My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
07/08/2026 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
>
07/08/2026 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/27/2026 5:03:28 PM
Creation date
7/23/2026 1:25:04 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/08/2026
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
19
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
MASHPEE ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS <br /> MEETING MINUTES <br /> JULY 8, 2026 <br /> Ms. Sweet said that the applicants should provide the data in writing to the <br /> Board as soon as possible regarding the comments discussed at the last meeting <br /> on the architecture and could impact the peer review comments submitted on <br /> the traffic. There's a need to rework the site plan and building and may be <br /> difficult to move the hearing process forward until there's a sense of when the <br /> development team can address the feedback from the peer reviewers. <br /> Mr. Alphen asked if the Board is requesting the applicant team address the civil <br /> and architectural comments first before receiving the traffic conversations by the <br /> next meeting. Mr. Alphen mentioned that they will be requesting waivers. <br /> Ms. Sweet said no; the Board will be addressing the traffic peer review at the <br /> July 22nd meeting because (HSH) Howard Stein Hudson will be presenting their <br /> comments. But all three disciplines have been crossing over in their comments, <br /> and all three have been provided to the applicants. <br /> Mr. Alphen agreed that the peer review document was submitted into the record <br /> and stated that his team will address the technical responses and may involve <br /> modifications to the project. <br /> Mr. Reidy commented that this project needs to fit in with design of the <br /> neighborhood and would like the applicants to address issues regarding <br /> pedestrian access within the neighborhood. <br /> Mr. Furbush commented that there are seven pages of issues to address and <br /> asked if the entire document should be read into the record. <br /> Ms. Sweet wanted to make sure that the Board understood the specific concerns <br /> presented by Mr. Pavlik. <br /> Mr. Pavlik questioned if this project would trigger any MEPA reviews based on <br /> the existing Mashpee Commons Project, and this is something the applicant <br /> should also look at. <br /> Attorney Kwesell confirmed that the document does not require it to be read in <br /> its entirety. <br /> Mr. Alphen said that they will provide technical responses as soon as possible. <br /> He mentioned that the Mashpee Commons project is a separate project. <br /> 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.