Log In


Reset Password
Archive

South Main Plaza Gets Initial P&Z Approval

Print

Tweet

Text Size


South Main Plaza Gets Initial P&Z Approval

By Andrew Gorosko

Following a November 16 public hearing, Planning and Zoning Commission (P&Z) members approved a developer’s plans to renovate the commercial building at 123 South Main Street that formerly housed The Fireside Inn, which was a restaurant, banquet hall, and catering facility.

People living near the site, however, expressed concerns over the impact of future redevelopment proposed for the property, which would include the construction of a new 20,000-square-foot retail building in the area that served as The Fireside Inn’s southern parking lot. Their concerns largely focused on the traffic that would be generated by new commercial uses in that congested area. The site is in a B-2 Business zone.

Following the hearing, P&Z members unanimously approved Highland HC, LLC’s, plans to renovate the existing building on the site at 121-125 South Main Street. The project is known as Highland Plaza.

The renovation work would increase the structure’s size by less than 1,500 square feet, expanding it to a floor area of 31,896 square feet. Approximately 6,050 square feet of the structure on the western side of the building would be reserved for a future 120-seat restaurant. The remaining 25,846 square feet of space is currently designated as “ancillary storage space,” but would be put to retail uses in the future, according to the developer. That area formerly served as the Fireside’s larger banquet hall.

The P&Z recently revised the zoning regulations to allow a combined commercial use of sites with B-2 zoning, such as 121-125 South Main Street, involving both restaurant and retail uses. 

The Highland Plaza application approved by the P&Z on November 16 amounts to Phase 1 of what would be a three-phase project. The second phase would involve specifying the restaurant and retail uses of the renovated and expanded structure. The third phase would entail the construction of a new approximately 20,000-square-foot retail building lying south of the renovated structure.

Architect/engineer Peder Scott, representing the developer, said that renovating the former Fireside building will involve removing some components of the structure, as well as adding some new components. Partial demolition has been underway at the property for a number of weeks.

The various changes to be made to the structure will have it meet applicable building codes, including fire codes and handicap access codes.

The town’s Design Advisory Board (DAB) has endorsed the developer’s architectural design for the project, Mr Scott told P&Z members.

The renovation will include constructing a pitched roof to replace an existing failed flat roof. Also, new windows and handicap access ramps will be constructed.

Public Comment

During the public comment section of the hearing, resident Lena Sampaio of 120 South Main Street listed a series of issues that will face residents in the area during the site’s redevelopment and future uses.

The renovation work on the site has created dust problems within her house, she said.

Redevelopment would pose issues involving increased traffic, a potential road widening, site illumination, and noise concerns, she said.

Donald Ramsey of 3 Prospect Drive said The Fireside Inn was a “good neighbor” for nearby residents. Mr Ramsey expressed concerns that redevelopment of the site would damage the local quality of life.

Mr Ramsey said that increased traffic flow through the area would cause problems, noting that the site is located near the hazardous intersection of South Main Street, Prospect Drive, Peck’s Lane, and Appleblossom Lane, which has a high accident rate.

Mr Ramsey expressed regret that the P&Z recently revised the B-2 zoning regulations to allow combined restaurant/retail uses in places such as the redevelopment site.

Similarly, John Lariccia of 7 Prospect Drive voiced concern about new commercial development in the area, pointing to potential traffic problems. He asked what type of retail uses would be situated on the property.

P&Z member Lilla Dean said that the agency does not yet know what specific retail uses Highland Plaza would contain.

Resident Mark D’amico of 5 Prospect Drive raised a host of concerns about the site’s redevelopment, seeking to clarify how the construction work would be phased.

P&Z Chairman William O’Neil said the P&Z is “extremely concerned” about the traffic effects of such redevelopment. “Traffic will be a big issue,” he said, noting that traffic circulation near the site poses issues.

P&Z member Robert Mulholland noted that a dangerous situation exists when southbound motorists on South Main Street seek to make a left turn onto the site in the face of very heavy northbound traffic flow.

Mr O’Neil suggested that a third travel lane be created on South Main Street in that area to alleviate congested traffic conditions.

But Oscar Sampaio of 120 South Main Street said a third travel lane would worsen conditions, leading to a “speed zone” in the area, in which motorist’s speeds would increase. The existing posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour there should be cut to 35 mph, he said.

David Goodwick of 117-119 South Main Street said that he would cooperate with a widening project for South Main Street in that area.

Mr Mulholland urged that residents living near the redevelopment site pursue their traffic concerns when the Police Commission reviews the traffic aspects of the project. The Police Commission is the local traffic authority. Because South Main Street (Route 25) is a state road, the Police Commission would make traffic recommendations on the project to the State Traffic Commission.

The future applications from Highland HC, LLC, to the P&Z to redevelop the site will require formal traffic studies, unlike the initial phase of the redevelopment project.

In its November 16 initial approval for the Highland Plaza project, the P&Z required that the project meet applicable commercial sign regulations; that a waste dumpster on the site be enclosed, visually screened, and closed when not in use; and that the applicant clearly mark a wetland conservation area on the eastern section of the site.

Comments
Comments are open. Be civil.
0 comments

Leave a Reply