| Member Ferrera raised several points on the Environmental Impact |
|
| Statement. On page 1(a) it notes that 48% of the trees will be saved; this is |
|
| not consistent with the percentages discussed this evening. Page 2(a)2 |
|
| states that the projected price range when built is above $170,000.00. He |
|
| said they should clarify if they are referring to the lot or the home. Page |
|
| 3(a)4 should read, "there is not private open space planned for this site. |
|
| He suggested that they make reference to the retention/detention pond. |
|
| Paragraph (c) indicates the proposed timetable for this project. He said |
|
| they may want to revise their answer. Page 4(i)1.c states that there is no |
|
| wildlife habitat. He believes that some form of wildlife is there and that |
|
| there will be some impact to it. Page 5(3)3 regarding the preservation of |
|
| existing trees, he felt that perhaps this is the commitment the homeowners |
|
| are looking for. He was concerned that by stating it so simply as that isn't |
|
| the reality of the situation. He said there are trees being removed and he |
|
| encouraged some re-wording of that statement. |
|
| Member Rosen pointed out on Page 1(a) of the Environmental Impact |
|
| Statement that it says, "Regulated wetlands as shown on the preliminary |
|
| plat will remain undisturbed." He said the staff report indicates that there |
|
| are no regulated wetlands. He suggested they make that comment |
|
| consistent. Member Rosen noted that the excepted parcel has two homes |
|
| on it. The ordinance does not allow for two homes on a single parcel. The |
|
| large home is probably 40-50 years old. He said he would appreciate |
|
| some explanation of whether or not they are grand-fathered in now that the |
|
| parcel has changed. He asked that the record be made clear. |
|
