Planning Board Sep 16, 2026

We even >> Sarah. >> Excellent. >> And we haven't heard anything from Fred, so I don't know. I expect him to drop in sometime soon. >> Full house. >> Okay, Mr. Marshall, let's see. The meeting is live. It's recording. You have a quorum of the board. The attendees uh have arrived. I think we're good to go. >> All right. Thank you, Pam. >> You're welcome. >> Welcome to the Ammeris Planning Board meeting of September 16, 2026. My name is Doug Marshall and as chair of the Ammeris Planning Board. I am calling this meeting to order at 6:36 p.m. This meeting is being recorded and is available live stream via Ammerst Media. Minutes are being taken pursuant to chapter 20 of the acts of 2021 extended by chapter 2 of the act of 2023 and further ch extended by chapter 2 of the acts of 2025. This meeting will be conducted via remote means using the Zoom platform. The Zoom meeting link is available on the meeting agenda posted on the town website's calendar listing for this meeting. No in-person attendance of the public is permitted. However, every effort will be made to ensure the public can access the meeting in real time via technological means. In the event public access is disruptive for any reason, we will post an audio or video recording, transcript, or other comprehensive record of proceedings as soon as possible after the meeting on the town's website. Board members, I will take a roll call. When I call your name, unmute yourself, answer affirmatively, and return to mute. Bruce Cen, >> I am here. >> Uh, I don't see Fred Hartwell yet. Uh, Jesse Major, >> present. >> Doug Marshall, I'm present. Angus Mloud, >> present. >> Roy Johnson, >> present. >> And Jarus Smith, >> present. >> Thank you all. During the meeting, if technical issues arise and the discussion needs to pause, it will be noted in the minutes. Please use the raise hand function to ask a question or make a comment and I will call on you to speak. After speaking, remember to remmute yourself. To the general public, the public comment item on tonight's agenda is for comments on topics not appearing later on the agenda. Please hold comments on those later topics until we get to those topics. When public comment is solicited, please indicate you wish to make a public comment by clicking on the raise hand button. If you have joined the Zoom meeting using a telephone, please indicate you wish to make a comment by pressing star9 on your phone. Uh when you when called on, please identify yourself by stating your full name and address and put yourself back into mute when finished speaking. Residents can typically express their views for up to three minutes or at the discretion of the planning board chair. If a speaker does not comply with these guidelines or exceeds their allotted time, they may be disconnected from the meeting. All right. Uh time now is 6:39. And our first item is uh re review and approval of minutes. We have the June 3 minutes uh in draft form from our hardworking staff. Uh, did anybody have any comments for on these minutes other than that they are the usual excellent summary that we expect? Jesse, >> uh, no comment. I thought they were great. So, I move to approve the minutes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Second. >> Thank you, Angus, for your second. All right. We have a motion on the floor. Does anybody want to make any com other comments about these minutes? All right. I don't see any. We'll go right into our vote. >> Starting with you, Bruce. >> Uh, yes. Hi. >> Uh, Roy. Roy Johnson. >> I don't think I attended this meeting. So, am I avail I can't vote, right? >> You can abstain if you'd like. >> Abstain. Yeah, >> sure. All right. Uh Jesse >> I >> Angus >> I >> and Jara >> I >> and I'm an I as well. Five in favor one abstension and one member not present. All right. Thank you all. Time is now 6:40 and uh so members of the public this is now the time for general public comments about topics that don't appear later on this agenda. Uh so if you have want to make a public comment at this time please raise your hand. Uh I see that we have three public members of the public in attendance. Uh, I usually read the names so they all know who is present. They are Jake Theel, Mora Keane, and Melanie St. John. And I still do not see any hands raised or anybody wanting to make a comment. Give you another few seconds and then we'll move on. Okay. Uh, it doesn't appear that we won't have any public comment this evening. Time is 6:41. All right. Uh, so the third item on our agenda is the general housing discussion. I have two uh topics on the agenda for that. First is the just a check-in on the work for the uh resoning of the PRP district uh to allow housing. Um Roy, I think you missed the last meeting. Um we we talked about what you might be doing and you might do. Um do you want to just give everybody an update on what you have done and we can discuss where to go from there? Thank you. So, out of the six different parcels in the PRP, I contacted [clears throat] um four different owners, uh there's one owner that that owns two of the parcels, and all of them were receptive to doing mixed use 55 and over and changing uh letting us work with them to change the zone zoning so they could put residential of some kind in there. They were very flexible. All right. And um I think we had had suggested that you could draft a memo to council uh essentially a cover letter for the zoning bylaw changes that that Angus had drafted. Um I I saw you had emailed a first pass at that. Um, and there were some questions you had because you haven't been part of the process. >> Correct. >> Um, are you ready for somebody else to pick that up and finish it off? >> That would be helpful. >> Okay. >> All right. Well, I'm willing to do that actually. So, I think why don't I just uh plan to do that. Um, there Roy, when you and I talked, there was one se sort of question in parentheses on the draft from Angus that I wanted to see if we needed to talk about. Do you remember what that was? >> Not off hand. Um, >> okay. >> Was it Let me see. >> Well, if if you don't, that's fine. Um, what we'll do is um try to I'll try to be better prepared for the meeting for the next meeting when we can talk about the draft and um and try to talk about that that last question. Does that sound fine? >> Sounds good. >> Okay, good. >> Well, uh Doug, there was one one other thing I was just going to note. So, I had sent Roy the over the um a version of rewriting the bylaw that would be a PRP overlay that uh Nate had proposed, but we're going in a different direction. So, I know I Roy had had um highlighted some things from that overlay, but I don't think they're applicable now. So, I don't I don't think you need to worry about as you're writing things for the town council to consider. I don't think you need to even share the overlay idea with them since we're not going that direction. >> Okay. Um Angus, I hate to I hesitate to ask this, but um since there's been a couple of versions of types of things floating around, would you mind sending me your last set of files? >> Yeah, I can. I mean I I think you can also >> or I would they be >> they are >> they are in the packet. Yeah, it's the set of files that's been in the packet for the last like five or so meetings. Um just the PRP section. I think I mean Pam, you can correct me if I'm wrong. It's the same stuff that I sent in a while back. >> Yes, it is. >> Okay. >> I think the only other thing that might be missing is my memo. So, I'll I'll send you what I've got, Doug, but it's it's essentially the same stuff that's been in the packets. >> Okay. Sorry. Sorry to ask you to send it again, Angus. >> It's okay. I'm going to do it right now. So, >> okay. Yeah, you can do it while we're talking. Bruce, >> the had all of those pieces of the bylaw. Um but except for one where the PP was it or the OP column of table was highlighted in orange or red. None of the others had any they were basically just extracts from the zoning by as far as I could see. And if that's the case, I was wondering why we were why they were in the packet. Um because it occurred to me that I was missing something. There was something I didn't understand about what I was what I was looking at. Where were the So my question is, was there in the packet in those halfozen extracts from the bylaw, were they anything more than extracts from the way the bylaw currently reads? >> I I thought there were edits to a half a dozen different parts of the bylaw because Angus followed the trail all over. They were every one of them that I opened with the single exception that I mentioned earlier were clean and unlamaged. >> Oh, really? Okay. >> Yeah, they they look like it actually looks like they're PDFs. Um, so what I what I sent in were Microsoft Word documents with track changes um with all of the edits. So I can send that back in to Pam and Walker to to send with everyone to send out to everyone again. I think at some point maybe someone converted them into PDFs and then you lose the track changes unless you save the PDF in a certain way. >> That would have been me. That would have been me a long time ago. Angus, I am so sorry. I didn't [laughter] realize that happened like that. >> Can I can I just CC everyone on this email to Doug with the stuff? Is that okay? Just don't reply all. >> Just don't reply all. >> Well, thanks for bringing that up, Bruce. Okay. Um, so we continue to make progress on that on that topic. I I know that, you know, the planning department and town council are probably not eager for us to finish this and get them a new bylaw change to consider. So, nobody's pushing us to do this, but I think it's good for us to get it finished. All right. >> Can I just say one other thing, Doug? Sorry. >> When you get the documents, you may have to turn on track changes to see the visible edits. So, if you need help with that, just shoot me an email or or Google >> turn on track changes. >> I'm the same for everyone, Doug. Not not for you specifically. >> Okay. >> But I sh I do track changes with my students and I have to like tell them how to do it, how to like turn on track changes now because none of them have like really done it. I know how to do it in the 20 year old version, but it changed a few years ago and it's now more difficult to get rid of them or to anyway blah blah. I might uh facilitate I might Yeah, I'll look up but it's not as easy. >> All right. Uh and then the second item was the what what's called here the campus adjacent zone. Um, I did, uh, get started on, uh, drafting an overlay for that. Um, and then I got sidetracked on another topic that, uh, ended up before town council, the the, uh, the adjustment to the clean energy bylaw setback distance for wells. So, uh, I didn't get as far as I wanted to, and I don't have anything to show you tonight. So that's that's an update. I I did get started. I basically I took the university drive overlay text and used that as my template. Um and then edited from there. So um I definitely am considering I'm I'm taking the overlay approach rather than uh you know creating a new new zone that has all kinds of options for residential. All right. Gosh, we're going way too fast tonight. Uh, the time. Anybody else want to talk about anything else on general uh general housing at the moment? >> Okay. >> Sorry, Doug. Did we want to talk about Jesse's um ADU thing from from last time now that Jar's here and Roy? I know we're missing Fred, but >> yeah. Um well, let's see. Since since Jesse was named um Bruce, I'm going to let Jesse start. >> Thanks. Thanks, Angus. Um I had emailed Doug saying I didn't think we needed to. My my my sense from last time was there wouldn't be enough support from the planning board to move in that direction and that might be better to pursue other options down that line. Um I'm happy to talk about it, but I didn't I wasn't convinced it was good use of our collective time as a planning word. >> And um I I actually ran into Jeff Bags uh this morning. He said that he and the department are working on some bylaw revisions uh to address the the definition of an attic um and how that interacts with the ADUs. So, uh he told me that that would probably be going to council for referral to this board and CRC for for adoption. Not any particular timeline, but it sounded like something he would had pretty close to the front of his agenda. Jesse, >> two questions about that. And maybe you don't know. One question for you, Doug, one question for Walker, I think. Do you know if if they're also adding more language just about livable space, habitable space, defining that? Because >> I don't know. I mean, I think >> Well, we'll wait to see. We'll wait to see if it's coming here. Sorry. Um, in the meantime, my other concern is about ongoing applications or not even applications, ongoing submissions for new ADUs. If since we're in this moment, does that change people's abilities to say, I'm building an ADU with two bedrooms in the attic? Like what Walker, do you know are there a steady stream of applications coming now that are actually more than 900 square feet or are we doing anything to prevent that? Like what what's the what's happening there? >> I don't see the applications when they come in. So I'm not sure if there's been any more. Um the day the zoning bylaw um amendment is filed with town council is the day that the zoning will freeze and that people will no longer be able to put in applications under the current zoning. So people could be still putting applications in and then what happens to those applications will be determined by the results of the appeal um that's ongoing. So, it's it's not yet clear what's going to happen with the ADUs that are being built or being applied for at the moment. >> Okay. >> Thanks, Walker. Is it probably true that the building commissioner is holding on on approving building permits and that such a that you know those kinds of things until the appeal and legal process is laid out. I am not sure. I only know that they had a meeting with the lawyers about it on Monday, but I wasn't part of the meeting, so I'm not sure what the latest is on that. But it is something that's they're trying to move that along as quickly as possible, too. >> Okay. >> Sorry, I have one more follow-up question. If we wanted to know what that status is, who who who can tell a concerned citizen, meaning are there current applications being approved that >> I would ask the uh building department, you could put in a public records request. We have had a few public records requests about the ADUs from various people. Um so it's something that you know, you're not the only one who's wondering. >> Sure. Okay. Thanks. >> All right. any anything else? Uh, and I will ask the public has anybody anything any does anybody want to make a comment about housing as a general topic before we move on. All right. Uh, don't see any hands raised there, so we'll move on. Uh time is 6:55. We're up to item four in our agenda, old business. Uh topics not reasonably anticipated 48 hours in advance. Anybody have any anything that we should revisit? Angus, >> I just wanted to ask that did the town council have a vote on Monday about the clean energy bylaw? >> Yes. um they approved the amendment that the the two amendments that were um moved and then they did approve the bylaw. >> So and I think it I forget Walker but it sounded you know right I think they said it might take effect in a week or something. Um but it's imminent. >> Yeah. I'm not I'm not sure of the timeline. I didn't watch the meeting. But so so uh Pam and Walker will probably need to be giving us new zoning bylaw hard copies sometime soon with the additional 20 pages or whatever we ended up with from that one section. Anything else, Walker? >> Um I was just going to bring up that I talked to Inis, the consultant that we're working on the East Ammerst study with today. Um, we're planning some public outreach and um, just a question for any of you, if any of you can think of a convenient place for a community outreach event somewhere in that area um, or some suggestions of people I might reach out to that might be helpful. And um they will be coming on the 30th with some updates, a timeline, and some questions about the focus area and um more and like they want to hear from everybody on the board about what your priorities are for the area and what sort of zoning changes you might be considering. And they're going to have a a dialogue about that to get them going. Um they're working on the existing conditions now, but they're not going to quite have them all done by the 30th, they didn't think. So that's what they're going to start with. All right. So, we'll have a third meeting in September. Bruce >> U app propo of the old business item related to the clean energy bylaw and the council's decision on Monday night. I would just like to register my complete astonishment that the uh town council uh uh in adopting the two motions uh amendments have essentially uh declared that they believe that water dripping off PV arrays is twice as dangerous as a potential source of contamination than a buried septic system leech field. >> I sack on that, Bruce. >> It's outrageous. Stupid. It's embarrassing to be a part of this town which professes to want to encourage the deployment of solar PV and you get this kind of mindless nonsense. Right. If you could print that in the minutes, Walker, in bold capitals, I would be appreciated. But I dare say you will restrain yourself. >> I'm sorry. I don't think Pam heard you, Bruce. >> Oh, I heard. [laughter] >> All right, Jara. >> Um, I almost forgot what I was going to say. Um, although I do agree with everything you had to say, Bruce. Uh um uh Walker, so you were you were asking where in the uh East Ammer study area we should do a community engagement event. >> Yeah, if any of you know if there's like any community gathering spaces or something that might work in that area. I'm uh I reached out to the JCA and I'm going to look at see if any of the apartment complexes might have a community room or area that we could use. Um, but >> can we use the school >> like the new school? >> I've been told by the town that I shouldn't try to do that right now with it just opening and everyone feeling I guess overwhelmed about the school and in the past they've had some issues trying to coordinate with the school on public outreach. So that's being discouraged. [laughter] >> Okay. >> Unfortunately that would be ideal. >> I totally hear you. I would be uh if there I think it would be a really wonderful place to get very targeted and very relevant feedback. Um >> yeah and if you if you want to reach out to the >> I would be happy to >> and something more to come up I certainly wouldn't say no. >> Great. Okay. Um, is there someone in particular? I mean, I know I So, my son just started there a couple weeks ago. Um, and so I have already been into contact with people, but is there anybody in particular you would suggest I reach out to? >> I haven't been in contact with the school before actually since I've been working here. So, I don't know who the primary contact with the town are. >> Okay. Regardless, >> principal or somebody. >> Yeah, I would I would try to go through the principal or the front office. >> Okay. That's what I figure. But great. >> Um, it also I mean I >> I wondered whether that Maple Farm facility that's been dormant for so long, the the structure is big enough to have a large open space inside of it. But I I don't >> I wondered that too. As far as I know, it's just someone living there at the moment. Um, and I don't like I don't know who they are, how I would get in contact with them, but I suppose that is something that you know we thought of. >> Leave a note on the door or something. >> Well, I think I mean what's the name of the apartment complex there? >> There is Colonial Village and I have reached out to them. >> Does it have a common room? That's I'm not sure, but I've reached out to them already about >> [clears throat] >> um coordinating with them. And the consultants were interested in also potentially just putting up a tent in a parking lot near the businesses and just um going and talking to the business owners potentially at some point. Um so they can do some just outdoor stuff in the area too. >> Okay. Uh Jesse, >> what's the status of the old school there, the East Street School? Um, Wayfinders is going to be applying for funding this year. They've tried and we're not invited to apply for funding previously. So, >> sorry, I meant as a potential meeting place. Is it like are there >> not accessible? >> No. I mean, we could meet in the park out back if the weather was nice, but I'm not sure meeting space. >> Chunken, [laughter] >> have a morning meeting. All right. Um All right. Is that it for all business? All right. So, we'll move on to new business. Any any new business for topics not anticipated? Walker or Pam? >> Nope. >> No. >> All right. >> Nope. >> All right. Now, uh for a ANR subdivision applications, I think I saw one in the packet. We do have one. I'm going to see if I can bring up some documents. Walker, do you want to uh explain this? >> Yeah, I mean, this one's pretty straightforward. They've got space barely for two buildable lots. So, they're just splitting the lot in half. They're trying to sell the house right now, and I think they want to retain the other half as a building lot or sell them as two separate lots. Um, so it looked like the plan looked fine. I didn't see any issues with it. They meet all the criteria. Um, the DPW reviewed it and didn't see any issues. So, I think this is pretty straightforward. >> No, there'd still be frontage. um you know, sufficient frontage and we've got the circle. >> We've got the circles and they've got Yeah. >> Yeah. >> There it is. A little smaller. >> Yep. It meets the criteria. >> Yeah. All right. Any uh Jesse, go ahead. Not to be nitpicky, but that circle doesn't look like it really fits in those lines. >> I'm sorry. Say that again. Doesn't look >> circle. The circle [laughter] the lot one uh 4,596 ft. The circle looks like it's Is that is that meant to represent some minimum distance from the lines? Forgive my ignorance. >> I mean, if you zoom in, it meets the proposed parcel lines, but it doesn't go over them. Okay, it's tangent. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Looks looks >> it's also not a requirement that they show this on the site. >> Fine. >> They and sometimes they do and sometimes they don't, but the building commissioner has taught me that they don't have to show the circle. >> Okay. Thanks. >> You're welcome. [clears throat] >> All right. Um, does anybody have any objection to my signing this? And we all agree that this is not subject to subdivision, our subdivision bylaw. Speak now or raise your hand if you are not in support. Angus, >> sorry. I just have two clarifying questions that I I always forget with the ANR um subdivision plans. Um one is uh do a Butters have to be notified of a subdivision plan? >> Not anymore. >> Okay. Um and then uh second uh be behind the scenes town staff verifies that each lot meets the requirements for the for the zoning. Yeah, district. That's Yeah, that's what I thought. Okay. Just wanted to make >> it's also reviewed by the town engineer and so he has returned this to us and said no comment. All right. Uh, thanks, Angus. And, uh, Pam, I guess I'll make an appointment to come in and sign the sign the drawings. >> Okay. I'll be there the next two days. >> Okay. >> Stop by. >> All right. Um, any other ANR or subdivision topics? >> Nope. >> Nope. All right, time is 7:07. Upcoming ZBA applications. Oh, I'm sorry, Jara. Go ahead. >> Sorry. Yeah, I just Well, I mean, I'm now I'm getting ahead. I'm definitely getting ahead of things, but I'm just wondering I'm thinking about ballot question number seven and um what that would do in terms of ANRS and maybe this is a conversation for another time, but I hadn't really thought about how that how question seven might affect that kind of thing. Is that the one that uh >> that's the 5,000 square foot and like 50 foot frontage requirement for or minimum requirement for all >> right >> single family lots. >> Well, >> I don't know. Just something to think just something to be aware of. >> Throw everything into chaos. Don't you think, Tara? >> Well, I'm thinking this Well, like if it's a 50ft frontage and then this is >> Oops. >> 270 ft. you know, theoretically this could be five, >> right, >> properties >> without but I mean like I I don't I don't know the technicalities of it enough well well enough yet but um >> I think if it does get voted into place it still has to be um regulations still have to be written by the state. So they would kind of like how they regulations after they would have to look at all this and get public comment and figure out how it would actually >> work >> right >> practically. >> I mean obviously there's a a structure that covers three of those properties theoretically. So it wouldn't be practical in a lot of senses but >> yeah they'd have to have some way of determining how many feet you have many square feet you have open on your lot potentially or how much of the frontage could be used. Can you can you do flag locks in this case? I I'm not sure. >> Oh wow. I had even thought about that. >> Complicated. >> Oh my god. Yeah, I had [clears throat] thought about that. Yeah. I just I guess something to think about is we may have more ANRS coming our way in 2027. >> Okay, that's so so think about that and then get back to us. [laughter] >> We'll do All right. Um, SP, SPR, SUB applications, anything on the horizon? >> Nothing. >> Nothing that we haven't talked about before. >> Okay. >> So, I do have a ZBA one now. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah, I do. So, I learned about a special permit for 28 Sha Street that's actually going to go uh before the ZBA on September 24th. So, we didn't get a whole lot of notice. Um but it is so it's currently a two family with an owner occupancy condition. So, they're seeking a new special permit to alleviate that. um a as well as to allow for six cars. There are already six parking spaces um available on the lot. They they just haven't allowed six cars. So, it's going to go in front of the ZBA for those two reasons. The owner um circumstances have changed for the owner. So, he's his now he's older and his central living is in New York City. Um, but he's going to have a property manager. Um, yeah. So, he would like to eliminate the owner occupancy. It's pretty straightforward. >> All right. Yeah, that that doesn't really have very much uh sort of dimensional or physical implications. So, I think I I wouldn't feel like we needed to see that one. >> Okay. >> Plus, we don't have a meeting before the 24th. >> No. >> No. And I just I learned about this in between our last meeting and this and this meeting. >> All right. Does anybody else feel like they would want to I mean, I think at this point, if you're interested in that, you should plan to go to the meeting on the 24th that CBA here holds. All right. Um, I guess that's it for ZBA and SP, SPR, SUB applications. Jesse, >> I was just going to make one related comment which like you said the J I'll start to think about more. I'm wondering if other people feel similarly about parking. Uh, especially with all the ADUs I'm seeing go up. Some streets now have many more cars visible and just on not on the street but basically on the street. So there are several new sites that now there's six, seven, eight cars parking regularly and it very much changes the dynamic of the you know street experience. Uh, so it's been on my mind to just try and think about if there are ways we can influence where cars are parked or maximum numbers and such. So, >> well, I I can say, you know, Cambridge certainly has robust infrastructure to deal with parking. Go ahead, Jara. I'm well I'm curious if the town has ever thought about expanding permitted parking [snorts] um you know or even like even directionally up towards and around UMass or something. Um >> yeah, we actually were talking about that the other day. >> Um >> interesting. >> They're talking about adding permitted parking up like in the Fear Fairing Street area. >> That could be an interesting solution. Although >> I know I mean in my neighborhood we don't have very many people that come and park and then take the bus or ride a bike to UMass, but every now and then there's a couple of cars that I wonder if that's what's happening. >> Um because we're, you know, we're not on campus, but we're close enough to pick up a bus or ride your bike or walk if you really have to. All right, Jesse. >> Yeah. Um, that's part of the equation. I think that's I was referring to more the on lot parking. >> Oh, >> which is now much more abundant with more people living there, >> right? >> And and >> have you got have you got properties that an ADU has already gone? >> Yeah. So, I think it was maybe the first one. It's it's at the corner of Lincoln and Fairing. Uh the address is a fairing address. So it's technically behind the main house. There used to be four cars there. They made the pavement bigger. There's now seven cars regularly. And and I understand that's what's allowed, but I'm thinking more of the visual experience like if there's ways to require screening or I mean I I don't know what the solutions are, but it really changes just the the streets the streetscape. And I worry if the ADU density keeps increasing, which I think we all know it will, they're going to be many streets which you'll walk down the street and it's just parking lot after parking lot after parking lot is your visual and nearby experience. Like you walk on the sidewalk there and you have to walk by multiple cars within reach of your, you know, within arms reach. So again, it just changes the character of the neighborhood in a very significant way. Jared, >> Jesse, you bring up a good point about the like on-site. There's such a thing as parking maximums as well. Like we've most people have heard about parking minimums, of course, especially anybody on a plane board. Um, but there's also a lot of cities out there that if they can't eliminate parking minimums for political reasons or even legal reasons, they do maximum parkings so that you cap how many cars can actually be on site. And if you were to do that in conjunction with a expanded permitting for off- streetet like that might be one way to tackle an abundance overabundance of cars both on and off. >> Yes. >> Um, just thought. >> Great. Well, I suppose we could also Isn't there something in the zoning bylaw now about you have to have a certain number of spaces that are more than 20 ft from the road? Um I I could be mistaken, but um >> I think that's about minimum, isn't it? >> We could say that, you know, you you can't park within some number of feet of the roadway. All the parking has to be set back. >> Correct. I'm trying to think about things just like that. Right. Yeah. I don't know that that's practical everywhere. And then the problem in my mind is, well, we're allowing another ADU, an ADU to be built, so then potentially there's eight people living there. Can we really say maximum four cars? I maybe we can. I'm sure we >> can. Yeah, I like Yes. I'm just exploring those things in my mind, >> right? >> Okay, Angus. I mean, [laughter] I guess it's so parking minimums are are a major blockage for denser developments um in a lot of cases. So, I mean, I think we could also think of I think we could think about all all aspects, all kind of parts of it, parking minimums, which we could get rid of, and you could see then more housing built without any additional parking potentially. But if you partnered that with permits for on street parking um which would bring in revenue for the town and also lead to some controls and then also put in some parking maximums for developers who want to attract people with cars then I mean I think all three of those strategies in combination could kind of cover all aspects of the issue. >> Okay, Jara and then Jesse. Um I totally agree and uh and and Jesse just to expand on my excited point of yes we can say that is you know I uh the the the the privilege of having a parking space guaranteed makes anything more expensive. And so like if we don't force those places to h you know have a minimum or have a cap then some of those places are going to invariably be going for less and will be more affordable and more accessible to people because they are not coming guaranteed with a parking space. And so like I just uh that is it that is its own really important like um natural not policydriven or funded way of making places more affordable is just don't make it as attractive by in by imposing parking requirements for all of them. Um, so because there's going to be kids who don't have cars, who want to walk, who want to bike, you know, and like those are the kids who will rent those ADUs. Um, presuming it's the kids at the school. Uh, [laughter] but I'll I'll I'll end there. The point is that I, you know, my my whole thing is about housing choice, and that means that choosing homes without a parking space should also be a choice. I'll stop there. All right. I'm just waiting for Roy to raise his hand at some point because he's in the real estate business. So, I'm just That's just a tickler. Roy, no hurry. No obligation. Angus or Jesse, you're next. And then Angus. >> Um, yes. I I mean, my thoughts started with maximums and then I thought about over the last three years my involvement and planning board. Every time, this is more in the context of some of the mixed muse building conversations, the overlays. Every time reducing the minimums comes up, there are, not on this group, but in larger conversations, there are very loud, very opposed voices. And I'm not saying that's not a reason we should try and do it, but that's an element that we will have to contend with. Uh again, maybe some of you could speak more to this, but I would also posit that developers who are building another ADU would be very opposed to that. And of course, they want the extra parking exactly for the reason you said, Jar, to have the increased cost or higher priced units. Yeah. >> All right, Angus. So, um I I guess so I haven't dug as heavily into the parking regulations as I should have. I've been focusing on PRP, but parking is another like whole realm that that we can tackle to try and and provide more options for for housing. Um I guess I I have kind of a couple of questions about this and maybe this is this is more for a future meeting. I'm just looking back over the bylaw changes for ADUs that we we um incorporated and I uh on the one so in 5.0113 um general requirements for protected use accessory dwelling units and local accessory dwelling units there's a couple of different letters um or subsections that I'm a little unsure about. So, one says, uh, a parking plan shall be submitted to and approved by the building commissioner and shall be in accordance with the design and landscape standards of section 7 of the zoning bylaw. Um, then later it says, um, sorry, there shall be no more than two on-site parking spaces provided for any ADU. >> Um, that's letter I, uh, 5.011. 1113 I does that mean that if a new ADU is built they can only add two parking spaces to the lot. >> Yeah. Can Sorry, Doug. Can I comment on that? >> Sure. Walker I will note has nodded her head. >> Yes. I mean I remember discussing that and that's correct. the the issue or the the the getaround is that if your driveway is already bigger, if your lot's already can accommodate six cars, you can then add two more. >> Okay. >> Right. And so I think that's the case I was just describing where there was space for probably five already. They made it a bit bigger with the ADU construction. So now there's more cars there. Right. Well, and I mean it says, you know, you you can't add any more than two parking spaces for the ADU, but could you add four to the principal dwelling? >> I mean, could you add addition? Could you say, "Oh, those aren't for the ADU. These new spots are actually for the principal dwelling." >> But I don't I mean, I' I don't think the town regulates that to that level. >> Yeah. >> Don't have a parking inspector for single family houses, right? As far as I know. >> And so, so like Yeah. Even before that ADU, there were four or five cars there regularly. >> Right. >> Also, the >> I'm just trying to get a sense of this is a maximum that's in the bylaw. Correct. But as far as I know, it's the only maximum that we have. >> Correct. >> Right. >> Okay. >> So, like you have a 100 foot driveway that's double car wide. You could put cars all all along it. Right. >> Yeah. I was going to say to Jesse's point, regulating parking spaces is not the same as regulating the number of cars. You could be parking on the grass. That's probably not allowed in the bylaw technically, but I know people do it. >> All right. Well, it sounds like this might Is this a topic we want to talk about to put on our agenda or do we want to just kind of wait and see how the ADU topic evolves before we tackle it? Angus. >> Well, I think I think this is a great thing for us to continue to work on and and talk about, but I think someone would kind of need to take like charge of it or like it would become their their baby, if you will. Um, >> you almost you almost sounded guilty that you hadn't dealt dived into that that topic yet and >> yeah. [laughter] >> Okay, Jara. Um, uh, gosh, so many times I raise my hand and then forget what I'm going to say because somebody says something funny. Oh, um, would this maybe be more the charge of the transportation and parking commission maybe? Or like is this something where we'd want to have a joint session? >> They're certainly they certainly have a part of it if we're talking about on street parking. I mean, I think once we get into the public way, it really >> becomes their baby and we can suggest things and >> see what they think. Okay, >> Bruce and then Jesse. >> Um, Doug, I think uh it would be interesting to gender a conversation around what Jerus suggested of a maximum u because that's very a very definable topic. Should we consider uh imposing maximum parking uh uh allowances or requirements on certain sites in certain conditions and if we do which would be those sites? What would be the condition? In other words, spend a some time focused on that particular question and then u I would ask Jer whether you could uh perhaps write a you know a two or three paragraph position paper on that because it sounded like you knew what you were talking about. So I I think that would be the point of entry that I think would be easiest to talk and also I think as Jesse your others have said it might also be a lightning rod for um public participation. So that would be good too. I mean we get public comments and so forth on so I I I I suggest that that would be the most productive and and and and most uh uh the point of entry with the most horsepower. >> Okay. I will say, you know, based on my observation of the rental unit kind of across the street from me, there's the nominally four people that live there and often there are actually five. Um, and then there's all the all the boyfriends and and the boyfriends are generally parked along the street. And um so a maximum, you know, if if our maximum really only applies to the property itself, you know, that excludes the people that are coming and parking on the street. So it is it is kind of spanning public and private. Well, I agree. But now you're having the discussion. I mean, I think we could talk about this. >> Okay. >> Because I think it's it's I I want to understand whether there's a there there. And I I don't know whether there's a there there, but I haven't thought about it enough. >> All right, Jesse. >> Uh, two quick comments. One is that the Transportation and Parking Commission, as I think someone just said, only will deal with street parking, not anything else. Um uh [snorts] the second point was even though I brought it up, I brought up more in the context of screening and streetscape because I worry we spend 200 hours working on something. We get it through council. It's a maximum parking and then it's like the four unrelated by law which is probably flouted by 70 or 80% of our rentals and we we don't do anything about it. So, is it worth the is the juice worth the squeeze? But happy to I'm at the same time I'm still happy to talk about it again some other time. >> Okay. Well, maybe we I mean, just as an aside, maybe we ought to recommend that we change that four unrelated to five unrelated. >> I have opinions on that, too, but different >> just because [laughter] just for the fun of it. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> All right. Um, let's see. We were on SP, SPR, SUB, circled back to housing and parking. Uh, I think we are now up to planning board committee and liaison reports. >> Time is 7:28. Um, Bruce, anything for PVPC? No. Okay. Uh Roy, anything for CPAC? >> Good news. I got a note from Angela in the uh town manager's office that I need to go in and uh [snorts] become a member of. I hadn't received anything until the other day. >> All right. So, you're in the process of becoming a full-fledged member of CPAC, >> correct? >> All right. Well, congratulations. >> Thank you. >> And for DRB, uh, I have nothing to report. Um, we haven't had a meeting or any communication since our last meeting two weeks ago. All right. Uh, report of chair. I don't think I really have anything to report this evening. Um, oh, wait a minute. Um, Walker, what did And Pam, didn't we also have in our packet uh the evaluation of Eversourc's draft environmental impact report on the transmission right away? >> You public comment. Yes, >> we had received a public comment from a member of is it the Shootesberry? >> Uh, >> yes, I did. Yes, yeah, it was Shootsbury. >> So, that was the attachment that he included. So, I I put it all in the packet. Everybody should have received it um through the comment form because he sent it that way. Yep. >> Um, but because I put it in the electronic packet, I printed it for you, Doug. >> Yeah. Okay. So, well, I I just didn't want to get through the meeting and forget about it. >> Yeah. >> Um, so, you know, he he was just alerting us to the fact that Eversource is in the midst of upgrading some right away uh conditions. And it sounds like they're looking at clearing a bunch of land that may al already be forested at the moment. Um, is there is there anybody on this committee that's interested in looking at this and talking? You know, I guess maybe what I should just do is say could everybody at least sort of skim through this for next time? And Pam, can we just put this on as an actual item on on next uh the next meeting? Although I suspect the next meeting is pretty full and this may be uh something that has a time limit associated with it. Walker, what were you going to say? >> I was just going to say that I've passed this on to Aaron Jacqu and Dave Z and they will also be taking it to the consom for comment who I think are maybe a little more knowledgeable. But if anyone's interested in also going to the Consom meeting or seeing, you know, watching the video of that or something, you might get more information. I'm not sure when it's going to be on the agenda, though. >> Okay. All right. Good. So, Concom can kind of take take the lead on it. >> Great. >> Uh, Jesse. >> Yeah. I was I guess that answer part of my question. I was going to ask who else in our town will look at it. Is that I mean, that's sounds like appropriate. Are there any other bodies that have jurisdiction sort of on this? Because it didn't seem like we actually do. It did go to the historical commission as well because it goes through and close to some historical resource areas. Um although no significant impact was noted by the historical commission. >> Good. >> All right. Good. Great. Thanks, Walker. That's good. >> All right. Um so back um yeah, I don't have anything else to report in terms of chair's report. Uh, anything on from staff Walker and Pam? I >> don't think I have anything. >> So, Alexis is getting up to speed and at some point we will see her. >> Yeah, she was out sick today. I actually was going to ask her. Um, but maybe the Yeah, I'd like a quieter meeting, I guess, for her to come and just talk, but >> Okay, >> maybe come and listen, too. Yeah, I'll see what I'll see how busy she is. >> Yeah. So, for next meeting, we have the East Ammerst Consultants. >> Do we have anything else on our agenda that's unique? >> I don't think we do. >> No. No. >> So, the bulk of the meeting will be that. And then we don't have a meeting October 7th, right? >> And our next meeting is the 21st or something like that. >> Correct. Yep. >> All right. All right. Good. Any Anybody have anything else? We got to let Jesse go at 8 by 8 o'clock and we're gonna Looks like we'll make it. >> Well done for a change if I can say that. [laughter] >> Yeah. All right. All right. Well, thank you all and enjoy the rest of the evening. >> Have a good night every time. Is it >> 7:34? Good night. >> All right. Thank you. We did it. >> All right. Good night, Pam. Good night, Roy. >> Good night. Recording.