directions were just evacuations if there's an emergency will just you can either go back out the door you came in but we should all meet in the parking lot behind me here you can also go out through these doors which obviously much quicker to get nomination if people think and then we'll ask the people who have been nominated whether they accept the nomination if there's more than one nominee i'll ask each nominee to give a sentence or two about or however much you want about why they're interested in the position and then we will see if the public has anything to add and then we will vote we can either do them individually chair vice chair and clerk or we can do them all together none any discussion anyone like to discuss the nominees did a good job and i'm sure prime will be actually i have only one coming which is bill could learn from mad about how to get tuesday we can skip it or we can do a make up i would suggest we make a call on whether to do a make up at the first meeting in december greg and then the make up would suggest so number one stuff recommends the board confirm that the provided values include all impervious surfaces including roads the overall level density is based on the total project area including roads therefore stuff considers the road should be included for impervious coverage calculations as well so this is a result of a misunderstanding on our part the original comment was that staff requested coverage calculations for the shared lots and each of the villages eventually neighborhood residential zoning districts in the project we accidentally gave coverage calculations that included the single family lots which is part of the neighborhood residential district so we've submitted revised coverage calculations buildings and overall coverages for the neighborhood residential district  for just the shared lots which does include the roadways and the village residential district it doesn't have any single family homes so those values were still valid for for this they  shown on sheet seven may be an exception to this generality and draws the board's attention to them for their consideration so at the last hearing we were given direction to include pre construction grades on every the so the difference between the pre construction grades almost sixty one sixty two and i believe sixty three and sixty four also are two feet and the reason for that is the the road grade  that they have bought is a little steeper than other parts of development a lot of the roads are pretty you know it's pretty flat but in this area it's a little bit steeper so because the road changes grade two feet in there next to each other not across the street they also change a little more properly but they are consistent with what's across the street so we're comfortable as they are if you want to pull up the sheets to specifically look at them we can do that too you said the difference is two feet you mean it's two feet less than two to three feet above grade or the above grade or you can see higher than the road side  lot that takes that the runoff where does it run to you very well sensually going on everything's graded towards the rear property line so even though there is some grey going you know across the units the there's much more ground going away from the road you know towards the back there's there's a swell that runs along the rear property line that's going to it's going to catch basin at the end of it and that that's where the market's picked up and these lots aren't the only places it shows up there's other instances where the where this is the case i think these are just well like steve so there are these one hundred sixty one sixty two sheet nine there should be on the bottom right this comment is kind of carried from another comment that showed that lots across the street wouldn't be at the same level because we only granted the downhill lots and this this comment was you know so they said ok let's go through and put a pre construction grid on everything and that's what we did you know the thought was everything that's across the street will be the same but you know as the road changes in great obviously you know being consistently two to staff comments we discussed where that's allowed but basically if they need to fill and mass that provision is to allow them to adjust the new grade so they can base the elevations off of that rather than what it was before they had to so it's all based on kind of structure if you read the rules and take it word for word it's you know the average greed underneath the structure you know you know we've thought that that's consistent with an existing runway and surrounding houses but here when the roads getting built with all the houses that everything's going to be you know uniform it's not like you're going to have one house sticking up six feet above you know the house next door so we think for this sort of thing it makes sense drainage homeowner that the house needs to be somewhere between three and four feet above the cellar of the great to make sure that they have adequate drainage the water doesn't want to talk to garage so at a minimum that's what the homeowners got expect and the guy is not going to shuff is parkland requirement i think it's like seven and a half acres of parkland per me thousand people we meet that standard designating four separate areas throughout the development these areas we we are open space management plan we said that they could either be mowed regularly or if the age away decides they could be brushed hog you know semiannually hourly sign staff thinks that if these areas are used to meet this parkland regulation then they should be mowed regularly consistently so we've made and these are the four areas here they're all in blue  formula as to what they thought their fair share value might be and also includes the traffic impact fees that will pay which is around nine hundred dollars or so in total between the traffic impact fee and the one thousand dollars per lot feed now will contribute you know somewhere in that two hundred sixty thousand dollar range to the future construction of cytomel how that compares to the cost for construction wrote  up that the last time we saw a study and write up that doesn't indicate how much that's not going to cover it but i think it's a fair contribution given what the actual requirements of the project are so i mean i'm ok with the but i think that in the on of the ends i think that in a situation where you know development on the adjacent parcel stalls for whatever reason the city may choose to apply it to other objections to the name and completion in some fashion a violation of so much expectation can you remind me where that arose from and whether there was in fact and he s committing it promised expectation of his condition and expectation is probably the strongest word that we've been able to substantiate it was never promised by the city but  it has been said that some developers promised homeowners not you heard that yet so i think i think people heard many different things it's fair to say that every realtor and every every lawyer isn't exactly that didn't offer the same exact counsel i live in a development it was made clear to me how it was going to turn out but i like my lawyer like my realtor  that we as the d r p is always been the driving force to try to get that completion done it was never a part of any previous approval or condition of any approval and so putting it on the project contribution that they put towards the future construction as being a fair compromise you know towards that in the future i won't believe questions an do like at least the proposal that you have to delineate between the private lives and the open space the boulders the private space because you know anyone that lives in a subdivision knows that it's property creep occurs into the common city land so i like that it's actually delineated so that it wouldn't somewhat become you know that one walk between two houses something becomes a two big side yards you know so i just want to say that i did like space so number four stuff recommends the board require the applicant to amend three to accurately reflect the proposed easements on the remaining land outside the fifty foot right away to be offered to the city but within the existing seventy five foot r nway staff notes that proposed easements are a requirement required element of final plant submissions you want to pull up sheepy all three i think we we have labeled everything we put a hatch on the seventy five foot there's just some question what was the seventy five foot right away by the african what was the fifty foot right away to be offered to the city is pretty much a labeling issue and we think we've this is the latest and greatest i think we've solved that here so the seventy five foot right of way is this line up here and it's all hatched within gray  fifty foot right away to be offered by the city is this line here but they're most there both the mention seventy five feet and fifty feet  you so we are actually doing a question sorry this is this is the plot that you're hoping to record yeah so this would be that the surveyor is going to stamp this plan totally settled the the reason i ask is the confusion came because there's a seventy five foot right away that exists that the offer to the city is only for fifty foot right away rachel plans we showed grading outside the fifty feet so the comment was or you're grading outside of the right way as well yes we are but it's land that we control anyway so so so it was confusing and i think we sell the stuff so so all the grading is occurring on property it number five acknowledging the border act of the applicant to place them there the stormwater section commented the boulders between units eighty three through eighty six and the storm pond and the boulders between lot thirty four and the storm pond number six actually the boulders between you know want to nine in the open space are located on a storm drain which must remain clear for maintenance access staff recommends the board require the applicant do instead place the demarcation at the property line for you know  to nine and acknowledges that boulders may not be the appropriate solution staffer commands that should the board wish to include this as a condition of approval the board determined that the demarcation shall consist of used up all of the available space so the strong pond is right up against the well known buffer so the space between the storm pond and the homes that is flat and available for boulders is also the land that this from our section needs to gain maintenance access in the situation so if there's boulders there they can't get in with an excavator to clean up and we have a much visualise you because we have the safety issues in the the stray soccer ball might go down there but there's only about thirty feet behind the units and there actually is nothing above eighty six that you can actually use that way so that's the permanent poo it but they were going to go right along here right on the next number that i'm with why don't i you know one thing we were going to suggest if if they didn't want the volition these men that could apply here to is that is that we could use science we could use some small signs similar like you might see it from our national all th areas have a small sign that says natural area do not enter and then you see all the for passover way walks in the good of a size that we could we could sign for instance the back of this pond with the next item by one on one we could sign it so that the fear with one  eye is that they'll expand their lawn into the natural area but we could sign it at least you know so at least there's something there there's not going be a boulder so that they know they that's that's a natural or you know we can't you can't that between summerfield and braver you know that's do the politicians go you know during construction of building the units probably every other year and we'll have to clean them before the city will take it over once everything is established and for the most part what what gets cleaned out of the for mayor here  it's not it's not the main part it's over here where you know the boulders you know the access point for this is pretty much on the road someone just moved to get rid of the first two boulders you know we're getting him good access  would be is if they had to get at the pipe for some reason that's probably at all once a week thirty to fifty years something like that i mean you know you you don't you just don't see him taking up you know a pipe like that naturally so to separate the lawn area from you know you don't want to nine the common land from the natural area would be you know we show them pretty much right in the middle  probably where the comic came from i think that the board's thought about land are excavating equipment can handle moving a boulder as long as it's tight and doesn't result in the homeowner being like that's my up these lines don't know that the other point is if it's condominium people you say shouldn't but you know because the homeowner documentation kind of million people shouldn't be planting and landscaping their own yards typically you have like a bed in the front of your condo that's labeled yours to do what you want with their stuff like that but you know the majority ninety nine percent of the land is common land that is maintained by the homeowners association so  all associations always act in the best and i would just suggest that there that with these couple of these men areas that are really important for for maintenance that it be specifically spoken to in the kind of documents if we could get that and so so  you place same place or i don't like i don't really care i would put them down the middle of the pipe chase there just to sort of stop people from from planting trees including the ok you know i'm one other questions comments from the board the road extension were people who supported the wire while playing or that certainly does exist there and the other posts and spoke against it they were people who live at the i would argue that the forty three percent contribution is truly unfair my reason to argue that that it should be more than forty three percent is in how you lation were using the amount of acres of development that is near sighted overextension in proportion to the seven hundred thousand dollars there were two properties that work included in this  suggesting that leaves approximately two hundred sixty thousand dollars that should go to the side road extension instead of one thousand per unit that would translate to one thousand again about fifty or so people to so it wasn't just the houses on that one and a somerfield concerned as i said last meeting in a meeting with four concerned about making it easy cross through kind of situation  we all are aware there are weapons and development happens in north of this solar feels that that will be connected you know and we connect and shut the traffic up to one sixteen that's fine what we all neighborhood and i think that would be detrimental to the whole development very much not north of the solar panels it's still going to and have my street one step in and three very regardless because of all the traffic coming through it so i think that's important to note that there will be approximately one hundred percent increase in traffic on our street  the other point i'd like to make is that the technical review which thank you folks who are going ahead and agreeing to a technical review to get the independent third thing that they very much support is the development and build of the road i understand it may be considered a teacher but right now is when we're being impacted and you know this is going to believe be there when the time yes or in the meantime we're currently having time for us almost every complete and total sale for everything i understand and i believe it's been very fair in trying to listen to all parties and come to the best possible solution i know it's not an easy job but again hopefully you'll consider  richard i just asked him for some clarification make sure that what we were talking about was clearly conveyed correct me if i'm wrong but i think we discussed it you expressed that you were more where there was a lot of discussion all going on at the same time and there is some of that so we're talking about going from two hundred fifty to three hundred fifty