Laserfiche WebLink
Mashpee Design Review Committee <br /> Minutes of Meeting Held Thursday,April 26,2007 <br /> Mashpee Town Hall Meeting Room 3 <br /> Committee Members Present: Thomas O'Hara, Robert Nelson,Tom Jalowy, Lee Gurney, and Richard Stevens. <br /> i <br /> Summary <br /> • Olympia Sports—Design Review agreed with placing store name on entrance doors, but not on the windows. <br /> Sign proposed with lettering white with red approved. Final Plan to be sent to Building Department for Design <br /> Review review and approval. <br /> • Salon 151 —Existing sign that had been moved from old location Stamped Approved. Also Approved prior <br /> request for new signage in the event they use the previously requested new signage later on. <br /> • Breakaway at Trinity Place—Not Approved, <br /> Dunkin Donuts,40 South Street-Approved 20 square feet total signage as proposed. <br /> • Duck Pond-Building 2 Plan stamped approved. <br /> Thomas O'Hara, Chairman, called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m.. <br /> Sims <br /> Olympia Sports <br /> 11 Commercial Street <br /> Neokrafft Sims Inc., Peter MgWhy <br /> Peter Murphy of Neokraft Signs appeared and gave a very nice presentation of the proposed signage. Since backlighting <br /> of the sign was proposed, Design Review informed Mr. Murphy that back-lit signage was not allowed by by-law except if <br /> Board of Appeals permitted it. Mr. Murphy said they would not go the Appeals route and, instead, would do external <br /> illumination. Mr. Murphy was also informed that any window signage would have to be included as part of the 20 square <br /> feet signage allowed. <br /> Conclusion: Design Review agreed with placing store name on entrance doors,but not on the windows. Sign <br /> proposed with lettering white with red approved. Final Plan to be sent to Building Department for Design Review <br /> review and approval. <br /> Salon 151 <br /> 439 Nathan Ellis Highway <br /> Unit#3 <br /> John Lacava addressed the Committee saying that Salon 151 did not have an approved sign for their new location;they <br /> thought they could just move sign from the old location since it had been approved for the old location. He showed photo <br /> of the moved sign and also photo of new, approved sign. Design Review commented that the signage for the new location <br /> that had been approved but not used is preferable to what they put up from their old location. Mr. Lacava agreed and said <br /> perhaps sometime in the future they would replace existing sign but right now$3,000 replacement cost is a factor. <br /> Conclusion: Existing sign that had been moved from old location Stamped Approved. Also approved prior <br /> request for new signage in the event they use the previously requested new signage later on. <br />