The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutKHealey e-mail RSP to Planner com memo 120312Williams, Kathleen From:Williams, Kathleen Sent:Monday, December 03, 2012 8:32 AM To:'Kieran Healy' Cc:gushealy@hotmail.com Subject:RE: Seagull Beach Motel Page 1 of 3 12/3/2012 Hi Kieran, I appreciate you looking at my comments. We can discuss more at the meeting on Wednesday. With regard to landscaping, there are other forms of landscape plantings that can hide the parking and soften the building edges without being a full screen. The north elevation is plain and would benefit from new foundation plantings. I think a landscaper or a landscape architect could help you with providing what we are looking for and addressing your concerns. Perhaps a 4’ picket fence would provide the screening of the parking from Route 28, but still have the perforation you are talking about for safety reasons. Dick Martin did mention that he felt we need the missing standard information which include landscaping, elevations, materials and properly stamped plans. See additional comments below. See you Wednesday. Kathy From: Kieran Healy [mailto:KHealy@BSCGroup.com] Sent: Friday, November 30, 2012 4:49 PM To: Williams, Kathleen Cc: gushealy@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Seagull Beach Motel Thanks Kathy - Glad to see we are so close and I do appreciate your comments. I Will look into these items and will be ready to discuss with the committee on Wednesday Just a few quick comments as to why we did what we did and a review of your comments. 1.Window will be redrawn as a triple. Shutters were mentioned - not required and Mr. Martin also qualified it with saying other Board members may not like it. I think shutters are gaining some support. It would be good if you had some shutter options for the DRC to review (cut sheets). When you redraw the north elevation, please be sure to represent the existing location of the windows. The second floor window over the triple window, is not directly above this window. 2. The porch was to go over the existing concrete stoop. Will consider enlarging.Thank you. 3. Parking is now acceptable. The curb cuts are drawn at 20' for two way traffic. I do not know why we would restrict this.To increase the amount of buffer and reduce pavement. 4. Right now there are concrete pad for access to the buildings. We are planning to shorten those in length but not in width. I have not shown grass lines as there would be two many lines, but will have a color display to clarify these items 5. a The trees are all set at 20' on center and the shrubs are mixed in where we feel appropriate. With the addition of the front roof we have nothing to hide on this building.We are not looking to hide the building, we are looking to embellish and improve aesthetics with foundation plantings. 5.b We can better fit the trees if so desired in front. I have depicted all the trees on our property as far away from our building as possible. Why is that not okay.The trees looked as though they were planted directly next to existing shrubs and I thought you had done this to keep the 20’ spacing. I feel that locating the plantings with relation to the existing shrubs is more important than the 20’ spacing. Is it the potential widening of route 28 that is prompting this?Yes. 5.c. We like grass and for safety concerns we want the bushes to be a little sparse. Dense bush/shrubs lines create a hiding area that can create problems.There are other types of plantings besides trees and shrubs which may work in this area. A landscaper could help with these choices. 5.d We can add some more shrubs in that strip of land on the Street intersection. 6. The OHW will run with one of the other two wires servicing the building,Thanks 7. We have move the dumpster area back to be more conforming knowing that it does not conform. Lets discuss on Wednesday on a solution. 8.a I will have two copies stamped by my Civil Engineer for Wednesday. He has already reviewed. 8.b Will add some labels to make it more clear. 8.c In the Past the DRC has not required elevations for areas that we are not changing. I do understand that the new roof can be seen from the other two sides but it exactly the same as the two sides depicted. Could you check with Sara or Dick on that.See above. 8.d The proposed renovations and siding will match the existing. I can bring a 30 year roofing arch. shingle if you would like. Lighting is going to be 60 watt exterior lighting.Bring the samples to the meeting. The DRC would be interested in the style of building mounted lighting, so cut sheets are helpful. 8.e. We will paint and we will repair. Please look at the new siding on the Capn Gladclif for a comparison of my brothers work. We are very different from other projects where we have had to hide something. There are numerous projects around town where there are trees in the front buffer and nothing else and approved by the DRC. The new CVS in Yarmouth was just approved - please review. Again for safety I do not want to place bush lines only individual bushes.CVS project was advisory, not mandatory, and each project is different. Looking forward to hearing from you after Sara / Dick comment about the other two elevations and will see you Wednesday if not before. This has been their policy but I do not want to take it for granted. Regard Kieran >>> "Williams, Kathleen" <kwilliams@yarmouth.ma.us> 11/30/2012 3:25 PM >>> Hi Kieran, Page 2 of 3 12/3/2012 Please find attached my planner comments on the Formal Design Review submittal. I am sending these to you in hopes that you may be able to address some of the items before or at DRC meeting. Have a great weekend, Kathy --------------------------------------------------------- Kathy Williams, Planner Town of Yarmouth 1146 Route 28 South Yarmouth, MA 02664-4492 (508) 398-2231 Ext 1276 kwilliams@yarmouth.ma.us Page 3 of 3 12/3/2012