Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SPR-Lighting Go-Carts
• Formal Review SITE PLAN REVIEW COMMENT SHEET Date: February 21, 2023 Map: 37 Lot: 148 Applicant: Maria Curtis-Lighting Speed Go-Carts Location: 228 Route 28 Zone: B-2 Persons Present: Lt. Adam Riker Maria Curtis Lt. Matt Bearse Jay Gardner Kathy Williams Kieran Healy Mark Grylls Carl Lawson Project Summary Use the existing paved site as a temporary Go-Kart racetrack. No increase or disturbance to existing pavement. Comments tot U Building: Proposed use is an N11 use per Table 202.5 and will require a Special Permit from the ZBA. Change of use and not upgrading to be in compliance with Section 301 of the Zoning Bylaw requires a SP from the ZBA per section 301.2. (Buffer trees) Lighting to fully comply with Section 301.4.10. Signage requires permit. All requirements of applicable sections of 780 CMR shall apply. 2Communitv Development and Planning: The proposed use and site improvements are to be temporary (2-3 years). 4 Should the applicant wish to make this a permanent use, additional improvements would be recommended/required through Site Plan Review. Provide information on the type and size of trees proposed for the planters with the ZBA application. Provide safe handicap accessible route from the handicap parking to the porta-johns. Conservation: The proposed work is not within conservation jurisdiction. Design Review: Refer to the attached February 7, 2023 Design Review Committee Comment Sheet. Engineering: • Engineering does not have any comments due to the temporary nature of the submission. no permit needed for fueling if total gas storage is 21 gallons or less, no single container more than 7 Wire: allons. No overnight storage of fuel. Fire Department access as required by 527 CMR 1 Ch 18. Gate access for EMS and Fire. Fire extinguishers per NFPA10. ealth: More information will be provided to the applicant on the number of portable restrooms required and handicap 91 • ccessibility requirements. Retail food service only. Mobile food truck will be required to be licensed and meet requirements of the State Sanitary Code. Health - Hazmat: A Board of Health, Handling and Storage of Toxic or Hazardous Materials license is required if the volume of materials exceeds ten gallons at any time. A sufficient supply of absorbent material must be kept onsite. Safety a_Data Sheets (SDS) for each stored material must be kept onsite. Information on waste oil volume and storage details must be provided. 150%volume secondary containment is required for all materials. Water: Not present Read & Received by Applicant(s) Review is: 0 Conceptual ® Formal ❑ Binding (404 MotelsNCOD/R.O.A.D Project) x❑ Non-binding (All other commercial projects) Review is by. ❑ Planning Board © Design Review Committee YARMOUTH TOWN CLERI DESIGN REVIEW COMMENT SHEET '23FER144410:52 RE( Meeting Date: February 7, 2023 at 4:00 PM, Room B/Remote Map: 37 Lots: 148 Applicant: Maria Curtis Zone(s): 82/HMOD1/ROAD Site Location: 228 Route 28, West Yarmouth Persons Present: DCR Members Present Yarmouth Town Staff Present Guests Charlie Adams Kathy Williams Maria Curtis Sara Porter Kieran Healy, BSC Group Steve O'Neil DRC Review for this project started at: 4:00 PM DRC Review of this project ended at: 4:16 PM Project Summary General Description: The Applicant is proposing to locate a temporary go-kart track, tent, storage trailers and associated parking and temporary landscaping on a partially developed site (paved parking areas but no structures). The site is proposed to be leased and all equipment would be temporary based on a 2-3 year lease. Summary of Presentation: Kieran Healy of BSC Group noted the temporary nature of the use with a temporary tent, two storage trailers at the far back of property and utilize existing paved area for the go-kart track. No new pavement is proposed, only striping and bumpers for the go-karts. All buffer landscaping will be in planter containers. Parking is to the rear of the site with in-lot trees in temporary containers. DRC Questions & Discussions: Sara Porter asked about the tree types/size. Kieran noted they would be 2" caliper trees to fit in the containers, and they are still working on a particular species which has a small root ball. Charlie Adams asked if there could be some shrubs around the sign. Ms. Curtis indicated she would clean this area up with plantings as it is the main entry of the business. Sara Porter asked about what happens to the container trees in the winter. Mr. Healy indicated the trees would remain as the containers are large. Mr. O'Neil asked about snow removal during the winter, and whether the container trees would be moved to the interior of the lot. Mr. Healy indicated the use would be closed down during the winter and there is no intension to move the container trees. Mr. O'Neil asked about the proposed sign. Mr. Healy noted the existing sign would be used with a new faceplate. Mr. Adams asked about what will be done with trash and whether there is a dumpster. Mr. Healy indicated there is little trash and would be taken away in trash bins. No food service is proposed, although a food truck may be on the site. Review Comments In Relation To The Design Standards SITING STRATEGIES Sect. 1, Streetscape ❑ N/A 0 Meets Standards, or I Discrepancies There are no proposed buildings and no existing buildings facing the street. The existing concrete slab from the former building and the pavement within the front buffers will not be removed. The proposed trees within planters will help somewhat to define the street edge for this temporary use. Identify the type and size of trees in planters. Sect. 2, Tenant Spaces 0 N/A El Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies YARMOUTH TOWN CLERI Sect. 3, Define Street Edge ❑ N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or Cl Discrepancies: See comments above for Sect 1 Streetscape '23FEB14A41O:52 REI Sect. 4, Shield Large Buildings ID N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies. Sect. 5, Design a 2nd Story 0 N/A ❑ Meets Standards,or 0 Discrepancies. Sect. 6, Use Topo to Screen New Development 0 N/A ❑Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies Sect. 7, Landscape Buffers/Screening ❑ N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or IJ Discrepancies: See comments above for Sect 1 Streetscape Sect. 8, Parking Lot Visibility 0 N/A 0 Meets Standards, or 0 Discrepancies- Except for two handicapped spaces, the parking is located to the rear of the property(but not to the side/rear of a structure) with in-lot trees in planters. There are also some buffer trees in planters along Route 28 which will screen the parking in the rear. Sect. 9, Break up Large Parking Lots ❑ N/A 0 Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies The parking located in the rear of the property with six in-lot trees proposed in planters. Use of trees in planters should only be allowed on a temporary basis to break-up large parking lots. Sect. 10, Locate Utilities Underground 0 N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies No new utilities or changes to utilities are proposed. Two mobile light poles are proposed which will be generator run. Sect. 11, Shield Loading Areas I1 N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or 0 Discrepancies. BUILDING STRATEGIES: There are no permanent structures proposed for the temporary use, although there is a proposed temporary tent along Route 28 and proposed trailers in the rear of the property. Sect. 1, Break Down Building Mass—Multiple Bldqs. 0 N/A 0 Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies Sect. 2, Break Down Building Mass—Sub-Masses, 0 N/A 0 Meets Standards, or 0 Discrepancies Sect. 3,Vary Facade Lines 0 N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies. Sect. 4,Vary Wall Heights 0 N/A ❑ Meets Standards,or❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 5, Vary Roof Lines I1 N/A ❑Meets Standards, or 0 Discrepancies: Sect. 6, Bring Down Building Edges 0 N/A 0 Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies: Sect, 7,Vary Building Marls For Depth 0 N/A 0 Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 8, Use Traditional& Nat'l. Building Mat'Is El N/A 0 Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 9, Incorporate Pedestrian-scaled Features 0 N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 10, Incorporate Energy-efficient Desiqn 0 N/A 0 Meets Standards, or 0 Discrepancies: Next step for applicant: © Go to Site Plan Review 0 Return to Design Review for Formal Review On a motion by Steve O'Neil, seconded by Sara Porter, the Design Review Committee(DRC) voted(3-0) to approve these DRC Comments as meeting minutes for the February 7, 2023 meeting for the proposed temporary go-kart track at 228 Route 28. rjli _ Received by Applicant(s) ATTACHMENTS: • February 7, 2023 DRC Agenda • Aerial • DRC Application form • Proposed Racetrack Site Plan, prepared by BSC Group and dated January 23, 2023 YARMOUTH TOWN CLERI '23FEB 144110:52 REt