The board devoted attention to the site plan for Sweet Spot River Edge LLC’s proposed cannabis dispensary. A representative for the applicant presented revised plans that included detailed renderings of the exterior signage and generator. The board scrutinized the signage, ensuring it would not be illuminated and confirming it would feature individual, non-illuminated letters. Board members raised questions about the aesthetics and visibility of the signage, emphasizing the importance of clear and effective wayfinding for the dispensary.

A major topic of discussion was the generator associated with the dispensary, a natural gas-operated unit. The board discussed the screening for the generator, which would be surrounded by a gray neutral-colored shield to blend with existing rooftop units. Questions arose about the connection of the gas line to the generator and whether similar screening should be applied to other rooftop HVAC units. The board’s professionals debated the necessity of screening for aesthetic purposes, ultimately agreeing that the screening should enhance the building’s appearance without being obtrusive.

The board then examined traffic and parking considerations. Brian Inanda from Neglet Engineering, the traffic expert for the project, provided testimony on the traffic impact study conducted for the site. He explained that the traffic generated by the dispensary would be manageable, with access points designed primarily for right-in and right-out traffic, operating at a level service C. Inanda presented parking requirements for various uses on the site and noted that the dispensary would require 21 parking spaces, including spaces for both patrons and employees.

Concerns were raised about the adequacy of parking, especially for the cannabis dispensary. Historical parking data from satellite images showed that the parking demand was consistently low, with 30 to 37 vehicles parked on various days. However, a board member suggested that employees park in less utilized areas, such as behind the Ethan Allen store, to free up spaces for customers. The applicant’s representative confirmed that discussions with the landlord were underway to facilitate this arrangement.

The board also addressed potential conflicts between tenants regarding parking, particularly if the property were to change hands or if tenants changed. It was agreed that future tenants would need to return to the board to negotiate parking needs.

Additionally, the board examined the site’s circulation plan, which detailed various driveways and signage aimed at improving customer access to the dispensary. The plan proposed reducing total parking spaces from 118 to 116 to enhance traffic flow. Concerns were raised about the traffic island at the southwest corner of the Ethan Allen building and the potential for delivery trucks to obstruct visibility and access for customers. The representative emphasized that the circulation plan aimed to streamline traffic flow and that infrequent large truck deliveries could be managed effectively.

Signage and traffic flow were dominant concerns, with discussions about the existing absence of an “exit only” sign at the last exit driveway and the need for a comprehensive signage package to address both external and internal traffic flow. The engineer presented findings on lighting conditions and proposed improvements, including installing ten wall-mounted fixtures aimed downward to enhance site illumination without disturbing adjacent properties. The board emphasized the necessity of additional lighting, particularly along the pathway at the back of the building, to ensure safety.