Laserfiche WebLink
rn � <br /> Attu ey Kirrane responded by stating, , "We have no interest _ <br /> in building the road out to old Barnstable Road" . He further <br /> Tfi <br /> is clarified that the road is shown as going out to old. Barnstable r <br /> w <br /> Road and has been shown on a plan since the subdivision was <br /> initially approved; making it clear there was to yl <br /> be an access to <br /> old Barnstable Road. The primary reason for access, as indicated <br /> by the Planning Board, is public safety* <br /> Attorney Kirrane stated the Applicant pp cant has no interest in <br /> creating more pavement; and that it would be costly to build the �� <br /> road out to old Barnstable Road. Applicant icant hasproposedit. <br /> P <br /> providing an emergency vehicle access with a ravel surface an <br /> some type of ate that g and <br /> g would be accessible to emergency vehicles. yf� • <br /> Leslie Garrigus, 46 Snead Drive-Stated she had <br /> d a medical <br /> emergency in December-1997, and has absolutely no complaint <br /> regarding the amount of time I p : <br /> g g e i t took EMT s t o respond. She : >> <br /> inquired as to how much more time it would take to arrive at <br /> { houses beyond hers. <br /> John Kuchinski responded b explaining <br /> p y that due to the <br /> length of the road, two (2) means of access is preferred in the <br /> event one access becomes blocked for some reason. <br /> Mashpee Resident--Pointed out to the Planning Board. that ` <br /> because the south end of Snead Drive is so narrow, a one-way sign <br /> be erected at the circle in or ■ g <br /> t der to avoid. a head-on collision} <br /> He also suggested the Planning Board consider rendering the Job f s <br /> Fishing Road extension moot, should the b <br /> proposal e approved. <br /> The Chairman responded that approval of one of these issues <br /> would not necessarily render the other moot. <br /> Dick Bowen-Suggested a break away <br /> y gate be installed in the <br /> event the paved road is approved. • <br /> At this point the Chairman stated there is a discussion item V`' lo, <br /> si. <br /> before the Board whereby the Developer is seeking instruction <br /> ;,f <br /> from the Planning Board. The question being the determination of <br /> e proper time at which to enforce requirements of the Special. � <br /> Permit. He noted there is a way to connect the road that has <br /> always been part of the development plan; extens ions of the road <br /> have <br /> .. <br /> been made on two (2) separate occasions, each with the '1 <br /> understanding that a plan for completion be submitted prior to <br /> approval of the next segment. <br /> The Chairman clarified a safe and adequate access and an <br /> alternate means of access and egress is required, and noted the <br /> length of the cul-de-sac to be unconscionable. F <br /> r <br /> Board Comment <br /> -17- <br /> �r <br />