New amendments to the contract zone for the state’s largest retail project brought the Westbrook City Council closer to an agreement with developer Jason Snyder Monday. But not close enough for a vote.

Councilors determined that those and other changes made to the contract zone in recent weeks would require the project to return to the Planning Board for another public hearing and recommendation.

Residents, many of whom said they didn’t intend to speak at Monday’s meeting, continued to stand up and urge the City Council to move forward with the $300 million, 1.6-million-square-foot retail project proposed for Stroudwater Street.

“Let’s not talk it to death,” resident Al Juniewicz said after Councilor Drew Gattine proposed an amendment to add restrictions on traffic impacts and give additional direction to the Planning Board.

“Don’t amend this thing to effectively kill it,” added former mayor Ken LeFebvre.

“Let’s move this project ahead. Enough is enough,” Bob Morrill said.

After comments from residents and a debate among councilors, the developer’s attorney and the city solicitor, the City Council passed two amendments to the contract zone, out of five proposed.

Two weeks before, the City Council passed a list of last-minute amendments proposed by Councilor Suzanne Joyce that added requirements for the size of the development, a mix of uses, traffic studies, noise, access from Stroudwater Street, trail connections and open space, among others.

On Monday, Gattine proposed an amendment to add language to the contract zone that would not allow the project to have any impact on traffic, noise or light on surrounding neighborhoods. He also proposed a clause that would give the Planning Board the power to determine the overall size of the project.

Snyder’s attorney, Chris Vaniotis, and other councilors said that requiring no traffic impact was impractical, and Gattine agreed to change the wording to minimal traffic impact, but the amendment was still voted down, 2-5, with only Gattine and Council President Brendan Rielly voting in favor of it.

City Solicitor Bill Dale advised that the Planning Board should not be given the authority to determine the size of the project without justification. Gattine removed the clause and the amendment passed 4-3, with Councilors Dotty Aube, Joyce, Gattine and Rielly in favor.

Throughout the meeting, Gattine – a consistent critic of the project who lives on Stroudwater Street – continued to press the issue that a traffic study is required by city ordinance as part of the contract zone. Dale said he didn’t interpret the ordinance that way and believed a traffic study at this point in the process would be, at best, meaningless and, at worst, misleading, due to the fact that specific tenants have not been determined.

Councilor Mike Foley proposed an amendment that stated the traffic information provided by the applicant so far was sufficient enough to satisfy the requirements of the ordinance and that further traffic studies would be required at the site plan review stage. The amendment passed 5-2, with Rielly and Gattine opposed.

Gattine also proposed an amendment to remove Class A lounges from the list of permitted uses – a motion that died because no other councilor offered to second it.

Councilor John O’Hara proposed an amendment to require the developer to donate to several city funds, charities and organizations, both up front and again at different stages of the project’s build-out. Dale said the amendment wouldn’t be possible until the city adopted an impact fee ordinance, and then, the City Council could only require the developer to pay fees based on the impacts of the project, such as wastewater management and police service, but not donations to the food bank or Little League baseball, as examples. Dale said the Council could add that ordinance after approving the contract zone and “catch the project” at a different stage of review.

After debates around the several amendments proposed, the Council considered the contract zone as a whole, with amendments from both Monday’s meeting and from Oct. 20.

At that meeting, Dale had told the City Council he believed that, based on both city and state laws regarding zone changes, those amendments would require another review and public hearing in front of the Planning Board. After reviewing the eight typed pages of amendments more thoroughly, Dale came back Monday with the same recommendation.

Vaniotis argued that none of the amendments changed the vision or core of the project and thus did not require Planning Board review.

Councilors took Dale’s recommendation and voted 4-3, with Councilors Lyle Cramer, O’Hara and Foley opposed, to table the contract zone for additional Planning Board review.

City Administrator Jerre Bryant said the Planning Board would hold a public hearing on Tuesday, Nov. 18. If it makes a recommendation to the City Council that night, the contract zone would return to the Council for a preliminary vote on Monday, Dec. 1.