna have the windows installed within 90 days? Is that the guarantee?\n\nSpeaker 9: No. And, and no gar guarantee for 90 days because we have to make a special order for the framing and the windows.\n\nSpeaker 3: So we don't have a guaranteed date.\n\nSpeaker 9: No, a hundred percent because we have to make a order tomorrow, see how long the, the manufacturer can deliver it for the material to us. Alright.\n\nSpeaker 3: So you will send something to the Department of Planning Yes. Community development with your timeframe. Yes. And you'll do that with by what date?\n\nSpeaker 9: Uh, next week, a few weeks or not one a week? I think\n\nSpeaker 3: Within a week.\n\nSpeaker 9: Oh, yes. Okay. For the plan.","timeStart":878.885,"timeEnd":968.765,"chunkIndex":9},{"id":"f6a8625f-e244-4b99-b446-d4c0f0374a6e","content":"Speaker 3: Okay, that's good. Now, when we had the conversation about the light, we agreed he did not need to put a light in in the vestibule. So we'll hear what my other colleagues have to say about that. But I don't think the light in the vestibule is necessary\n\nSpeaker 4: Outside the vestibule. Not in the vestibule.\n\nSpeaker 3: I un I understand. Yeah, I,\n\nSpeaker 9: Because the neighbors all the time, if they see the lights, they say, Hey, coming in, shut off the light, please.\n\nSpeaker 3: So I I, I\n\nSpeaker 9: Don't know if he, I\n\nSpeaker 3: Don't think the light is necessary. I think getting the windows in as soon as possible as necessary. That's it.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you Jean. Steve.\n\nSpeaker 5: Uh, first I'd like to thank you for, uh, being really responsive in painting it right away, uh, or painting the plywood right away. Uh, I agree with Mr. Benson about the light.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Uh, thank you Jean. And, and Steve. Um, I, um, I also agree, I think that the, the windows, let's get the windows taken care of and as soon as the, the windows are taken care of, um, you know, in that letter we'd like to order the windows. Give us the timeline, but we'd also like to understand when the full project is, is being completed. Again, that should not hold up. The ordering of the windows, the ordering of the windows is the most important thing at this point for the board.\n\nSpeaker 9: Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Alright. Thank you very much. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 9: Have a","timeStart":969.275,"timeEnd":1059.365,"chunkIndex":10},{"id":"f0bd58ce-02a7-48f6-8498-341bf4957e91","content":"Speaker 2: Night. Thank you. You too. Okay. Uh, the next agenda item is, uh, agenda item number four, which is the, um, reopening or the, uh, continuation of the public hearing for docket number 3 8 6 2 for 1 26 Broadway. And I'll turn it over to Director Ricker. Great,\n\nSpeaker 6: Thank you. On January, uh, eighth, I received a letter from the representative for the applicant asking that this application be withdrawn, um, without prejudice. Um, and, uh, uh, it is my understanding that the applicant intends to submit, uh, for a new project at some time in the future, but at least in terms of this iteration of 1 26 Broadway, they request that the application be withdrawn without prejudice.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you very much. Uh, Ken, do you have any questions or comments? None. Jean. None. Steve?\n\nSpeaker 5: None.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, alright. Um, is there, I believe that the next step that we would need to do is to, um, vote to close, uh, the public hearing for docket number 3 8 6 2. Or I would like to see if there is a motion to, um, close the hearing, hearing for docket 3 8 6 2 by accepting the withdrawal without prejudice for 1 26 Broadway.\n\nSpeaker 5: So moved. Second,","timeStart":1059.365,"timeEnd":1152.415,"chunkIndex":11},{"id":"67bdfbf6-be5c-44b6-b7f0-3a252f0232fc","content":"Speaker 2: We'll take a vote starting with Steve. Yes. Jean? Yes. Kin? Yes. And I'm a yes as well. We will now close the docket for 3 8 6 2 1 26 Broadway. Uh, the next item on our agenda is a agenda item number five, which is a public hearing for docket number 3 8 6 7 9 to 11 Robins Road. Uh, this is a continuation from our hearing on December 1st. Uh, could I ask the applicant to, uh, please join us at microphone Mr. Mahoney,\n\nSpeaker 10: Yet? I'm not here yet. Um,\n\nSpeaker 11: I think this was on December\n\nSpeaker 2: 30, so. Okay. Thank you. I apologize. Absolutely. So we will, um, hold another, um, couple of minutes, I think out of order, we will take, um, new business and I will see if, um, Claire, if there is any new business that you, um, have for the board.\n\nSpeaker 6: Uh, none at this time. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Uh, Steve, any new business? Uh,\n\nSpeaker 5: Two items. Okay. Uh, first if I may ask staff, uh, how are things going, um, with the, or in the search for a new transportation planner?","timeStart":1153.105,"timeEnd":1224.895,"chunkIndex":12},{"id":"2c5e2360-9dd6-4d9b-85c6-30d6231acc3c","content":"Speaker 6: Thank you for asking. Um, we had, uh, originally advertised the position, um, earlier in the fall and received several applications. Um, went through, uh, a series of interviews, um, and elected a finalist who we could not, uh, come to terms with. Unfortunately, I am working with the manager now. Um, we are, we are currently under a hiring freeze. Um, but I am working with the manager about a timeline to repost the position. Obviously this is a very important position, um, to the department and to the town. Um, but I am working with the town manager now about, uh, next steps and, um, how we will proceed with re-advertising the position.\n\nSpeaker 5: Okay. And, uh, item number two is, uh, a piece of news from Streets blog that I came across today. Um, it's basically a, a little news site for transportation related stuff, but apparently the MBTA contacted them and they are, uh, terminating their, uh, procurement process for the redevelopment of the Alewife station garage. Uh, they're basically citing economic conditions and, um, you know, are not favorable to, uh, redevelopment at this time. So no, no word on what's going to happen, but, um, you know, that was a, like a significant thing on the horizon that is no longer on the horizon. Thank you.","timeStart":1226.025,"timeEnd":1308.205,"chunkIndex":13},{"id":"7482289d-9412-4dea-919b-beae5f03ded7","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you for the unfortunate news. and update Steve, um, gene, any new business? No new business, Ken, any new business? No new business. Okay. Um, so at this time, we will take a, uh, short, uh, recess until, uh, 7:30 PM when we will, um, uh, hold the, uh, open the public hearing for docket number 3 8 6 2. I would just need a, uh, motion. Um, I think it's 3 8 6. Thank you very much. I read the darn number. Uh, 3 8, 6 7. So, um, uh, is there a, uh, motion for a short recess until 7:35 PM when we will open, uh, uh, reopen the, uh, public hearing for docket number, uh, 3 8 6 7.\n\nSpeaker 4: So motions\n\nSpeaker 3: Second.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Steve? Yes. Jean? Yes, Ken? Yes. Yes as well. So we will, um, reconvene at 7 35. Alright. Let's go ahead and, uh, reconvene our meeting now that it is 7 35. Um, for those of you just joining us, um, we did, uh, just, uh, close docket 3 8 6 2 for, for 1 26 Broadway. The applicant has withdrawn their application. So for any of you who are joining us for, um, for that agenda item, uh, note that we will, uh, not be discussing that further, that application has been withdrawn. Um, we are now, uh, opening the public hearing for dock number 3 8 6 7 9 6 9. Why do I, no, 3 8 6 7 3 8 6 7.\n\nSpeaker 5: Yeah, sorry. Now","timeStart":1309.455,"timeEnd":1415.795,"chunkIndex":14},{"id":"16692df4-0748-4bcf-9753-7969a9c92557","content":"Speaker 2: I wrong. That's okay. , we'll get all these numbers right to some point tonight. Um, public hearing for docket number 3 8 6 7 9 to 11 Robins Road. Um, this is a site plan review hearing continued from December 1st, and I will turn it over to Director Ricker.\n\nSpeaker 6: Great, thank you. Um, in this project, the applicant proposes to demolish an existing two family dwelling with a detached garage and construct two three story residential buildings with two units each on the property located at nine to 11 Robins road. Um, updated, uh, documents were provided by the applicant since the last hearing included, including updated architectural plans and drawings, updated color renderings, landscape plan, a memorandum regarding the second driveway. Um, there were also several, uh, issues for the applicant to address, which have been done. So, um, in the new, um, uh, uh, in, in the new drawings and the updated proposal, um, and which are, uh, listed here in the staff. Uh, memo.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you very much, director Ricker. So I at this time would like to invite the, uh, applicants for nine to 11 Robins Road to join us at the, uh, microphone. And we can certainly, um, provide more chairs if there, um, are more than one applicant. Um, joining us,\n\nSpeaker 12: I think we should be okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: You should be okay. Fantastic. Thank you. So if, um, the applicants who will be speaking could please introduce yourselves, um, you'll have, um, up to, um, eight minutes to address the board.","timeStart":1415.795,"timeEnd":1504.365,"chunkIndex":15},{"id":"664e84cf-7fec-4bd9-997c-c7cc0b718d5a","content":"Speaker 12: Good, good evening, Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Mary Wind Stanley O'Connor. I represent nine 11 Robins Road, LLC. With me is, um, the manager, William Mahoney, the architect, Mr. Co, Charlie Cochran, and the general contractor Thomas Evaro. Um, as the director, director said, we've updated, um, the plans and provided the information you requested at the December 1st hearing. Um, I would suggest that I, uh, have Mr. Cochran review what's been updated, if that's what the board would like at this point.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, ye yes, if there are any, um, high level items that you would like to point out from the, um, revised application, we've certainly reviewed all of the materials that have been submitted to us. But if there's anything that you would like to highlight, we'd be, um, we'd certainly welcome that. Alright,","timeStart":1505.155,"timeEnd":1551.405,"chunkIndex":16},{"id":"33401bd4-7f76-479d-8e62-44195d7049db","content":"Speaker 13: Thank you. Uh, my name is Charles Cochran, uh, cornerstone Architect. Since the last meeting, uh, we have updated the plans and the elevations. Um, based on the comments we've received, uh, we lowered the ceiling heights down to eight foot in order to get better, uh, roof pitches on both structures. Um, we also have widened some of the entryways, uh, to make a more pronounced on the, uh, street side. We have added details over the windows with new cross head, uh, headers. We widened the, uh, corner boards and we went from the, uh, on the fire, the privacy decks. We now have a solid wall. One, maintain some privacy, but also that allowed us to take that band and wrap it around the building. They also help cut the vertical height of the buildings down. Um, other than that, that's pretty much the changes that we have made.\n\nSpeaker 12: We've also made two of the parking spaces, compact car spaces, and we've given you an updated landscaping plan and you have my memorandum on the issue of the two driveways and the, and the rationale, uh, for that.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you very much. Um, and it looks as well as you, you have a sample board with you. If you can just walk us through what you, um, have to share with us this, this evening.","timeStart":1551.405,"timeEnd":1623.965,"chunkIndex":17},{"id":"0342e2f8-a6ef-4e81-b894-041d8aa6a6c5","content":"Speaker 14: Everything here is PVC plastic. We use totally on the outside. We make our own carnivores, which they are one by six, by one by five PVC all the way up. And we do what we call water table at the bottom. It could be anywhere from a one by eight to a one by 10. And we take a one by three, we put a 15 inch degree on it. They give it a little slant so the water goes off it, that band goes right around the whole house. Plus it gives it a detail instead of, you know, coming down. We, we use a plastic, um, uh, window sill. Okay. And we use a square edge, whether it be a one by four or one by five square edge around the window. Okay. Um, this, this product here, it's like a Hardie plank. It's just a different make. They seem to all be using it now because of the texture. It's still for life, you know, it's compositive, it's, uh, pretty basic on the outside what we do. The nine out of 10 times your gut is are black, your garage doors are black to go with everything else seems to be what people like. Um, that's about it. Okay. I can answer any questions you want to know on the outside.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great, thank you. Um, I, one, well, I have a couple questions, but the first is regarding gutters. I, I don't see them illustrated on this, um, this rendering. I is will there be gutters that building?","timeStart":1627.215,"timeEnd":1724.095,"chunkIndex":18},{"id":"34795d52-5b87-402e-a424-26d85c7a5c8d","content":"Speaker 13: Will they, the elevations, I believe show the gutters and the downspouts. Uh, they didn't get in time for the renderer. Um, okay. But the gutters and, and, and down spots in my mind will match the colors of the, uh, siding in order to basically fade away.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. So there'll be\n\nSpeaker 13: A grayish color,\n\nSpeaker 2: There'll be the grayish color. Okay. Alright. Uh, so let's start with, uh, with Ken.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. And, um, let, let's call it your building B\n\nSpeaker 13: One facing Higgins.\n\nSpeaker 4: Yes. These are considered town homes, right?\n\nSpeaker 13: Yes. They're basic two bags.\n\nSpeaker 4: Uh, and so when I look at the elevation, uh, of, uh, uh, the, uh, the entry to building B, the, the one that faces the street, that's, that that scale entry, the entry there with that protocol and everything else. Then I look around the side, the entry that's toward, um, uh, the parking area. That doesn't look like a front entry to me now. Okay. And these are supposed to be equal houses, you know, like town homes. So, I'm sorry, would you be able to, uh, scale up?\n\nSpeaker 13: No. Yes.","timeStart":1724.125,"timeEnd":1797.245,"chunkIndex":19},{"id":"48315ac3-a776-46e9-843a-259b92b9e0fd","content":"Speaker 4: Um, the one on the, the rear. On the rear. So just, you know, just pump it up a little bit so it looks like the one on the front. Sure. Now mm-hmm . When I first look at it now, it like, looks like two town homes, you know? Yes. It doesn't, 'cause when I look at this right now, it looks like one house of back door, um, on the same building there. If you look at the, uh, I think those are the bathrooms. There's two windows right in the middle of the building. Uh, there's no millions there. Is that just a, uh,\n\nSpeaker 13: No, they, they should all have the dividers. Just\n\nSpeaker 4: A glitch then. Right. Just attracting. So there will be, uh, uh, millions similar to, uh, above or below. Correct. Okay. Um, when I look at, I think it's building a now, okay, on your, on your elevations, on building a, uh, where is it now? Okay, on the, on the, uh, third floor, on the middle of the building, right above the entry. Mm-hmm . You got two windows in a dormer there. Right. It's right in a closet. So you have two windows right in looking right into a closet and a dormer in a closet. Is, is there a reasoning?\n\nSpeaker 13: Well, I, I think the dormer was put there for aesthetics. Uh, I mean, those windows can certainly be curtained off or closed up, so no one can see in","timeStart":1797.385,"timeEnd":1889.345,"chunkIndex":20},{"id":"7d32332e-4a24-4d58-aa87-444dab0e9b50","content":"Speaker 4: I, I know, but just it's to me, um, you know, you can save, uh, money and, uh, and use the same, uh, level of, of, um, articulation somewhere else. And, uh, maybe make the, the windows on either side of it bigger and make the room bigger and not have a window in the closet. That's all. I'm just, it's, it's not a, a statement saying, you know, you do that. I'm not gonna say yes. Yeah, . Okay. I'm just questioning the fact that, you know, it seems kinda odd to me. There's, you know, two windows in the closet in a big dorm room, uh, for it, you know, that looks to me like a, you know, it could, it could be a nice bedroom, a study and so forth.\n\nSpeaker 13: Well, that, that's actually the dividing wall is right down there between the two, uh, units too. Yep.\n\nSpeaker 4: Right. Yep. But I would ask you to look at that again. Okay. That's all. Okay. Um, and then on the same building, on the rail elevation, you have four dormers there. Okay. And four windows. And I look at your floor plans, you only have two windows.\n\nSpeaker 13: Uh, it could be just a drafting error. I mean, it should be a window, I believe, in each, uh, bathroom, in each clo, and one in each closet. Well,\n\nSpeaker 4: Let's go to the, let's go to the fourth floor or third floor, sorry. Uh, okay. Um, so you would have windows in the closets again? I just, I show one thing and the elevation shows something else right here.\n\nSpeaker 15: Oh, yeah. Right.\n\nSpeaker 4: So you're putting windows and closets together.","timeStart":1890.905,"timeEnd":1997.615,"chunkIndex":21},{"id":"1b08c3e2-f0b2-4712-83ad-7ccb0baa9a12","content":"Speaker 15: So, because the, the setback line is the setback. Correct? Correct. So it is, I know the, this chunk is, uh, 28 square feet, but since I'm wondering if it's, uh, the limit bit is 25, but with the line going, you dally through it. Uh, it's not clear what the, how much of it. So you know what those Yeah, exactly. I don't know that off hand, but\n\nSpeaker 4: What's, what's, uh, what's allowed by code,\n\nSpeaker 7: Uh,\n\nSpeaker 5: These, these a, a porch can project into a minimum yard up to a distance of three feet, six inches mm-hmm . And 25 square feet. So this is, um, yeah, it's\n\nSpeaker 4: 28 feet right now. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 5: So, well, well it's 28. The square, the rectangular part is 28. Mm-hmm . But the setback doesn't follow the rectangle. I see. It cuts through it. So it's less than 28 feet. But is it, my question is how much less?\n\nSpeaker 4: Let's make it 25 and we'll be done. I can make\n\nSpeaker 7: It 25.\n\nSpeaker 5: We can make it 20. Well, if, I mean\n\nSpeaker 13: We can adjust it so that there's definitely not more than 25 feet.\n\nSpeaker 5: Okay. That's, that's all. Okay. Yeah. We'll, you'll, um, that's the reader that is the requirement. And I'm glad to hear you could accommodate it. Thank you. Nothing further. Madam chair.\n\nSpeaker 12: Madam chair may just make a couple of comments.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yes, please.","timeStart":2284.815,"timeEnd":2364.565,"chunkIndex":25},{"id":"4d5ffc3e-edec-49da-a302-b0942ad1c781","content":"Speaker 12: Park the driveway issue. Um, it was done that way in part 'cause um, the neighbors on Robins Road, um, didn't want massing the parking in one area. And 'cause this is a corner lot, um, it, it, it seemed aesthetically better. Um, and, um, I've given you the rationale. Now, the people on Higgins, uh, there's a house that does not have any parking and they parked three cars on the street, which is not permitted. Um, so to the extent that the argument is, is there's a lot of parking, I think except parking is not permitted. Um, we did, we do have six spaces, only four required. Um, my client would like to leave it at six spaces. He did make two little compact.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you for the summary. I appreciate that. So, um, the board would need to, in our decision, um, make a finding that the, um, uh, second driveway, um, is, um, I believe the word we would need to use is, uh, appropriate for the project\n\nSpeaker 3: Meets the requirements of 6.1 0.1 a two.","timeStart":2365.075,"timeEnd":2433.755,"chunkIndex":26},{"id":"3a8ce1cf-3dcc-44ae-977e-a4e2750822d4","content":"Speaker 2: Alright. Uh, anything else before we, uh, move to public comment? Alright. So at this time, we will welcome, uh, any member of the public who has joined us this evening, um, to address the board on the project of 9 2 11 Robins Road. If you'd like to speak, uh, please raise your hand and I will call on you to address the board. Okay. Um, please, uh, so as you're coming up here, I'll, uh, let everyone know as you're addressing the board, uh, we will, um, take any questions, but this will not be a back and forth dialogue. We will not answer any questions as they're posed. We'll, we'll, um, keep them for the end of public comment. You will have up to two minutes to address the board. If you could please, uh, introduce, introduce yourself by your first, last name and address. You're welcome to begin. Yeah.","timeStart":2442.475,"timeEnd":2488.645,"chunkIndex":27},{"id":"55600d12-c6fc-4ec7-81f2-d6b265eb074c","content":"Speaker 17: Um, Saru Ji, I own the property right next to it's, uh, nine Higgins Street. Um, I wasn't there for the last two, um, meetings traveling from Austin. Um, my parents live there, so yeah, my biggest concern, I, I heard that we couldn't park on the street. We have, we are permitted to parking permits. We don't have a driveway, so, um, so we do park on the street. Now. The problem is when it snows, we have to elevate our cars into the front of our yard and the side of the house, um, because there's no parking on the street when it snows. So, so that's my biggest concern. I don't know how much of the area that you're planning to take, um, or I guess the, the parking lot on the, the side of the house where it aggresses towards the, to our, our side of the house.","timeStart":2489.265,"timeEnd":2545.005,"chunkIndex":28},{"id":"6496afe0-aaa8-4821-b9bb-217c5632c323","content":"Speaker 17: So I'm just kind of concerned that we won't be able to do that when it snows and there's a snow emergency, um, in effect. So that is my biggest concern. I don't know it's been brought up or by, uh, anybody else, but, um, that's my biggest concern. So I kind of want to hear what the plan is in terms of how much space that's gonna be taken, uh, on the side of the house, um, for the parking lot that it's shown on the, the picture there. So that, that was my biggest concern. Again, we park on the street, we don't have parking. Uh, we don't have a driveway. Uh, we do have seven feet from our home to the, um, to the other house where, uh, that's a property line. We could build a parking lot there, but we haven't. Um, but again, that was our biggest concern, so I just wanna kind of understand what that would look like.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you. We will note that for our, uh, reconvening with the applicant. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you. Uh, would anyone else like to speak this evening? Yes, please.\n\nSpeaker 7: Hi there.","timeStart":2545.105,"timeEnd":2616.555,"chunkIndex":29},{"id":"5df04c0c-4934-4eef-b2a2-5cb121ae4a9e","content":"Speaker 18: Larry Brenner. I'm at 16 Higgins. Um, I would like to both thank the applicant for, uh, trying to put as much parking in as possible. I understand that the two driveways, uh, were a concern. I re feud the memo and I would want to emphasize all the points in there. We don't want to create more of a parking problem. Um, and there are gonna be cars on the, with the street. There always are. Um, and the more parking spots with these new town homes don't have, they're gonna end up on the street. Um, looking at our whole, uh, with, uh, you know, Higgins, uh, street, there is an average of two cars, uh, per unit and they're all two families or, or more at the other end. Um, and so that's four cars and there are six spots which isn't as good as eight, but it's getting close with. So we don't have as many cars on the street and they tend to park on Higgins, not on, uh, the AC cross street just 'cause it, it's a quieter street, but it's also much narrower. And we have had issues with the e emergency vehicles being able to get through and we don't want that. So thank you.","timeStart":2617.405,"timeEnd":2715.925,"chunkIndex":30},{"id":"8c5db343-ab66-4d9b-ab9a-6d43ded8ab90","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you very much. Uh, would anyone else like to speak, uh, on this project this evening? Okay. Uh, seeing no one else, we will close public comment, uh, and we will turn this over to the board for, uh, discussion. So, um, what I, uh, would like us to do is discuss the two driveways and, um, ensure that the, um, board, uh, has a discussion, um, to support the finding that the second driveway meets the criteria of 6.1 0.182. Um, or discuss that the board does not feel that way. So, um, Ken, we'll start with you.\n\nSpeaker 4: Um, I'm fine with the two driveways. I feel like, um, they, they've done their best to, uh, mitigate this and having, uh, less of a parking field and having it spread out is fine. Um,\n\nSpeaker 4: The only thing is, um, the curb cut is the same as the, uh, the drive, uh, drive aisle. Um, if the rest of the board feels like that could be narrowed a little bit, that'd be fine by me, but it, I'm okay with the, the width it is right now. Um, that's the only thing that I, I, I could see as a, as a pushback. But as far as, um, what they did, uh, they've added vegetation along the, on the side there, they added a fence, they did all the stuff that we wanted to do. I think I'm, I'm happy with that is right now.","timeStart":2716.215,"timeEnd":2820.545,"chunkIndex":31},{"id":"b83acbb3-80b2-4988-8ecb-995d09daddd6","content":"Speaker 2: Great, thank you. Um, and uh, as we are discussing that, um, attorney, um, wins O'Connor, I know that one of the, um, neighbors had a question about their parking adjacent to this parcel. My understanding is that all of the improvements that you are proposing is on the owned parcel, correct? Yes, it is on my client's parcel. Correct. Okay. Um, thank you for that. Uh, Jean, um, thoughts on the second driveway?\n\nSpeaker 3: Yes. I mean, I, I wanted to follow up with the gentleman who asked the question. Since their driveway, the second driveway is completely on their property, does that mitigate your problems?\n\nSpeaker 16: Yeah, the only thing, so we have to do actual, uh, survey to see how much space there is. What I'm saying is now when it snows, since you can't park on the street, we do park on the side of the, the house. Um, I, we have personally,\n\nSpeaker 2: Oops, it, it, it's fine. The, um, the sample board just was, was falling. We're good, we're good. Keep on going.\n\nSpeaker 3: So you could still park on your property. This would not eliminate that.\n\nSpeaker 16: I, that's what I need to figure out. Yes. We need to do a survey to figure out how much space we have Yeah. From that house to what, where they're planning to build the parking lot and if there isn't enough space, that's gonna be a problem for us.\n\nSpeaker 3: Right. Ex except this is all on their property. Their driveway is all on their property.\n\nSpeaker 16: I mean, is that, I don't know. Has it been surveyed?","timeStart":2821.035,"timeEnd":2919.685,"chunkIndex":32},{"id":"59aca61b-a890-456c-a4be-7386d57b9f2a","content":"Speaker 2: Yes, they, they have. Yes, they have a um, so, so I, what we're letting you know and what the applicant confirm for us is that all of this work is being done on their property per the survey and the, um, plot information that was provided. Correct? Correct.\n\nSpeaker 3: The, the only difference would be if, if your family was parking along Higgins, you wouldn't be able to park where they're putting the driveway in, in Higgins because then it's gonna be their driveway. But, so you'd lose basically one parking space on Higgins, which is where the driveway is. Um, so it seems to me that it meets the requirement. It, you know, in two A, um, it avoids an undue concentration of population allows adequate provision of transportation safety because it's like any other driveway, there are no protected trees being taken down. Um, doesn't violate any other requirements, et cetera. It looks like there's sort of low traffic streets on both sides. So it's not really an issue. So I think it meets the criteria to allow two driveways.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you Jean. Steve?\n\nSpeaker 5: Uh, I concur with attorney when San Lee O'Connor's memo, and I think it meets the requirements in 6 1 10 A. Thank you.","timeStart":2920.825,"timeEnd":3008.035,"chunkIndex":33},{"id":"84afdf3f-4b04-428c-adce-b0c33f4c3722","content":"Speaker 2: I do as well. Uh, so I wanted to identify, um, the, the items that were identified to be addressed to see if we could move, uh, forward towards an approval this evening with special conditions. Um, and again, there, there may be others that the, the board would like to discuss, which might, um, require further discussion. But I'll, I'll run through those that were raised during our initial comment. Um, so there was the, um, um, request by, by Ken I believe to increase, was it the scale on, can you remind me which, which portico?\n\nSpeaker 4: Uh, in unit four, uh, unit number four in building B, the entrance the match, uh, portico to match the portico in unit three in building B. So there's similar size. So it looks like a townhouse in\n\nSpeaker 2: Building B. Yes. Thank you. Um, thank you. Uh, there is the provision that the bicycle structure cannot be greater than seven feet. Um, and confirm, um, through a dimension, um, plan, I would suggest to the department of planning and community development that the porch projection on building B, um, the total area in, um, of the projection is 25 feet or less. Less\n\nSpeaker 3: 25 square feet.\n\nSpeaker 2: Square feet. Thank you very much. Um, that is what I have Jean.\n\nSpeaker 3: Um, lemme see if I have anything else. I think that's it too.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Steve, did you have anything else? Uh, nothing\n\nSpeaker 3: Further.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Ken, did you have anything else?","timeStart":3008.915,"timeEnd":3119.615,"chunkIndex":34},{"id":"f60902bc-1ca8-4905-a82a-d47d0f4f1eb3","content":"Speaker 4: Um, not, uh, just to relook at the, uh, in building a your four windows in the, in the four closets. It's not gonna d terminate my thing here, uh, my boat here one way or the other. It's just, I would like to look at that again. 'cause, you know, uh, just having dark windows up in there, it doesn't look right. It just looks funny having windows in the closet and uh, yeah.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. We will not make that a, i I do not want to make that a special condition and they can't.\n\nSpeaker 4: It's just a comment. Yes,\n\nSpeaker 3: I get it. I get it. Right.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. So, um,\n\nSpeaker 4: Excuse\n\nSpeaker 2: Me. Bless you. Is there, um, a motion to approve, bless you. Docket number 3 8 6 7 for 9 2 11 Robins Road with the finding, um, that this, uh, project meets the requirements of the, uh, site plan criteria and that the second driveway meets the criteria of 6.1 0.1 A two and with the special conditions that the applicant increase the scale on unit four and building B to match the portico in unit three on building B, that the bicycle structure cannot be greater than seven feet tall. Tall. Thank you. And that the porch projection on building B is 25 square feet or less. Um, all of those items can be submitted to the Department of Planning and community development for administrative approval. Any other special conditions that the board would like to add? So is uh, there someone who would make that motion? So motion\n\nSpeaker 4: As amended?\n\nSpeaker 7: I'll second.","timeStart":3120.475,"timeEnd":3224.245,"chunkIndex":35},{"id":"02deadbf-8394-47e1-bf44-53f833cc9d03","content":"Speaker 2: I will take a vote starting with Steve. Yes. Jean? Yes. Kin? Yes. And I may, yes as well. Congratulations. Thank you so much for working with the board and um, your site plan\n\nSpeaker 7: Approval\n\nSpeaker 2: Is now complete. So we will be following,\n\nSpeaker 7: You'll get something in the\n\nSpeaker 2: Mail? Yes. We'll be following up with, um, with those items. Okay. So that, uh, now closes the public hearing for docket number 3 8 6 7 9 to 11 Robins Road. Uh, we'll allow them to leave and then we will open the public hearing for docket 3 8 8 1 2 59 Broadway. Let us confirm that the applicant is here and uh, if I could ask that the applicants please, uh, move down to towards our microphone. We'll just get ourselves reset,\n\nSpeaker 7: Plug\n\nSpeaker 2: In behind you right over here please. Thank you so much. Um,\n\nSpeaker 7: Here.\n\nSpeaker 2: Alright, we'll get that queued up and then we'll open the hearing.\n\nSpeaker 7: Oh, this is my, no, my mouse is over here.\n\nSpeaker 2: All right. And is this a presentation that you were looking for?\n\nSpeaker 7: Yes, that's the\n\nSpeaker 2: One. Perfect. Fantastic. Very warm. All right. Right. Let us know when you are. I'll\n\nSpeaker 7: Be just one\n\nSpeaker 2: More minute. No problem. Just let us know when you're ready and we'll get started.\n\nSpeaker 7: All right. I can't see that. Should\n\nSpeaker 6: I angle this to the board more?","timeStart":3224.965,"timeEnd":3406.725,"chunkIndex":36},{"id":"4b928bd0-2b5a-4ce5-82c2-a555b831a738","content":"Speaker 2: That would be very helpful if you wouldn't mind. Thank you, Claire. I'll move if that makes it easier. I can't see it either. Perfect. You all see that now? Okay, great. So we will now, uh, open the public hearing for docket number 3 8 8 1 2 59 Broadway. And I will turn it over to Director Ricker for introduction. This is for a site plan review hearing. Great.\n\nSpeaker 6: I'm up again. Awesome . Um, the, uh, this is an application for 2 59, uh, Broadway. The applicant proposes to demolish the existing four unit residential building with detached garage and construct a mixed use building containing 14 residential units and two commercial units. A total of five parking spaces will be provided. The applicant has submitted a transportation demand management plan to request the parking reduction. Two affordable housing units are proposed, uh, in accordance with our affordable housing requirements, um, in the zoning bylaw. And just a note about the, uh, transportation demand management, uh, plan, the parking reduction request, uh, proposes the following TDM methods to charge for parking on site to be located within a quarter mile walk of a bus stop with scheduled bus service at least every 30 minutes to provide electric bike and scooter charging stations and also some additional strategies. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you very much. Um, so at this point I'd like to turn it over to the applicant. Uh, you'll have up to eight minutes to address the board, and then we will, um, begin our, um, initial discussion.","timeStart":3407.195,"timeEnd":3505.805,"chunkIndex":37},{"id":"28ac07a9-c70c-4ae8-a6b7-9589a07bebb7","content":"Speaker 19: Thank you, Madam Chairman. My name is Christopher Mulhern. I'm the principal of Harrison Mulhern Architects Winchester Mass with the architects for the project, uh, 2 59 Broadway Realty Trust is our client and owner of the property. I know you've seen all this information in your packet, but I want to run through it quickly if I might. Next slide, please. Uh, the, the project's located in the Mass Broadway multifamily Overlay district and summarizing the bylaw. The goals of the district are to provide a variety of housing types to generate affordable housing, to locate housing near retail, to reduce automobile dependency, to protect the climate through sensitive development, to increase investment in redevelopment, to support computer consumer base for local businesses, and to comply with the requirements of the MBTs. A zoning, uh, chapter 40 a section three. A next slide, please. This is the site plan. It's the corner of Broadway and Palmer on next slide, please.","timeStart":3506.415,"timeEnd":3568.485,"chunkIndex":38},{"id":"14fcb5fc-de95-4cae-b743-2023e6989727","content":"Speaker 19: This is the current Victorian that's on the house. It was originally built as a two family. It's currently divided into four apartments. This is the view looking north across the intersection. Next, this is the view, looking southwest down Palmer Street towards the corner. Next slide please. The R two zoning district calls for 15 foot front yard setbacks, five foot side yard setbacks, and a 20 foot rear setback. The bylaw lets the owner select one side and one rear yard for a corner lot. We have chosen the side opposite Broadway as the rear yard and the side opposite Palmer as the side yard. The MBMF overlay district allows for the reduction of the front yard setback to zero. If one of the bonus requirements is met, we meet the requirements for the ground floor non-residential use bonus. So we are using a zero setback on Broadway and Palmer.","timeStart":3569.315,"timeEnd":3627.125,"chunkIndex":39},{"id":"bf7b7b93-9d72-4dc4-ba08-26e7d1efa4f2","content":"Speaker 19: In addition, the bylaw calls for a seven and a half foot setback, upper story setback along Broadway, uh, at the fourth floor level. Next slide. This diagram shows the proposed setbacks. Six tenths of a foot and seven tenths of a foot, uh, are at the street front facing piers 2.2 feet at the storefront in the notches between the piers, 5.2 feet on the left side, and 20 feet at the rear. Next slide please. This is what we wanna build. It's a five story building with a mostly retail ground level and four levels of rental apartments above the building. Steps back about 15 feet at the fourth level, presenting a three story facade to Broadway. The residential entrance is in the center of the Broadway facade, marked by the glass curtain wall on the two floors above. The retail level is clad in red brick with caststone base course in lentils.","timeStart":3627.705,"timeEnd":3688.285,"chunkIndex":40},{"id":"7489e2c3-9f71-4001-af31-9a4d8829eef9","content":"Speaker 19: The upper levels are clad in a range of light colored fiber cement panels accented by aluminum cornices and sunshades. Next slide here is the ground floor plan. 92% of the street frontage is retail with a glass storefront to a height of nine feet. The smaller retail space on the left will work for a small professional services office. Well, the larger one could be a variety store, a day spa, a small daycare facility, or perhaps a coffee shop. Both spaces have access to the a DA bath in the residential area in order to avoid having to build out employee bathrooms in the retail footprints. The residential portion is accessed via a vestibule of Broadway or by one of the two doors at the rear of the, the building. The modest lobby links the doors to the elevator and the egress stairs. The balance of the space is taken up by a shared laundry facility, the shared a DA bath, a bike room with space for 24 bikes, and a rear vestibule doubling as a trash and recycling center.","timeStart":3688.625,"timeEnd":3756.045,"chunkIndex":41},{"id":"586c7caa-8144-47bd-9fe8-7f7dfef10540","content":"Speaker 19: The back hallway will house the mailboxes and a realtime transit display. Next. This landscape plan shows the development of the balance of the site. There are five parking spaces, three full-sized and two compact tucked under the overhang portion of the building. These are accessed by way of the existing curb cut on Palmer Street. The back center walkway has a bike rack for two visiting bikes. The sidewalk from the rear vestibule provides access, level access for a moving wheel, wheeled trash carts for the building to the truck. The electric transformer and the generator providing standby power for the elevator will be located along the side yard privacy fence. We'll come back to the other landscape items in just a moment. Next, the second and third floor plans are the same with four modest apartments per floor. Three one bedroom units and one two bedroom, one bath unit.","timeStart":3757.025,"timeEnd":3819.865,"chunkIndex":42},{"id":"70164c8a-f7b1-405e-923c-9824ca438732","content":"Speaker 19: In addition to the two affordable units, proposed the small size of these apartments will put the rents at the low end of the range for new construction. Next, the fourth floor steps back about 15 feet to the line of the center corridor, leaving three one bedroom units. The middle portion of the roof created by the setback, will be used for a shared outdoor deck area, the main part of which will be shaded by a pergola. The edge of this roof will be protected by a 42 inch high parapet. Next, the fifth floor follows the pattern of the fourth with three one bedroom units. All of the bedrooms in the project have windows on two exposures allowing natural cross ventilation. Next, the upper roof plan has shown on the left showing the elevator penthouse, heat pumps for the residential units, ventilation equipment, and the future solar array.","timeStart":3820.645,"timeEnd":3885.505,"chunkIndex":43},{"id":"95762b20-69f4-41dd-8d79-cb8b37f21a63","content":"Speaker 19: This 35 panel, 15.4 KWRA will generate about 17,400 kilowatt hours of power per year. This level also has a 42 inch high parapet. The top of the roof parapet will be 61 feet, two inches above the ground level, shielding the rooftop equipment from view. The right side of this slide shows the parcel, basement level housing, the building utility areas, and one storage cage per each apartment. The basement will be held away from Broadway and Palmer Streets to minimize the impact on the existing street. Infrastructure. Next, here are the street elevations with Broadway on the left and Palmer Street on the right, the residential entrance is in the center of the Broadway facade. The Broadway front is three stories tall with the two upper floors set back. The retail storefront wraps around to Palmer Street. That facade features three small bays with projecting tops. Next here, the rear and left side elevations.","timeStart":3886.215,"timeEnd":3956.165,"chunkIndex":44},{"id":"6d716db7-9eab-4b24-a70b-4b26a54c5bcf","content":"Speaker 19: Uh, the applicant felt as if, uh, the, the complications around trying to renovate the, uh, existing building and the resistance to the addition to get to five units was making, uh, making it, uh, not really viable, uh, to, to go forward with five. So they decided to pivot and go to, uh, this approach, which is a comprehensive, uh, redevelopment of the, of the lot.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, can you speak to the resistance that was occurred? Um, because I know that this board had, um, been supportive with the, um, with the, uh, enclosure of the rear stair, which had been, um, at the last hearing that I attended, uh, or meeting with the historic commission, um, had been successfully addressed. Um, was, can you speak to, um, can you be clear, because I'm not aware of any resistance that what that had occurred, um, after the meeting that I attended where there was a, um, successful discussion around the enclosure of the rear stair.\n\nSpeaker 19: So, uh, I'm a little bit out of a loss here because I wasn't the architect on that project. Um, but, um, my colleague can answer, I believe.","timeStart":4273.345,"timeEnd":4368.705,"chunkIndex":48},{"id":"e6e4a2ab-3b49-439f-bf7f-05a557d734fe","content":"Speaker 20: Thank you very much, Chris Madam Chair. Uh, three members of the board. Uh, my name is attorney Robert Peterson. I'm the, uh, family attorney for the BUAs family who owns this property. Uh, it is my understanding, and I was also not involved in the previous development, but from my discussions with the Bulah family, when they went about, uh, that original planning, it became for what they had to do relative to the financial constraints around improving the property as previously proposed. Uh, when they went back in and reviewed the zoning bylaws of what could be allowed here under this, uh, overlay district, it became more, uh, both financially and practically feasible for the site layout as well as the structure, current structure that sits on the site and overall redevelopment, uh, as their long-term goals kind of changed when they revisited the, uh, they revisited the redevelopment of the site.","timeStart":4369.875,"timeEnd":4415.545,"chunkIndex":49},{"id":"0a4058c3-48ab-46af-8bc9-f2a63acbfcff","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you for the clarification. Thank you. Okay. Um, so with that, we will turn it, uh, over to the, uh, board for any questions or initial feedback. Um, just procedurally, I will share that, um, the board will, um, uh, most likely ask you, uh, several questions, uh, during this initial phase. We will then open up the hearing for, uh, public comment. I will see where we are in our, um, timing of our agenda this evening to determine the length of public comment. Um, we will then turn it back to the board who will discuss, um, whether we will be able to reach a finding this evening or whether we will need to, um, continue the, the hearing and ask you to come back with, uh, additional clarifications. So with that, I will turn it over to, uh, Ken.\n\nSpeaker 4: Alright. Um, this is a, uh, site plan review.\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes, sir.\n\nSpeaker 4: So, uh, for us, we're just reviewing this, this meet all the zoning requirements and all the MBT regulations and rules, so it's not really a special permit review.\n\nSpeaker 19: Understood.\n\nSpeaker 4: The only thing you're asking for is, uh, from us is, uh, probably, uh, um, um, reduction in parking,\n\nSpeaker 19: Uh, approval of a transportation demand management plan, which then leads to a reduction in parking. Yes, sir.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. So when I look at your parking, you have five parking spots there with a drive lane of 12.7 feet?\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes, sir.","timeStart":4415.595,"timeEnd":4499.565,"chunkIndex":50},{"id":"dc926956-cd93-4c4c-a8bc-43f3c2b45c7f","content":"Speaker 4: Um, I don't know how you can turn a car on that, on that, uh, 12 foot, uh, 0.7, um, turnaround. I mean, a car is 18 feet deep, and so you, there's, there's no way of you getting that turn. I don't think our rules allow for that. Uh, you have 14 units, that means that, um, at least one of these handicapped spots, one of these spots have to be handicapped, and you don't indicate that at all.\n\nSpeaker 19: My response to that, um, with respect to handicap parking, my understanding of the bylaw, the A DA rules 5 27 CMR is that, uh, 15 spaces requires the first handicap space. So there's no requirement in the a DA for a handicap space in, in this particular lot. Uh, if we needed one, if we had a tenant who needed to have a space that was accessible, then we would convert the last space on the left to a handicap space by changing the grades to incorporate that sidewalk as the access area with respect to the width of the driveway. The intent here is that these are overnight parking spaces that they're only used by residents, tenants of the building, and the turning is tight. There's no question about that. But we, I believe that it's possible to use all of those spaces with a 12 foot, 12.7 foot access drive.\n\nSpeaker 4: Uh, well, that's left up to debate right now, and, uh, I don't believe it is. Okay. Okay. Um, and, um, as far as locating the handicap, um, uh, spot, that is true what you said, but it has to be, uh, at the, um, closest, uh, possible parking space. You can't put it the furthest one away.","timeStart":4500.185,"timeEnd":4624.265,"chunkIndex":51},{"id":"71a4e173-88fe-4055-ac31-0e5d46d634bf","content":"Speaker 19: So there's a door, uh, directly adjacent to that parking space, which has a grade access, uh, to the inside of the building. So there would be a very short, accessible route from the space to the building.\n\nSpeaker 4: Uh, it, it is a route, not the primary route, but that's, we, we can, I'm just bringing up issues right now. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 19: Understood. I, it's not the primary entrance, but it is one of the accessible entrance to the building.\n\nSpeaker 4: Um, and right now, according to you, you say you guys have 60% of ground floor that is, um, commercial,\n\nSpeaker 19: 60% of the usable area. Yes, sir.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. And when you say usable area, then, then what, what do you, what do you classify as usable area?\n\nSpeaker 19: So we classify, uh, everything accepting the stairs and the elevator, uh, of, of the interior space as usable area. So if you take the footprint of this floor, deduct the stairs in elevator, then the balance, uh, is 60% retail and 50, whatever, it's 63 47. Uh, 37.\n\nSpeaker 4: So are you counting the bathroom space, uh, and the a DA, uh, bathroom as retail?\n\nSpeaker 19: No. Okay. I think we counted that as part of the residential space.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. The hallway's residential too? Correct. Okay. 'cause the way you have Elena, I find that the commercial space is kind of small and, uh, chopped up. It'd be very hard to find any tenants that would want to go in there.\n\nSpeaker 19: It's divided into two spaces. That's correct.","timeStart":4624.525,"timeEnd":4725.565,"chunkIndex":52},{"id":"9487cf79-3e25-4fc0-9819-e4e12956d454","content":"Speaker 4: Um, my suggestion is to maybe have the residential entry on Palmer and have the commercials, uh, solely faced, uh, Broadway. This way you have a combined space and you can make it, uh, make a more of a, uh, entry near the parking at the corner of the parking lot. And, uh, and the building is this way you can increase your commercial space. Um, I, I right now find that, um, the, um, you know, this is not enough commercial space you have laid out here. Okay. Um, the other thing that I, I want touch briefly on is the height of your building.\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 4: Alright. Uh, you can, you're certainly allowed, uh, if you meet all the requirements, six stories,\n\nSpeaker 19: We're not allowed. Six in this street, we're\n\nSpeaker 4: Only allowed five. Sorry. You allow, you allow five, sorry, my, my, my mistake. You allow five stories, but you, your floor floor height is extremely high. Um, if I look at your building section, uh, in the middle of the building, you have a one foot, uh, uh, where is it now?\n\nSpeaker 19: 10 foot eight, I believe is what it, it has, uh, as a floor to floor height for the upper, uh, residential floors. We're using 14 feet for the, uh, ground level, which allows us, uh, the depth of structure that we need to minimize the columns. And it allows us, uh, a way to combine the utilities to, uh, get them consolidated before they leave the building.","timeStart":4726.225,"timeEnd":4826.205,"chunkIndex":53},{"id":"ffe8b495-1849-4a93-8bba-4539a37227e2","content":"Speaker 4: Well, the first floor, you have 14 feet? Yes. Okay. Which is fine. Uh, you know, I think it's, it should be that high, uh, yes. For, for commercial, uh, for commercial space. But then you have 10 foot six, then you go to 11 foot two, 10 foot six and 11 foot two. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 19: Uh, so the, the reason for that is that the, uh, the fourth floor, uh, setback requires a significant amount of insulation at the roof. And in order to be able to walk out directly from that fourth floor level to the outdoor space, we need a little more height to accommodate the insulation at the roof. The typical framing that we would use in a building like this is 20 inch deep wood trusses. So that's how we get to, uh, needing 10 foot six or 10 foot eight for the typical floor to floor height. And the one floor is bigger because of the roof deck and the installation requirements of the roof deck.\n\nSpeaker 4: Well, I was hoping you, you can get, uh, right now you have over, uh, 61 feet, correct. Tall building. That's,\n\nSpeaker 19: That's including the parapet, sir. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 4: You're like nine feet short of a high rise\n\nSpeaker 19: . That's true. Well,\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. And, um, eight\n\nSpeaker 19: Foot 11 or eight foot 10 short\n\nSpeaker 4: High rise. It just doesn't seem quite fitting in that spot.\n\nSpeaker 19: I see.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. Mm-hmm . So what I'm asking you to do is, uh, if you can lower your floor to floor heights, you have, uh, close to, uh, four, uh, three foot six on your parapets.\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes.","timeStart":4828.435,"timeEnd":4926.555,"chunkIndex":54},{"id":"2273e551-40ec-4f9b-9135-6a5a990c7f06","content":"Speaker 4: Um, you're up there. No one's gonna look horizontally in this building. I would get rid of the parapets and put screen walls, uh, further back on the, on your mechanical space. Well,\n\nSpeaker 19: We could do that, but the, the upper roof is so small that, uh, screen walls set back are basically going to, uh, reduce the solar array significantly. If we, uh, if you look at that roof plan again, you'll see that we're, we're using pretty much all the available space.\n\nSpeaker 4: I would, uh, use that as, um, as a way of saying you can't put as much solar as you can there, because right now the building looks a little too massive to me. You, you have these, uh, uh, parapets, you have these extra floor heights. I think you can easily squeeze all those six feet outta this building here. And that's half a story lowering the building down. And that's a, that's a good way of heading, heading the right direction. I, I see it. Okay. Uh, another thing is, uh, when you have these big heavy parapets and these parapet walls, it makes the building very chunky. If, if you, if you're gonna use these parapets for, uh, screening of your, um, of your balconies, I would suggest maybe a lighter railing system that's more transparent. So you lower that almost four foot high, uh, parapet down further so it doesn't seem as massive.","timeStart":4927.055,"timeEnd":5011.285,"chunkIndex":55},{"id":"e3a76e20-4a7c-4193-bb4d-38b329688ba5","content":"Speaker 4: And, um, you know, either, uh, glass, glass railings, wire railings or whatever, or set it back a little bit so it does, so it doesn't look so chunky. Um, that's what I have for the, uh, for the massing so far. Okay. I mean, you, uh, on your setbacks, you have your elevator, I mean, your stairs and your walkway there. Okay. Um, that doesn't have to be the same height as the units. I, I, I see how you want to have, if you go to the fourth floor, uh, or the fifth floor, you have, um, your egress stair facing, um, Broadway and, and, and a hallway there. Yes. That could be much lower. It doesn't have to have the same height as your, um, as your unit. So you're introducing another setback, such a tall building. I'm just looking, uh, encouraging you waves looking at this building so you can, uh, reduce the massing of this building.\n\nSpeaker 19: Mm-hmm\n\nSpeaker 4: . Alright. Um, you know, you might even go a step further and say, look, uh, at the, at the top floor, the corners of the building are all the bedrooms. Maybe the bedrooms don't need that meet, don't meet that height. And, uh, only the living rooms and kitchens need the extra height to give it more volume or take the same advantage and make the windows bigger. So it looks, uh, so, so, uh, so, uh, the space looks bigger mm-hmm . And makes more light in. And then also by putting, introducing more windows or bigger windows, it makes the heaviness of a building go away.\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes.","timeStart":5012.265,"timeEnd":5117.465,"chunkIndex":56},{"id":"56eae831-3edb-4105-84f9-460ce1cc53a3","content":"Speaker 4: Uh, right now, when I see the building, it's, it's extremely tall and heavy with the, uh, with the parapets and the, you know, the, and the materials you've chosen and some of the windows. So, well,\n\nSpeaker 19: I respectfully disagree with you, but, uh, one of the things that we need to talk about is that we're up against, uh, significant energy code constraints with respect to the amount of glass that we have in this building. And, uh, so we're trying to balance getting good daylight in the interior spaces and also getting, uh, the right performance from, uh, from the building to meet the passive house requirements of the\n\nSpeaker 4: Energy code. Uh, I, I, I don't disagree with you there, but I see lots of buildings, uh, that's being built right now with large windows, and they do meet the requirements. Okay? Mm-hmm. So they, they, they have ways of doing that. Um, okay. Just take another look at that. Um, I'm gonna leave it at that for now. Okay. 'cause, um, the, I I'm gonna let my, uh, other colleagues talk a little bit more about the architecture. 'cause right now it looks like it's, um, I'm not, I, I can't tell what it is right now. It's, it's sort of a conglomerate of different styles and different things. So I'm gonna, I\n\nSpeaker 19: Think, well, it's trying to be a modern building and it's trying to have a variety of materials. I, and using those materials to break down the scale of the building.\n\nSpeaker 4: I, I, I still think we need steps to go further. Yes. Just to add\n\nSpeaker 20: For,\n\nSpeaker 21: For, for purposes of clarification, so we can further,","timeStart":5117.765,"timeEnd":5210.045,"chunkIndex":57},{"id":"aa7f823f-7909-4d75-bb8c-87c2b2899c00","content":"Speaker 20: Uh, kind of, um, you know,\n\nSpeaker 3: Uh,\n\nSpeaker 20: Do what we need to do and work with the board to make sure this is, uh, the right development for the site. So just, just taking an overall view of your comments, basically. Um, we will, you know, obviously we heard them and we'll take it back and we will, it seems to me you're, you're talking about, um, the, the bulk as provided on the building. If we could kind of, are you looking for a more streamlined design and a sleek design and, and take all that back? We'll,\n\nSpeaker 2: We'll, we'll get to that point. Okay. I think at, at this point right now, um, what I'd like to do Sure is, is before we give you a specific direction Sure. Let's hear the comments from the other board members and we will get to a point where we will give you very clear direction on, um, uh, some of the architectural, um, moves that we would like to see explored. Fair\n\nSpeaker 20: Enough. Thank you. Mind,\n\nSpeaker 4: This is only my opinion so far. I understand the rest of the board has not had a chance to express theirs, and they have just as much valid things. And we will discuss it and as a group, we'll give you a direction. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You. Thank you. Uh, Jean?\n\nSpeaker 3: Yes. Thank you. So, on the front and side of the building, I don't know, Claire, if you can pull up from the plans and drawings. A 5.3,\n\nSpeaker 19: Are you looking for the front elevation?\n\nSpeaker 3: Well, the, the actual, you know, sort of, um, the, what it's gonna look like,","timeStart":5210.345,"timeEnd":5297.685,"chunkIndex":58},{"id":"703eb547-6cc9-406d-a726-f29e015fec39","content":"Speaker 19: The 2D, the rendering. Oh, the rendering. Uh, okay. So, uh,\n\nSpeaker 3: This one again, like, like yeah. Slide this\n\nSpeaker 4: 5.3 sounds pretty good.\n\nSpeaker 3: Slide 0.38, 5.3. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 19: Slide slide eight. Uh, Claire,\n\nSpeaker 3: Slide eight. Okay. Hold on just a sec. ,\n\nSpeaker 2: I love when he pops up and says hello .\n\nSpeaker 3: Um,\n\nSpeaker 19: There you go.\n\nSpeaker 3: So just to the right of, um, the sort of the center windows. Yes. There are two like little I square icon things on the wall, and those things reappear on the side. Correct?\n\nSpeaker 19: The building,\n\nSpeaker 3: What are they?\n\nSpeaker 19: They're, uh, vents, they're, uh, they're kitchen hood exhaust connections. Okay. Matched up, uh, color matched to the siding that they're sitting in.\n\nSpeaker 3: Okay. Yeah. Well, as you'll find out, we don't allow those, I have to go through the roof. So, um,\n\nSpeaker 2: There's no, uh, sidewall venting.\n\nSpeaker 3: Yeah. So that'll,\n\nSpeaker 19: Even for kitchen hoods, correct.\n\nSpeaker 3: That'll have to be changed. Um, so you indicate the building is on the inventory of historical and architectural significant thought.\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 3: Where are you in the process of getting a demolition approval?\n\nSpeaker 16: Uh, we applied for a demolition permit in July of 2024. Uh, the demolition delay, sorry, 2025, uh, 2025. Uh, the torical permission did institute the, uh, moratorium in at their September meeting. So that moratorium will run through July of 2026.\n\nSpeaker 3: So you'll have permission as of July, 2026 to demolish the bill. Yeah,","timeStart":5298.145,"timeEnd":5412.965,"chunkIndex":59},{"id":"850077ea-0916-40f8-81ce-e92024c5cfd6","content":"Speaker 16: We'll have to go through that. The, the, the procedure that is dictated by the building inspector\n\nSpeaker 3: Questions. Right. Okay. Thank you. That's helpful to know. So can you go over again how you determined that 67.44% of the ground floor is commercial?\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes. Uh, you take the interior space of the ground floor and, uh, deducted, I took, deducted the two stairwells and the elevator from that number, and then compared the balance classified everything, accepting their two retail spaces as residential, and then did the percentage that way that was, uh,\n\nSpeaker 3: So so you had mentioned usable\n\nSpeaker 19: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 3: Floor, but that the word usable is not in the zoning bylaw, it's just ground floor. So I'd like to know how much the percentage would be if you put back in the elevator and the stairway and everything else that's confined by the wall of the buildings.\n\nSpeaker 19: We can do that. Yeah. I think calculus, you'll have to, the reason that we went the way we did was because, uh, we were under the, uh, understanding that this board on a previous project had made a determination that it was the ratio between the residential usable space and the retail usable space.\n\nSpeaker 3: That was a misunderstanding. It was a, the ratio between the amount enclosed by the walls not having to do with usable space enclosed by the walls. So, and not every member of the board agreed. And we never had a final vote on that. 'cause the project was withdrawn.\n\nSpeaker 19: I see.","timeStart":5412.965,"timeEnd":5519.925,"chunkIndex":60},{"id":"e1b7a188-8a6e-4670-9c7f-780c3aae3f4f","content":"Speaker 3: Um, and in fact, my opinion on that previous project, which remains my opinion on this one, is it's the total area that's enclosed not only by the first floor enclosed, but by the overhang on the second floor. And that's all the ground floor of the building. So the total floor area on your materials is 2,932 square feet. And, um, 60% of that is 1759.2 square feet. So you haven't come close, in my opinion, to meeting the 60% because you are at somewhere around, um, 1,220 square feet. And my view is you have to get up to 1750 9.2 square feet.\n\nSpeaker 19: Well, uh, um, with res with respect. Uh, sure. If, when I read the zoning language about the bonus, it talks about the area of the ground floor. Now, the area of the ground floor can't be the same as the area of the second floor unless the floors match. So if the building steps in on the ground floor, then the area of the ground floor is what it is. That's\n\nSpeaker 3: Not how I read\n\nSpeaker 19: It. I see.\n\nSpeaker 3: We'll have a difference, but\n\nSpeaker 4: Some of my colleagues agree that's a difference in the, let's, let's leave that along for now. Yeah. Okay. So\n\nSpeaker 3: The next is, I'm wondering, have you done any market research to see how leaseable these two spaces are the two retail spaces in the building?\n\nSpeaker 19: No.\n\nSpeaker 3: Yeah. You,\n\nSpeaker 19: I have no reason to think they wouldn't be leased though. Well,\n\nSpeaker 3: I have a reason to think the opposite. In a previous, um,","timeStart":5520.145,"timeEnd":5636.055,"chunkIndex":61},{"id":"d1519ea7-23ec-4b5c-8dda-a24cbf45feb8","content":"Speaker 3: Special permit about a year ago, we asked the person to do some market research and they came back and they said there's no market for office space in Arlington at the moment. So the idea that, um, the 337 square foot could be leased for office, I think is pretty farfetched unless you can come back with some market research in information to the contrary. And I would say the same thing about the, um, the 883 square feet. Now what's interesting if you actually read the zoning bylaw, is it actually says for you to get the bonus, those places have to be actually occupied. Not available, but actually occupied by eating and drinking establishments, business services, childcare or retail uses. So at least for me, I would like to see a market survey coming back to us that says, these size spaces at this location, reasonably, we would expect could be used by one of those types of things, uh, mentioned there.\n\nSpeaker 19: Would you agree that, that it's a pretty inclusive list though, based on the last term? It\n\nSpeaker 2: Does not include offices. Pardon me? I believe it does not include offices.\n\nSpeaker 3: No, it doesn't. So,\n\nSpeaker 2: So that is not, that was presented as a use of the commercial space, and that is not listed in the allowable uses in that sec, in the bonus provision.\n\nSpeaker 3: Right. So there's a limitation. So I'm just saying at this point, I don't think you meet the 60%, and I don't think these spaces meet the requirement for the bonus. So I'll leave it at that for the moment on that. Um, ha. Has, has your client ever managed, um, other apartment buildings that have Oh, yes.","timeStart":5640.005,"timeEnd":5767.355,"chunkIndex":62},{"id":"e6a29840-8c4e-4774-91ee-61fc1b99ca6e","content":"Speaker 19: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 3: Um, 14 units are thereabout and only five parking spaces on site. How many?\n\nSpeaker 22: Yeah. 16 units and six parking spaces.\n\nSpeaker 3: Yeah. And where is that Al And there's on the street parking overnight allowed in Alston. Perfect. Perfect. Yeah, so you can do that. Okay. Um, your TDM plan that you presented Thank you, was a very comprehensive plan, although I have some issues with it. Shows that mode shares for the project would determine using the 2023 census data for the tract. And it indicated that 51% of the people commute via vehicle, car, truck, van, something they own 7% by public transportation, 8% bike or walk 34% walk from home. Well, if we're talking about approximately 50% commuting by car and we're just expecting it to be the same, why aren't we looking at seven spaces? So at least half of the units, um, have a parking space. So you're at least conforming yourself to what you've put in the TDM plan.\n\nSpeaker 19: Well, I guess the idea of the TDM is to try to change the behavior of the people who rent in this, uh, building. And the notion is that if you charge for parking and the parking is limited, that people are gonna find other ways to get to work. That's the concept of the TDM.\n\nSpeaker 3: Well, out","timeStart":5767.775,"timeEnd":5864.255,"chunkIndex":63},{"id":"fc89172c-29f0-409f-aee0-c2296667f2e0","content":"Speaker 3: The way this works is you present the TDM plan for us, and then we have to approve the number of spaces that are reduced. You don't get the reduction automatically. Um, some of your TDM plan methods, by the way, don't meet the criteria. For example, you listed providing covered parking, bicycle parking, and storage, but that's already required by the bylaw, so you can't double count. So that doesn't count is one. You list the 87 and eight 50 bus routes, but they must run, um, seven days a week and 30 minute frequency. And the 87 bus route doesn't meet the seven days a week. 'cause it doesn't come to Arlington on Sundays. The three 50 bus route doesn't meet the 30 minute headways because on weekends, the headways are approximately an hour on the three 50. And you haven't shown the location of the bicycle charging stations. I don't think I saw them on the diagram.\n\nSpeaker 19: You're right. That's not on the plan.\n\nSpeaker 3: So you have to have at least two bicycle charging stations that\n\nSpeaker 19: Are, I thought that we only needed one. Why do we need two? Because\n\nSpeaker 3: The zoning bylaws in the plural stations, not station stations.\n\nSpeaker 19: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 3: I didn't see the, um, maybe I missed it. Are the sizes of your parking spaces on one of the plans? Yes.\n\nSpeaker 19: I didn't see it. There's a civil plan that has the size.\n\nSpeaker 3: Okay, thank you. I didn't see, um, the short term bicycle parking in the rear, how will people arriving by bike know where to find the parking?","timeStart":5866.435,"timeEnd":5972.765,"chunkIndex":64},{"id":"f070965a-54c4-4bec-a447-6995fe7a5ba5","content":"Speaker 19: Uh, I guess we'll have to sign it. I mean, there's no, it's not obvious. The location is not obvious, but the bike rack will be obvious. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 3: The, the zoning bylaw requires that the short term bicycle parking, the located within 50 feet of the main entrance of a building, or no further away than the nearest off street parking space, whichever, is closer. Now, we have occasionally allowed people to put parking in back, but you'd need to have signage, you know, by the entrance to the building and the entrance to the, um, retail spaces.\n\nSpeaker 19: That would be no problem. That\n\nSpeaker 3: Where the parking is, um, regarding your landscape plan. Yes. Uh, the zoning byer requires a tree warden approve your choice of trees. You mentioned honey locusts. Have you run those by the\n\nSpeaker 19: Tree warden? We have not. Yeah. That will need to, we're, we're happy to do whatever the tree warden wants us to do as far as those trees go, then\n\nSpeaker 3: You'll have to do that. Um, the, uh, memo from the Department of Planning and Community Development had some other things about bicycle parking, um, including details about the two tier bike\n\nSpeaker 19: Racks. I'm happy to address those now if you want. Uh,\n\nSpeaker 3: Well, we'd like to see them inri in writing. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 19: Um, we submitted a response to, uh, the memorandum. Okay. This morning, uh, to\n\nSpeaker 3: The, this hasn't gotten to us,\n\nSpeaker 19: To the planning department.\n\nSpeaker 3: Um, did you d did you respond to also the, uh, waste and\n\nSpeaker 19: Recycling? Yes, sir. Containers? Yes, sir.\n\nSpeaker 3: And the exterior lighting?","timeStart":5973.585,"timeEnd":6077.165,"chunkIndex":65},{"id":"d4b00640-29e1-4a8a-8fdc-0296ac37b83a","content":"Speaker 19: Yes, sir. Okay. Do you want to talk about the lighting now? No,\n\nSpeaker 3: No. As long as you did a response to them, we'll get to see it. Okay. Okay. That's all I have at the moment. Thank you. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You. Thank you Jean, Steve.\n\nSpeaker 19: Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 5: Alright, thanks. Uh, so I am one of the board members who, uh, regarding the 60% requirement, I'm one of the board members who felt that it meant 60% of the interior area. So you are, the two commercial spaces, um, are total 1,220 square feet. Yes. And I guess my question is, you know, 1,220 is 60% of 2034 square feet. Mm-hmm . So if the, um, enclosed area of the first floor is larger than 2034 square feet, uh, you're not meeting the requirement.\n\nSpeaker 19: I understand that our understanding from previous hearings by this board was that it was the usable interior space. And if that's not the case, if that's not the board's interpretation this week, then we will make a change.\n\nSpeaker 2: It is not at all. I don't appreciate that. Thank you. I'm sorry, Steve.\n\nSpeaker 5: Okay. Um, so yes, regarding bicycle parking, uh, because there is a bike parking requirement, the bicycle parking, uh, to use bi bike, indoor bike parking as a TDM plan, it means providing parking in excess, which I think the, you've done, uh, the requirement is 21 spaces and you're proposing 24. Correct. So I, I I think that would be countable. Um, Claire, could we just, could you, uh, bring up a rendering or actually, I could, I could point at this one if that's okay. Or\n\nSpeaker 19: Slide eight. Yeah. Yeah.","timeStart":6077.425,"timeEnd":6180.485,"chunkIndex":66},{"id":"b88180c1-bbf2-4fe6-8e44-05ef1079d95f","content":"Speaker 5: So one of the things that I sort of had to struggle with was the, the top floor. Yes. Um, now I, looking over, way over on the right, uh, there's sort of that side panel. I, there's a window, there's a blank space next to it. I realize there's a, a mechanical closet behind that. Correct. But it seems like the, and the front, uh, the front piece in the middle is, I believe a hallway. Correct. And then there's a stairway over on the left. Okay. Correct. Um, it feels like the, the windows did not get the same attention to detail as the ones on the other side of the building. Um, so just, or to put it, to put it plainly, the windows on the Palmer Street side look a lot nicer than the ones on the, the Broadway side. Okay. Um, and it would be nice to sort of have them on par.\n\nSpeaker 5: Um, also, it's a very large white space . Um, and I understand that, uh, a good chunk of that, or, you know, some of that height comes from a, from the parapet. Yes. And I'm hoping that, um, you know, bringing that down will sort of reduce the, it's almost like a little bit of a blank wall effect, or at least you, to me, visually. Um, you might also consider putting in, you know, just like a le maybe a layer of color under the cornice, uh, to, you know, just, um, you know, add something to that space, . Understood. All right. That's all I have. Thank you.","timeStart":6181.265,"timeEnd":6286.435,"chunkIndex":67},{"id":"a751605b-3c02-414f-be97-5fa8d5553193","content":"Speaker 2: Thank you very much. Um, my colleagues have covered many of the items. I'll just cover a few items, uh, architecturally, lemme make a copy here. I keep my list. Um, I think Steve just started, uh, well, Ken has discussed that the parapet is, is too high visually, both at the fourth floor setback as well as at the, um, at the, uh, upper floor. Um, so that needs to be lowered. Um, and Steve just mentioned the top floor currently reading is an extra box stacked on top of the building. Obviously, you don't meet the current provision for the fifth floor. Um, if you are able to meet that provision, um, that definitely architecturally needs to be, um, tied into the rest of the building architecture. Um, whether it's set back on all of the street facing sides, um, incorporating, um, some other roof elements, whether they're, um, they're articulated to reduce that flat slab effect that we're seeing now.","timeStart":6287.165,"timeEnd":6351.035,"chunkIndex":68},{"id":"b28b92c3-2f0a-437c-91cc-ec974af8f482","content":"Speaker 2: And, um, I'd like to see a stronger cornice or shadow line at the, at the, at the top for at, again, for the proportion. Um, I think that we need to see more articulation at the upper story and the side windows or the, the, the windows, they're very flat. Um, the color palette also seems to be very stark for this residential neighborhood. Um, could, could you please, thank you. Um, the color palette is, is very stark for this residential neighborhood in terms of the, the bright, the bright white. Um, so I'd want to have you take another look at the coloration. Um, and, and again, Perkin, I'm just having trouble discerning the architectural style and it certainly doesn't have any, anything to do with the context of the neighborhood. So, um, I think we need to take a, a, another look at the architectural style in general. Um, reduce the con the, the number of materials that we're working with here. Um, you know, it's, um, it, it's a challenge with the current architecture in the, in the neighborhood. Um, I think that we also need to provide a stronger datum between the, um, commercial, the commercial and the residential above. Um, it, it, it feels truncated right now, and there's not really any, any band, um, that differentiates between the two. Um, and that's, that's all I have right now. So anything else before we open? Um, the docket for public comment.","timeStart":6351.655,"timeEnd":6463.135,"chunkIndex":69},{"id":"c778f8f5-19ce-44de-b5dd-56b97ddd2d5b","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. Um, so let me do a time check right now. Um, per our, uh, agenda, we are running into our, um, warrant article time. Obviously, I would like to hold some time for public comment and then we'll need to reconvene to give specific direction as a board. Um, I'd like to hold, um, we'll hold up to, um,\n\nSpeaker 2: We'll hold, um, 20 minutes, up to 20 minutes for public comment, and then we'll reconvene as a board so that we can, um, we can finalize, uh, our recommendations by no later than nine 30. Um, so with that, um, I will open the hearing up for public comment. Um, as a reminder, anyone wishing to speak, please raise your hand once I call on you. Um, I will ask that you join us at the microphone up here at the front. Um, you'll have up to two minutes to address the board. We will not address comments as they are posed to the board. I will collect them and we will address them at the end. Um, and we ask that you introduce yourself with your first and last name and street address. Um, with that we will start with, um, the intentional in the, in the black shirt.\n\nSpeaker 7: Read to try and stay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you.","timeStart":6465.685,"timeEnd":6554.975,"chunkIndex":70},{"id":"4ac3703b-8e1f-4bef-951b-b996dd148232","content":"Speaker 23: Hi, uh, Jerry Leonard, 44 Palmer Street. Um, I'm speaking on behalf of a group of neighbors surrounding 2 59 Broadway. Earlier today, we submitted a memo to, to the board, uh, raising concerns about whether the proposed building is an appropriate fit for the neighborhood in terms of size, aesthetics, traffic, overall impact. We want you to know that we support increasing housing. We welcome new neighbors, but we think the proposal appears inconsistent in some respects with, uh, both the MBTA Communities Act and of course, Arlington's own, uh, zoning and environmental standards. The project currently includes 14 apartments, as you know, mostly one bedroom unit seeks a bonus fifth story, and results in a 61 foot tall building nearly twice the height of nearby uh, structures. Uh, it also seeks elimination of setback requirements, which would otherwise soften the visual mass, uh, of the building. Uh, it, the building really stands out for its height, appearance and the number of cars that it would bring to local streets.","timeStart":6556.435,"timeEnd":6615.085,"chunkIndex":71},{"id":"6473828e-f10b-4cf5-ab56-a58187a53bb3","content":"Speaker 23: We wonder whether the project truly qualifies for the bonus floor as, uh, has been mentioned, limited ground floor, uh, commercial space. We're inclined to agree with, uh, Mr. Benson's, uh, interpretation on, on that score. Um, we think that, uh, uh, interpreting, uh, differently incentivizes, uh, developers to minimize the actual commercial space, uh, by, by, uh, minimizing the, the ground floor size. Um, parking is also a serious concern. The project provides only five off street spaces. Instead of the presumptive 14 and plans to charge high monthly fees, this will actually likely push more cars onto already congested streets, uh, for parking, especially Palmer Street, which is narrow, frequently obstructed during the day, and already poses challenges to emergency, uh, vehicles. Uh, further, the building's height would significantly reduce sunlight for neighboring homes, gardens, and potential solar installations. Uh, a three or four store, store building would greatly reduce these impacts. We'd love to see, uh, reconsideration of what could be done with the, excuse me, the existing building. I'm sorry. And finally the project is, can I make one last quick point?\n\nSpeaker 2: It's very,\n\nSpeaker 23: Very quick. It's very short. Uh, the project is dominated by one bedroom units, which, while legal of course, runs counter to the spirit of the MBTA, uh, communities Act. Thank you. Which emphasizes families with children. Thank you. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Um, uh, next speaker. Yes.","timeStart":6615.665,"timeEnd":6705.045,"chunkIndex":72},{"id":"9b312ae3-8a23-49ef-81a8-b61622d41582","content":"Speaker 24: Thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, and, uh, members of the board. I'm Carl Wagner. I'm a town meeting member in Precinct 15, and I live in Edgehill Road. Um, I, I want people to understand that this, I believe is the very first project that will have bonuses in the MBTA density overlay series of projects. It's setting precedents. I appreciate that the board is taking its time to be careful. If we make a mistake in a precedent here, it's much harder to turn back from it in the future. Uh, I think this building has a lot of problems, maybe in a town or city like Alston, it would fit in, but it doesn't fit its neighborhood at all. And it's gonna punish the people who live there, which is sort of appropriate. 'cause it looks like it is a detention center on the top of it or something.","timeStart":6712.975,"timeEnd":6755.285,"chunkIndex":73},{"id":"96fee08f-c365-4c22-8c18-125dc8b73bcb","content":"Speaker 24: I don't know. Um, four, five, whatever parking spaces for 14 units is so different from what I sat in this room with some of you and heard these people say. We would get one unit per MBTA, uh, development unit, one parking unit per MBDA development unit. This transportation demand management stuff is fake. It's reducing, uh, parking to un unbelievably punishing levels for the people who will live there. And we saw that the board is rightly questioning the space for the vehicles. I would ask you to consider that most of you who live in Arlington have a car in your family or in your unit somewhere. And how would you feel if, if it was reduced to some fraction below half even of the units getting the, the parking spaces? I'll tell you that I believe right now in Arlington, over 96% of, of multi adult, um, uh, families have cars and of all households over 90% have cars. So I, I bicycled MBTA, uh, to go into work in Boston, and many of you do things like buses also, but realistically, this is going to really hurt the people who live here. This building doesn't belong in Arlington. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Um, uh, next in the green shirt. Thank you.","timeStart":6755.845,"timeEnd":6834.485,"chunkIndex":74},{"id":"da6a8cec-8ce3-40a1-8e4e-fa931d0f3786","content":"Speaker 25: A timer for myself. Good evening. My name is Jeffrey e My wife and I live at 2 6 1 Broadway. You can, we're right there that blue house. We moved to Arlington five years ago, and we have a young son at home. This proposed building is gonna be taller than any other building, at least as far as I can tell on Broadway or Palmer. Based on the shadows diagram, my home and several of the houses on Palmer are gonna be completely overshadowed by this building that's gonna affect our gardens, our lawns, and the ability for my 2-year-old to play outside in the backyard and get some sun. It's even gonna affect the ability for us to have solar. We had quotes and plans to have it installed, but with the shadows, it's rendered moot. I think it's great that these new projects are required to have solar, but it feels backwards to me to let one building potentially cause a net negative in the amount of solar in the neighborhood.","timeStart":6846.965,"timeEnd":6890.605,"chunkIndex":75},{"id":"cc8856d4-9f1e-4d38-93db-2c5c3ff55946","content":"Speaker 25: We also have questions about the bonuses. As I understand it, and as you've discussed, uh, to obtain the bonuses, the requirement is that the commercial space is occupy 60% of the ground floor. I know that there have been discussions, uh, about whether or not gross floor area is appropriate to use here. And I will say this, uh, my wife is an attorney, and one of the things that she's taught me is that sometimes the words that you don't use are just as important as the words that you do. Gross floor area is not used. And if you ask a layman or anyone in here what ground floor means, uh, I mean, if you ask a layman who doesn't read this stuff every day, Hey, where's the parking? They would say, ground floor. So to me, the proper square footage for the calculation would be to use the area under the second floor.\n\nSpeaker 25: Removing the fifth floor bonus and maintaining a 15 foot front setback would go a long way towards making this property fit into our neighborhood. A zero foot front setback is also dangerous, in my opinion, for pedestrians, bicycles, and other cars. In the last five years that I've lived here, I've witnessed numerous accidents where cars are getting tbo t-boned. Uh, because crossing Broadway from Palmer is hard enough already, and, uh, having a zero foot setback is gonna make sight lines even more difficult for everyone. I would even ask the board members to visit the intersection and see if the building had a zero foot setback, what your sight lines would look like. And that's two minutes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you very much. Uh, anyone else? Uh, would anyone else wish to speak? Yes.","timeStart":6891.625,"timeEnd":6974.365,"chunkIndex":76},{"id":"f19ae731-a589-41db-90ad-f7b86910fad4","content":"Speaker 26: Um, Rebecca Peterson. I'm, um, a town meeting member. Um, and I'm just speaking in general about this project. Um, I want to thank the board for your comments tonight about the issues that you see with this project. Um, because I think these builders and architects are failing us as a town. Every single project is the same bland box of gray and white with maybe a little spice of color around the windows. It's very modern. Um, they all look the same. It doesn't blend in with the neighborhood like other, uh, people have said, and I, I don't understand how there can be so much confusion about the bylaws. I don't have any kind of background in design, architecture, anything. And I can grasp what these concepts are and what the rules say. I don't have them all memorized, but I can understand them. And I feel like every time we have these meetings, the people, the proponents of the projects are trying to say, well, but we qualify for the bonus, or we qualify for this.","timeStart":6983.025,"timeEnd":7046.045,"chunkIndex":77},{"id":"8fe72fa3-8c29-44d3-b56d-bd4be25f840c","content":"Speaker 26: And I, I don't understand the questionable math and the questionable, uh, ways that this is trying to get done. And, um, just as a side note, I can't think of a single new project that has, uh, referring to the commercial space that has vital shops that draw foot traffic on the ground floor. And I know that you can't, you know, there's a bunch of uses and so you can't dictate what goes in there. But all of these projects that are recent have like, kind of shaded windows. And then one of 'em is sort of a gym near the high school. No one ever goes in and out. And I, you know, it would be really great to have some shops, some restaurants, anything that would draw foot trap traffic and make it seem like a vital commercial corridor and that the space is, you know, really, um, benefiting the residents of Arlington. So thank you.\n\nSpeaker 7: Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, anyone else wishing to speak this evening? Yes,","timeStart":7046.105,"timeEnd":7102.805,"chunkIndex":78},{"id":"3dffb5b9-9326-4b9f-9453-6004bd3ba652","content":"Speaker 27: Hi. I used to be a town meeting member, but found it tough. Um, but I appreciate your comments. My name's Michelle Nathan, I'm Robin Hood Road. Um, and the project doesn't directly affect me, although it does in the sense that I care about others and the whole community and not just myself. Um, most people, um, I have a little bit different angle. Most people don't understand the role of pollinators such as bees. And so I've been doing a lot of research because I'm very interested in the natural environment and the sky. That's what nurtured me as a child. And the studies have shown that, um, when the lights are not shielded and they're not pointing down, that the pollinators end up getting disoriented and they lead to early death. So I think most people know the role of pollination in terms of our food supply, and that's what keeps our food supply going. Um, so I wanted to, you may have already talked about it, but, um, I understand your bylaws says lighting in residential buildings should be shielded and pointed down, but I see a lot of buildings like this and others that aren't that, um, that way that they're very glaring. Um, so I just wanted to protect our pollinators. We all like coffee . Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Uh, would anyone else like to speak this evening? Yes.","timeStart":7112.025,"timeEnd":7221.045,"chunkIndex":79},{"id":"aaababb8-d620-4cb7-8933-15080d29f9a5","content":"Speaker 28: Um, Aaron Holman, 12 Winmore Street, also town meeting member, uh, precinct six. Uh, I think one of the biggest objections to me is the idea of five parking spaces for 15 units. And let me cite some evidence why that is completely and totally inadequate. Uh, and I can back these up with, uh, references right now. And historically since the turn of the century, roughly 90% of Arlington's units own at least one car with an average of about 1.5 cars per unit. And currently 73% of residents commute via a car. Most of them single. The only person in the idea that you are gonna have five spaces for 15 units. Where is the economic viability for the people who are going to work there? That is entirely consistent, inconsistent, uh, with Arlington Transportation Demand Management. Uh, there are some things that are inappropriate. It is not the proponent's fault that the rules allow things like charging for parking as a transportation demand management strategy. That's a little bit like Elon Musk charging for his pornography software and saying that will cut pornography use. You can't do that. Uh, the other thing is we have enough inadequate spaces throughout Arlington of dinky little storefronts. Arlington Center where I live, there's regularly at least 10 storefronts. They're far larger than 337 square feet and they are vacant. The idea that you can have a 337 square foot space that's useful for anything is truly offensive. That is not how we gain businesses in Arlington.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Your time. Okay. Uh, would anyone else like to speak this evening? Yes,","timeStart":7243.865,"timeEnd":7373.245,"chunkIndex":80},{"id":"14a82897-6c8c-4975-891a-e5216c0db8e0","content":"Speaker 23: Good evening. Thank you. Um, Steve McKenna, resident Arlington real estate agent. Um, I'm not for nor against, but I want to bring up something that Ken mentioned immediately. Um, understanding all the situations with parking and the comments that were made. There is a concern that a parking space is eight and a half feet by 18 and a half feet. And I think the turning radius is gonna be extremely difficult. Number one, there's been no discussion about snow removal, snow placement. The other item is you have a six foot buffer fence on the side. That could be a concern for exiting vehicles where you should probably taper down the fence to some port as you get closer to the sidewalk. So there's some safety issues there. And then the location of where you're gonna take the trash out, how is that gonna be removed from insight if the parking spaces are taking up the access? That's all I have to say. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You very much.\n\nSpeaker 7: Thank you. Uh,\n\nSpeaker 2: Would anyone else like to speak this evening? I'm sorry I missed you over there. Thank you.","timeStart":7387.155,"timeEnd":7449.125,"chunkIndex":81},{"id":"97885594-24a9-40d8-9162-c6f303bc398d","content":"Speaker 29: Hello, my name is Mota Marks, um, and I live on Pine Ridge Road. I'm in Precinct 12. Um, and um, I actually submitted a email previous to this, which I think you have in your records. Um, but I just wanted to quickly say, because this is kind of the first review of this new project that's being presented, and um, uh, I just wanted to kind of confirm, um, along with I think a lot of other people right now that, um, that this project seems extremely out of character for the neighborhood. Um, I'm just looking at this picture of this giant building and it's, that house next to it is being completely dwarfed by it. Um, you know, I think that this is a case of we don't necessarily need to do what we can. We can build something that is more appropriate for the neighborhood that, um, can address some of the affordability issues in Arlington without building something with monstrous proportions like this.","timeStart":7456.815,"timeEnd":7537.085,"chunkIndex":82},{"id":"b49d56eb-c019-4da9-ad5a-ec1c1f121ca7","content":"Speaker 29: Um, that is literally towering over the neighborhood. That is, um, causing a lot of pressure in terms of the fact that it's right on a corner, um, is, I know this corner. And the, it is a very dangerous spot to be having such a tall building, um, in terms of traffic and people crossing. And it is also, um, obviously an issue in terms of the parking. That's ridiculous. People have cars here in Arlington, whether you like it or not. Um, the people living there may, you know, most likely will have cars. And we do not have on street parking overnight in Arlington. Um, and even if we did, there's very little room on most of our streets, a lot of very narrow streets. Thank you. It's very difficult. So thank you. Um, that was just my addition, . I also submitted another statement, but thank you. Appreciate\n\nSpeaker 2: It. Thank you very much. Um, would anyone else like to speak this evening? Okay, with that we will, uh, we'll have one last speaker. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 30: Uh, my name is Joanne Lenan. I'm a town meeting member in Precinct 21. Um, I don't, I I wanna mention that, um, I submitted a letter and, um, 210 signatures about respecting the bonus rules for the affordability bonus, um, when the developers of 1 2 6 Broadway appear to be pursuing that, I,\n\nSpeaker 2: I, I'd ask that you please keep your remarks to this particular","timeStart":7537.505,"timeEnd":7651.315,"chunkIndex":83},{"id":"a42524f4-e5c0-413f-9ccf-9969a5053470","content":"Speaker 5: Just two possible clarifications on the TDM issues. Yes. Um, with re I realize that the 87 and three 50, although I, I think their TDM plan was mentioning it for complete list, they don't meet the frequency requirements, but I do believe that they're close enough to the 77 so that yes, they are Okay. So that, that, that measure is okay. Okay. Um, regarding the, um, regarding the provision of, you know, covered bicycle parking, my understanding was that, uh, long-term spaces that were required by the bylaw did not count as a TDM measure. Correct. But additional ones would, and they have provided additional ones,\n\nSpeaker 3: But maybe not enough.\n\nSpeaker 5: Well,\n\nSpeaker 2: I think that's what the board needs to review, and, and I would agree that for the amount of reduction that they are with Jean, that with the amount of reduction that they are seeking, they have not provided. Okay. That's sufficient. Um, alternative transportation methods, anything else? Okay. Do you have, um, well, yes.\n\nSpeaker 4: Since this is a high rise building, you can need it, it, it, you need a fire control center.\n\nSpeaker 2: You\n\nSpeaker 19: 70 feet high rise building started 70 feet,\n\nSpeaker 4: You still need a fire command, uh, fire control center. You'll see, you'll see, uh, mail rooms, you still need all these other stuff. Can you include all the stuff that normally goes with the building in there so that we, so when we get the accurate square footage, certainly retail space versus lobby space,\n\nSpeaker 19: Are there any other items that we have a, we have mailboxes shown, we don't need a separate room.\n\nSpeaker 4: Where is the mailboxes shown?","timeStart":8044.595,"timeEnd":8150.365,"chunkIndex":88},{"id":"ccf0318e-4492-4470-8afc-df81dbdd683f","content":"Speaker 19: They're on the, uh, on the corridor that leads from the lobby to the back door. Mm-hmm . And so, uh, there will be a, there will be a fire panel in the vestibule that controls the fire alarm system, but the high-rise requirements don't kick in until you get to 70 feet of height.\n\nSpeaker 16: As, as a quick clarification, are you talking about a fire, the fire relay system in the fire department?\n\nSpeaker 4: Yeah. You know, water room, all that kind of stuff. Yeah, I think that's,\n\nSpeaker 20: He's more, he's not talking about hitting the high rise requirements. Ah, just make sure we have\n\nSpeaker 2: Sprinkler control room, et cetera. Yep.\n\nSpeaker 19: Yeah, I\n\nSpeaker 4: Just wanna make sure you have all the stuff that, that comes with an apartment building shown. We, and the square footage is count as part of that. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 19: We think that we have everything shown. Ma many of those items that you're talking about are in the basement, but they're all in there.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. Just, just clarifying that. Understood.\n\nSpeaker 19: Yep. Yep.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, do you have any questions for us? Uh,\n\nSpeaker 16: No questions. Just, uh, a minor point.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yes.","timeStart":8150.365,"timeEnd":8213.805,"chunkIndex":89},{"id":"85825eaf-4df1-4c22-b8fa-0c7bed5eada7","content":"Speaker 16: We talking a lot about, uh, there's been a lot of comments about, um, parking and the one-to-one parking per unit. Um, and I'm just, I don't think I'm telling the board something that they haven't already heard. Uh, the three, a zoning act was enacted to address these concerns that we have relative to our, our, our our need or our use of vehicles and ways to, uh, develop housing in these areas by which we have access to these, these transportation nodes. Um, so I, I wholeheartedly appreciate, and I understand people's concern about the one-to-one parking and what it does to parking, but I've had this discussion, and not just Arlington, but, and other municipalities and, and I think what we're trying to do, or three A is trying to do is try to change that line of thinking. And I know we talked about the TDM, but I, I think that the t DM that you folks have goes a long way to kind of fort that, the one-to-one basis on two different cars. Um, and we will address, uh, specifically on Mr. Benson's concerns relative to what our TDM says. But I think that the TDM that you guys have or you guys allow, that does go a long way to kind of get us away from that one-to-one parking. Just wanna make","timeStart":8214.745,"timeEnd":8290.455,"chunkIndex":90},{"id":"0dcd1e7c-3ae2-47c8-9c4e-14d861230c9c","content":"Speaker 2: That comment. Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, so what we will need to do is, um, identify a date for, um, for you all to return to the, the redevelopment board. And I'll look to, um, uh, Claire, uh, for our next available meeting dates. I know that we are scheduling into the second meeting in February. That's correct. Is that correct? That's correct. So that would be the 23rd. Third 23rd. Does that date work for you or do you need us to look into March?\n\nSpeaker 19: Let's strive for it. Let's, I mean,\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. So we will do that if you do find that you need more time. So materials need to be submitted, um, a week in advance. Um, so be be aware of that timing. If you do find that you need more time, please let the Department of Planning and Community Development know and we can continue the, the hearing as required. Alright. Uh, is there a motion to continue the public hearing for docket number 3 8 8 1 2 59 Broadway two.\n\nSpeaker 4: So, motions, sorry,\n\nSpeaker 2: I need to give you the date, sorry, , uh, two, um, Monday, February 23rd.\n\nSpeaker 4: So motions,\n\nSpeaker 3: I seconded 2 0 2 6.\n\nSpeaker 7: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, we'll take a vote starting with Steve. Yes. Jean? Yes, Ken? Yes. And I'm a yes as well. We will see you back on, uh, February 23rd, 2026. Okay. Uh, so we will now move to our next item. Um, and I'll give people a minute or just a minute to disperse that are interested. We are still in the middle of a, um, meeting, so I just ask that you do so quickly","timeStart":8290.455,"timeEnd":8400.245,"chunkIndex":91},{"id":"8cc3dc82-513d-4730-986a-5e90314e59b6","content":"Speaker 7: On it back.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Thank you. Um, so, uh, we'll now move to our, our next agenda item, which is a discussion of potential warrant articles for 2026 annual town meeting. So I will note that this a couple of items related to, to this agenda item. This is not a hearing. We will not be taking votes. We will not be, um, calling members of the public up to speak. Um, we, this will be a discussion between members of the board. If there are individuals, um, who are here, um,\n\nSpeaker 2: Who have clarifying information that the board would like to call upon, we will do so. We have asked the chair of the, um, zoning board of appeals to join us this evening. As we've been discussing several Warren articles with the zoning, um, board of appeals since our retreat in September and had set, um, his attendance at this, um, evening for, for questions related to zoning board articles. Um, we have a significant number of potential articles on our list, and our goal tonight will be to determine those, which we move forward to the creation of, um, warrant article language for review. Um, the, the board will take a vote at our, um, next meeting in January on the warrant, uh, the language that will be submitted, um, to the town warrant for this year. Because of the number of articles and the time currently, we will devote, we're going to try and keep it to no more than five to perhaps 10 minutes, but I'm gonna try and keep it to five minutes per, uh, potential article.","timeStart":8402.305,"timeEnd":8548.765,"chunkIndex":92},{"id":"1835194d-a35c-4cd1-85a0-3b140279e3a4","content":"Speaker 2: Um, I may take these out of order as well. Um, but let's go ahead and start with, um, with the top of our list. Um, what I will do is I will turn this over to, um, Claire, um, from the Department of Planning and Community Development, um, and then back to the board for a discussion so that we can get to a yes or no as to which articles to, to move ahead to Warren article language. Okay. So the first item is, um, a, um, is a change to the current A DU provisions, and I'll turn it over to Claire as there was a memo that was prepared by the department planning and community development.\n\nSpeaker 6: Great, thank you. Um, we received very late, uh, last month comments from the Attorney General's office about, um, changes that we made to the A DU bylaw. It may be late, I think, for this board to review fully, um, the, uh, memo that was provided. Um, essentially what it says is that, you know, we can continue, um, with the bylaw, uh, as written, but there are, um, extensive comments, um, from the ags office, uh, as it relates, uh, uh, to further implementation of the bylaw. I think this is something that we could likely hold on for this year, but is something certainly that we need to look at moving forward. And we provided the, um, like I said, we provided the ags response for the board's reference.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you, Steve.","timeStart":8549.545,"timeEnd":8646.405,"chunkIndex":93},{"id":"72d21aed-dd14-4b7b-ba9a-fca5a9b62348","content":"Speaker 5: Um, I've, I read the ags response the day after it came out. Um, yes, we have some work to do, but, um, I agree with Director Ricker that it could probably wait. We, the ag has told us what we can and cannot do, um, so we can just live with that if necessary.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you, Jean.\n\nSpeaker 3: Yeah, I agree. I think the AG didn't understand a couple of things that we did that I think are consistent. So it'd be interesting if discussion at some point, but the one thing I wonder if we want to do this year is the one thing where they said it should be changed from special permit to a finding, and that might be something to do now. Well,\n\nSpeaker 5: If, if we were to do something this year. Yeah, yeah. Uh, and that's what I was referring to when, uh, the bit about, you know, the AG has told us what we can't do, so that, that's exactly what I was referring to. So\n\nSpeaker 3: I think that's the one thing it might be worth pursuing this year.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, Ken,\n\nSpeaker 4: So Jim, what you're saying is the ADUs right now is by Right, right. So it's not by special permit?\n\nSpeaker 3: Well,","timeStart":8647.065,"timeEnd":8712.495,"chunkIndex":94},{"id":"07803ea1-d2e6-46a4-a485-0f6b7c3d997e","content":"Speaker 5: The, the, there is a provision in the A DU by law that requires a special permit if the A DU is, uh, does not obey the side yard setbacks. So converting an existing garage to an A DU, which happens to be, you know, a significant number of them. Um, it the way, if I understood the memo correctly, um, the AG is saying that you can require a finding, you know, approve it via, via a finding rather, but you can't require a special permit\n\nSpeaker 3: For, for, um, a non-conforming use. Yeah. So it's very, it's very specific and it might be worth just changing that this year.\n\nSpeaker 32: Excuse me. Could Mr. Benson please speak into the microphone?\n\nSpeaker 3: Yes. I'm question to you. I'm sorry. I'm very bad at that. Thank you for reminding me.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, so that could be done through potentially a, um, a more administrative change.\n\nSpeaker 5: No, it's, it's in the bylaws, so it have to go to town meeting\n\nSpeaker 2: No, no, no, it through town meeting. But it is, it is really more of an administrative change in, in, um, conformance with the ags, uh,\n\nSpeaker 5: Guidance. Correct. It's, it would basically be a technical correction to bring the bylaw into agreement with what the ag says we can do.\n\nSpeaker 3: And, and, you know, this is not something that was changed, that we changed, um, when we made the changes for the A DU, this has been an existing problem. Right?\n\nSpeaker 2: This was something that was not changed when we made the last changes\n\nSpeaker 3: Some years ago, apparently, or decades?\n\nSpeaker 5: No years, no, just\n\nSpeaker 2: Years.","timeStart":8714.265,"timeEnd":8820.045,"chunkIndex":95},{"id":"ee072d68-1ad4-4c74-8ae4-10077be44211","content":"Speaker 5: It, it was during COVID , yeah.\n\nSpeaker 3: It\n\nSpeaker 2: Was 6, 5, 5 years ago. Um, so, uh, Claire do,\n\nSpeaker 4: If it's just, if it's just an administrative or a corrective change based on age a, uh, ags, uh, recommendations. So I, I don't see why we just, just couldn't just put that through and just say, Hey, this is a correction that we have to make to our thing and leave it at that. There's no, we're not reinventing ags Again, we're not, we're not we looking to change anything. The ags, we just trying to make it\n\nSpeaker 2: Legal. Okay. So that would be the, the one change. Um, the one warrant article related to the AGS recommendations would be a technical correction related to the use of special permits versus findings for non-conforming\n\nSpeaker 3: Uses. The key sentence that says, moreover, general law, chapter 48, section six's recommendations for preexisting nonconforming structures and lots does not require a special permit, but instead allows a finding. So that's, that's the one little thing that I think it might be worth changing this year.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, Claire, is that something that the department would want to create language around, or would you, um, I know that you had said that you were going to, um, submit recommendations at our next meeting, but if that is really the only article that the redevelopment board would like to take up from those findings this year, is that a reasonable\n\nSpeaker 6: That Yeah, that shouldn't be Okay. Incredibly difficult for\n\nSpeaker 2: Us to\n\nSpeaker 6: Okay. Put together.","timeStart":8820.265,"timeEnd":8920.725,"chunkIndex":96},{"id":"bd00f3c9-ea4f-4aff-9ac1-3f7e7c6c825c","content":"Speaker 2: Great. Okay. That closes the first, um, item. The next is the removal of the certified mail requirement, um, section 1.5 with a change to first class mailing. Claire, I'll turn this over to you.\n\nSpeaker 6: Great, thank you. Um, one of the things we discussed, uh, at our, um, meeting, uh, retreat in October was, uh, the board's desire, um, to remove the certified mail requirement, um, and potentially change that notification to first class mail. Uh, instead we find that this certified mail requirement is cost prohibitive, uh, for those, uh, uh, citizen warrant articles that seek a zoning map change. Um, and, um, I, I believe this was, uh, an item that was put on, excuse me, that was, uh, raised during the, um, uh, uh, during, during our retreat. And I believe it's something the board, uh, does wish to act on at least, uh, potentially at this next town meeting. Excuse me.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Um, Ken,\n\nSpeaker 4: What does town council say about this\n\nSpeaker 6: Town Council?\n\nSpeaker 4: We were gonna talk to him about this, weren't we?\n\nSpeaker 6: Yeah. Town Council has said that this requirement is nothing that is required at the state level. Um, this is something that is purely, uh, uh, uh, an an Arlington, uh, requirement.\n\nSpeaker 4: So other towns don't do this.\n\nSpeaker 6: That's correct. Well, as far as I know.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. Um, I see no problems. Just change it. Just make, make it a simpler,\n\nSpeaker 2: Um, um, okay. Thank\n\nSpeaker 4: If we have time, I would say do it. If we don't, then, uh, we can always, uh, push this up to the next year.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, Jean,","timeStart":8922.145,"timeEnd":9036.245,"chunkIndex":97},{"id":"94e3d67a-eb8c-4364-b1d2-d6dd7900c1ba","content":"Speaker 6: It seems\n\nSpeaker 3: A simple enough change to the bylaw to do this year,\n\nSpeaker 2: Steve. I, I agree. I think it's appropriate for this year. Okay. So we'll need to create, um, language around the, um, change for the mailing requirement. Okay. Um, I'd like to go through all of the departments proposed updates. Um, the next is the, um, uh, I believe that Katie had, uh, changes to the, actually, let's go to the environmental articles next.\n\nSpeaker 6: Great. Thank you. Um, we have, uh, a, uh, ugh, we have an update, um, to the Flood Plain District session, um, an update to hazard mitigation and potentially a light pollution zoning change. Our environmental planner, David Morgan, is here this evening to answer any questions and provide further, uh, information.\n\nSpeaker 2: So I believe that we discussed these at our retreat. Um, lemme just pull those notes up, but, um, uh, Jean, I'll turn it over to you first to see if you have any specific,\n\nSpeaker 3: I don't. I'd be happy to hear what David has to say about the\n\nSpeaker 7: Environmental article.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, and again, we're looking for a brief overview for the three that are proposed, please.\n\nSpeaker 33: Sure. I have the floodplain District first.","timeStart":9037.625,"timeEnd":9157.185,"chunkIndex":98},{"id":"271aa154-a905-4cf5-9dba-20457e240b47","content":"Speaker 33: I'll pull that document up and walk you through the changes there. These are changes that are required by FEMA for, uh, eligibility for Arlington to remain in the National Flood Insurance Program. Last year at this time, we received notice that we were approved to incorporate this new language, but it arrived too late for submission for town meeting to get a warrant article and get before this board and others in order to clarify all the requirements. So what we wound up doing was putting it in a special set of regulations for the Conservation Commission to enforce for a year. And now that will sunset when we adopt this as a, a zoning ordinance. Again, the, the current, uh, bylaw remains in force in effect, it's just that we're delegating a responsibility to con com for the time being for enforcement. So the changes that they're requiring of us include, uh, the stated local purpose for flood resilience standards.\n\nSpeaker 33: That's just basically the preamble has some updated language specifying where the flood maps can be accessed by the public. There's a section on a definition of terms, they've, they've added about 12 or 15 terms that need clarification and definition, um, designation of the community Floodplain Administrator, that's me. It's already in my job description. It's just being spelled out in the bylaw requirements of all permits for proposed development in the Floodplain Overlay District. This is, uh, nothing really special. It doesn't change any of ARBs procedures. There are no new requirements. It all just falls on the sort of onus of the, the special permit","timeStart":9158.415,"timeEnd":9280.285,"chunkIndex":99},{"id":"b1b3c2d0-706e-4e56-a3b8-36831c2ddae0","content":"Speaker 33: Statement prohibiting floodway encroachment. We already prohibit construction in the floodways requirements for review of subdivision proposals. Not an issue in Arlington, requirements for elevation and anchoring of recreational vehicles in the flood zones. That is something that conservation already deals with and, you know, can enforce around. So the fact of it being in the bylaws, just sort of a, a rear guard to allow inspection services to do the same requirement to notify appropriate officials of any alteration or relocation of a watercourse. And likewise, to notify FEMA of data that changes the base flood elevations. These are processes that we have been through with the Conservation Commission in the past. Applicants will sometimes, uh, seek to, uh, be in or out of the flood zone depending on their, uh, position. And we can go through that process with them variances for, uh, building code, floodplain standards and zone to bylaws.\n\nSpeaker 33: Uh, there, there are very few exemptions and, uh, variances, I believe right now, you know, I'm not gonna go into it for the sake of time, but that is part of it. Abrogation and, uh, greater restriction section and disclaimer of liability. These are, you know, points of legalese toward the end of the, the bylaw customary sorts of things. Um, that is it. We, again, were approved by DCR. Their floodplain manager oversees the implementation process for the new language. So effectively this would be, I don't want to overstate it, but it's effectively a copy paste job to go from the existing Conservation Commission version of these regulations to the zoning bylaw with some tweaks to, you know, make it format correctly and fit in the right sections. Okay.","timeStart":9282.185,"timeEnd":9407.765,"chunkIndex":100},{"id":"216e90c7-fce6-4498-b445-0f63300aa4ef","content":"Speaker 5: Steve, so just, uh, to, uh, so, so I have it clearly. This is basically FEMA requirements so that we can remain in the National Flood Insurance Program and people like me who have flood insurance can continue to have flood insurance. Exactly. Yeah. I, I think we should do it this year. any personal interest? None whatsoever. Yes. I, yes, there is personal interest. Thank you. You won't be able to vote on\n\nSpeaker 2: It, to be quite honest.\n\nSpeaker 3: No, you can't\n\nSpeaker 2: Per, well, we'll have to, we'll have to review that . Um, uh, next one, hazard mitigation update.\n\nSpeaker 33: Uh, we would need to, this won't happen this year. Uh, we're, we'll, we'll need to do that next year. Great.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, and then the last one I have was a light pollute pollution zoning change.\n\nSpeaker 33: Yeah. There is a section in the industrial, actually I have it here. It's actually under other districts and I've lost my place. I'm sorry. Here it is. Section 5.2, sorry, 5.3 0.23.","timeStart":9408.415,"timeEnd":9477.935,"chunkIndex":101},{"id":"9b27751b-b779-4b5c-8266-235e3bc199ea","content":"Speaker 33: I'm going out of order. I'm getting ahead of myself. Let me reset. Section 5.6 0.2 D four is where this, uh, lighting section lives. Now it's under other districts. Like I said, it's a lighting regulation, uh, that applies only in the industrial districts. I spoken with members, Lac and Benson previously about the prospect of putting this in the, uh, residential and commercial districts. And so the proposal would be to, uh, effectively move this language out from where it's applied only to industrial districts to the, uh, more general section that applies to all districts. And the proposal would be to create section 5.3, 0.23 of the zoning bylaw. We call it lighting presumably. 'cause that's what the current section is called. And this just reinforces, uh, consistency with the requirements of Title V. Article 14, our dark skies bylaw. Uh, it has requirements about having all light be downcast, at least 75 degree cutoff or fully shielded. And also talks about lighting for walkways or parking lots to be adequately spaced for even light distribution. Finally minimizing over spill onto adjacent property. Um, if there is a new version of the dark skies bylaw that comes through this town meeting, it would supersede some of these requirements such as the one about over spill. So that is\n\nSpeaker 33: Potentially something that you could strip out of this language. Do\n\nSpeaker 2: You anticipate that this year? Is that why you mention it? Yes.\n\nSpeaker 3: I think we, I mean, we didn't resolve whether it made more sense to change the zoning bylaw or to change.\n\nSpeaker 2: Jean, can you speak into the mic please?","timeStart":9480.395,"timeEnd":9610.485,"chunkIndex":102},{"id":"431df6c5-90d2-473f-97ad-729e38269277","content":"Speaker 3: I'm sorry. We didn't resolve whether it made more sense to change the zoning bylaw or go with the current existing town Dark Sky. And it seems to me like if there's gonna be a change to the town dark sky, why don't we let that go through mm-hmm . And then see whether we need to do anything else with the zoning bylaw.\n\nSpeaker 33: That's reasonable. I'm thinking that in the absence of changes to the dark skies bylaw, it would still be useful to have process around how the, uh, commercial, residential, and industrial applications get evaluated. Yeah. It, I,\n\nSpeaker 3: It's sort of harder with zoning 'cause we tend to only see them when they show up here. You know,\n\nSpeaker 2: Ken,\n\nSpeaker 4: I should hold them for now till we wait. Um, dark sky comes in and see how it goes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Right. I would agree. I think let's, let's take up the floodplain district item of the\n\nSpeaker 33: Three. Sounds like a plan this year. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Steve Concur. Okay, great.\n\nSpeaker 33: Very good. Thank you. Thank you very much.\n\nSpeaker 3: Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You, David. Okay. Um, Claire, you, um, sent a, um, an item related to, um, changes to the signage bylaw. Um, can you top line that item? I know that we all received Katie's memo. Um, so I think, uh, just a high level overview would suffice and then we can turn that over to the board to discuss. Sure.","timeStart":9610.665,"timeEnd":9705.225,"chunkIndex":103},{"id":"365e0c49-aaf3-4790-b6e3-f5b5810b8877","content":"Speaker 6: Um, Katie, Lucia is also here this evening. If she, if you, the board members have any questions, um, I think what we are looking to do is make changes, uh, to the sign bylaw to make it, uh, easier, uh, for business owners, uh, to, uh, use and understand. I don't have Ms. Elia's memo immediately in front of me. I know at least one of the changes is, uh, to allow for cabinet signage. Um, again, um, I think that there are other, uh, uh, changes that are related to dimensional requirements, um, especially, um, the corner, um, uh, installation of sign, installation of signage on, uh, on corner, uh, properties. Um, generally, um, I would refer you back to Mrs. I's, uh, memo.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Thank you very much. Um, I do not agree with removing cabinet signs from the list of prohibited signs. I think that they were, um, they, well, I know they were added there for a reason, and I don't think that they're appropriate in Arlington. Um, I'm not sure that this is something that we need to address this year, the other items, but I'll, um, be interested in, in the other members' thoughts on this. Um, kid,\n\nSpeaker 4: Um, well, I, I tend to agree with you, but what, uh, what's, um, generating this change? Does, has there been a lot of requests from, um, business owners to make this change? Or has this come up in, um, signage permits and everything else that's, that made, that created this as an issue?\n\nSpeaker 6: Katie, if you'd like to come and answer that question, that would be great.\n\nSpeaker 2: For specifically cabinet signs, or are you asking about all of these?\n\nSpeaker 4: All of these,","timeStart":9705.445,"timeEnd":9811.925,"chunkIndex":104},{"id":"e0f37d1a-6b9f-4065-83f6-ae88da524929","content":"Speaker 2: I mean, I, I, I think before Katie, I, it looks like, um, she has referenced where there has been one item. So for example, under seven, there was, there was one applicant who was looking to install a new sign. The same under number six. There was one who was, you know,\n\nSpeaker 4: If it's only one item, I don't think it's worth it. But\n\nSpeaker 34: This is a number of various changes, um, to the signed bylaw that have come up a number of times. Um, based on the several years that I've been reviewing signed per applications, um, the exam, I've, I've only provided one or two examples, just for the sake of, of tonight's conversation. Um, I, I don't feel particularly, you know, precious about, um, certain items. So it, um, you know, for example, the, the cabinet signs, um, uh, we can walk through them one by one, but I'm, I am cognizant of the time we have here. Um, for the cabinet signs, um, there've been, I would say three or four applications, um, of businesses who have requested cabinet signs, um, largely because they are not aware that we prohibit cabinet signs. Um, it is just another option, uh, for those businesses. Um, while signs are, are tend to be sufficient. I, we don't have to necessarily go into each and every item. But yeah,\n\nSpeaker 2: I, I think let's, um, let's, let's go through the other members of the board and, and see, um, what other ones we might want to take up this year","timeStart":9825.005,"timeEnd":9931.445,"chunkIndex":105},{"id":"ff93f34d-5bda-42e5-aac7-cf6b163e9b99","content":"Speaker 3: Starting. Yeah. Novo, I think this is a terrific memo with all of the attachments, so thank you so much for doing them. And I think we do have an opportunity to make some rational changes to the sign by law that will help businesses in town. And, and that won't sort of harm, you know, what it looks like to go downtown. So I went through all of these. So traffic visibility at intersections. Mm-hmm . And the example you gave of Marathon Sports, I think there's another option, which is if the building's already there, just let 'em put the sign up on the wall. I wouldn't want to reduce the area because there was at least one place where they would've sort of put a freestanding sign into the visibility area, which I thought was a bad idea. But with Marathon, I think the alternative change, which you didn't mention, would be just if there's an existing building there, let them put the sign up on the building.","timeStart":9931.805,"timeEnd":9989.325,"chunkIndex":106},{"id":"19e88fab-8286-43e2-bfd1-98079926443c","content":"Speaker 3: That was that. I don't have a strong feeling about cabinet signs, except there are some already in town. Mm-hmm . And Katie, I guess, gave us a photo of a cop of a couple at least. And some people have asked, and I don't find them particularly a bad thing to have town. Um, so I'm okay with that. I don't think we can allow the exception for electronic Massachusetts lottery signs because of First Amendment issues. We can't only allow one sort of type of thing to advertise with, um, electronic signs without allowing all of them to advertise. So I think that is, um, a real problem if we would just allow it for one type of advertisement. The marquee, allowing the Marques to be electronic, I think is a great idea as long as they're not flashing, uh, or, you know, changing every so often. But if they're solid, if they're flashing or changing, I think it becomes a real traffic hazard.","timeStart":9989.635,"timeEnd":10053.125,"chunkIndex":107},{"id":"f61f6f3d-6e25-4ac2-a3fc-5cfa8cf293bc","content":"Speaker 3: But I think if it's done the right way, it would be great. I didn't really understand revival references to neighborhood office district, so I'll pass that one by. Um, if we allow Canopy and projecting signs in the residential business district, we should probably allow them in the regular business district freestanding, which you recommend for, um, the residential business, but also aren't allowed in the business district. So if we allow 'em for one, we should allow 'em for both. Yeah. We need to limit the number of A-frame signs, but I don't think any of 'em should be allowed on the sidewalk, you know, so I would agree with the one, and I would say not on public property, because right now the bylaw does allow 'em on private property, and I've seen them like block half of a sidewalk mm-hmm . So I like the idea of one, but I would add to it not on a public sidewalk. So I think these are mostly good ideas and I think they're worth putting together in a package. Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You. So the, the three, um, that are not the cabinet sign that I captured, that you were interested in moving forward with the, uh, discussion around the electronic message board and displays for our key signs with administrative approval, the projecting sign and add the business districts and the A-Frame,\n\nSpeaker 3: Right. And, and no, you conflated to allow, allow the projecting sign type in the business district limit the aframe\n\nSpeaker 2: To long. I have those as two. Yeah,\n\nSpeaker 3: Those","timeStart":10053.625,"timeEnd":10153.165,"chunkIndex":108},{"id":"23ed6333-5784-4da4-a897-cc9e21dfab8f","content":"Speaker 2: Are two separate. Yeah. I, I, sorry, I I did list those as two. Oh, okay. I did not take a long enough breath between them.\n\nSpeaker 3: So, so the ones that I, I would say we don't have to do, we don't have to do any of 'em, but the one that I'd prefer, you know, we not doing is the cabinet signs and the exception for electronic Massachusetts lottery signs, but allow them for marquees.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Steve.\n\nSpeaker 5: Uh, so regarding, um, so I agree with Mr. Benson that the allowance for lottery signs is probably going to run into, um, Reed versus Gilbert. Yep. That's it. Very good. Steve\n\nSpeaker 3: ,\n\nSpeaker 5: I help. Yep. Yep. Yep. Anyway, uh, so I, I agree. We, we, you know, maybe that one sets, um, the traffic visibility one, I, I think that 6 2 3 A three,\n\nSpeaker 5: If that were rewritten to read like 6 2 3 A two. So, okay, so backing up 6, 2, 3 A says general, it's, you know, general location restrictions except we're pro specifically authorized in this section, signs may not be placed in the following locations. Right? So, uh, sub two says you can't put a sign in any location that obstructs a view of any authorized traffic sign signal or other traffic control device. Mm-hmm . So three could just say in any location that obstructs a visibility of traffic, and then you're, you're, you're rather than just drawing out triangles and, um, you know, there's no height component because the thing is 10 feet up in the air, it's not really interfering. Just, just say, just so it doesn't interfere with traffic visibility.","timeStart":10153.165,"timeEnd":10250.165,"chunkIndex":109},{"id":"09bc32e9-a1d6-492b-88a3-77f77d702d69","content":"Speaker 3: I think that's gonna be subjective.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, I, I'm concerned about that. Yeah. Being too subjective under administrative approval.\n\nSpeaker 5: So if it, if that is subjective, then I would suggest, uh, going, I don't know the section offhand, but the traffic vis, there's a section in five three something or other that deals with visibility around corners. Um, but the gist is that you can't have anything protruding, uh, between in the, in the so-called triangle between the heights of three feet and seven feet. Um, so I think it would be, you know, reasonable and not subjective to, to restrict, you know, in the vertical visibility area. Mm-hmm .\n\nSpeaker 3: Okay. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Kim?\n\nSpeaker 4: I think it's fine. If we had time, um,\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, I wouldn't, I wouldn't prioritize these.\n\nSpeaker 4: I, I just think there's so many more things that I would agree we, we have on the plate right now. These are all good, all good points, but I don't think we,\n\nSpeaker 3: Well, well, you know, if we would've, if I were to ask one question is are the two theaters wanting to do this now? Is it something that would help them?\n\nSpeaker 5: I ask\n\nSpeaker 3: So they don't fall off the ladders and break their necks and things you\n\nSpeaker 34: Mentioned. I do ask, because specifically it's, it's come up in the last year with the Regent Theater, um, since, since it is under new ownership considering what the marquee could look like for the future. Um, not just because of, in addition to the, you know, more occupational safety hazards, we\n\nSpeaker 3: Should go ahead with that one then.\n\nSpeaker 2: Marquee.","timeStart":10250.405,"timeEnd":10345.485,"chunkIndex":110},{"id":"1ff9f780-9c65-4b55-904e-79095a997b18","content":"Speaker 3: Yeah, the marquee\n\nSpeaker 2: Only. Can we just give him a waiver if it's just one?\n\nSpeaker 3: No, we are not allowed to give waivers.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Provide relief.\n\nSpeaker 3: That would be, we can't provide relief. We should just change the sign bylaw.\n\nSpeaker 34: And, uh, again, I'll note we're, we're still looking at,\n\nSpeaker 2: We need to really carefully write that language because I am concerned about other digital science,\n\nSpeaker 3: But we could do it just for marquees over theaters. Right?\n\nSpeaker 2: Yes. That's what I'm saying. We'd have to be very tight with the language.\n\nSpeaker 34: We are, I'm working very closely with the Region theater to, to find very specific options to make sure it's very appropriate given the historical nature of the theater, both theaters.\n\nSpeaker 2: Right. That's my other concern is what, what this looks like within the context of both of the Exactly. Yeah. Okay. So, um, the one that we would prioritize is the marquee signs with the A-frame and the projecting signs, um, as a second priority.\n\nSpeaker 7: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you very much.\n\nSpeaker 34: Thank you,\n\nSpeaker 7: .\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um,\n\nSpeaker 7: Let's see,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, the next item was the compliant officer discussion. Clear?\n\nSpeaker 6: Yes. Um,\n\nSpeaker 7: Generally","timeStart":10345.675,"timeEnd":10453.425,"chunkIndex":111},{"id":"76a7b60d-d92b-4938-8ee4-e9e6fb647d6b","content":"Speaker 6: When, um, we are in the budgeting cycle, uh, which happens, um, from about SEP in September and October, um, that is the time to request additional positions. Um, I have repeatedly, uh, requested, uh, additional, uh, position, uh, every year since I've been here. Um, and have, uh, it, it is, it is not, um, uh, not been supported. Um, you know, uh, as, as part of, as part of the general budgeting process. I'm not sure how this might work, um, as a, as a warrant article. Um, I think, I think I would have to talk with, uh, with the law department, uh, more specifically about what that may look like.\n\nSpeaker 2: Right. And, and again, I don't think that this was proposed as a warrant article, but that again, it was identified at the retreat that this should be, um, that we would like to see it on the warrant as part of the budget Right. For this year. But it sounds like that was, um, not able to be accommodated this year, this year, not. We will keep requesting it on the department's behalf.\n\nSpeaker 6: Absolutely. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Into the future.\n\nSpeaker 6: Appreciate your support.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, and then the next was a, uh, request for, uh, consultant funding for the Arlington Heights Business District.","timeStart":10453.815,"timeEnd":10541.365,"chunkIndex":112},{"id":"f5b053db-7209-4224-bcbc-a39e0cd0b7ce","content":"Speaker 6: Um, I believe that is an appropriation that we could, um, certainly request. Um, I think it, we have pursued grant funding for, uh, uh, a project, this project, um, to really no avail. Um, this is something that has not been, uh, included as part of the planning budget. Um, most of the, uh, planning budget that I receive, uh, through CDBG funds has been dedicated, um, over the last, um, two years at least to the comprehensive plan, uh, project. Um, I think that, you know, a request for an appropriation, uh, makes sense if that's what the, uh, board and the Heights business district, uh, committee feels is necessary. Ken,\n\nSpeaker 4: I'm on the fence on this one here, just with the budget crisis with the town has right now and the holding the hiring freeze and so forth. I, um, but then this would also be generating income too that could potentially generate more income in the future. So it's, uh, I'm not sure. I'm, I'm on the fence about this one.\n\nSpeaker 6: Jean,\n\nSpeaker 3: I mean, is, is, this is part of the regular budget, so it would either be in the town manager's budget or not?\n\nSpeaker 2: No, this would be, this would be a specific,\n\nSpeaker 6: A work designated request, a request for an appropriation from town meeting.\n\nSpeaker 2: Not unlike funding has been requested in the past for items like the, um, commercial design guidelines, commercial design guidelines. Um, I believe you had a consultant for the, um, amp up comprehensive plan, comprehensive plan project. So this would be in that vein.\n\nSpeaker 3: Oh,\n\nSpeaker 2: I hear Ken's point as well.","timeStart":10542.105,"timeEnd":10655.945,"chunkIndex":113},{"id":"df87cda0-205d-4b5b-bff2-b9967e228bc2","content":"Speaker 3: I mean, it's really hard to ask when the town's gonna ask Correct. For another big\n\nSpeaker 2: Overnight. So this, we, we may need to make do with the resources, the limited resources that are available currently. Yeah. To the redevelopment board by the town. Yep. Yep. I'm fine with that. Okay. So we'll\n\nSpeaker 4: Hold,\n\nSpeaker 2: Hold. Well, it's, it's, we're going to keep moving with the project, so we just unfortunately won't have those resources available to us if we don't ask town meeting for them. Okay. Um, let's see. And I think that takes us through, um, I'll go back up to update the bike parking table by adding multi-family housing. Claire.\n\nSpeaker 6: Great. Thank you. I don't know, Rachel, if you have notes on\n\nSpeaker 2: I do not. This,\n\nSpeaker 6: Um, I believe this came out of, um, our, our retreat. I don't have notes on this. Um, I don't know, Steve, if you have any thoughts or, you know,\n\nSpeaker 2: The genesis\n\nSpeaker 5: Of this. I was, uh, slightly puzzled by the inclusion of it. Um, I, I think\n\nSpeaker 2: Something that's necessary. Alright.\n\nSpeaker 5: Yeah. I, I think we can skip this. Great.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. Uh, can I add so to that maybe that was part of it. Um, I was thinking maybe we can vis revisit the bicycle parking in mixed use buildings having to be on the first floor. Um, maybe, uh, put it such that maybe, uh, one during the special permit view, uh, the a RP has has some rights to, um, allowed if there's elevator, uh, if, if it's an elevated building. So we can do\n\nSpeaker 3: That now.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah. We do that","timeStart":10656.105,"timeEnd":10758.885,"chunkIndex":114},{"id":"948f5998-0f94-4e3a-b282-5aaefaeac6e3","content":"Speaker 3: Regularly. It doesn't have to be on the first floor,\n\nSpeaker 4: So we can put it on the lower floor as long\n\nSpeaker 3: As, and we've approved the couple where they've had ramps.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. Because this way I think it's binding where there's not enough commercial space. Uh, we\n\nSpeaker 3: Haven't, they're not required to be on the first floor.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. Then take it back. Nevermind. Perfect.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. And then the last one related to the, um, department of Planning and Community Development. We received a, um, memo from the multi-Family housing overlay district, um, who asked us to review, um, current, um, proposed zoning provisions, um, per our last meeting. Um, I don't believe that we are there yet, um, with, for the affordable housing overlay. Um, but we have received that memo. Um, and I know that we are looking to schedule the Arlington, um, the Affordable Housing Overlay committee to, um, to meet with the redevelopment board in February. Um, so, uh, Jean, I will, um, start the discussion off with you related to the memo.\n\nSpeaker 3: Oh, I thought we were meeting with them tonight.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, no, no, we, we don't have room on, on the Okay. A agenda. So we had asked them for a, um, a, um, memo that wasn't, that that was okay. Not discussed to have a meeting tonight. Yeah, I","timeStart":10758.885,"timeEnd":10849.125,"chunkIndex":115},{"id":"40def29b-1af0-48a7-a06f-c50a459a0193","content":"Speaker 3: Mean, there was a lot of great work that went into the memo. I really appreciated and I really appreciated, uh, the draft change to the bylaws. Um, there were a number of things that I would need to talk to the committee about and understand why they were there, because I had some serious questions about them. I don't know if you want me to go in to all of them, but they included, for example, uh, the height of the buildings, especially in the more residential neighborhoods, which I think, um, might be too high. And that was the reason when we did the MBTA overlay, we lowered the heights in the residential neighborhoods. I'm concerned about, um, some of the industrial parcels that are on the list. I'm not as concerned about the business parcels 'cause I understand that might be some of the best places for them.","timeStart":10849.125,"timeEnd":10910.815,"chunkIndex":116},{"id":"e96f779b-c226-46b8-864f-8a748168102c","content":"Speaker 3: Um, I think some, I, this came up before, I think some of the locations are terrific. I'm gonna have trouble with the locations where people can't walk to Broadway or Mass Ave within about 15 minutes of the locations. Um, because you're, you're suggesting a 50% reduction in the amount of cars that are allowed. And, um, that means people, you know, need other ways to get places. So I'm, I'm also a little concerned with the, you know, one parking space for every other one and relying on the information from the Arlington Housing Authority. 'cause one of the important things you told us last time was the a HA has the lowest income folks and they're less likely to be able to afford to own cars. Where folks who are gonna be in these places can be like 80% of me median income, and they're more likely to have cars. So, um, I have some concern about, um, what you're trying to do to limit the amount of parking spaces under those circumstances. And there were a few, there were a few other things. I I think it's, it's really in the right direction. I think it's really something that the town should be doing, but it's, I think the details of what would work and what would be acceptable for town meeting are need to be a discussion","timeStart":10911.555,"timeEnd":11008.935,"chunkIndex":117},{"id":"9d8de58c-c74b-4b8f-b016-b5e449ac3563","content":"Speaker 5: Steve. Sure. Um, I'm going to, uh, try to, because, uh, the memo was, was, uh, kind enough to include some questions. I'm gonna try to zip through and provide you at least by answers. Um, so in these, uh, but with a couple of other comments. So in, um, in 5 9 3, um, there's a, there's a sentence that says site plan may include, but not be limited to. Uh, when the AG reviewed our MBTA Communities Act language, um, the phrase, they flagged the phrase, but not limited to say stating that an unbounded set of criteria was not compatible with BuyRight development. So I consider striking that. Um, regarding the properties, uh, leader Plaza in Brookline Bank, uh, there are two adjacent parcels, all that are also owned by 8 64 mass at LLC. Uh, you might want to consider adding those because it's effectively one big parcel. Um, I have a bunch of questions about five nine 4G two, but I will def save those for later. I, I think the mixed per use provision is fine as is. I understand the, the, the issue with asset classes. I, I don't think a mixed use bonus is necessary. Um, I, I happen to be comfortable with, uh, point with half a half a parking space because that is my understanding is that is the housing corporation of, of Arlington's current utilization. A HA Yeah. No. HCA? No,\n\nSpeaker 3: I think it said a HA which is it? H-H-C-A-H-C-A. Okay.","timeStart":11009.745,"timeEnd":11105.565,"chunkIndex":118},{"id":"db46a1ac-89de-4db6-8793-c7487cf7e48e","content":"Speaker 5: Okay. Um, I think like the, the six stories on ma on, on the corridor dis Right. Using corridor and neighborhood districts, um, I, I think makes sense and I think six stories is appropriate on the corridors. And I guess, uh, we will have a discussion about what the neighborhood districts are. Um, I think it's fine to stick with setbacks as the dimensional governance for yards. Um, you know, because, you know, I don't think a, a separate open space requirement is necessary in Arlington land costs run into the millions of dollars an acre. So, you know, the yards are a luxury item and I understand the trade off that you're trying to make here. Um, I think it would make sense to reduce side yard setbacks to, uh, when a parcel abuts a b and I district and I would keep the 10 foot setback for the, um, for the corridor district. I know I just said that there's a trade off here, but, um, I, I think, you know, having some, having a 10 foot setback or some setback will make it a little more, uh, palatable to, um, a little more palatable. That's all I have.\n\nSpeaker 3: I, great. I forgot some things I just wanted to\n\nSpeaker 2: Mention, mention and I just, I just wanna make sure it's clear what our goal is tonight. Mm-hmm . So it's, is this going to get to town meeting this year? And we have some distance to cover before it will, and that we have already talked to the, um, housing overlay committee about coming in in February. Okay. To do a meeting where we can address,\n\nSpeaker 5: Ah, I was not aware of that. Yes.","timeStart":11105.915,"timeEnd":11196.645,"chunkIndex":119},{"id":"3ba2bcae-68d6-460f-926b-8fa217fb2306","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. Yes. I, I thought I was clear on that, but I was not clear enough. I missed clearly once, my apologies once you started talking, so I just wanna be clear about what tonight is versus what February is. Okay. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 5: Thank you. Yep.\n\nSpeaker 3: Three, three quick things. There would be a lot of kids living in these places, I hope, and they need places to play outside. And I'm a little bit concerned when there are almost no setbacks. There are no places for the kids to play. And even monotony manner, which is our only sort of family place, has places for kids to play. And I would hate for us to end up with new affordable housing buildings that go up to the setbacks and there are no places for the kids to play nearby. Um, that concerns me. Um, I don't think you put, um, anything from the schools on the list on the list of, um, locations, if I remember correctly. And at least two of the schools over the decades were sold and are now condos. So it might make sense to, um, add the school committee, um, parcels to the list.","timeStart":11196.645,"timeEnd":11262.605,"chunkIndex":120},{"id":"d61716bf-197f-48e5-aef3-ed45a565c450","content":"Speaker 3: I had forgotten to mention that before. Um, you know, I'm, thank you for clarifying the HCA parking, I had forgotten that, but the HCA parking's all right, you know, on mass on their place is right on Mass Ave. You might wanna have, you know, one parking space for every two units if it's within, you know, a 15 minute walk of Mass Ave or something like that. But if it's farther away, I think it needs to be a higher number. Finally, and this is gonna be the most controversial, sorry, I mentioned this as the last one, but I forgot it. You know what, what I think we're finding with a lot of the developments that come our way is they really, really need a lot of work. And the best way to have that lot, a lot of work is special permits rather than site plan review. So I think this would work much better as a special permit project rather than as a right site plan.","timeStart":11262.765,"timeEnd":11321.325,"chunkIndex":121},{"id":"2edc4cd7-54ab-440d-a2b4-ef59b7710fd5","content":"Speaker 2: Yep. And I, I, I just wanna piggyback onto that, Jean. I I agree with you. And that's where I think, again, we're, we're, we have a lot of work to do still on this. So between that, again, I would agree with Jean about not including the industrial districts. Um, some of the locations in the business district, um, Russell Commons is, is, I would take that off the table. We have a much more comprehensive opportunity to include housing, commercial business and municipal programming there. Um, but there's, there's, there's a lot of work about the stories there. It's, it's too tall what's proposed right now. Um, I'm concerned about SROs. Um, there, there's just a lot for us to, to go through and we can start, you know, I think at our next meeting in February, we can designate some time to be able to\n\nSpeaker 3: Do that and, and even like the assisted living, which is one of the options that needs much fewer parking. So just having a blanket, you know, one space for every two doesn't work. Depends on a lot of factors.\n\nSpeaker 2: Kim, anything else high level before we","timeStart":11321.665,"timeEnd":11384.525,"chunkIndex":122},{"id":"441c61f2-a27c-4951-bc90-ddaebffaf15e","content":"Speaker 4: Highest level I've thought is, I, I agree. I don't, uh, I don't think, um, this is ready for, um, this year's, uh, warrant article and a lot more discussion needs to be had. Uh, we've only met once and, uh, and, uh, we have a, uh, uh, a pretty good, pretty well worked out, um, memo and I, I, I think it was, um, really well written, but, uh, we still need to, there's still a lot of topics that we still need to talk about and I want to talk about some of those and, uh, let's not talk about it now. Let's wait till the next meeting. Perfect.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Um, the next item, uh, Claire that you had on the list was the multi-family housing overlay district. There were a list of items, um, that you had listed here.\n\nSpeaker 6: Sure. Um, I apologize. I don't have notes on these items and I am not sure, um, I think this came out of our retreat. Um, there were several, um, notes, uh, that came out of the, the minutes, uh, from the retreat. And I think this is one of them. Um, I would have to get back to the board with clarification about what exactly, um, all these different items mean with regard to the multi-family housing overly district. Perhaps this is something that we should hold on, uh, until next year,\n\nSpeaker 3: Except for the last bullet, which we should\n\nSpeaker 6: Do this week. Oh, yes. Excuse me. We should remove the language that refers to EOH cell E-O-H-L-C approval because\n\nSpeaker 3: We got\n\nSpeaker 6: It, um, in five 80 4G because we did end up, uh, receiving approval for our economic feasibility analysis ultimately.","timeStart":11385.275,"timeEnd":11491.155,"chunkIndex":123},{"id":"6865d6c7-5f0c-4192-9555-ca4f47ae0b89","content":"Speaker 2: Great. Thank you. Um, Ken, any, any other items from this list that you would want to move forward? And I think that was a fairly administrative change, obviously the Yes. Removing the E-O-H-L-C, no designation. Okay. Steve,\n\nSpeaker 5: There. It may. Um, so because we are, uh, wrestling with, uh, differences of opinion on the bonus provisions, I would throw out the idea of, um, you know, minor changes so that we all agree on the interpretation.\n\nSpeaker 3: I agree. If we can all agree Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yes. I don't know that, that we're in a place where that's\n\nSpeaker 7: So\n\nSpeaker 2: Feasible.\n\nSpeaker 5: If, if, um, if, but if not, then you know, it can wait until another time,\n\nSpeaker 2: Ken.\n\nSpeaker 4: Yeah, I agree. This, uh, I don't think we're gonna agree on, um, on differences of opinion of what we,\n\nSpeaker 5: We, well, it's not what we, what we have to agree on is what we want them to need. Right,\n\nSpeaker 3: Right.\n\nSpeaker 4: And you did wanna get that all done and then clarified and pushes ahead.\n\nSpeaker 5: I, I think the clarifications will be, will be pretty straightforward, but, um, I'm, I'm suggest I'm, if we're going to do,\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, I would, I would prefer to, um, just move ahead with the E-O-H-L-C. Okay, that's fine too. Items, unless, can you feel otherwise? Nope. Okay. Okay. Alright. Um, the next item is Jean, these were two from you. Um, hold on, let's see which ones the location of, um, the minimum or the, the clarification of the minimum drive aisle or driveway. These came from you, from our retreat,","timeStart":11491.805,"timeEnd":11621.245,"chunkIndex":124},{"id":"5f98911b-554d-4a1c-be06-6ac74ec62cb9","content":"Speaker 3: Right? Just, well, no, this just came up at the last meeting where everybody said, or you\n\nSpeaker 2: Emailed this one to me. Yes, thank you. Yeah,\n\nSpeaker 3: We should just change it from 24 feet to 22 feet if that's what we want to approve.\n\nSpeaker 4: But it's the, but it's the driveway between parking spaces not the driveway. That's correct. I just wanna make sure it's clear, right?\n\nSpeaker 3: Yep. And yeah, there's a chart that we can use for that.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 5: So I, I have a, a, a small thought on that,\n\nSpeaker 2: Steve.\n\nSpeaker 5: Yeah. So over the weekend I went through a couple of, uh, neighboring communities zoning bylaws and looked at what they do for drive aisle with mm-hmm . Um, Cambridge uses 22 feet. Somerville and Medford used 20 Watertown and Malden used 24. Melrose did something interesting. They used 20 feet for residential and mixed use in 24 for all other uses, because we keep finding like parking to be, you know, sort of the push and pull between commercial space. Um, I, I kind of like the way they split the difference and used the smaller for, you know, the mixed use in residential and just kept it 24 for the, you know, for all other uses. I think that that's worth considering.\n\nSpeaker 3: I was parked at Burlington Mall last week and I have, I have a compact car mm-hmm . Right. And I came out and parked next to me was this like pickup truck that was probably twice as long as my car. And it's like somebody's personal vehicle, you know, it's not, it wasn't a work vehicle.","timeStart":11621.335,"timeEnd":11718.455,"chunkIndex":125},{"id":"67050d71-2d71-42fc-98a6-d780400fa8c5","content":"Speaker 2: So it, it sounds like we don't yet have consensus, but we can work through that during the warrant article, hearing process mm-hmm . And that a, um, modification to the parking requirements in 6.1 point 11 point C3 is something that we would want to take up and debate what specifically that is.\n\nSpeaker 3: Yes. Okay. And, and then I, I had given, I had given people a memo with some proposed minor changes to the parking rules to make it clear that they apply in the multifamily overlay district. So I can, I can send that to you again, Rachel, if you don't have it.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, sure. Okay. Make sure that, that goes to,\n\nSpeaker 3: That's part of the, at MF overlay district to parking requirements for clarity.\n\nSpeaker 2: That's two separate articles,\n\nSpeaker 3: Yes.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Let me separate this. Okay. Yep. If you provide the language, then we can send it to you. Yep. Then we can review that at our next meeting\n\nSpeaker 7: As well.\n\nSpeaker 2: Jean?\n\nSpeaker 3: Yes, I'll send it to Claire too.\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Great. Thank you. Okay. Um, and the next, um, items we should go through are the ZBA articles. So, um, Christian,\n\nSpeaker 7: Thank\n\nSpeaker 2: You for submitting these. I know we, um, exchanged some initial feedback Absolutely. Based on the board's, um, discussion of these articles in, um, at our annual retreat in September. Um, so the first was the definition of a half story. Yep. And this really has to do with how you are seeing a half story interpreted.","timeStart":11719.635,"timeEnd":11866.245,"chunkIndex":126},{"id":"092dc247-5fd9-41db-bc63-a5706024c21e","content":"Speaker 35: Exactly. So the intent behind half story definition, um, is it's usually applied in Arlington. You have a house that has a gable or a hip or whatever roof. You have a small dormer coming off the roof that makes it a half story. What we're seeing a lot more now are attempts to create some kind of strange roof structure that meets the technical definition to keep it a half story while creating what's effectively an entire third story. Um, and there is nothing in the bylaws that's written today that precludes doing that. Um, we're also seeing structures where it does a two story structure and a full third story over half the, the floor below. Um, and so the question that the board has is that it's our understanding that this is really not what the town wants and that we are looking for guidance from, um, either from the a RB or from town meeting, is to, um, whether there should be a change to how we define these in order to get the results that I think we are more consistently looking for as we're determined by the residential design guidelines.\n\nSpeaker 2: Do you have a proposal\n\nSpeaker 35: At this point? No. Um, 'cause we're sort of struggling a little bit with this and we, what we don't want to end up doing is, is I think you had sort of alluded to earlier, is having a lot of things that are on the agenda for town meeting and this just gets sort of Yeah. Lost in the shuffle. So I think it be, from the board's perspective, it would be better to have a, a more con sort of considered approach to this, uh, looking towards 27.","timeStart":11866.475,"timeEnd":11963.365,"chunkIndex":127},{"id":"1388a8b1-98ef-467b-b024-7f58b5154231","content":"Speaker 2: So one of my recommendations, and I think we might have talked about this at the retreat, was to look, you know, if there is more of a design guideline mm-hmm . Required, is this one of the areas where we talk about some sort of a hybrid form, best based code definition, where we are providing some sort of a diagrammatic guidance, um, and set of options within the zoning bylaw. But that is something that we would need to obviously target 2027 and have some more conversations around. Kristen,\n\nSpeaker 4: When are you talking about, are they come in with like mansards, uh, as another floor or\n\nSpeaker 35: Mansards? It's strange trusses. Um,\n\nSpeaker 5: Could I, I, I'll, I'll, I think I've seen a few of them. I happened to have thought, I happen to think it was kind of a cool thing, but mm-hmm . Basically think, think of, let's say you had a three story building and you take\n\nSpeaker 2: The Steve, I just wanted are is this, are we getting into solving it? Oh yeah.\n\nSpeaker 5: Are\n\nSpeaker 2: We deciding whether or not we're moving forward with it's,\n\nSpeaker 5: Um, I, I, I would hold, I would punt on this one. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Thank you. So I agree that, um, we should have more conversation over the, the next year, but absolutely. It sounds like not for this town meeting. Okay. Um, the next one is the, um, optional option for additional height or stories, um, for relief for houses in fema, the FEMA zone.","timeStart":11963.945,"timeEnd":12052.335,"chunkIndex":128},{"id":"376d026a-aaeb-43db-a631-d5aaf79b3bbd","content":"Speaker 35: So this had come up because if you are, um, doing work on your house and you are in the FEMA flood zone, you are required, your lowest level of inhabitation has to be above the mean flood zone. And so it basically means that your basement can't be habitable and you can't sort of lower your house in order to gain that space. And so we were looking to, um, modify the definition of building height so that in the, when you're within that area, you can consider the mean flood elevation as the base elevation rather than the mean grade of the site. Do\n\nSpeaker 2: You have a proposal in terms of language for this article?\n\nSpeaker 35: I can prepare you one.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Uh, Ken,\n\nSpeaker 4: I'm okay moving this one ahead.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh,\n\nSpeaker 3: Is, is this just for new construction or what like\n\nSpeaker 35: Does, so basically just once, if somebody's doing work on their house and it, the question about the building height comes into question, it just allows them to, rather than lose a great portion of their house because of the, the flood elevation might be, you know, two or three, two feet above the street or something. So it\n\nSpeaker 3: Might be renovation of\n\nSpeaker 35: Addition. So it might be renovation, it might be addition homes\n\nSpeaker 3: As opposed to\n\nSpeaker 35: Exactly new.\n\nSpeaker 3: Because there's one I've forgotten what street it's on. That is I've, it's sort of like on stilts, but it's only two stories.\n\nSpeaker 35: Correct. Yeah.","timeStart":12052.755,"timeEnd":12141.245,"chunkIndex":129},{"id":"969d92f7-2f97-473e-a5f2-7524a5ba1440","content":"Speaker 3: And um, I was like, oh, that's interesting. And then I thought, well, if, if they could go up more, they'd be towering over all the other houses and that's not necessarily the best answer.\n\nSpeaker 35: So that's part of the, that's part of the question is, you know, by living in the flood zone, do you sacrifice the number of stories that you're allowed to, to have Yeah,\n\nSpeaker 3: I come, come back with a proposal, I guess.\n\nSpeaker 35: Absolutely. Well,\n\nSpeaker 5: There, there is another aspect to that is people who are in a flood zone that would like to raise their house and there's not, the house is two stories or two and a quarter stories, but you run up against the height limit and you can't get out of the, you can't get above the BFE.\n\nSpeaker 35: Exactly. Right.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Uh, so that one we will, um, see, uh, proposed language before our next meeting? Yes. Okay, great. Um, the next one is around fair housing law and accessibility. Um, I think that, um, there was the question around whether or not this, um, how this needed to be modified. So\n\nSpeaker 35: Yeah, so exactly. Um, and after further conversations, um, we think that this is something that we should put off to 27, but it's something that the town, um, more appropriately should be looking at. 'cause this is really not a, something that's for the a RB or for the zoning board of appeals. This is really something that's basic town policy.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Great. Thank you. And then, um, the next item that we had is around the application of the tree by bylaw when requesting a second driveway.","timeStart":12141.425,"timeEnd":12241.755,"chunkIndex":130},{"id":"332734fa-be21-47df-947d-85f5e24eefa7","content":"Speaker 35: Yep. And this is, um, it's already in the zoning bylaws, so this is really a matter for, um, discussion with, uh, select board as to whether this should be in the tree bylaws. It is in the town bylaws. Okay,\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. So the, um, one that we will move forward with is the, um, option for the additional height or number of stories of relief within the FEMA zone. Okay. Did I miss anything?\n\nSpeaker 35: Um, there were a few others. Um,\n\nSpeaker 2: I apologize if I missed.\n\nSpeaker 35: No, that's okay. There were some of them that you had previously identified as things that you were wanting to pass on. So that's that\n\nSpeaker 2: Why they didn't\n\nSpeaker 35: Make the list. Um, yeah. So one was about, uh, home occupation, which is being covered under a different article. So yes, allow that to go forward.\n\nSpeaker 2: There's a petition that's moving forward for that.\n\nSpeaker 35: Um, there was a thing, there was a series, there were a couple involving the question about, uh, duplexes and common walls, um, and how we make that definition. That's something that needs further discussion. So that would be a, also something for 27 that\n\nSpeaker 2: Would be great.\n\nSpeaker 35: Um, uh, there was,","timeStart":12242.095,"timeEnd":12317.525,"chunkIndex":131},{"id":"00fb2bb6-2ad7-4a08-b400-d34df3102241","content":"Speaker 35: Uh, about usable open space. Um, but again, we can discuss, we'll need to discuss that further. Um, and then, um, lot coverage we decided we were not gonna touch. Uh, there was a question about, um, enclosure of porches. Uh, this is one that has become much more, uh, common before the board of appeals. Um, it used to be that if you had an, if you had a porch at the front of your house, you could enclose it by, right. Um, that was changed by town meeting sometime within the last five years. And now it requires a special permit. So we're receiving a large number of special permits to enclose porches. Um, these are porches that are within the existing front yard setback. And so the, the dilemma that the board is having is what's the difference between enclosing a porch and just doing an addition in the setback. Um, and this is something where just because of the language that's being used in the bylaw, we think that it's appropriate for some further discussion consideration as to what the town really wants, uh, so that the board is, you know, doing what the board is, what the town is looking for the board to do.\n\nSpeaker 2: Do you have proposed language on this item?\n\nSpeaker 35: This is something that I, I would've loved to refer to some kind of a committee or some study group to just sort of really consider as to what, what it is we really are intending this to achieve.","timeStart":12318.825,"timeEnd":12407.325,"chunkIndex":132},{"id":"2eb2faf7-43fb-4f6e-95a6-23f2d6378908","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. So this, so it sounds like this item and the definition of half story, that there may be a couple Yep. That we can, um, pull, pull apart aside committee to, to work on for 2027. That'd\n\nSpeaker 35: Be great. Perfect.\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, how are we approaching this going forward?\n\nSpeaker 35: And that was all of them.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you so much.\n\nSpeaker 35: Well, thank you for your time. Appreciate it.\n\nSpeaker 2: Perfect. Okay. Um, and then Claire, the last couple that we have on, on this list, um, these are, none of these are a RB articles, correct? They are, um, petitions. We have, um, the home occupation clarification, which we have met with the applicants on previously fences and traffic visibility.\n\nSpeaker 6: This is one that you saw, excuse me, madam chair. This is one that you saw last year. Um, the, uh, proponent, um, we, the A RB ultimately did not decide to take up the article. The proponent, um, wishes to, uh, make another presentation to the a RB potentially, um, at your next meeting, um, as she intends to, uh, try to pursue this zoning warrant article again,\n\nSpeaker 3: Can I just mention for that she, she called me or emailed me or something about it and I said it was last year in part. It was, it was last year. Yeah. It was, uh, inspection services. I thought this was a really bad idea. Right. So I thought she should spend some time talking to Mike Campa about it.","timeStart":12407.635,"timeEnd":12512.875,"chunkIndex":133},{"id":"8a54d1ec-8cd6-42d3-bc11-c38b1532e203","content":"Speaker 2: Right. And I do know we have a full agenda for our next meeting, so I think if they, um, this individual wanted to come in front of us, we'd be looking into February.\n\nSpeaker 6: Okay. Alright.\n\nSpeaker 2: Would anyone do, I mean, it's not a, it's not an article that the board is going to take up. So if it is a citizen petition, we, um, we would, we would need to move that into\n\nSpeaker 6: February, into February to offer feedback\n\nSpeaker 2: Or Oh. At,\n\nSpeaker 6: Or at least to take the,\n\nSpeaker 2: The hearing at that point we'd be into hearings. Right. So we're doing the hearing, just, it's a little\n\nSpeaker 6: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Unfortunately, fortunately we have a lot of development happening in town, but unfortunately it limits our limits, our,\n\nSpeaker 6: Our time,\n\nSpeaker 2: Our ability right now. Okay. Um, and then, um, we'd already spoken regarding the nor crossing Gardner. This is a citizen petition. Correct. Is there anything further on this one, Claire?\n\nSpeaker 6: Uh, no, I don't believe so, although Mr. McKenna is here tonight to answer questions, Steve. Okay,\n\nSpeaker 2: Great. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 3: Can I just, just my one thought about,\n\nSpeaker 2: Please speak into the microphone.","timeStart":12513.045,"timeEnd":12581.375,"chunkIndex":134},{"id":"ddf1f207-1d17-453c-80c8-e613bdb1ccab","content":"Speaker 3: My one thought about that, Steve, after looking at the locations and your memo is to suggest you think about whether R three would be a better, uh, solution than R two because you already have some three families there, and R three has smaller lot sizes and I think slightly smaller frontage. So you may go with R two. I'm just suggesting do a comparison of R two and R three to see which works better. As far\n\nSpeaker 6: As I know there's only one R three,\n\nSpeaker 3: But you could Okay. Um, just a suggestion. Great, thank you.\n\nSpeaker 6: And I'm sorry. Yes,\n\nSpeaker 2: Go\n\nSpeaker 6: Ahead. And then Madam Chair, we have with us this evening, um, Mary, when Stanley O'Connor, who is representing a developer looking at the St. Camilla's property, um, and a potential rezoning, um, with for attorney, uh, O'Connor wrote, uh, the board a memo, um, describing the potential for four alternate, uh, zoning, uh, changes that would allow for development of, uh, a, an a senior, uh, assisted living facility on the site.\n\nSpeaker 2: And these were taken in, it was two pairs, correct? It's, yes, it's in the\n\nSpeaker 36: Alternative. Right. If I could just, do you want me to go?\n\nSpeaker 2: Uh, please. Yeah. And, and you were looking for, um, your client to, to submit this as the petitioner, correct. And yes, a RB with board","timeStart":12581.395,"timeEnd":12675.035,"chunkIndex":135},{"id":"52cf054d-15fc-4d25-9319-c6e5fdab2d5d","content":"Speaker 36: Feedback. We'd like board, um, you know, feedback and, uh, on this as well. Um, so, uh, I represent HYM investment in ESL. The gentlemen are all here this evening. Um, we looked at, they had been in communication with St. Camilla's for quite a period of time. And if you know the location, it's the very large lot before you get to the church, it would be subdivided. It's not, that's why there's that lengthy description of the property. Right? It's a four and a half acre site. Um, so when we looked at this as, you know, R six permits, um, assisted living, um, but if we went the R six route, um, what they're proposing is to do a development that blends with the neighborhood so that it looks similar to houses with ga with the sloped roofs and things. Uh, they could do something with a flat roof.","timeStart":12675.315,"timeEnd":12723.435,"chunkIndex":136},{"id":"a94cddfa-62f8-49b3-b680-bd908362da52","content":"Speaker 36: They don't wanna do that. They want it to blend into the neighborhood, so they need more height there. Um, and actually what I provided you was, uh, we would propose to change the zoning, which is an R one to an R six. This is, uh, option number one and change amend, uh, the dimensional and density section, uh, to assisted living residences of more than 20,000 square feet. It would have to be. And the architect is here, 50 feet, three stories, 1.2 FAR because of the sloped roof and the way it's measured. Um, we have met with the town manager, the assistant town manager, uh, director Ricker, um, assistant director, um, uh, Suarez, as well as Mr. Champ and the fire chief on this and several of the selectmen. They're very excited about, um, this type of project. The other alternative was to do an R seven.","timeStart":12723.435,"timeEnd":12774.795,"chunkIndex":137},{"id":"0ec839b7-90a8-41fb-b1f3-74c1b83730ce","content":"Speaker 36: Um, and, uh, under it would come under any permitted principal structure, which would need mean we'd need to change the use regulations class of use to add assisted living residence by special permit. It would be by special permit and subject to environmental design review. But it would require not only a change to the zoning map, but a change to the language in the bylaw, whichever route, um, is gone here, uh, whichever route is the better preferred route to go. Um, so that's, uh, we don't have an issue with whichever, um, uh, route is selected. It's just that the height, uh, I mean, it's, it's a little unusual because, uh, and my single family and I live on Concord Turnpike and my single family home can go up to 35 square, uh, feet in height. And if you look at the R six, um, it's 35 feet for three stories, um, for, uh, townhouses, apartment buildings, um, or, you know, other type structures. So this is, um, uh, would be a three only, they only want to do three stories, but they want to make sure that it blends with the neighborhood. So that's the con, that's the height, the height issue.\n\nSpeaker 7: Okay. Great.\n\nSpeaker 5: Thank you very much. G I'll, I\n\nSpeaker 3: Just get to you first. I, I need to think about this more. I didn't have the context before. Sure.\n\nSpeaker 36: Um, they have a photo if you'd like to see it, um, to the, what, what they build and what it looks like, which may give you some context. Um,","timeStart":12775.615,"timeEnd":12862.605,"chunkIndex":138},{"id":"ed9afd58-8f33-45d3-aa60-31b18f950596","content":"Speaker 3: I didn't have the context of even what you just said. Oh, okay. Um, what was I going to ask you? Um, no, but we it the entire site or is the site? No,\n\nSpeaker 36: What will happen is as you go up conquer turnpike, uh, um, you come to the um, uh, large open lot, uh, which, and there's directory there, it would be that area. Um, the church would remain, the church felt it very important that the setback from Concord Turnpike be far enough back. So the church would still be significantly visible from the highway. So the church will remain, they will continue to have the requisite parking and they own the lot across the street. I was asking where they have the overflow parking, so the church will remain. Um, so this would too put a significant parcel that is not on the tax rolls back on the tax rolls.\n\nSpeaker 7: Thanks.\n\nSpeaker 4: So where are the buses park, right?\n\nSpeaker 36: Yes. Yes, that's exactly where the buses parked now. Okay,\n\nSpeaker 7: Steve.\n\nSpeaker 5: Yeah, I, I understand the, the dilemma, R seven gives you the right dimensions, but you don't have the use. And R six is\n\nSpeaker 36: Exactly the exact opposite. You've got it, Steve. Exactly.\n\nSpeaker 5: Um, I don't have strong feelings one way or another. Um, though I might, if I had to pick one, I would be more inclined to, um, add a, add dimensional regulations for an assisted use facility in R six.\n\nSpeaker 36: There is, it is an R six, um, the assisted, um, well,\n\nSpeaker 5: But I mean, adjust the,\n\nSpeaker 36: Adjust the height and the Yes. Okay.","timeStart":12862.885,"timeEnd":12950.635,"chunkIndex":139},{"id":"cf3b8ca3-e95c-460d-bf2a-1ab006d46ba0","content":"Speaker 5: Yeah. Yeah. A dimen dimensional. Right. Okay. Yeah. You have to use, but the dimensional,\n\nSpeaker 36: We don't have\n\nSpeaker 5: The dimensions. Yeah. Correct. Make that change.\n\nSpeaker 4: Is there any other way of doing this without doing a zoning map change?\n\nSpeaker 36: Um, no, because, uh, it's How, how does zoning map change? It, it, it, it's a, well, it's a district change. It's a changing from an R one to an R six or an R seven.\n\nSpeaker 4: Yeah. That's be involved zoning map.\n\nSpeaker 36: Yeah. There's no other way. Um, it can go into a B three, but, uh, I don't think we we're talking B three in that residential district. Right.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay. I'm just wondering,\n\nSpeaker 36: You know. Yeah, no, we looked at every, we looked at all\n\nSpeaker 4: Photos, you know, what, what's entitled with the zoning map\n\nSpeaker 5: Entailed Yeah. What you have to do mm-hmm\n\nSpeaker 7: .\n\nSpeaker 4: Um,\n\nSpeaker 36: And this has been sent to town council, so I'm waiting for him to opine as well and gimme some feedback.\n\nSpeaker 7: Hmm.\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah, I would, I would agree with, with Steve. I think both are valid ways of, of looking at it, but our, our six seems to be the Moore Street. It, it, it seems, it seems to, um, align a a bit.\n\nSpeaker 3: Well, you know, if we all more succinctly thought this was a, a really good idea for the town, um, we could file the petition, which would relieve them of some of the burden, um, of notice. I just,","timeStart":12950.635,"timeEnd":13043.165,"chunkIndex":140},{"id":"c221ca39-2606-40dd-8a9a-c02d626e0ea8","content":"Speaker 2: We could, I I just don't think that we've, they have been studying it for quite some time, and this is our first, it is two weeks before the warrant closing. Right. We can't do that in two weeks, are just learning of this, uh, tonight. So I don't know that Yep.\n\nSpeaker 7: You're right. That\n\nSpeaker 2: Is feasible for the redevelopment board. You know, had we talked about it sooner or per perhaps.\n\nSpeaker 5: Yeah. And I, I think that, you know, with our, with our six, there are a couple of smaller scale things allowed that might work as incidental to, um, to an assisted living facility where R seven doesn't quite have those, so.\n\nSpeaker 7: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 36: Thank you very much.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Um, Claire, uh, were there any that we have not covered?\n\nSpeaker 6: We do have a representative from the, um, housing corporation of Arlington here this evening, um, with a request, uh, slash uh, with a request of the board for feedback regarding, um, a potential project at 8 48 46 Mass Ave. No, excuse me.\n\nSpeaker 7: Just a general,\n\nSpeaker 6: Just a general question. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Um, okay. I know, I know we don't have that on the, I\n\nSpeaker 7: We wanna do a open control. What,\n\nSpeaker 2: What, what kind of feedback? I'm cognizant of time and that's not on our agenda this evening. Okay. I, I was not aware of that. Um, and, and I would, would like to wrap us up and we do need to kind of recap,\n\nSpeaker 7: Um,\n\nSpeaker 2: No, no,\n\nSpeaker 7: Not","timeStart":13043.305,"timeEnd":13149.765,"chunkIndex":141},{"id":"dfb41ad6-820d-450f-b288-1a4c6693fece","content":"Speaker 2: Today. Yeah. Um, so is it a question for the board about a, I mean, we don't have any materials for for right, for this, is this about a potential warrant article that the petitioner is submitting?\n\nSpeaker 7: Andrew had worked. Um, he had,\n\nSpeaker 2: I I, I have no knowledge about this and it's not on the agenda, so I'm, I'm sorry\n\nSpeaker 7: To\n\nSpeaker 2: Skip it. I I'm sorry. I just, I don't have It's okay. We don't, we don't have it on the agenda. Um, okay. Is it about an a zoning warrant article that you're looking to submit? Yes, it's a\n\nSpeaker 37: Warrant article, but I, I think, uh,\n\nSpeaker 2: Is it, it sounds like, yeah.\n\nSpeaker 37: Yeah, I, uh, if it's, it was a warrant article, something that could go to town media, uh, before the end of January deadline, so.\n\nSpeaker 2: Right. That's, I I'm sorry, I just, we don't have it on, on our agenda for this evening. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Um, so let me go back to our list of, of what we do have, um, on our agenda so that we can run through and make sure that we have a path forward for those that we decided to move forward with. So, um, those that we are moving forward with are the technical corrections related to ADUs, removing the certified mail requirement, um, and a change to first class mail notification. Um, removing the language related to the E-O-H-L-C from the multifamily housing overlay district. Uh, a change to the, um, drive aisle, um, or driveway width.\n\nSpeaker 7: Drive","timeStart":13150.015,"timeEnd":13261.995,"chunkIndex":142},{"id":"d728fce8-ebcf-4ac9-8baa-72b8b66a5a43","content":"Speaker 2: Aisle. Drive aisle drive aisle with, oh, Jean, I screwed this one up. What was the, the, I,\n\nSpeaker 3: It, it was, it was some ch well turned off. I took\n\nSpeaker 2: It off my phone. Yep. I I copied the same one twice. I'm, I apologize. I'll have to go back. And\n\nSpeaker 3: It, it was some changes to the parking things to incorporate the neighborhood multi-family district.\n\nSpeaker 2: Correct. Fine. You just let me call that language fine. And I'll, I'll pull it back in. Give me one second.\n\nSpeaker 4: I, I also had one here. Are we updating the bike parking table by adding multifamily housing to it?\n\nSpeaker 2: That No, that's what we, that's what we had said we were not going to do.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay, fine.\n\nSpeaker 3: So we didn't know what that meant.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. And you are providing, you're providing language gene on all of those?\n\nSpeaker 3: On the ones that I had done, and I don't remember which ones they were.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. So the drive aisle is that it's not mine? No, that is Department of Planning and Community Development Language. Okay. Okay. Um, Jean, yours is the, um, parking requirements. Mm-hmm .\n\nSpeaker 3: Right.\n\nSpeaker 2: I am just gonna go back up to the prior ones as well. Um, the change to the first class male, that's Claire. You're doing that language? Yes. And the, um, removal of the E-O-H-L-C? Correct. Okay. Um, the floodplain items, um, that is being provided by the Department of Planning and Community Development. Mm-hmm . Okay. Um, the marquee signage language that has already been provided per our memo. Mm-hmm\n\nSpeaker 7: .","timeStart":13261.995,"timeEnd":13423.265,"chunkIndex":143},{"id":"5842827f-dbd0-45f2-8712-8aba590807e3","content":"Speaker 3: Well, we might wanna amend it a little bit to make it clear it's not flashing and moving pictures and things like\n\nSpeaker 2: That. Yes. Um, are we doing the freestanding projecting and a frame? That was an open question once we looked at what we had on the plate.\n\nSpeaker 3: I think we should do the old A-frame. Yep. To both limit the number, which was suggested by Katie. Yep. But also say they can't be on the public sidewalk.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 3: Is that make sense, Katie? Yep.\n\nSpeaker 7: Yeah, they're already canceled the public,\n\nSpeaker 3: Although they are. Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 2: Right. And again, that's the enforcement officer issue. ,\n\nSpeaker 3: I, I think, I think the zoning bylaws a little fuzzy on that so we could clear\n\nSpeaker 2: It up. Okay. Number and not in public way. And the freestanding, uh, projecting signage next year.\n\nSpeaker 3: What's that? Next year.\n\nSpeaker 2: Next year. Okay.\n\nSpeaker 3: Is that okay?\n\nSpeaker 2: 2027. Um, let's see. The next item I have is, uh, the Christian is to propose language on the number of stories of relief for houses in the FEMA AE zone own. And I have two separate spreadsheets.\n\nSpeaker 7: That's","timeStart":13424.455,"timeEnd":13527.675,"chunkIndex":144},{"id":"ab025e6d-2126-4b25-a4ea-fe1208466729","content":"Speaker 2: All I have. What did I miss? I like, there was one that I missed. There were, there were two. Um, Katie, I, when we went through the economic development items, we missed the, um, uses adding uses to the business districts. Was there anything else that we missed or just that one? That one. Okay. Because I think increasing fines for the vacant storefront, that's not the zoning bylaw, that's the town bylaw. Okay. So we'll need to talk with the select board about that separately, that one.\n\nSpeaker 3: But you know, hers, the one that she mentioned, which was animal daycare.\n\nSpeaker 2: That's what, yeah, that's what I'd like to get back to you. I, I admitted that one. That's my, that's my mistake. So that's one that the board should talk about was the memo that Kate Katie prepared for, um, adding uses to the business district. And I believe that there were two sections to that. One was about animal,\n\nSpeaker 3: Animal daycare,\n\nSpeaker 2: Daycare, and then the other one was about health and fitness clubs. And I have concerns about that one given the way that, um, those do not activate the storefront, the pedestrian way typically. So, um, Steve, what are your thoughts?","timeStart":13527.675,"timeEnd":13600.565,"chunkIndex":145},{"id":"4bdfabc8-5839-418a-9816-ebae848c5542","content":"Speaker 5: Um, one of the, so the, one of the things that I did was to crosscheck the use edition and figure, try to figure out how much parking did they need. . Yep. And one of the funny things is that, uh, for health club, um, and one of the other definitions there, there are no uses associated. There's a definition, there's no use associated with it, but there is a parking requirement. Um, my own, my main request or my main, uh, bit of feedback is that, um, try to square all three of those things. The definition, the use and the parking requirements.\n\nSpeaker 7: What is the parking requirement for square foot\n\nSpeaker 5: For Health Club? I don't know it offhand, but I could nevermind.\n\nSpeaker 7: Yeah,\n\nSpeaker 5: Don't know it offhand. , it's probably one. It, it may or may not be one space for 300 square feet. Okay. Who knows? .\n\nSpeaker 7: That sounds like a for restaurant .\n\nSpeaker 2: So we will look at the animal daycare use mm-hmm . Language, um, at our meeting at our next meeting, 26th. Um, but not the health. Okay. And fitness. It can, unless you feel differently. Nope. Okay. All, and I think that is it\n\nSpeaker 7: Two, three?\n\nSpeaker 2: So I have, yeah. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. If I take the two signage ones D separately. 10. 10.\n\nSpeaker 3: Mine with three or four. I just have to find them.\n\nSpeaker 7: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Oh, there were multiple under yours. Okay. So we have a minimum of 10 ten's. A lot would go up to 12. Well, I mean that is ten's quite a lot. It's","timeStart":13600.785,"timeEnd":13715.005,"chunkIndex":146},{"id":"7fcd2d87-11f8-48e7-95c2-57a2d5d82c3b","content":"Speaker 4: A lot. We've done it before. I know we have done before, but ,\n\nSpeaker 5: Well the look on the bright side, it's down from 30\n\nSpeaker 2: . Alright, so that is what we will be moving forward with, um, for language to review on, um, our meeting next Monday. We will need to review and approve individually each of the, um, proposed, um, warrant. We will need to review and approve the language for each, each of the proposed warrant articles. Not\n\nSpeaker 3: Next Monday, the Monday after\n\nSpeaker 2: Next, correct. And then our next Monday meeting. Yes, you were corrected Two in two Mondays. Thank you Jean.\n\nSpeaker 4: And we'll get all this stuff beforehand to look at or we,\n\nSpeaker 2: It's, it's gonna be,\n\nSpeaker 4: I I it seems so tight.\n\nSpeaker 2: It's very tight. Yes.\n\nSpeaker 5: This is for better or worse, this is how town government rolls .\n\nSpeaker 2: Yeah.\n\nSpeaker 4: Okay.\n\nSpeaker 2: Okay. Okay. So, um, the, that closes agenda item number seven, and our last agenda item, um, is open forum. So would anyone, uh, like to speak this evening? Yes.","timeStart":13715.005,"timeEnd":13786.185,"chunkIndex":147},{"id":"fe171ac6-e7b4-4122-bed7-4463ca9b8066","content":"Speaker 24: Thank you Madam Chair and members of the board. Carl Wagner, precinct 15, and I live in I chill road and town meeting member. Uh, I was disappointed that the public who have largely drifted away now didn't get a chance to speak on some of the items, particularly the affordable housing overlay. And I'm not quite clear on whether you've decided to advance that for this year. I hope you will not, or at least if you are considering it, I hope you will reject it ultimately, because the real problem is that the public, again, for the second year in a row, were not included in the defining of what an affordable housing overlay would be in Arlington. And even at this point, if the affordable housing overlay district committee chooses to, uh, reach out to stakeholders such as financial and services and schools, the elderly, actual low income people, of which there were none on the committee.\n\nSpeaker 24: Uh, this, this is, there's not enough time between now and April. Um, a real honest attempt to make affordable housing in such places needs to include stakeholders such as the people in this room. And, uh, even as we heard in the proposal for R six up by, uh, by the church in Route two, fitting into the neighborhood is something that is incredibly important and, and asking the town what we want. So I would ask you not to look favorably on the work of the ah hd com, uh, committee until they include broad stakeholders in the decision process. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you. Uh, would anyone else like to speak this evening? Okay. With that we will close public comment and uh, Rachel,\n\nSpeaker 5: It was one","timeStart":13793.755,"timeEnd":13886.445,"chunkIndex":148},{"id":"0297890b-3ac7-4f1f-9f66-d7d9b063b3ad","content":"Speaker 2: Person. I'm so sorry, I'm, I didn't see your hand please.\n\nSpeaker 30: Um, Joanne Colane, sorry, introduced myself earlier, but, um, I, I heard, um, when you were talking about, you know, possible changes or clarification in the multifamily overlay district language of our bylaw , that's kind of, um, something that obviously has been contentious at a lot of these meetings since the first project sought one of the bonuses and now this is the second one. Um, and so when I heard that you're thinking about proposing changes that would clarify that, it sounds\n\nSpeaker 30: To me like an acknowledgement that the current laws that we've passed do not allow excluding, um, anything from the definition of ground floor at street level. Um, and that trying to redefine that definition on the fly as it seems has been happening. , I don't mean to say that, you know, in a disrespectful way, but it's still undefined. Right? Um, and so it sounds like that's an acknowledgement that redefining it so that there would be no minimum, um, because it's not clear what people get to extract from what they think is ground floor at straight level. Um, it sounds like redefining it that way would not be compatible with the laws that we currently have on the books. So I just wanted to put that out there.","timeStart":13886.445,"timeEnd":13999.605,"chunkIndex":149},{"id":"365725e4-0c37-4cf3-881c-ca6bdf8a54dc","content":"Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you very much. Anyone else? Alright, so now we'll close public comment. Um, and to clarify, um, we, uh, will not be moving forward, um, with the, um, uh, recommended zoning more in article language for the, um, affordable housing overlay committee. There has not been enough time for the board to, um, to work with the committee to get to a, a place where the board, um, feels like it's ready to move forward. Um,\n\nSpeaker 5: Yes, just, uh, regarding interpretation. So this is a general comment, but, um, sometimes the different people can read a, a law and come up with different interpretations. This is the whole reason why we have a judicial, judicial system. And it's also one of the reasons why there are five of us and we make decisions based on a quorum. Um, it's also the reason why our, you know, are any permitting decision we make is appealable. And a judge can tell, can go in and later and say, agree or disagree. Um, you know, the fact that people will dis and not every court case where multiple judges or imp paneled is, they don't always make an unanimous decisions. We don't always make unanimous decisions. Um, it's just that people have different perspectives and can read things in different ways. There's, um, you know, it is kind of the system we have. Thank you.\n\nSpeaker 2: Thank you Steve. Um, uh, any other, uh, I know that we took new business, um, previously. Um, so at that, is there a motion to adjourn? I vote second. We'll take a vote starting with Steve. Yes. Jean? Yes. Again? Yes. And I may, yes as well. This meeting is adjourned.","timeStart":14001.355,"timeEnd":14116.325,"chunkIndex":150}]}}}