My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
04/18/1990 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
>
04/18/1990 PLANNING BOARD Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/22/2022 5:05:05 PM
Creation date
6/22/2022 3:33:50 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
PLANNING BOARD
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
04/18/1990
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
9
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
New Seabury company to discuss Great Flat Pond traffic <br /> issues . <br /> Mike Grotsky and Chris Burden were present. <br /> Mr. Grotsky stated that there are 2 issues: <br /> A - covenant issue <br /> B - traffic issue <br /> Mike feels the covenant is irrelevant because they can not <br /> longer build that connection road. <br /> In consideration of the traffic when build out those units <br /> he has done some calculations . <br /> On Walton Heath Road, BSC felt 1, 000 vehicles per hour would <br /> be appropriate figure. <br /> Maximum number of vehicle from total buildout of 784 units, <br /> using trip generation study of 7 . 33 trips per unit 'per day,. <br /> only l/lo of that will be on the road during peak hours - <br /> 288 vehicles per hour and capacity is 1,000 vehicles per <br /> hour. <br /> It is their conclusion that they have the capacity to handle <br /> additional vehicles adequately. <br /> 288 is peak . flow including holidays . <br /> Tom stated that it is a safety issue not merely capacity. <br /> It is a residential neighborhood with many driveways. <br /> Mike stated that it is a very seasonal neighborhood. <br /> Chris stated that these numbers are conservative, with many <br /> units having access on Mid Iron way and still shows only 1/3 <br /> of capacity of road. <br /> Tony asked if. they had any indication of accident record for <br /> New Seabury? <br /> Mike will research it. <br /> Tom stated that one way to ensure Planning Board has ability <br /> to require another access is to revise the covenant with a <br /> different number for when it takes effect . <br /> Tony stated they should get fire department and <br /> police/accident input. <br /> Judy stated she has no problem with modifying the covenant <br /> as long as there is future ability to require. another <br /> access . <br /> When this part of the project is planned they will be back <br /> to Planning Board who will then review road and can review <br /> necessity of another access . <br /> Chris Burden believed all other items on covenant had been <br /> -satisfied except for that issue. 1. <br /> He suggested they amend the language for #7 or eliminate V . <br /> Upon Charlie ' s inspection would release items 1- 6 and new <br /> covenant would be a variation of item V . <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.