Laserfiche WebLink
Public Hearing (Continued): Site Plan Review <br />25 Walkers Brook Drive, Stop & Shop <br />Application to demolish existing structure and redevelop site in entirety for a 63,000 sq. ft. Stop & Shop, <br />with related utility, drainage, screening and other site improvements (Action Date: May 8, 2006) <br />JS re-opened the public hearing. He said the applicant will be presenting an updated design. <br />A Draft Decision has been written and the applicant has had a chance to review it. The <br />Draft has been posted to the CPDC's webpage. <br />Mr. Tom Lemons, the town's lighting consultant, presented his report. Mr. Lemons <br />concluded that the three floodlights facing the building need to be shielded. Aside from the <br />shielding for the floodlights, Mr. Lemons said the lighting design was excellent and would <br />provide light where it is needed without lighting the neighborhood. His calculations <br />determined that the illumination falls off to less than one foot-candle at the boundary line. <br />Noting that there was a problem with glare from decorative lighting along One General <br />Way until Danis had made changes to the lights' wattage and fixtures, the Board asked the <br />Town Planner to have the Draft specify that Stop & Shop's decorative lighting should be <br />the same wattage and should incorporate the same changes to the fixtures (if necessary) as <br />those along One General Way. <br />The Board also expressed concern over the possibility of glare from the floodlights. Mr. <br />Lemons said the floodlights point towards the building and therefore the abutters should <br />not be affected especially if the floodlights are shielded as he advised. <br />Mr. Tony D'Arezzo of 130 John Street said Mr. Lemons' calculations should be made "per <br />fagade" and should not be based on the sum of all the lighting. Mr. D'Arezzo also said the <br />entrance and exit should fall under the lighting code for canopies. <br />Mr. Lemon responded by saying in his opinion the building is fairly uniformly illuminated. <br />He said the rear fagade lights are a higher wattage but added that they have to be because <br />they illuminate the rear parking lot too. Regarding canopies, Mr. Lemons said there are no <br />canopies in the plans although the entrance is recessed. He added that he did not see any <br />excess in anything the developers are doing. <br />Mr. D'Arezzo asked if Mr. Lemons had reviewed the roofs reflective coating. <br />Mr. Lemons said all lighting is located below the roofline. Only sunlight and moonlight <br />would reflect off of the roof. <br />Attorney Mark Favaloro, representing Danis Corp., asked what the lighting would be in the <br />rear near the Danis property. Mr. Ed Shaw said there would be three lights mounted across <br />the rear wall of the building. They would be fully shielded and shine down and out. <br />Sconces on the side of the building would point down and towards the building. <br />Next, the Board decided to review the Draft Decision in some detail. Brant Ballantyne <br />recused himself. <br />Page 2 of 12 <br />