Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutmin of planning brd 02/09/05 r :-.('~ ;~"1 ,....-,.,.., ;) r: " ~.",.. Planning Board Minutes '};' r ICE Present: Tom French, Chairman; F~:::~~~;g~O~lerk; Waher Jenkins3l~h T~A I: 58 John DeMassi, Frank Holmes Shaun P. Burke, Director of PI and Develo ment S l. M....t...Ot6t...7~.{..... 2. Special PenIdt PUIt ...,........... - MaufWd ~ "'11 Develv IDeIlt - Sehool StreetJJle.te 148lRo.te495 -WIS DeveIe meat Mr. French asked for an update of the revised plans. Lou Masiello, WS Development, explained the revised plans, which address concerns about the orientation of the lower left-hand buildings and their loading and service areas. Those buildings been reoriented so they do not face School Street; this change also reduces the number of parking spaces for which they will request relief. r Another change has been to the back portion of the site, which has a large building intended to house around 7 tenants. He said their application would have allowed them to move the interior walls, which the board and residents had been concerned could result in that building becoming one large store. Mr. Masiello explained the new plan shows that building becoming narrower, which would appropriately house mid-sized retailers such as Linens & Things, Barnes & Noble or Dick's Sporting Goods. Mr. Masiello said this change would preclude their ability to bring in a single large retailer. Craig Lizotte, ESS, explained the engineering changes made to the stormwater management system following the Engineering Department's comments. These include the addition of small detention basins to eliminate effects on the wetland systems and water elevation in the man-made pond. He said he addressed the Town Engineer's comments in his February 3, 2005 response. Mr. Lizotte said the sidewalks and crosswalks will be colored pressed bituminous concrete and will look like brick. Mr. Masiello said there would be no joint, and the material will be as strong as the driveway material. Sidewalks in front of the buildings will remain concrete. Mr. Masiello explained the changes to parking; he said the revised plan shows 2,007 spaces. He presented a table showing what the Zoning By-Law would require for each use and noted their original plan included 1,966 spaces. He said the project size has been reduced, so the number of parking spaces required by the Zoning By-Law has decreased to 2,470. They are requesting to park the retail and restaurant uses at 4.5 spaces per 1,000 feet, which results in the 1,907 spaces. He said the hotel would be parked at one space per room, or 100 spaces. Therefore, the entire site would have 2,007 spaces. Mr. Masiello explained they would not like to count employee parking spaces in their total. ,-- Mr. Masiello explained a plan showing where the customers for each use would park; one of the concerns had been that some parking was shown across the driveway from the stores. He said in the revised plans, that has been eliminated and the plan has been redesigned to be more thoughtful in providing parking closer to the uses that need them. ( Mr. Armstrong asked if the colored pavement would fade over time; Mr. Masiello said the color is mixed into the asphalt. Mr. Annino asked about the restaurant employees. Mr. Masiello explained the Zoning By-Law would require one space per employee. He said their variance request to the Zoning Board of Appeals is to park the retail/restaurant uses at 4.5 spaces per 1,000 feet, which is intended to accommodate both customer and employees; they are asking not to be required to park employees independently. He said the 1,907 spaces supplied will accommodate both the retail and restaurant uses. Mr. Masiello said the seating capacity for all the restaurants will be 1,500 seats and he estimates 250 employees for the entire center; Mr. Annino said with 20 employees for each of five restaurants, that would not leave many employees for the retail uses. Mr. Masiello said he arrived at 250 employees through his company's experience. Mr. Annino asked if the other shopping centers to which this has been compared contain five restaurants and a hotel; Mr. Masiello said they do not all include five restaurants, but several include a similar number of restaurant seats. He said none include a hote~ but noted they have not requested relief for the hotel parking. Mr. Annino said he had visited the Shops at Blackstone Valley and could not fmd a parking space near the restaurant he was visiting. ,-- Mr. Holmes asked about the ratio of restaurant square footage to the whole center at the comparison facilities; he said with this plan, the ratio seems to be very higher. Mr. DeMassi said it appeared two of the comparison malls had greater square footage and the rest were significantly smaller, and said they had at least one big box store, which he said generates a different traffic pattern than smaller stores. He asked about the outdoor seating shown on the plans and asked ifparking had been accounted for. He said many parking spaces will be lost during the winter for snow storage. He said there had been no detail about whether the hotel would have function facilities or a restaurant. He said the mezzanine space in the Kohl's building is about 7,000 square feet and asked if that is office space, and whether it should be parked differently than the retail space. Mr. Masiello said the Hingham and Canton facilities are larger than this proposal, and some of the other centers are smaller, but their per square foot parking demand is very similar. Mr. Masiello said the restaurant seats are a gross number, so the outdoor seating would not require extra parking. He said they haven't identified each restaurant, so they have calculated a specific seating allowance for each. Mr. Masiello said there is no restaurant or banquet facility proposed for the hotel. Mr. Masiello said he has not identified how many seats would be in each restaurant, but has proposed enough parking for 3,000 seats. Mr. French said the board is concerned that the hotel is isolated from the rest of the site, and if there were a restaurant in it, the hotel lot would fill quickly and overflow parking would be far from the hotel. Mr. Masiello said he could live with a condition that there be no restaurant or banquet facility. r r Mr. Jenkins said he was concerned with customers driving to multiple stores because they are so far apart. He said he was also concerned about snow storage in the parking lots. Mr. Masiello said this layout has brought the site closer to being independently parked per business. He said there is nothing that would restrict them from moving all the restaurant seats into one building, but he said he wouldn't do that. He said he could live with a condition allowing the restaurants to be placed in certain areas of the site. Mr. Jenkins said he was concerned about the buildings on the left at the entrance; Mr. Masiello said one may be a restaurant, but both will not be restaurants. He said every restaurant that has approached him about that location has said they wouldn't want to be in one of those buildings if the other building was a restaurant as well. Mr. Masiello said the mezzanine level in Kohl's is management office space. Mr. Masiello asked if that had to be parked at office levels. He said that space is included in the floor area of the entire building. r- Mr. Armstrong asked about Note 9 on the plans, which says the development is 450,000 square feet; Mr. Masiello said that should be reduced to 435,000 square feet to reflect the revised plans. Mr. Armstrong said the building envelopes are very large; Mr. DeMassi said if those buildings were moved within those envelopes, it could affect the parking for those buildings. Mr. Masiello said the intention is that buildings could change within the envelopes, but the total square footage of the center could not exceed 435,000 square feet. He said a building could be built large enough to :fill the entire envelope, but another building would have to be downsized to keep the center within the 435,000 square feet. Mr. Armstrong asked if that would affect parking; Mr. Masiello said if all the buildings filled their respective envelopes, they would not be able to park the site effectively. He said the intention of the envelopes is to accommodate differently shaped buildings. Mr. Armstrong said he would be more comfortable with the envelopes tightened up; he said he understood some stores and restaurants may have special designs or shapes, but was uncomfortable with the size of some of the envelopes. Mr. DeMassi said he was concerned about the orientation of the hotel within the envelope. He said he would prefer the hotel be oriented the way it is on the plan. Mr. Masiello said the shape and size of the envelope is negotiable, and he has done that with other centers, followed by an architectural review to ensure the stores fit in and that that the parking worked, etc. Mr. DeMassi said the site is already so full, he wouldn't want there to be an opportunity for additional square feet of retail. Mr. Masiello said if such a change were proposed, the special permit would have to be modified and the board would have the opportunity for another public hearing. r- Dr. Torman asked about the Hingham facility's parking problem. Mr. Masiello said that site had a parking ratio based on the floor area of retail and restaurant uses. Then an additional restaurant became interested, but would not :fit into the approved permit, so they went back to the Planning Board to amend the permit and reconflgured the parking. Dr. Torman asked if there is room at this site to create more parking ifnecessary. Mr. Masiello said they probably would not have room to add 400 spaces because they have ~ added detention ponds, but said they can probably add 100 spaces. He said there is an area currently being used as open space which could be used for overflow parking. Dr. Torman said he was also concerned with snow storage. Mr. Masiello said snow removal is a management issue; he said they truck the snow from the site, especially during busy times. He noted the heaviest snow season is normally during lower parking times, after the holidays. Mr. DeMassi said any snow kept on site will impact the ability of the mall to park adequately. Mr. Masiello said at the ratio they propose, 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet, they could use 10% of their spaces for storage before cutting into their excess spaces. Dr. Torman said he would like to see the future spaces shown on the plans, even if they are not going to be built. Mr. Holmes said he would like to see the potential future parking shown on the plans. He asked if that parking could actually be built, because it seems to be wet. Mr. Masiello said there would be a sidewalk from that area to School Street into the site. He noted they have increased the number of spaces on site with the latest revisions, so some of the spaces previously discussed as future spaces are included in the new plan. r Mr. Holmes asked about shopping carriage storage. Mr. Masiello said they had proposed some cart corrals on the first plan, but do not have any in the new plan. He said they could be put back in the plan if the board wants them. Mr. Holmes asked how many parking spaces would be lost; Mr. Masiello said each would take up one space. He said the board had seemed concerned about the aesthetics of the corrals and without them, the stores would be required to gather their own shopping carts. He said the parking ratio would still work with the cart corrals added. Public Comment John Southern, 15 Old Elm Street, asked about the entrance road being reconfigured so the buildings at the entrance are on one side of it. Mr. DeMassi said that design was to avoid back ups onto School Street and Route 140. Cara Lynch, Mansfield Citizens to Save the Land, asked about potential increases to the building sizes. Mr. Masiello said they would not be able to change the aggregate size of the center, but the individual buildings could be adjusted within their envelopes. He noted that if one building is increased, another would have to be decreased. Ms. Lynch asked if the shape of the envelope could be changed; Mr. Masiello said the envelope would be part of the approva~ which could not be changed. Jim Polumbo, 155 School Street, asked how many parking spaces would be required by the Zoning By-Law. Mr. Masiello said the original plan would have required 2,600 spaces, but the revised plan would require 2,470 spaces. r Lindsay Hayes, 40 Lantern Lane, said the restaurants would be busy on the weekends and it would be impossible to get a parking space. Mr. Masiello said there have always been 1,500 restaurant seats proposed, and the Zoning By-Law requires 375 parking spaces, or one per four seats. Mr. Masiello said the restaurants are distributed throughout the site. ,-.. Mr. French introduced Keith Bloomer, the board's traffic consultant. Mr. French explained the board will be making a recommendation on the parking to the Zoning Board of Appeals, which will make the final decision on the parking variance. Mr. Bloomer noted comment 45 in his December 8, 2004 memo, which referred to this issue. He said he had referenced two sources of industry standards. The Urban Land Institute recommends 4.5 spaces per 1,000 square feet of grass floor area, which is what the applicant is proposing with 1,907 spaces. The ITE parking generation guide recommends 4.75 spaces per 1,000 feet, which he said is more conservative. He said both are accepted rates used throughout the country, but noted many municipalities have higher rates. He said the applicant's response to comment 45 was that they would provide a snow storage plan and identify areas for future parking. ,-.. Mr. Holmes asked what those parking rates represent. Mr. Bloomer said the parking generation guide is an average for the majority of the year. Mr. DeMassi asked why many towns have higher parking rates than the industry standards; Mr. Bloomer said he didn't know, but noted that most towns he has reviewed have granted variances. Mr. Armstrong asked if those averages include employee parking; Mr. Bloomer said they do. Dr. Torman asked what percentages other towns have granted variances for; Mr. Bloomer said he has seen variances granted for numbers similar to this request. Mr. Jenkins said there are different ratios that could be used depending on the size ofthe center. Mr. Bloomer said the applicant talked about the potential for additional parking on the site, but not in the center of the site. He suggested that could be considered as employee parking. Mr. Masiello said that is what they do at Derby Street, and they have had good luck enforcing employee parking in their centers. Mr. DeMassi asked about the bus stops shown on the plan. Mr. Masiello said the site has been designed for bus trave~ including the radii. He said there is no known bus service to this site at this time, but they will build to accommodate busses in the future. The routing through the site would be through the main driveways, rather than around the buildings. He said they would not lose any parking for the bus stops. He noted fire trucks will be able to access all the buildings. Mr. Armstrong asked if there could be a bus stop near Kohl's. Mr. Masiello said there could be. Mr. Burke asked the applicant to review the variance applications. Mr. Masiello said there are three requests, two are variances and one special permit. ,-- The first variance is from Section 4.8.3, Water Body Setback, relating to building setbacks from certain types of soils. He said he believes the intent is for septic system design and the soils are not related to wetland areas and he has requested relief to be allowed to build within those soil areas. Mr. Burke said this is intended to provide separation between poorly drained soils and a septic system, and since there is no septic system proposed, he said he would not be opposed to the variance. ,-- Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation on the grant ofrelief:&om Section 4.8.3, Water Body Setback (DeMassi-Annino) All in favor. PASSES Mr. Masiello asked about Mr. Annino's ability to vote. Mr. Burke said he received a letter from town counsel late this afternoon amending his original opinion. Mr. Burke explained Mr. Annino had been about one hour late for the December 16, 2004 meeting, and town counsel had said Mr. Annino would be unable to vote, believing Mr. Annino had missed a presentation by the applicant's consultant, when in fact he had missed a presentation by the board's consultant. After Mr. Burke explained that to counse~ Mr. Mangiaratti revised his opinion to indicate that since Mr. Annino had missed part of the presentation by the board's consultant, who had previously provided the board with his written report, he could vote on the special permit. Mr. Masiello said the second variance is from Section 4.4.1, Off-Street Parking requirements, to provide fewer spaces than required by the Zoning By-Law. Mr. Burke said a reduced parking area would mean less impervious surface, but he said he would be more inclined to support the variance request if the applicant had identified a definitive overflow parking area that is practical and safe for people to get to their destinations. He said the remote satellite lot indicated for this plan is not practical. On the other hand, he noted that Mr. Bloomer has said the applicant's proposal uses r' reasonable methodology and assumptions. Mr. Burke said requiring an additional 400 spaces would mean additional impervious surface that would only be used infrequently. He said the applicant's proposal meets industry standards and suggested sending the ZBA a positive recommendation. Mr. Holmes said he agreed with Mr. Burke, but was concerned that there isn't really a good place on the site for the overflow parking. He said he didn't think the site would need the number of spaces required by the Zoning By-Law, but said because there isn't a reasonable overflow location, perhaps the site is just too large for the parking it needs. Mr. Armstrong said the tenants to whom Mr. Masiello is marketing this site will not sign leases ifthere isn't reasonable parking. He said he agrees with Mr. Burke about the need to reduce impervious surface, citing the Home Depot site, which has parking areas that are infrequently full. He said as far as snow removal goes, if customers cannot get into the stores, the stores will contact the property management company to remove the snow. He said with the reduction in the size of the development, increase in parking and the reorientation of the parking, he is comfortable there is enough parking. ,-. Mr. Jenkins said there is potential for additional parking on land owned by the state in the upper left-hand corner of the plan. He said there are some wetlands in the area, but said it may be able to accommodate another 50 spaces. He also asked about the area to the left of the secondary entrance; Mr. Masiello said there is land there that could accommodate additional spaces without affecting wetland areas. Mr. Jenkins said the board's consultant had mentioned two industry standards for parking; one of them would require 1,800 parking spaces, which this application would more than meet. He said the Zoning .--- By- Law requirements may be somewhat excessive, and given the tenant mix and building sizes, he would support the variance. He said he would not want to see a grocery store on the site; Mr. Masiello said he is not proposing one. Mr. DeMassi said he is concerned about the need for customers to drive from store to store. He said he doesn't feel this is similar to any of the other malls the board has been shown, and doesn't feel the site will work as presented. However, he said he thinks the plan is one retail or restaurant space away from being the correct density. Motion: To send the ZBA a positive recommendation on the variance from Section 4.4.1, Off-Street Parking, to allow 4.5 parking spaces per 1000 square feet of restaurant and retail use, and to not require one space per employee. Ask the applicant to show additional future parking on the plans (Armstrong-Annino) Mr. French said he thought the overflow parking as discussed is remote and possibly not safe. He said the best way may be to shuttle people from other parking lots. Motion and second amended to remove the suggestion to mark potential future spaces. Mr. French said he was concerned about the restaurant seats, as restaurants take up more parking than retail. Mr. Armstrong noted the maximum number of seats is 1,500. .--- Five in favor. DeMassi, Holmes opposed. PASSES Mr. Masiello explained the special permit is for relief from Section 4.3.6.b.1.b, the 50- foot separation across the street from a residential use. He said in this case, that "street" is Route 495. He said they bad originally asked for relief from that requirement in two locations, but the ZBA had been concerned about the relief requested at the School StreetIRoute 495 corner. The relief request now does not include that area. He said they comply with the requirement along School Street and Route 140 and they are only asking for relief in the area of the proposed hotel. Mr. Burke explained the landscaping provisions apply to all commercial developments, regardless of whether they require a Planning Board special permit. He explained the by- law was intended to provide separation for residential zones and uses, and said a question had arisen about sites with existing natural vegetation. He said the result was that if there is existing vegetation, it could be kept with a special permit rather than a variance. He said the special permit test is much lower than the variance test. Mr. Annino said he is concerned because the Planning Board is reviewing this application under its own special permit, and another board is going to be able to grant a special permit of its own. Mr. Burke said the idea was to give applicants the alternative to do something other than what is laid out in the by-law, and to allow them to take advantage ofthe existing vegetation. ,-- Mr. Burke said he recommended not supporting the special permit. He said the board has looked at this issue on other sites, and the board's position on Great Waves, which was about 800 feet from the nearest residential use, had been to keep that 50-foot buffer in ~ place to protect the abutters. He said the same thing happened at Shaw's in the Erin's Centre development, where the developer wanted to build closer than 50 feet to Route 140, which the board did not support despite the distance across Route 140 to the nearest homes. He said the Great Woods and conservation land is behind the hotel on this site and suggested that even though the site is adjacent to an interstate highway, a negative recommendation be sent to the Zoning Board of Appeals. Mr. Armstrong asked how the application meets either of the two tests for the special permit. Deb Horowitz said there would be wetland areas impacted if the hotel were moved because they are required to keep the buffer. She said in the area in question, requiring additional trees would not make any difference to the residences across the highway. Mr. Masiello said the area where the buffer would be is currently cleared land and to create the required buffer, they would have to plant trees and grass. ,-- Mr. Jenkins asked the distance between the lot line and the edge of the road. He said there is a piece of land between the edge of the road and the lot line. Mr. Annino said that land is totally out of the town's controL Mr. Burke said if the by-law requires the applicant to supply the buffer on his land, it is not reasonable to expect that land owned by another entity, in this case the Commonwealth, will be maintained. Mr. Armstrong said he thinks the intent of the by-law is to provide a buffer between a commercial development and residences across the street. He said the land across from this site is the Great Woods with several highway lanes in between. Mr. Annino said drivers on Route 495 are going to be able to see the site, and the buffer would provide improved sight lines. Mr. Masiello said the Route 495 ramp is 30 feet higher than the site. Mr. Armstrong asked whether planting new trees would make any difference. Mr. Burke said it would take a long time for the trees to mature, so there wouldn't be an immediate impact, but in the long term, planting trees there now would be useful. Mr. Armstrong said the buffer would make it hard to build the hotel as proposed. Mr. Jenkins said if the board supports less parking, it would be hard not to support this relief request. Mr. Burke said he supports less parking because he would not want to see as much vacant pavement as there is at Erin's Centre, and would rather see green space. Mr. DeMassi asked about where the utility lines would be installed. Mr. Masiello said the poles would be in islands in the parking lot, with the wires above the parking areas. Mr. Masiello said the grade differential is lower than he thought; he said it is 5-10 feet. Mr. Holmes asked about the potential for unde~ground utilities; Mr. Lizotte said National Grid is not willing to locate the utilities underground. ~ Leonard Flynn, 102 Jewell Street, asked if the poles would be within the 50-foot buffer. Mr. French said they would be. Mr. Flynn said the trees would also screen the drivers on Route 495 from the backs of the stores, and the buffer will also protect those using the Great Woods from seeing the stores. He said the 50-foot buffer is minimal and should be r- maintained. Mr. Flynn said he had visited the Bellingham center and found a traffic problem. He said the applicant has not presented any concrete information about tenants. Motion: To send the ZBA a negative recommendation on the grant of the special permit from Section 4.3.6.b.l.b because despite the fact that the "street" in this case is Route 495, the applicant should be required to keep the 50-foot buffer on his property to screen the development, not only from the residential abutters across the highway, but also from the drivers on Route 495 and from the Great Woods conservation land. (Annino-DeMassi) Four in favor. French, Armstrong, Jenkins opposed. PASSES Mr. Burke asked about stormwater management and whether the pond is being used for storage. Mr. Lizotte explained storm water will continue to flow through the pond, as it does now. The system has been redesigned with new basins so there will only be insignificant increases in the water level in the pond for a short time. He said the new system will have no impacts to the pond and the wetland areas. ,'-' Mr. Burke said when the special permit was filed, there were seven different uses detailed. He said the applicant has said he has no intention to do fast food, but asked about the auto body/repair shop in the application. Mr. Masiello said they have no intention of doing a fast food restaurant. He explained the auto body/repair use is listed on the application because they have done some electronic stores which have auto sound system installation facilities. He said he doesn't envision a use like an oil change or lube facility. Mr. Masiello said he would be willing to remove fast food from the application, and would be happy to further clarify the auto body/repair issue. Mr. Masiello said he has responded to the department head comments and to Mr. Bloomer's latest comments. Ron Muller, Greenman-Pedersen, said he thought Mr. Bloomer's comments are in line with his numbers. Mr. Bloomer had asked about the revised plan for School Street, which shows a median in the middle of School Street; Mr. Bloomer had asked what would happen if the north side of School Street were developed and about the ability of tractor trailer trucks to make the turn and the possibility of a jug handle at that location. Mr. Muller said that would depend on how the north side of School Street is developed; he said he would look at the plan and make accommodations for truck traffic. Mr. Muller said Mr. Bloomer had asked about possible con:t1icts with site traffic turning right out of the site; Mr. Muller said when a left is made into the site, it would allow right turns coming out. Mr. Bloomer was concerned about allowing V-turns and whether that would con:t1ict with right~turning movements. He said with the few houses on the north side of School Street, it wouldn't be a big issue, but could be if and when that side of School Street is redeveloped. Mr. Muller said there could be stop signs added, but said the V-turns would still be necessary for access to those homes. Mr. Muller said the median would have plantings and a sidewalk through it. Mr. French said if the north side of School Street is developed, the median would prevent drivers from driving directly from one side of the street to the other. -- Mr. Holmes said there had been a comment from Mr. Bloomer about Plymouth/School Street delays. Mr. Muller said Plymouth Street currently has long delays for traffic r- turning left onto School Street, and when traffic is increased, delays will be increased. He said the question is whether something can be done to improve that, but said there is not sufficient volume to justify a light. Mr. Muller said there are some existing problems at that intersection, such as the sideline restraints and overgrown vegetation. He said Police and Fire are concerned about emergency vehicles leaving Plymouth Street and traffic coming over the bridge toward Plymouth Street. He said he has spoken with the Fire Chief about a warning sign that can be activated by the department to warn drivers about the need to stop at the bottom of the hill. r Mr. Holmes said there had been an indication that a number of intersections would experience queues greater than their storage ability, which could create a dangerous situation. Mr. Muller said that had been discussed with regard to post-development volume, both with and without mitigation. He said they are proposing to either make improvements to accommodate the storage length or to reduce queue length. Mr. Bloomer said comment #17 from his December 8, 2004 letter talked about 95th percentile queue lengths, which are the worst-case scenarios. He said it is desirable to provide as much storage as possible, but it is not always necessary to provide it for the 95th percentile. Mr. Muller said they are proposing to widen the School Street/Route 140 intersection to a double left-turn lane and to extend the storage in both lanes, so left- turning traffic will not back up into the through lanes on Route 140. He said a similar condition would occur on School Street. He said they would not be able to accommodate the 95th percentile queue for the westbound left turn from Chauncy Street onto Route 140. He said the situation there would be better post-development, but would still not accommodate the 95th percentile queue. Mr. Muller said they have met with the owner of the day care facility on School Street. He said the new traffic from the shopping center should not affect that facility because of the signalized intersection. Mr. Holmes asked about traffic coming from West Mansfield, with one lane approaching the site, then two right-turn lanes into the development. He said the stacking length for the turning lane was based on 10% of the traffic coming from that direction, and if there is more traffic coming from that direction, it would stack up beyond the ability to hold the queue. Mr. Muller said the two lanes approaching the signal are both through lanes, so right-turning traffic will line up in the right lane, but noted that some traffic in the right lane will be going straight. He said their analysis did not factor in the secondary driveway, so with some of the traffic using that entrance, the situation at the main driveway would improve. The driveway is designed for a "B" level of service, and would handle all 95th percentile queues. Mr. Masiello said the traffic studies were done for the original proposal of 450,000 square feet, which has been reduced to 435,000 square feet. He said they have not reanalyzed the traffic report or changed the mitigation methods for the reduced size. ,"-'" Mr. DeMassi asked if there would still be a single lane to the first entrance when approaching the site from West Mansfield. Mr. Muller said there would be one approach r--- lane, with two lanes after that. Mr. DeMassi asked if there could be two approach lanes further back on School Street. Mr. Muller said that could be done, but said the traffic could be accommodated without that change. He said he could do an analysis on different percentages of traffic coming from West Mansfield. He noted that Pare has concurred with his analysis of where traffic is coming from and said he wouldn't want to build more lanes than necessary. Mr. DeMassi said there are five restaurants proposed for the mall, and the times people will go to the restaurants will be prime commuter times. Mr. Muller said he wants to ensure traffic continues to flow along School Street, and believes this plan will accomplish that. Mr. French asked about Mass Highway and Route 140 access. Mr. Burke said Mr. Sullivan and the Town Manager have asked Mass Highway to consider a right-in, right- out option. Mr. Masiello said Mass Highway's latest letter seemed to indicate it would consider that option. He said he would be willing to build that if allowed, but will continue to plan for mitigation if it is not. Mr. Masiello said Mr. Sullivan supports an entrance on Route 140 and has suggested a plan to ease congestion at Spring and Willow Streets involving a reconfiguration of how those streets tie together. He has suggested orienting Willow Street in more of a 90- degree angle to Spring Street. Mr. Sullivan has suggested the right of way be straightened and Mr. Masiello said they are willing to do that. ,-- Mr. French suggested the board review the new material prior to the next meeting. Motion: To continue the public hearing to March 9,2005 at 7:00 p.m. (Torman-Annino) All in favor. PASSES l~k'...iA (~....s Mr. Burke explained the site is eight acres on Williams Street, to be split into two lots, both with the required lot size and frontage. The existing house will be removed. Motion: To endorse the Form A (Torman-Armstrong) All in favor. PASSES 14.iAM~ Motion: To adjourn at 10:45 p.rn. (Torman-Annino) All in favor. PASSES Next meeting: March 2, 2005 at 7:30 p.m. Room 2 a/b ~/,(f7L-:3 Signature of Clerk ~/7)oJ- , Date of Approval ,--....