L’Oreal Plan For Building Expansion Sent Back To Drawing Board

Representatives of L’Oreal USA were sent back to their drafting table by the Planning Board December 6, whose members did not like the company’s plans for a more than 149,000-square-foot addition to their main building on Commerce Drive.

The Board members’ main gripe was that the new addition would encroach on homes that abut the L’Oreal property on Gary Court.

L’Oreal’s plan was to construct the addition and also build a stormwater retention facility in current wetlands on the property.

Also part of the plan was a new 101-space parking lot.

Board chairman Michael Orsini led the charge, telling L’Oreal engineer Ahmed Tamous that he did not like the proposed layout.

“This seems like it’s more or less maximized to impinge on the residential area,” he said. “It just seems like the layout is maximized to intrude upon that. I can’t believe there isn’t a better way to do this.”

“If you’re going to fill the wetlands, why not push the basin back toward the residential area and have that more or less wild and make the building more horizontal,” he said. “It doesn’t seem to be the best layout.”

Board vice-chairman Charles Brown agreed.

“This seems very intentional to intrude on a protected area,” he said. “I’m at Gary Court every weekend … I know the people’s house there who you’re intruding on. They’re very proud of their home, they’ve been making improvements over the years to their home, and to think that you wouldn’t even put a wall to protect their houses is just unacceptable.”

“You could easily have laid this building out in a horizontal fashion, moved everything closer to the existing building without going further to the protected wetlands,” Brown said.

“When this was laid out, the intent was not to do the most damage … The current operation of the building … it’s aligned with how the equipment, how the manufacturing is laid out,” said Ahmed Tamous, the project’s engineer.

“While it may not have been your intent to do any of that … the intent is different from the result, and the result is that,” Orsini said. “I’ll tell you right now, you have to rethink this.”

“Maximum consideration was given to screening and trying to be sensitive to the residents,” Sean McGowan, L’Oreal’s attorney, said. “That’s not to say that you’re wrong … but I just wanted to be clear that from my perspective, screening and trying to prevent an intrusion into the nearby residences was the foremost consideration.”

“I really want you to rethink the layout,” Orsini said. “I don’t understand why the building couldn’t be more horizontal … then your basin goes toward the back … the basin can be landscaped and is sort of a buffer in itself.”

“I just can’t believe there isn’t a better engineering of this building,” he said.

The hearing was adjourned for five minutes, allowing McGowan to confer with his clients.

After the break, McGowan asked the Board for an continuance while they “take a look at everything and see if things can be shuffled around, or at least move some things around.”

“There are some logistical challenges … the building is not going to be able to be made totally horizontal,” he said, adding that his clients would “see if some changes can be made to minimize encroachment to the rear of the property.”

The next hearing on the application was set for April 3, 2024.

Your Thoughts

comments