03:29At the heart of the meeting was a proposal to transform the current site, which includes an unused funeral home, into a modern daycare center with a footprint of approximately 6,960 square feet. The board reviewed the application’s details, with legal representation outlining the need for both preliminary and final site plan approvals, along with bulk C variances. These variances pertained to setbacks due to the lot’s unique front and rear yard classification and proposed solid fencing that would otherwise not comply with residential area regulations. The board examined the implications of these variances, particularly concerning the outdoor play area located in what is classified as the front yard.

10:20A representative from the architectural team testified about the design, which incorporates a fenced playground and updated parking facilities. The board discussed the removal of a proposed LED sign from the application and sought clarification on operational aspects, such as age group service and adherence to state regulations. The architect assured that the center would comply with state licensing requirements, operating within guidelines for a maximum occupancy of 198 children and 27 staff members.

43:12The meeting’s focus shifted to the traffic management plan. The proposal included creating new ingress and egress driveways along Westfield Avenue, with specific measures to address potential traffic congestion. A traffic engineer presented a report detailing the expected traffic flow, emphasizing right-in, right-out access to mitigate peak hour congestion. The board scrutinized the parking layout, which included 37 spaces and anticipated a turnover of up to 140 drop-offs during peak hours. Concerns were raised about the potential impact of parents accompanying children into the building, which could extend drop-off times and affect traffic patterns.

17:29The board also examined the project’s compliance with the COA overlay zone, designated for affordable housing, and how the daycare’s development might contribute to the housing fund. This aspect of the application highlighted the ongoing challenge of balancing commercial development with community housing needs.

01:26:37Public commentary added a layer of complexity to the discussion, with a resident voicing concerns about demolishing the existing structure, which, despite not being officially recognized as historic, holds architectural significance for the community. The resident urged the board to weigh the historical value against the benefits of a new daycare facility. In response, it was noted that the building’s age and lack of modern facilities made repurposing it impractical for the daycare’s needs.