Residents warn floating‑zone proposal could bypass town road standards and strain emergency access

Multiple residents and commissioners raised concerns about road standards and emergency access during the July 28 hearing on REG A26‑0004. Commenters warned that a common‑interest model that avoids creating town‑dedicated roads could produce narrow private driveways and long access lanes, complicating snow removal, fire and EMT access.

Jeff Pritchard, a resident of West Mystic Avenue, said the draft lacked clarity about ownership and lot definitions, and warned a developer could avoid town roads under the proposed model. "You could say you want 5,000 square foot area for the residential unit... and I don't know if that's really what was intended," Pritchard said, arguing that absent clear standards the plan could eliminate required town‑width streets. Paul Bates added a traffic‑impact point estimate, saying the largest hypothetical development could produce "up to 4 or 500 cars," and called that outcome "shortsighted and unfair" without full road infrastructure.

Applicant Kevin Blacker said he supports roads built to town standards in many locations and suggested targeted waivers where environmental benefits warrant different designs. Town staff also explained that even when roads remain private the special‑permit/site‑plan process includes construction standards and inspections and the fire department must approve emergency access. Commissioners noted the public‑safety and fairness tradeoffs and incorporated road‑and‑access concerns into their deliberations before denying the amendment.