| Mr. Galvin was not aware of any change in the status of the Floodplain Use Permit. |
|
| Mr. Galvin believed that the displayed photograph and overlay would meet the |
|
| requirement of a plan showing other orientations. There have been no changes in |
|
| conditions with respect to the woodlands issues. Similarly, the wetlands permit which |
|
| concerns only the 1/10 acre wetland that is the drain and passes in front of the |
|
| property and the roadway onto the property, and they are requesting reissuance of |
|
| that permit for 55 cubic feet of fill. According to Dr. Jaworski it is an acceptable |
|
| incursion. The natural features incursion is the result of what was a reduction in the |
|
| scope of the project. There had previously been an incursion by Lot 8 into the |
|
| wetland. Lot 8 was moved out of the wetland so that the incursion is only into the |
|
| natural features setback. They are requesting that the previously issued approval be |
|
| reissued. According to Dr. Jaworski the function of the natural feature setback will be |
|
| served by the curb and gutter of the road. Finally, they ask that the site plan be |
|
| approved for a condominium development. The standards which are applicable are |
|
| the identical standards, and the same ordinance provisions by incorporation, as are |
|
| contained in the subdivision control act. There is no good reason not to reissue the |
|
| previously issued permits; there is no good reason not to recommend favorably the |
|
| previously granted wetland use permit. Mr. Galvin mentioned the previous attempts |
|
| that Mr. Socks has made to purchase other properties in order to develop an |
|
| alternative access point to the subject property. Mr. Socks has negotiated with the |
|
| persons who own adjoining properties on Auburn Road at the northwest corner of the |
|
| proposed development in order to obtain access to Auburn Road; however, there is a |
|
| restriction on a portion of the Raffler property regarding access, which would not |
|
| permit that property alone to provide access --two parcels would be required. Offers |
|
| were made to purchase at prices which are above the fair market value for similarly |
|
| situation properties in the area, and no agreement could be reached. Attempts were |
|
| also made to reach Livernois and were unsuccessful. So Mr. Socks has attempted to |
|
| provide alternative access. The conditions tonight are the same when the previous |
|
| approvals were granted. On that basis, and the recommendations of staff and outside |
|
| consultants, they respectfully request that the project be approved. |
|
