By Scott MacKeen
Staff Writer
11/26/09
Although its members appeared nearly ready to vote on whether to send a zoning article regarding the Temple Shalom redevelopment to Selectmen, the Planning Board still didn’t commit to the fate of the project. At the board’s Nov. 19 meeting, which was attended by nearly 50 residents representing both sides of the issue, Chairman Peter Jackman began with a statement suggesting that the gavel would fall one way or the other by the conclusion of the evening. “This is the 24th Planning Board meeting that this has been on the agenda,” Jackman said. “We’ve held eight meetings of an appointed citizens advisory committee for the project. We’ve heard verbal testimony from more than 170 speakers at Citizen Speak, not including the work of the advisory committee. I’ve received over 200 e-mails from this project. …I think it’s time that the project has got to move from the five people on the Planning Board and give the 279 elected Town Meeting representatives the opportunity to discuss, debate and take action on the project.”
But much more discussion happened at the meeting, as a still-being-refined plan was presented by representatives from Brockton-based Coffman Realty, the developer of the project. Also discussed were findings from a due-diligence traffic study done by Jeffrey Dirk, a traffic engineer from Vanasse & Associates, which was hired by Coffman.
The updated plan reflected the projections for parking needs and traffic patterns assuming that the 10,000-square-foot retail-building portion would now be a supermarket, in addition to the anchor 13,000-square-foot pharmacy and the smaller Temple building. That layout would be the highest-density traffic usage for the space, which was the information needed for the study.
“We looked at that [the highest-density combination space usage] as our design condition, to make sure that, in terms of access and in terms of safety the roadway system could accommodate that level of traffic with certain improvements,” Dirk explained during his presentation.
The findings suggested the need for a left-turn lane heading south on Route 138, for traffic entering the shopping area, which will be called Tucker Village Marketplace. A traffic light would be installed at the entrance to the marketplace, at the intersection of Concord Avenue and Blue Hill Avenue. A shared parking analysis looked at parking needs from a peak-use perspective, reflecting patterns during high-usage hours.
Much discussion focused on cut-through traffic affecting neighboring roads, including Crown, Cheever, Decker and Blue Hill Terrace streets, as well as Concord Avenue.
Concerns were also voiced about the already existing back-up traffic on Route 138, especially further south, during highly traveled times of day.
According to Dirk, further study and refinement of the plan would continue. Particular attention would be paid to traffic patterns around the direct neighborhood, looking at the possibility of creating one-way streets or posting “Do Not Enter” signs on certain streets.
“The areas where I see there’s more work to be done is really with a neighborhood traffic calming plan,” Dirk said.
“Traffic calming is an art.”
To validate the study done by Dirk’s firm, the board requested a peer review consultant take a look at the area and submit another perspective on the traffic issue as the plan continues to take shape. Coffman Realty has agreed to fund that study.
Temple President Lynda Packer shared what she perceived as being “disturbing information” brought to the attention of the Temple. She explained that there has been an opposition campaign spreading “misinformation and inappropriate comments” regarding the congregation and their plans. She said a town official had received calls indicating that the Temple had no intention of staying on the site once it was rezoned.
“We want to and plan to stay in Milton. Ours is the only synagogue in the entire town. We want to be a presence in Milton,” she said, noting that the Temple just finished celebrating its 65th anniversary. “Our congregation is growing with new young families. We all look forward to the next 65 years and beyond, together here in Milton.”
She also mentioned other comments heard via the rumor mill regarding the Temple’s weekly bingo game, and threats to some prospective tenants for the development.
“If you witness malicious or dishonest behavior, call it out as such,” she requested of the community. She invited residents to contact her if they have any concerns or questions over something they may have heard.
During the Citizen Speak portion of the meeting, 23 residents spoke, with views on both sides of the issue. Most comments were followed by equal amounts of applause.
Sheila Varela, Town Meeting member from Precinct 8 and co-chair for two passed override campaigns, spoke in support of the project.
“The No. 1 thing we get from citizens, when we’re asking them to raise their taxes, which is a very difficult thing to do, over and over again, is that elected officials are not doing enough to help us with the burden of the taxes here,” Varela said. “As an elected official board, if you don’t support this to go to Town Meeting, to be debated in a democratic fashion, I think there’s going to be a great amount of frustration across the entire town.”
Several others echoed her message, but most of the speakers’ comments centered on traffic, asking the Planning Board to fine-tune the plan, taking into consideration the concern the neighborhood has over traffic.
With that in mind, the board began to ruminate over details and language in the proposed article written by board member Alex Whiteside, which could ultimately be sent to Selectmen.
Much of the discussion centered on definition of words dealing with lighting, and what exactly would be sold at a pharmacy.
“These things sometimes tend to get forgotten in our rush,” Whiteside said, as he combed over the proposal.
After voicing all of their concerns, it became apparent that the board was not ready to vote.
“This plan is something to work with, but it certainly needs more work,” Whiteside said.
The decision was made to continue to tweak the plan and the language of the article, and to vote at the Planning Board’s next meeting Dec. 3, which is the deadline Selectmen have given the board for the article to be considered for the special February Town Meeting.
“One way or another, there is going to be an article on the warrant on this issue,” Whiteside said, who went on to explain that if the Planning Board refuses to send it, proponents by collecting 100 signatures on a special petition that can be submitted to Town Meeting.
However, it appeared that the board intends to send the article to the next level.
The Planning Board will meet Thursday, Dec. 3, at 5:30 p.m. at the senior center, 10 Walnut St.