Developers for Windward Development presented a plan Thursday to redevelop 39 and 49–51 Locust Avenue as a mixed commercial and lodging project that would add a 40‑key hotel, eight extended‑stay units, new ground‑floor retail and underground parking, and sought zoning text changes to allow hotels in the Business C zone.

Elliot Sidorides, representing Windward Development, told the Planning and Zoning Commission the two parcels total just over an acre and the proposal is an adaptive‑reuse master plan that places most added density within existing building footprints, steps back upper‑floor additions and introduces retail to Cherry Street. The project team said 39 Locust is a three‑story, ~16,000‑square‑foot office building and 49–51 Locust is a three‑story, ~20,000‑square‑foot office building. Proposed elements included a 40‑key hotel at 49–51 with an approximately 1,800‑square‑foot restaurant and outdoor patio, roughly 600 square feet of street‑level retail on Cherry Street, and about 4,600 square feet of retail/office infill at 39 Locust with eight extended‑stay suites above.

The applicant requested text amendments to sections cited in the application (section 4.6(d) to list “hotel” as a permitted use subject to special permit; changes to height allowances in 4.8(h); and related clarifications to count basement area for this steeply sloped site). The applicant said the text framework they propose mirrors existing approaches used elsewhere in town (retail B / business B zones) and asked the commission to permit an above‑30‑foot height up to a defined limit and to allow the basement level, if primarily nonresidential, not to count as a story under certain conditions.

Traffic and parking were central topics in the discussion. Consultant David Sullivan of SLR Consulting presented a traffic study summary that used weekday AM, PM and Saturday midday counts from early June and Institute of Transportation Engineers trip rates for the proposed uses. The team said the existing combined properties have 112 surface and underground spaces and the project would provide 98; calculated parking demand for the proposed uses is 94 spaces. Sullivan said peak‑hour trip generation for the proposal is modest (the team estimated net new trips of roughly 18 in the PM peak compared with the existing occupied uses) and the study found generally acceptable levels of service at nearby intersections, with one existing movement already at LOS D. The consultant recommended several off‑site pedestrian and curb modifications (curb extensions, crosswalk shortening, regrading at a corner to improve sight distance), and the design would close a redundant curb cut on Locust Avenue.

Commissioners asked for more detailed civil engineering plans, grading details, scaled drawings to allow Town Engineer review of proposed curb/r.o.w. changes, and a clearer, narrower text amendment focused on hotel use rather than a broad form‑based change. Staff (Sarah) clarified that a request to deed a narrow strip of town land along Cherry Street back to the applicant (about 1,200 square feet) was raised to cover a roughly 792‑square‑foot FAR shortfall in the concept; staff explained that any deed transfer would be handled separately through town council and could be made a condition of approval in sequence, not by the commission directly.

Commissioners also recommended a peer review of the traffic study at the applicant's expense and said the project should return with revised text language, full civil plans (including scaled right‑of‑way drawings), and responses to planner and engineering comments. The commission continued the public hearing and the applications to the October meeting; public comment on the application will be taken at the next meeting (the applicant presented tonight but public comment was deferred).