Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Planning Parking topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
NextGen Sports site-plan review carried after board presses for floor plan and parking details
Summary
The Westwood Planning Board carried NextGen Sports' application for a youth training facility to its July 8 meeting after board members and the planner said the record lacks a floor plan and a clear maximum-occupancy layout to enforce a parking variance; the applicant agreed to submit a plan by July 1.
The Westwood Planning Board on June 24 carried a site-plan application by NextGen Sports for a youth-oriented training facility after board members and the planning consultant said more detail is needed on floor layout and parking.
Attorney Matthew Capizzi presented the application (PB-26-0501) for 10 Charles Street, Unit 4, and said the proposal is a group-oriented sports-training business with an anticipated operating pattern of about 16–20 children and four trainers and defined drop-off and pick-up procedures. Vincent Mahlzan, founder of NextGen Sports, was sworn and described the business, noting the company also operates an out-of-state location and that he was "looking forward to opening the business and being part of Westwood." Mahlzan said weekday hours would generally be 3 p.m. to 9 p.m., with varied weekend hours.
Board members, led by William Martin, and Board Planner Ed Snieckus said the application lacks a maximum-use floor plan that shows how many batting cages and how many simultaneous occupants the facility will have. Snieckus said the required number of parking spaces for the proposed use, given the building's square footage, is 174, while the site currently provides 127 spaces — a shortfall the planner described as material unless the board fixes an enforceable maximum-use profile.
Capizzi offered as a condition that the applicant provide a maximum-use layout limiting the facility to eight cages and no more than 16 students with four trainers at any one time. The applicant said the usable training area is roughly 8,000 square feet and that a Parking Assessment Report had been submitted to justify the requested relief. Councilmember Lauren Letizia pressed for clearer calculations of the relief being requested; Snieckus reiterated that an explicit occupancy and layout limit would assist the Zoning Officer in enforcing any approval.
Mayor Raymond Arroyo asked whether private parties or outdoor amplified sound were planned; the applicant said no. Capizzi said the applicant would "come back at a later date" with the requested documentation and acknowledged there was no intention to "play games" with the board process. The board carried PB-26-0501 to its July 8, 2026 meeting and the applicant agreed to file a floor plan by July 1, 2026. The board also carried PB-25-0502 (an application for subdivision and a 'C' variance for 78 & 80 Sand Road) to July 8 because it was not heard.
The hearing record includes the planner's advice that the board specify maximum layout and occupancy in any approval so the zoning officer has clear enforcement parameters. The board adjourned at approximately 8:55 p.m.
The Planning Board will revisit PB-26-0501 on July 8, 2026, when the applicant is expected to present the requested floor plan and parking clarifications.
