My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
5/3/2017 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
>
5/3/2017 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/11/2019 5:14:40 PM
Creation date
2/11/2019 2:17:46 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
PLANNING BOARD
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
05/03/2017
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
h <br /> t <br /> Alex Pushkov reported that the design of the front of the building remained unchanged. Regarding the <br /> side elevation, differentiation of fa ade materials was requested by the Cape Cod Commission. Mr. <br /> Fudala inquired about a change to a door location previously found on the front of the building. Mr. n. <br /> Pushkov confirmed that door had been relocated to the side, at the request of the tenants. Mr, <br /> ooharian inquired about the use of vegetation on the building and Mr. Pushkov suggested the <br /> possibility of a green screen of vines against the building-so as not to project over the sidewalk, Mr. <br /> Balzarini inquired about changing the shingles to add interest and Mr. Pushkov responded that the <br /> building would be broken into separate elements with different materials such as clapboards and <br /> shingles. <br /> Mr, Balzarini inquired whether the project proponent had been in contact with the concerned restaurant <br /> owner. Ms. Johnson responded that a preliminary construction management plan had been drafted <br /> including sequencing and safety measures for tenants along Joy Street, with work beginning after <br /> Labor Day. Ms. Johnson spore directly with the Catanias to respond to their questions and would <br /> continue to offer an open dialogue, particularly as the project proponent hired a construction <br /> contractor. <br /> Mr. Fudala read through the proposed Modification Decision. There was discussion. regarding <br /> Conditions 3 versus 3 and 4* with versions drafted by both Mr. Fudala and Ms. Cox. Mr. Fudala <br /> ,pointed out the biggest difference being a return to the Planning Board, per theChair's request} to <br /> ensure protection of the tenants. Mr. Balzarini stated his preference not to hoid up the work due to <br /> difficulties with tenants. There was interest expressed in having the project proponent return to the <br /> Board with the contractor}s construction schedule. Ms. Cox stated that their Condition noted that work <br /> would not begin before Labor Day and that limited work would occur between Labor Day and <br /> Columbus Day, and expressed their preference to not have to return to the Planning Board. Mr, <br /> Balzarini stated that he wanted to see the construction schedule and Mr. Fudala stated that more <br /> information was needed regarding screening to protect existing businesses from dust and debris, Ms. <br /> Cox responded that they would be happy to provide the schedule but did not wish for it to be required <br /> for approval. Mr. Balzarini was 1n agreement. <br /> Mr. Hanson inquired about issues incurred from the previous building removal. Ms. Johnson <br /> responded that it was in their best interest to accommodate their tenants,, but emphasised the need for a <br /> p - <br /> balance between slowing down and lengthening the process or dealing with ternporary inconveniences <br /> in the interest of completing the project. Issues such as parking and signage and communication with <br /> the tenants would be addressed. Parking and a staging area would be set aside specifically for workers <br /> and materials, Mr. Rowley recommended contacting Eversource regarding the use of the staging area <br /> and theossib le need to add. an safety standards. Ms. Johnson emphasized that details would. be <br /> p y <br /> finalized once a constivetion manager was in place. Ms. Cox agreed that they would provide a copy of <br /> the construction lan. Mr. Weeden expressed concern about encountering a situation similar to <br /> p <br /> Ockway Highlands and Mr. Balzarini stated that the landlord was responsible for maintaining their <br /> relationships with the tenants. Mr. Cummings agreed that the Planning Board could not serve as <br /> mediators but if the 'roect proponent had to return, they would be forced to ensure that the plan was <br /> p � p p <br /> agreeable to all parties. Ills. Cox included language to address the concerns voiced by tenants for the <br /> g <br /> conditions adding that Mr. Rowley would be part of the pre-construction meeting. <br /> Mr. Fudala expressed concern about the fencing and Mr. Eddy responded that there would be <br /> coordination with a number of departments to fulfill the requirements for a demolition permit and <br /> OSHA requirements. Screening could be added within the chain link fence for safety and screening. <br /> Wording about the screening will be added to the Condition, Ms. Cox recommended the addition to <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.