Laserfiche WebLink
1 " <br /> J <br /> Rowley stated that the plan did not show a - - a , which would be needed to turn around for <br /> any stmt that was dam-ended. Howes, 'if the road was extended toward Sarnpsons MIL it would <br /> be extinguished if the road was extended and constructed.. Additionally, there was no explanation <br /> submitted to address the drain Mr. Balzarint inquired about the easement and Mr. Dawley <br /> stated that the drainage easement line on the plan did not provide an explanation about drainage <br /> plans. Ms. waygan recommended-that the.project engtneer consult with 11r. Rowley. <br /> Joe Heckler of Cotuit Solar stated that the plan was beim considered by three Mashpee Boards. <br /> The request for a variance had gone to the ZBA but a subdivision modification was needed before <br /> the ZBA could provide their decision. Mr. Heckler believed that the site plan had the drainage <br /> details and had been provided to the A. Air. Fu dal stated that a layout and lot line was beim <br /> created and a piece of the definition of the layout was missing. Mr. Rowley indicated that he had <br /> received no details regarding the site plan and recommended that the additional infon nation was <br /> necessary in order to be in compliance with Planning Board regdations. Mr. Heckler stated that he <br /> would follow up with Mr. Rowley. <br /> Regarding the cul-de-sac, Mr. Heckler wed th t Design Review hard de e d if the road <br /> was extended to Sampson's N ill load, the sac could be eliminated. Mr. Fudala stated that <br /> Savanna's Path existed to the building on the plan but the end of the pavement needed to be tied <br /> into the dirt road. Mr. Fu d a suggested the possibiUrLy of the road being gated for emergency <br /> access only. Nor. Rowley pointed out that the cul-de-sac was a requirement of the regulations and <br /> standard feature of a dead end street but#.bat the Planning Board could grant a waiver if the <br /> applicant so requested and provided g for-it in the application. <br /> Mr. FudWa stated that the Planning Board that the-Prehminary Subdivision Plan was fled on June <br /> and had 45 days-to act. lir. Fudala stated that the Bird could approve the request, approve it with <br /> conditions or deny it with reasons. ffapproved with conditions or denied with reasons, the <br /> applicant could still return with a Definitive Subdivision Plan meeting the conditions or resolving <br /> the reasons. <br /> MOTION: Mr-. al rm made a motion to deny with the reason for the driveway with no <br /> cul &6-sac and no drain a plan, and to finish tate def on of the new.layout being created. <br /> There was continued discussion mprdinng the cul-de-sacand Mr. Rowley emphasized that <br /> eliminating-the cul-de-sac would-not resolve the issue of individual s needing-to t m around. Mr. <br /> Heckler indicated that he would like a waiver from that aspect of the Subdivision Bylaw. Chairman <br /> Petersen advised Mr. Heckler that he would need toprovide a goad reason and explanation for the <br /> waiver. Mr.'Fackler stated that he would f llo r up with Mr. Rowley to discuss options available to <br /> him, such as a"T" or change to the layout line. <br /> 11Is, Way an seconded the motion. AD voted nn ,nirmonsiy. <br /> .SP CUL PFJUMM <br /> Applicant: Windchime Point Condominium <br /> Request: Permission to remove certain trees. Review of arborist reports. Report on <br /> June 15 site visit,decisions taken and add' Board aeon required. <br /> Ms. Way gan and Mr. Fudala participated in the am walls and Ms. Waygan stated that she would <br /> forward her report and photographs to Pl .Board members. Mr. Fudala noted that <br /> 2 <br />