Stop & Shop Attorney Grills ShopRite Witness

Attorneys representing Stop & Shop and property owners Munico Associates kept their promise Wednesday to object throughout Inserra Supermarkets' hearings before the Planning Board, with the project architect's testimony given close scrutiny.

Gail Price, a principal of the firm Price, Meese, Shulman & D'Arminio, cross-examined Thomas Ashbahian on the proposed ShopRite's height, square footage and roof plans before members of the public weighed in with their largely negative opinions of the site's design.

Price, in her questioning, contended that the full height of the building would slightly exceed 40 feet, which would be at odds with the project's site plans and trigger the need for a height variance.

Ashbahian disagreed, saying the highest points, at two planned clock towers (which may be cut from designs; see more here) are 36 feet. Were one to include the supermarket's loading docks when calculating height, the peak would still measure just over 39 feet, he said.

Under repeated questioning, Ashbahian conceded that the 62,174 square feet of space did not include the size of exterior shopping cart corrals or a planned employee break-room. Price attempted to get the architect to testify under oath that the square footage of the building would increase if such components were included in measurements.

"That's your speculation, not my representation," Ashbahian said.

Price also questioned a roof plan submitted Wednesday, asking why exact measurements of mechanical equipment weren't included in the plan. Ashbahian said the design was meant to be "pictorial" for the board's review but held that the sketches do depict the "actual" placement of HVAC and other equipment, even if exact measurements are not provided.

The attorney also questioned Ashbahian's testimony on sight-lines, as the architect had testified earlier in the hearing that rooftop equipment wouldn't be visible to anyone. Price's questioning showed that the testimony was based on Ashbahian's measurements from fixed points he chose as project architect.

Residents also questioned Ashbahian on his testimony. Shadyside Drive resident Mark Simpson was repeatedly advised by the board to question, not testify, as he criticized the choice of concrete for the rear loading docks of the otherwise red brick building.

"I don't know why we don't demand the best materials in this town," he said, contending that the choice of concrete came down to its relative affordability. Ashbahian has said at Design Review Board meetings that concrete is necessary for its durability.

Simpson also appeared incredulous when Ashbahian did not agree with his assertion that pitched roof lines are more expensive to produce than a flat roof; while there are arches and other design elements to break up the massing of the building, the planned ShopRite's roof line is essentially flat.

"Not necessarily," Ashbahian said, with Simpson reminding him that he was offering testimony under oath.

Resident George Pitts asked why the left side of the front elevation is relatively unadorned with design flourishes, in contrast to the right side of the building, featuring arches, dormers, windows, columns, etc.

"I was trying to articulate the facade to the Design Review committee without it getting out of hand," Ashbahian said.

Resident Mike Brienza continued to question whether the overall look of the ShopRite is in keeping with the downtown aesthetic, which Inserra representatives have said was their general goal.

"I don't believe the building fits in," said Brienza, whose line of questioning was challenged by Inserra attorney James Jaworski, who said such issues had been resolved at the Design Review Board level.

Chairman Richard Bonsignore disagreed, reminding all that prior hearings were purely advisory in nature. The Planning Board is under no obligation to follow the Design Review recommendations on the building's architecture.

Ashbahian declined to answer a question from Brienza on how Inserra would irrigate its planned green spaces, saying the question should be directed to the site engineer at a later date.

Price's appearance followed a bid by her firm last month to contest the Planning Board's authority over the project. Associate Kathryn Razin had argued that a supermarket is not a permitted use according to zoning code, meaning Inserra would have to get relief from the zoning Board of Adjustment to build at the Greenwood Avenue shopping center.

Board attorney Joseph Perconti had advised the board that it could proceed, saying he was confident a supermarket was a permitted use in the applicable B-5 zone.

Razin had said Price, Meese, Shulman & D'Arminio would be a constant presence at the Planning Board hearings and would object throughout.

Price and Jaworski were not immediately available for comment Thursday.