Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 08/24/04 r ''"'I ~IC~\'J'~Ofr \Ct ' i'\ \.....' Planning Board Mi~utli \ \ ~ 03 August~~~ · Present: Tom French, Chair; Fred Armstrong, ~l~rk;_l,?<tel~o, Ken T~F i ElO Walter Jenkins, John DeMassi, Frank Holmes r/I~1.'tC\1\JSt.11S M1,SSACHUSETTS Shaun P. Burke, Director ofP . and De tt1~nt 1...M~("i~~tQ...td~.."f7:l)qi~...... !\ECE1VEI rr':\l~ QJ:"F ICE ;. r\~\~). - (' Ol~ SEP -1 AM II: 03 .pei:Jllit Pllblie. B~ring- Reta,ilDevelopanent-,Sebool StreetJRoute 140 '495;..;. WIS :Develoment ' , , ,.~,' " The clerk read the public hearing notice. Mr. French read a disclosure indicating the company he works for, Daylor, has done wetland work on another project for one of the parcel's owners, John G. Walsh. Mr. French thanked everyone for attending the meeting and explained there will be a series of hearings on the project. He said this evening would include a project overview, introduction of the applicant and discussion of the aesthetics of the proposal. The second meeting will be about infrastructure, the third will be about traffic, the fourth will be about community/downtown impacts and the fifth night will be for summary and conclusions. Mr. French explained the procedure for each meeting, and asked that questions and comments be limited to the topic of that meeting. He added the board __ members and the applicant would receive copies of all correspondence, which would be available in the Planning Department for public review. Mr. French explained approval would require a super- majority of the board to find the benefits of the project outweigh r the detriments. Louis Masielllo, Director of Development, WIS Development, explained the proposed shopping center. He said his overview would touch upon issues that will be described in detail in later meetings. Mr. Masiello explained his company is a property management and development firm, primarily in the retail field, whose portfolio includes 70 retail shopping centers, most of which are open-air centers. The firm operates almost exclusively in New England, and it maintains ownership of their properties. He said they do not develop properties to "flip," but rather remain members of the community. Mr. Masiello explained the location of the site, which is on 73 acres of land forming the southern end of the Cabot Industrial Park. This site is in the triangle formed by 140/495/School Street, and they have purchase and sales agreements for all the land within that area. He said there are several homes north of the site, bounded by railroad tracks and the industrial park. r- Mr. Masiello said they envision this being a regional shopping center and want to locate in Mansfield because of the regional infrastructure. He explained the proposed site layout with multiple retail buildings and a driveway/sidewalk system. There is an existing pond, which will be retained. He said the buildings will be oriented as much as possible to take advantage of the pond, especially restaurants with outdoor seating areas. There is a pedestrian walkway for access from one group of buildings to the other and several places that have been identified as possible outdoor plaza areas. He said he hoped r- 8/26/2004 1 p~nning Board r- .r their customers would be both those driving in, parking and using a specific store, as well as those who park and spend time shopping at various shops and walking around the site. Mr. Masiello said the front of each building will have wide sidewalks, seating, lighting and plantings. There are four free-standing buildings that could accommodate restaurant , uses, but restaurants could also be within the grouped buildings. He said he expected national chain-type sit-down restaurants and he does not envision fast food uses. Mr. Masiello explained their plan to include a lOO-room hotel and a Kohl's department store on the large pad shown at the right of the plan. Mr. Masiello presented an aerial-view type artist's rendering of the site. He said there are 7-8 acres they do not intend to intensely develop, but which will be used for stormwater attenuation. There are green areas proposed around the Route 495 side of the site, as well as to the right of the entrance drive, which will serve as a buffer from the rear and sides of several buildings. He said they would leave the mature vegetation in place in those areas. There are also green areas along Route 140 that will be maintained and augmented by plantings, as well as landscaping in the driveway and islands, which will break up the massing of the stores. r- Mr. Masiello introduced the members of the development team: Richard Hollworth, P .E., ESS Group; Andrew Zelermyer and Deborah Horowitz, Goulsten & Storrs, zoning attorneys; Ron Muller, P.E., Greenman Pederson, traffic consultant; Glenn Olsen, PE, Geotechnical Group, stormwater and pavement; Randy Knowles, graphics; Kevin Hanley, SMC Survey. Mr. Masiello explained the permitting process the project will have to go through. They have submitted a Draft Environmental Impact Report and received a'scoping certificate from MEP A. He said they have not yet filed to do that work because they would like to continue with the town first. At the end of the MEP A process, they will apply for a Mass Highway Section 61 Finding and a curb cutlhighway access permit. They will apply for a sewer extension permit from Mass DEP in conformance with the town's sewer master plan, as well as a 401 water quality certificate. The Conservation Commission has issued an Order of Resource Area Delineation, which documents which areas are jurisdictional wetlands. They are in the process of an Order of Conditions public hearing with the Commission. They have begun hearings with the ZBA for dimensional relief on setbacks and parking issues. The Board of Selectmen will issue a water connection permit, which will include mitigation to offset any water draw from the town's water system. The Town Engineer will review sewer layouts and the Electric Department will issue a service agreement. ,-- Mr. Masiello said this project ties into Mansfield because ofthe unique location of a large parcel of land, which is zoned for this type of development, adjacent to the highway and ~ utility infrastructure systems. He said this is consistent with the Town's Master Plan, which called for this area to be developed, and because it is part of the industrial park. ~, 8/26/2004 2 Planning Board ~ ~ I Mr. Masiello said there will be a large positive fiscal impact to the community and estimates $7-800,000 in annual real estate tax revenue. He said he arrived at that number by comparing this to other industrial properties they own, as well as to studies done specifically for Mansfield about the likely real estate tax revenue generated by this type of development. Mr. Masiello estimated $110,000 in annual personal property tax revenue for the town, depending on the type of stores. Mr. Masiello estimated $125,000 in other revenue to the town, including fees and other items. He said there will be relatively little demand on town services, with no school services needed. He said this will be a $60 million project generating 1,200 new permanent full and part-time jobs and 400 construction jobs. Mr. Masiello estimated $700,000 in annual common area maintenance expenditures (landscaping, plowing, trash removal and other exterior items) to local contractors. He said the interior work would be up to each tenant. Mr. Masiello said they are budgeting $1,000,000 in utility infrastructure, including sewer, water and gas systems, and $1.8 million invested in public transportation infrastructure improvements (road widening, intersection improvements, signalization). -- Regarding aesthetics, Mr. Masiello explained there will be extensive landscaping, a boulevard-type entrance, period-style lighting, a pedestrian promenade, visually interesting layout, minimal visibility from residential areas, high-quality, upscale buildings and preservation of open space. ~ Ms. Masiello presented artists' renderings showing the view from Route 140, including an existing tree buffer that will be maintained and a rendering showing the entrance from School Street. Mr. Masiello described some of the retail stores they are working to try to get committed, including Barnes and Noble, Linens and Things, Joseph A. Banks, TGI Friday's, Panera Bread, Kohl's and Dress Barn. He presented slides showing the types of storefronts used in some of their other shopping centers, but said the specifics would depend on the final tenants. He said stores have typical design standards, but he tries to incorporate unique items, like stonework, in his centers. He said where possible, they use shorter lighting fIxtures and variations in the storefronts with low-level plantings and tower features to change the vertical and horizontal orientations of the buildings and to become focal points. Mr. Masiello presented a slide of a mill feature they constructed in a shopping center in Millbury, Mass to tie into the town's history. He said they try to do similar things in a lot of their centers, and hope to accomplish that using the pond and pedestrian walkway. ,,-- Mr. Masiello presented a slide showing a Panera Bread with seasonal outdoor seating, which he said would be the type of tenant overlooking the pond. He presented a slide showing a gazebo at the Smithfield, RI facility, which holds concerts. ~ 8/26/2004 3 Planning Board (' (' Mr. Masiello said they try to use ''pedestrian sized" light poles and showed a slide using that type of lighting. He presented a slide showing large stores, like Barnes and Noble, next to smaller, 2,000 or 3,000 square foot stores, and the way the architectural differences in the storefronts break up the site. Department Bead Comments The clerk read a list of memos from various departments, which the board decided would be better discussed on specific nights. Board Comment Mr. French asked if the plans the board has include the approved wetland lines. Mr. Masiello said they do, including 25-foot buffers from the wetland areas. ~ Mr. French asked if the parking conforms to the Zoning bylaw or requires variances; Mr. Masiello said it requires several variances, the most important is the reduction in the number of parking spaces. He said he had come to the board informally in November 2003 and discussed the number of parking spaces. He said he left that meeting with the belief the board was in favor of reducing the number of spaces; however, the Planning Board did not support that variance application when it was filed. Mr. Masiello said he doesn't believe they will need the number of spaces required under the Zoning By-Law. He said they have also applied for a variance from the soil setback issue, which he said would require setbacks for the buildings. They have also applied for a variance from the setback of the development from Route 495. He said the application meets the 50-foot setback in several locations, but not everywhere. He said Route 495 is 30-40 feet higher than the development and the closest residential structures across Route 495 are quite far away. He said none ofthe variance applications have been acted on by the ZBA. ,- Mr. French asked what the distance is from Route 140; Mr. Masiello said the minimum distance between the developed portion of the site and the right-of-way of Route 140 is 50 feet. He said the plan conforms to zoning as it abuts Route 140, but not entirely along Route 495. He said the hotel operators they have approached want to have visibility along Route 495. There is a 50-foot buffer from the corner ofthe buildings nearest Sean Drive, and the second driveway, closest to Sean Drive, has been moved out of the 50-foot setback. Mr. French asked about the soil setback issue. Mr. Masiello explained there are four areas containing those soils covered in the wetland/waterbody setback regulation. Dr. Torman asked about the 50-foot buffer closest to Route 495. Mr. Masiello explained the lighter area on the plan is between the buildings and their property line; the darker color is off their site and is part of the Route 495 right-of-way, with a heavily treed slope. He said the lighter color is the area intended to comply with the 50-foot buffer. Dr. Torman asked if that area could be used as emergency access to the back of the site; Mr. ,~ Masiello said if the variance were granted, it could be. He explained there is an old access road along that area, and could be used as a roadway. ~ 8/26/2004 4 Planning Board r r ,~ r-- ~. ".--.. Mr. Jenkins asked about the parking relief requested. Mr. Masiello explained there are three proposed uses on site: retail, restaurant and hotel. He said the retail use requires five spaces per 1,000 square feet, the restaurant requires one per four seats and the hotel requires one space per room; all require one space per employee. Mr. Masiello said they propose to comply with the restaurant and hotel parking requirements, but they propose 4.5 spaces per 1,000 feet of retail rather than five, inclusive of employees. Mr. Masiello said he used the same methodology used for the Smithfield and Millbury centers to arrive at the number of parking spaces. Mr. Jenkins asked whether the only area they do not comply with the setback regulations (with the revised plans) is the parking lot of the hotel. Mr. Masiello said that is the case. Mr. Jenkins asked about the distance between the road line and the property line; Mr. Masiello said there is 80 feet of existing vegetation along Route 495, which is not on their property. Mr. Jenkins asked about the undeveloped land at the corner of School Street/140. Mr. Masiello said they have rights to purchase privately owned land in the ''triangle'', but the land Mr. Jenkins asked about is owned by the Commonweahh. He said they do not intend to buy or develop that land. Mr. Jenkins asked if the developer has made the decision about what type of development to build here, citing the differences between the Millbury and Smithfield centers. Mr. Masiello said they are different types of centers and the Millbury center is newer and what they envision as being the shopping center of today. He said that has more variety and shape to the stores. Mr. Jenkins said Smithfield seemed to look more pedestrian friendly, with more covered walkways to protect patrons from bad weather, but which can also look monolithic. Mr. Masiello said they could consider a combination of the two, to be shopper friendly and architecturally interesting. Mr. Jenkins asked if the developer has thought about ideas to make the center Mansfield specific. Mr. Masiello said they hope to use the pond and pedestrian walkway, which will connect the two sides of the center. Mr. Jenkins said national retail anchors are less likely to incorporate unique design elements in their buildings and asked how the developer would encourage a retailer like Kohl's to use those design elements. Mr. Masiello said it is true that it is difficult to steer a national chain toward using designs other than their standard store designs, but said Kohl's has been very responsive to modifying their architectural design to fit in with centers. He said Millbury bad an architectural review process with the Planning Department showing how each store would look prior to construction. Mr. Jenkins asked where the power lines go through the site; Mr. Masiello said the Mass Electric lines go through from Route 140 toward Route 495 on overhead poles and wires, then span over Route 495. He said they are talking with Mass Electric to relocate the lines around the perimeter of the site with new poles, but the utility has been unwilling to relocate the lines underground. Mr. Jenkins asked about Mansfield Electric; Mr. Masiello said the developer will fund any upgrades or changes. Mr. Jenkins said that number should be included. 8/26/2004 5 Planning Board (' Mr. Jenkins said he wanted to see good-sized trees and plants used in the center. r Mr. Jenkins asked about the second anchor, the large building shown across the parking lot from Kohl's. Mr. Masiello explained they do not have a lease agreement for that building, but that it is shown on the plans as a Illulti-tenanted building. He said the leasing program is not far enough along to know what is going in there. He said there is the potential for it to be either a single or multiple tenanted building. Mr. Jenkins said he likes the mid-sized stores with interesting store fronts. Mr. DeMassi asked about the hotel area and asked if it could be shifted to some of the other available land. Mr. Masiello said there are wetland areas around where the hotel is shown, and the plan shows the wetland and the 25-foot buffer. He further explained there is a man-made channel which physically connects the wetland systems, but which is not subject to the Rivers Act. They had originally requested two crossings, but DEP has asked for only one. He said the hotel operators all require 100-150 rooms and parking, which this footprint would allow. Mr. DeMassi asked about the facades; Mr Masiello said they envisioned ~ades similar to Millbury and Smithfield on the smaller buildings, but possibly not on the larger pads. He said he was unsure how the restaurant pads would be treated architecturally. He ,.- offered to bring the board photographs ofthe large anchor tenants at other facilities. Mr. DeMassi asked if the leases would have requirements to use local vendors; Mr. .--- Masiello said they would not. He said his company would construct some of the stores, and some ofthe larger retailers would build their own stores. Mr. DeMassi asked about parking relief and employee parking. Mr. Masiello said a strict interpretation of the Zoning By-Law would require approximately 2,600 parking spaces; they are proposing just under 2,000 parking spaces. That reduction includes about 250 employee-related spaces and the other 350 would be related to the reduction in retail. He said they estimate about 250 employees on the largest shift for all the stores on site, considering the different peak times for the different uses. Mr. DeMassi said he was concerned about the peak holiday parking needs. Mr. Masiello explained they had looked at several studies based on peak holiday season, and the ZBA expressed its concern that they use regional traffic studies. He said they have done parking counts on their local centers to document the peaks, including the August 14 sales tax holiday. He said those studies indicate the proposed parking will be sufficient. r-- Mr. Annino said he was disappointed in the presentation concerning aesthetics. He said he wanted to see pictures of this development, not other developments, and its impacts on the community. He said the aerial drawings lack detail and in order for him to consider voting on this, he would have to see pictures with definite elevatiQns, canopies and tenants. He said the special permit decision would have to be based on how this project would benefit the Town of Mansfield, which includes more than dollars and cents. Mr. Annino said a development of this size would have to fit into Mansfield and the board would have to see more than pictures of other developments. He said he wanted to see -- 8/26/2004 6 Planning Board (~ elevations, views from all the roadways. how it affects neighboring properties. more f landscaping (especially on the boulevard entrance), signage and lighting. He said he did not want this project to look like Greenville, Rl, and he wants the board to be convinced this will be beneficial to the town, and to understand how the project will impact the neighbors. Mr. Annino said this is a beautiful site and he doesn't see how this plan will improve that; he said the backs of the stores will face School Street, which he does not want. He said he doesn't want to see loading docks or the backs of stores in the wintertime. He said he was concerned about traffic circulation and the parking fields. He said the facades have to be made to fit into Mansfield, and he does not want to see big box retailers. Mr. Annino said the dumpster locations need to be shown and screened. He said the pond is a beautiful amenity, but he would like to see it used more effectively. Mr. Annino asked about "other" annual revenue to the town; Mr. Masiello explained that is a calculation based on the Mullin report [on the fiscal impacts of development], representing non-real estate revenue like service fees, independent usage fees and utility fees. Mr. AnDino asked how many jobs would be from within the community; Mr. Masiello said he doesn't keep track of that, but his experience has been that their centers draw heavily from the community, but also from surrounding towns. -- Mr. DeMassi asked about the estimate on town services; Mr. Masiello said using the Mullin methodology, there is no school demand, and they will handle their own site maintenance, such as plowing and paving. They will use town water and sewer. He said he estimates about $85,000, which includes public safety expenditures. Mr. DeMassi asked about security; Mr. Masiello said they have not found the need for internal security. ,- I Mr. Annino asked about a movie theater; Mr. Massiello said they are not proposing a movie theater. Mr. Annino asked if he would mind iftbat were made a condition; Mr. Masiello said he didn't think it would be allowed by zoning, but could be a condition. Mr. Annino asked how this use would be consistent with other land uses in the area. Mr. Masiello explained there are a series of homes across School Street, and further along the School Street corridor there are three privately held homes not involved in this land transaction. He has approached the owners of those three homes, which are being marketed as industrial land. He said north of those home are the railroad tracks, and north of that is the Cabot Industrial Park. He said this area is primarily industrial and commercial land. Mr. Annino said he was concerned about the Scale of the homes on School Street, the scale of this project and its impact on those residences. Mr. Masiello said he didn't believe this would have a negative impact on School Street; he said they attempted to pull the largest stores as deep into the property as possible and maintained the existing landscaping. Mr. Annino said the neighborhood is primarily residential and he is concerned about how this development will be perceived from School Street. ,- Mr. Massiello said he said he will not be able to have every lease signed prior to asking for action from the board. He said things like landscaping, screening, site massing and --, 8/26/2004 7 Planning Board r dumpster locations can be developed during the review process. Mr. DeMassi said those ~ items were supposed to have been the topic of tonight's meeting; Mr. Masiello said because of the nature of retail, he didn't think he would have all that information, even by the last night of the public hearing. He said the conditions could put controls on the permit to require the developer to come back multiple times as tenants are signed. Mr. Annino said he wouldn't be able to make a decision Wider those conditions and he would need to see more parameters. Mr. Masiello said they have had architectural review on other projects and specific themes for the development. He said without the permit to build a shopping center, he would not be able to market the site. Mr. Annino said he wouldn't be able to determine that the benefits outweigh the detriments without having more information about things like the facades. Mr. Masiello said there are a lot of issues other than the fucades that need to be covered, such as traffic. He said he thought those issues could be addressed through the public hearing process, and an architectural review would give the board the power to deny individual tenants. Mr. Annino said without more information, he would not be able to vote on the permit. Mr. Armstrong said he was concerned about the scale of the project and the big box stores. He asked about signage. Mr. Masiello said the building signage would fit within the requirements ofthe Zoning By-Law; however, it is difficult to determine the specifics without knowing the tenants. He said he would like to deal with signage globally. He 1'- said they don't believe they will need to request relief from the pylon sign requirements. He said he didn't want to use pylon signs for each business; he would rather group the signs together. Mr. Armstrong asked if variances would be needed for the height of the r- pylon signs; Mr. Masiello said he didn't know at this time, but thought that could be covered during the public hearing process without knowing the tenants. Mr. Armstrong said pylon signs would have to be shown on the plans and approved by the board. Mr. Armstrong said he was concerned about the single access and does not want to see a situation like the Bellingham shopping center, where there is a movie theater. Mr. Masiello said that site is constrained by wetlands on either side, which forces the single access. He said the board had asked for a wider causeway entrance for this project; that entrance has been widened to two lanes in either direction. Mr. Holmes asked about the loading and dumpster areas; Mr. Masiello explained all of the routes to the loading areas shown on the plans have been designed for tractor-trailer use, which he said will work. He said the restaurants will have enclosed areas for loading and trash, with gates for service. He said the retail operations will be loaded at the rear and screened with trees; he said they would have open-air recessed truck wells with overhead doors. He said the restaurants and stores under 25,000 square feet would likely be loaded with smaller box trucks. Mr. Holmes asked for a copy of that study. ,-- Mr. Holmes asked about snow removal; Mr. Masiello said his firm would handle plowing. The Conservation Commission has asked for a snow storage plan identifying areas where there are no significant wetland features or other areas that could handle snow storage. Mr. Masiello said they would use those areas for snowfillls less than six inches; for larger snowfalls or storms later in the season or during the holiday peak, they ,--. 8/26/2004 8 Planning Board r f' would truck the snow off-site. Mr. Holmes said with the requested reduction in parking spaces, on-site snow storage would resuh in even fewer parking spaces. Mr. Masiello said they would not store snow in any wetland areas. He said some storage may be in landscaped areas, and said he would bring the plan he presented to the Commission. Mr. Holmes asked about the electric easement over Route 140; Mr. Masiello said that would be cleared for construction. Mr. Masiello said the required 50-foot buffer is a combination of existing trees, new plantings and grassed area beneath the power lines. Mr. Holmes said he was concerned about views from across the street; Mr. Masiello said that view would be of existing trees off property, existing trees on the property, and some cleared land under the easement. Mr. Hollworth explained that had been part ofthe ZBA review process; he said they have been working with Mass Electric so the poles would hug the easement and as much of the existing landscaping as possible would be maintained, approximately 30 feet, plus an additional 20 feet, which would remain landscaped but not retain mature trees. Mr. Holmes asked for a plan showing that area Mr. Holmes asked about lighting levels. Mr. Hollworth said he would provide the board with a footcandle plan. He said it would be generally 2-3 footcandles in the parking field. Mr. Holmes said the board would want to see the fixtures, cutoffs and other details. -- Mr. Burke asked about Mr. Masiello's approach to construction in Millbury. Mr. Masiello explained they got a special permit for the use and site layout, with the condition that they return for administrative design approval. That required them to bring architectural information back to the board for review and determine whether the information was consistent with the theme outlined in the original permit. He said that allows them to go to banks and tenants to begin putting the project in place, and gave the community the sense that the conceptual-level information was a promise, not just an idea He said they generated artists' renderings showing generic buildings, without the tenants being defined. He said there was also a narrative included in the special permit, specifying design guidelines. r- Mr. Burke said he understood the developer may not know who the tenants are at this time, but was concerned an architectural review may become unwieldy. He said he was concerned about signage, specifically the size of the pylon signs. He said he was pleased that Mr. Masiello said the pylon sign on School Street would be in scale with the street, because while School Street has some commercial buildings, they are not large structures. He said he didn't want drivers to look up at a towering sign from that perspective, and he didn't want to be able to see a sign from Route 95. He said he understood the number of stores is unknown at this time, but would like to see typical signs and he does not want to any signage variances requested on this site. Mr. Burke asked about the sides of the buildings that would fuce Route 140 and School __ Street. Mr. Masiello said the rear of the largest building is behind about seven acres that will remain treed. From the rear of the buildings closest to Route 495, there are 2-3 acres of trees that will remain. Mr. AMino said the developer would have to look at those r- views in the winter, as well. Mr. Masiello said there are about 40-50 feet of evergreens, 8/26/2004 9 Planning Board ( r- with decidous trees in the interior. Mr. Burke said there is a lack of evergreen coverage approaching the site from the School Street bridge. He said there will be 8-10 feet of building that could have dumpsters and loading areas facing School Street, and another 10-15 feet of building above that, which will not be screened. Mr. Masiello said they could wrap the architectural treatments around to the sides and backs of the buildings. He said the stores closest to School Street will have additional trees planted because the existing row oftrees is thin. Mr. Hollworth said the driveway was placed at the same spot as the existing driveway in order to retain more of the existing vegetation. Mr. Burke said it would be important to get a sense of scale and mass, including elevations and sight lines. Mr. Burke said regarding the hotel, the board has been consistent in enforcing the 50-foot landscape buffer. He asked if they had looked ata smaller footprint with a taller building. Mr. Masiello said they had looked at that, but the hotels he has been talking to want to have three or four-floor layouts. He said he didn't know ifhe would be able to entice a hotel to build a taller building on a smaller footprint, but said it has been under discussion. He said from an economic standpoint, a parking deck would not be possible. Mr. Burke asked the board if it would like to see a taller hotel with a smaller footprint. Mr. French asked if this part ofthe site is lower than the road; Mr. Masiello said it is lower than Route 495. --- Mr. Burke said the developer had discussed putting the electric service underground; Mr. Masiello said Mass Electric does not want to go underground. Mr. Hollworth said Mass Electric has offered to supply the board with an explanation of why that wouldn't be feasible. Mr. Burke said staff had discussed the fact that right now, the lines are not visible from School Street, and the Mansfield Light Department was not the utility requiring them to be relocated. He said after relocation required by Mass Electric, the lines may be visible from the roadway. Mr. Masiello said he plans to put the service to the center itself underground. ,,-- Public Comment Jimmy Epstein, 900 Maple Street, asked if it would be possible to move the public comment period to earlier in the evening. The board said that would be possible. Kevin Gartland. 145 School Street, said the ZBA had discussed the necessity for a variance for the relocation of the poles. Mr. Gartland said the ZBA also recommended that without specific tenants, it would move forward assuming a worst-case scenario as it relates to parking. He said he thought School Street would be negatively effected if this did not have enough parking. Mr. French said the most important issues are signage, a theme with enough detail to obtain support and approval of the board, screening, cross sections, mounding of earth to reduce the scale of buildings, additional screening, sight lines and possibly a scale model ~, Mr. Masiello said he intends to bring a version of the Millbury model that would be Mansfield appropriate, as well as more signage and building, buffer and sight line details. ~ 8/26/2004 10 Planning Board r-- I He asked if the board would like to deal with these issues at the next hearing and said he ,r' is still in front of the ZBA for parking relief; he said he would like to get the Planning Board's take on the parking issue relatively early in the process. Mr. French said the board is flexible as long as things move along and it is getting the information it needs. Mr. Masiello said he would like to talk about the parking relief issue as soon as possible. He said the questions raised tonight would require more than one week to address. Mr. Masiello suggested beginning Night Two with Public Comment, followed by Parking and Infrastructure. Mr. Masiello offered to sign a request for continuance and extend the time for final approval to August 31, 2004. Motion: To continue the public hearing to August 31, 2004 at 7:00 p.rn. (Annino-DeMassi) All in favor. PASSES Motion: To adjourn at 10:40 p.rn. (Torman-Jenkins) All in favor. PASSES ,- f! /7 jOy' Date of Approval r' ~ ~ 8/26/2004 11 Planning Board