Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5256 492-540 Route 28 Design Review Comments 09.18.26Review is: ❑ Conceptual 19 Formal ❑ Binding (404 Motels/VCOD/R.O.A.D. Project) ❑x Non -binding (All other commercial projects) Review is by: ❑ Planning Board © Desion Review Committee DESIGN REVIEW COMMENT SHEET Meeting Date: September 18, 2026 Map: 31 Lots: 79, 80, 81, 82-C, 83, 84, 85.1, 86 Applicant: Sandbar Management Inc. (Wicked Waves) Zone(s): 132 Site Location: 492, 498, 504, 512, 518, 526, 532, and 540 Route 28. West Yarmouth Persons Present: DCR Members Present I Yarmouth Town Staff Present I Guests Sara Porter I KathyWilliams I Attorney Andrew Singer Peter Malpass I I Pat Malone (Remote) Peter Slovak I I Joe Marrama (Remote) DRC Review for this project started at: 4:02 PM DRC Review ended at: 4:46 PM On a motion by Sara Porter, seconded by Peter Ma/pass, the Design Review Committee (DRC) voted (3-0) to adjourn the September 18, 2026 DRC meeting at 4:46 PM. Proiect Summary General Description: The Applicant seeks to reconfigure the existing water park and redevelop the three former motel properties (492, 498 & 504 Rte. 28) to relocate the Inflatable Park Rides to two of the former motel properties (498 & 504 Rte. 28) on the west side; relocate Aloha Bay from its approved location in the front center to the east side (540 Rte. 28 formerly Salty's Restaurant); locate an inflatable water ride in the front center; close two curb cuts on Route 28; reconfigure parking lots; and extend berm, fencing and landscaping to match existing. Summary of Presentation: Attorney Andrew Singer noted the new location of the inflatable rides to the west side and reconfiguration of the curb cuts, extension of the berm with landscaping, and trees in the parking lot in the rear. The middle area will include an inflatable water slide. On the east side where Salty's Restaurant is located would be a new configuration/location of Aloha Bay which was previously approved for the middle area. The emergency access road remains on the right side. Attorney Singer noted the two buildings located within Aloha Bay. They will be going to both SPR and ZBA. DRC Questions & Discussions: Peter Slovak inquired about the location of the support building to which Attorney Singer noted the location near Route 28 behind the berm/fence/landscaping. Mr. Slovak wanted to know how much of the building would be visible from Route 28. Joe Marrama indicated he didn't think anything would be visible and the berm will help to screen the water rides. Attorney Singer noted the building is 20' tall with picket boards above it to 28' and with the berm and fencing will only see the roofline. Peter Slovak asked about the type of roofing (shingles) and Sara Porter asked about the color of the shingles to which Pat Malone indicated they would be brown to match the tan of the building (not gray). Peter Malpass noted how busy the inflatable park was this summer and is delighted with the impact on local businesses. Mr. Malpass liked the thoroughness of the materials. Andrew Singer noted Kathy Williams' inquiry about the "themed random wood picket boards" up to 28' tall. Pat Malone indicated it was better than a roof alone and draws attention to something behind it. Joe Marrama indicated it will not be lit and there will be no signage facing Route 28. Attorney Singer noted it was part of the theme of the park. Sara Porter inquired whether it needed to be that high. Pat Malone noted that it will be lower than the slides. Peter Slovak asked about the shape with Kathy Williams stating it is a rectangle. Peter Slovak noted the height of the gap between the roof and the picket boards. Attorney Singer noted drawing attention to the business behind the fence/berm is a good thing. Although not in support of the picket boards, Sara Porter noted the idea is about having fun and wouldn't hold up the project if left in, but should also consider aesthetics. Applicant ended up leaving it in. Kathy Williams inquired about the siding materials. Pat Malone noted either wood or textured and will be cost effective. Most buildings in the park are wood now but could go with texture. Sara Porter is looking for the manufacturer's name and specification of materials with colors. Kathy Williams indicated it could be submitted at the SPR meeting on Tuesday. Kathy Williams asked about the decorative items on the side of the building. Pat Malone indicated they would be something similar to what has been shown. Peter Slovak asked about the berm and confirmation that it won't go away. Attorney Singer noted that it was on the approved plans as part of the ZBA approval. Mr. Slovak noted the potential impacts from the MassDOT road widening. Mr. Slovak asked about irrigation for in -lot trees. Joe Marrama indicated they would water the trees in the parking lot, but plantings on the berm will have irrigation. Review Comments In Relation To The Desian Standards SITING STRATEGIES: Sect. 1. Streetscaoe ❑ N/A 0 Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Due to the specific type of development, the buildings face inwards to the park and do not face the street with street facing entrances. Meets the standard if. • Proposed berm is a minimum of 4' tall with sufficient flat top to include 6' fence, and plantings similar to the existing berm including 3" caliper trees every 30'. • Location of the new berms and any new structures take into consideration proposed easements and takings associated with the MassDOT Route 28 Corridor Improvement project. • Larger/taller inflatable rides should be located further to the rear of the property. Sect. 2. Tenant Spaces ❑x N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 3. Define Street Edge ❑ N/A 9 Meets Standards. or ❑ Discrepancies: See comments above under Sect. 1, Streetscape Sect. 4. Shield Large Buildings ❑ N/A OO Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Although there are no large buildings, the berm helps to shield the various rides. Sect. 5._Design a 2nd Story, ❑x N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 6. Use Topo to Screen New Development 0 N/A 9 Meets Standards, or 0 Discrepancies: Sect. 7. Landscape Buffers/Screening ❑ N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑x Discrepancies: Need a 10' buffer with buffer trees along the western property line. Also see comments above under Sect. 1, Streetscape related to the berm plantings. Sect. 8. Parkina Lot Visibilitv ❑ N/A 0 Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: New parking is located to the side of the Inflatable Rides/main park motel, and screened with the berm/fence/plantings, or located to the rear of the property. Provide clear pedestrian routes from the rear parking areas and the sidewalk on Route 28 to the new ticket booth for the inflatable rides. Sect. 9. Break up Large Parking Lots ❑ N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑x Discrepancies: Parking lot to the left of the Inflatable Rides needs in -lot trees to break up the parking area. Planting islands should be a minimum of 5' wide. Sect. 10. Locate Utilities Underground ❑ N/A 0 Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 11 Shield Loadina Areas O N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: BUILDING STRATEGIES: Buildings proposed are located within and oriented towards the water park and its patrons. Portions of the Aloha Bay Support Building above the berm/fence will be visible from Route 28. Sect. 1 Break Down Building Mass — MUItiDle Bldqs. ❑x N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 2. Break Down Buildina Mass — Sub -Masses 9 N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 3. Vary Facade Lines ❑ N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑x Discrepancies: Facade facing Route 28 is over 50' without setbacks, but this portion of the building will be screened by the berm/fence Sect. 4. Vary Wall Heights ❑ N/A 19 Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Sect. 5. Vary Roof Lines ❑ N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or N Discrepancies: Roofline facing and visible from Route 28 is over 50' with no variations, but the DRC was not concerned. Sect. 6. Bring Down Building Edges 0 N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies. One-story structure. Sect. 7. Vary Building Mat'ls For Depth ❑ N/A ❑x Meets Standards, or xO Discrepancies: Sect. 8, Use Traditional & Nat'l. Building Mat'ls ❑ N/A ❑ Meets Standards, or Z Discrepancies: Applicant to provide a completed Materials Specification Sheet at SPR. Most building components will not be visible. Sect. 9. Incorporate Pedestrian -scaled Features ❑ N/A ❑x Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies Sect. 10. Incorporate Enerqv-efficient Design ❑ N/A 19 Meets Standards, or ❑ Discrepancies: Next step for applicant: 9 Go to Site Plan Review 0 Return to Design Review for Formal Review On a motion by Peter Ma/pass, seconded by Peter Slovak, the Design Review Committee (DRC) voted (3-0) to approve these DRC Comments as meeting minutes for the September 18, 2026 DRC meeting for the reconfiguration of Wicked Waves Cape Cod at 492-540 Route 28. Received by Applicant(s) ATTACHMENTS: September 18, 2026 Agenda September 16, 2026 e-mail from Kathy Williams and Aerial DRC Application: o DRC Application and Materials Specification Sheet o Site Plan, prepared by BSC Group, last revised September 4, 2026 o Aloha Bay Plans: Prepared by ADG, dated September 16, 2026 ■ Cover Sheet ■ Base Plan ■ Site Plan Concept • Support Building Plan and Elevations ■ Events Building Plan and Elevations • Site Elements o Water Park Illustrations: Prepared by ADG, dated July 15, 2026 (8 sheets)