evacuate we'll meet in the south parking lot which is this one right behind the stores the exit doors are the ones that you enter through or these two doors right here so we've got several means of  grass from the built from the building next item on the agenda additions deletions change in the order of agenda items are there any additions changes the lesion none comments questions from the public not related to the  g david marshall from civil engineering associates on behalf of the applicant thanks very much for being here david so the board last time we ta we discussed two thing first item was the first item that's listed on the staff comments is deliberate on the issue of whether trees move for golf course maintenance purposes need to be replaced on a caliber  basis the deliberation we just talked we just delivered so answer is yes and we have a a we have language for the the proposed roadway into the project site we did know one thing on the plans that were inaccurate in regards to a foundation drain from his home on lot eighty six he would accept a condition of approval that requires that that foundation drain shown on the eighty six be relocated on to the applicant's property rather than being relocated in an easement encumbering his property so that's just a confession in regards to an oversight on our have a better understanding of how far his property does go back towards the applicant's property but any discussion in the works ability about moving the foot you before going to there was no discussion a parcel and here that was slated for future developments but no units were in there and had a series of townhouses economy and it's here so much of this plan that i had this single family out which with a few minor changes made  little bit less road and public works and staff seemed to like it better than our original plan we did meet with a natural resource committee as the board requested and we met with the bicycle and   rest of the walk through of the project is just commercial five foot wide concrete sidewalk ask guests we've proposed that we continue that down through this green space and loop it over here to a possible future connection with the city on a parcel to the southwest the bicycle to death in committee wasn't all that crazy about making that connection one because we had to cross the well into the boardwalk connection across so what they ended up recommending is that they'd like to see a pedestrian bike path a ten foot wide path that basically goes from our connection here with side of the wand and go all the way through the project and go all the way out to heinsberg and then continue through the project all the way through for a future connection to a future possible development marketplace so that is what our plans currently show so we have a ten foot wide  connection that runs all the way through to here runs all the way out to the road and we are considering a change that staff has recommended whereas we may we come off the end of this we may change that pattern come down this street and come across and connect we'll talk about that little bit further as we get through the staff knows we had a slight reconfiguration of single family lots one here and we've changed all those crossings to be eighteenth put in with and those are the major changes that we've done since since sketch trouble distinguishing bit more i had nicely done to show that it had always been planned for future development and so this is just implementing what was already noted and permit in terms of density permit for the existing hundred nine years we had to go out and do a number of archaeological searches on the property so we did face one studies basically they plowed field and look for artifacts there are a number of places  particularly in this area that they discovered some artifacts so we did a face to study the face to eliminated some of the areas some consideration but there's an area left that in this area right in here you know close to this well area that they have not yet clear that they basically told us if you want to clear the area you the net you have to go the next step and do a phase three study or you can elect not to impact that area and leave it as it is and that's what we've chosen to do at this point but is there still room for people to move around in there over there where you can certainly walk and use that open air above but you know we couldn't excavate it we couldn't o would you like to i mean it looks like there's only one comment in the in the staff notes like the stuff is through your looks like you've got some the originally when the hundred nine unit was approved because the small lot size that was approved we asked for waivers and those are listed at the bottom of sheet two in terms of the maximum building coverage  maximum overall coverage and there was a first year except for the multi duplex buildings that we were proposing and so we are proposing to to keep those step back and also apply those setbacks to any of the two family homes that we're proposing to do the job search going up there so all the sounds good to me the comments questions ok other staff comments it looks like shift the alignment over rural road r road previously show east west roadway this is number seven you're right yes master plan ok talking about apologies because next we're going to talk about item number six here but they are the but they're both the same project though it's just two different prophecies so right now we're talking about the master plan item number seven it talks about those requests that waivers not every aspect of the application needs to be described in the agenda description master plan automatically allows waivers when one reviews a master plan a way versus something that's one of the topics that's addressed so it doesn't not need to be specifically described in the in the description but but if you object to the waiver you c which under discussion now before we move to the poor with every plan you're free to say whatever you want about  cup as i think there's more with extra money that's just a short note about the general topic the d the important thing to look at is a master plan if we're discussing the master plan that in the context of the discussion of a master plan the relay waiver request is one of the things that is considered at that point so we you know that's what we've brought up where now with the public comment part of the discussion you are if you object to or have something to say about the waiver itself and not the fact that we're discussing the waiver then please let us know with your conservators or any other  efficient traffic i can talk more about the traffic study once we get to that portion but i just don't want that issue to be closed when you close off a master plan so residents still feel that it needs to be  question i have is i noted previously discussions i knew the builders who moved suckers removed a couple of the houses to make a wider stace for the wildlife but then you're going to put in a park area and have a fenced in catchment water catchment that's really severely impede the wildlife accord so even removing the house doesn't be that we we don't necessarily have an objection with narrowing up that road but it's really public works call and this board's call not ours right so some of the board came back and public works came back and said yeah we're we're fine with that being you know eight hundred feet so you get to the first unit or something and that that's your call we have we have no objection to that we're basically on the list and you're basically just trying to correspond to what public works wall what the parameters or the wildlife corridor issues like to start with this question what is your authority to address assuming for the sake of the argument only that this project would destroy a wildlife park what authority to do anything about the authority comes under the two criteria that one of which addresses the open space plan and one of which addresses the comprehensive plan and those criteria are you know issue example of the lady's concern that moving the separating the working theory might we might want to have something more to show you about the road if depending on how the wildlife conversation comes out so how are we still free to do what he thinks significant if we have gotten to the end of the master plan question i just would like to understand th i'm on page three and the first step by them is that staff recommended the board approve the quest to apply the previously approved multifamily waivers to the two family home piles of dirt that they eventually had to move so so we have a place as we start building units we have a place to put all our fill so your regulations state that building highways determined by measuring from existing ground to the midpoint of the roof and well out of twenty feet are designed so that we have presented are typically twenty six feet so the issue is that in that road we're going to s so typically first floor the units are about two or three feet higher than the cell line road of santa line elevation on the road that's typically where we always always set them so with that then we think that we will comply with the building fill up because i want to see all the top of my neighbors or you know i don't care about walking where they were so you get one guy that's completely out so this but that's that from happening when you get into my point i mean the only thing i can think of would be viewed the impact on some hypothetical somebody so the question is is the review impact here one anybody you know you know and also we don't consider is a board viewing from private property unless it's a significant new quarter and it's a public you know way like i said we think we could considering where for a waiver that's that's always been my understanding about the whole issue of think in the city keep in mind that this is a lower we're short twenty sixty years if you look at the stack comments it basically says that development rights must be purchased by the applicant prior to the issuance of zoning permits for any units beyond the forty four remaining of the properties inherent density so so basically that's what we would like the condition to be not that we have to produce evidence that we have these twenty sixty earth before final plant approval but that we have board needs to know that the applicant has to be heirs and where they're from but we don't typically require them to purchase them until they need them but it would make any sense to give final approval not knowing where the twenty six a coming from as you be transferring twenty six from you have no idea where so we just need the option we don't actually perhaps so we're finally ok from you know that's what i want to be it's not that it's not just no pesticide or herbicide application when wetlands and buffer areas no more your wetlands and or their buffers disturbance of wetland vegetation should be limited to remediation activities and no planting non native species in well a good majority of the open space is well and above all right so you've kind of dictated what we can do basically we can't do anything we can't you know we saw that takes care about seventy percent of the oahu too and are just the same thing though that's correct so in the non wetland or non wetland buffer open space and we're proposing that we will w not have a specific provision for protection of the land with insider mail what staff is recommending in this comment is that the intent of the open space plan which is to provide developed because it was approved prior to the open space plan being implemented does that make sense i sort of understand another words there's nothing explicit about wildlife in the  that sense and also that we we did go meet as requested with natural resource plane airport they've come back with a list of recommendations and i think that we comply you know what their views are yes the question is well prepared are we getting to the the public i mean it in the staff comments that the line there's two lines that i sort of focus on them sort of wondering gets the crux of this issue of to develop a network or system however the project the parcels which are the subject of this application are not express fear identified as persons to be conserved protected and are managed as open space is that part of the overall comprehensive plan next to upon the other is a significant amount of wildlife that uses those those detention ponds where say they attract a lot of birds of a lot of different into say that that isn't you know an element that helps so it certainly doesn't distract in i think there's an opportunity to do something like a split rail rather than a very small you can't stand like anyone but you have something that's very closely spaced which could be you know he's partial benefit but right resources committee and they all of the things that i mean you're going to put signers depicting wildlife crossing at both ends of the connector for example you're pretty much going to do everything two this is page one forty so if you're just looking at the package for this project the minutes probably take up how many minutes take up five pages so it's probably the fi the very last recommendation consider having a developer contribute to a fund which may be used for future construction of the runway should the robot be deemed work to do in the future but otherwise would be used for other transportation network improvements which maybe  favorites so that's not going to happen so what then what i like to see that if you're generally in sync with this let's be specific about the things that you're not going to do and let's you know build the others in as conditions i'm sure no one from natural resources committee is here to it doesn't it doesn't seem to say exactly right what the reasoning is to the states going to ask the same questions why show me why you need a second roadway connection when you have one and so those are all things that natural resource committee we did in making that decision demarcation at the boundaries of open space areas to prevent the open spaces from becoming extensions of the adjacent backyards we without one hundred percent and i know what riot we use boulders to mark the back  that you know that the bottom of that page in blue we have all the stormwater section comments and i can pound through those if you want but eighty percent of them have been addressed the few remaining ones where we're close to  essential we have a we have a well a crossing here and so this section of road was eighteen feet so most it was eighteen feet when we got to the last what couple hundred feet maybe and went back to twenty four feet but but there was no houses as anything on there so it was that we're prepared for roger and in blue are his comments on the traffic analysis and then on page ten  is the staff comments in their cover letter in support of the application the applicant has requested remove all of condition number twenty five of the original approval were quarreling that the applicant reassess signs were growed cheese factory road intersection before the twenty six dwelling unit is constructed and pay fair share impact to the city of cellphone ten which will not exceed twenty one point three percent of the toll cost improvement in accordance with the with the director of public works recommendations that recommends that the two family dwellings in a single family dwellings on shared lots of recommends a board for the applicant to submit these materials forward view we will prepare and submit those for proposed electric telecom lines are not shown on the provider plan stuff recommends order for the app to make drawings showing the post layout of site utilities including electric cabinets prior to final part approval stuff for the recommends a board where they are going to demonstrate coronation with electric service each of the single family duplex and single family on a shared lot of homes the applicant has proposed has proposed a design guideline document to ensure that the mixture of home models meet this standard staff recommends the board so we prepared we prepared a guideline staff is recommending that you accept that god lives on a lush specific questions like yes we can with well at the bottom of page twelve it appears the total cost of the project may include the cost of single family homes to single family homes are not subject to the landscape and budget staff recommends the board clarify with the applicant the project cost exclusive of the single family homes in order to update their  quietly and scaping but it's still a question on that single family homes on common lots of the considered to be single family homes or not they are technically under a definitions but those would need to so what we would suggest is that we will we will crack the budget numbers we will provide you with a landscaping budget rather than landscape the entire project we proposed to show you typical landscaping around the duplex unit and around are able to do that and that will be incorporated in the on work on page fifteen  this was talking about some of the comments from the natural resources committee which we've already agreed to and we will agree to provide demarcation fencing or landscaping along the  might make to support a mutually supportive transition between these areas so our intention at this point time is to include in the covenants information about for months right to farms s o i mean all we can really do is make them aware that the neighboring properties have have that right  i'm not sure if there are any i'm just saying that it's got to be the signage component or something relatively simple yeah yeah we could sign it i suppose but it's going to be in people's back yards yeah i don't really have any good ideas for physical delineation so property boundary that goes up to that will stay but you know it's it's fairly clear i think to a homeowner where you don't know where their property ends of the begins but i mean i don't i that that bisects other than that you know we're proposing and just be you know most open space and be up to the homeowners association to decide you know whether they wanted additional amenities you know if you go forward we see homeowners associations you know we're moving amenities once they get control you know somebody for insurance reasons summers for liability reasons even even a simple playground if you talk to your direct director a it's you know that's essential would come down to where we're finding that the homeowners associations are removing them and if they don't like pools you know they're way too much you know way too expensive to maintain and particularly when the city know didn't have much public space and whatsoever and so you know this plan although not i wouldn't say that it's overly generous but it certainly has more space than either and i knew what you're totally verge of you're far apart range one point three six acres one point three three acres the community garden is just over tenth of an acre one point six acres a point three four acres almost one point three point substantiate their open space calculations with a plan and to describe the show how public open spaces will be demarcated from private spaces so we do have a plan that actually shows the open space calculations that one that w public polling places you know and you know whether we're back to fencing in a you know essentially split split rail fence i guess is the best way to you know to mark with those public spaces or maybe not maybe not to completely surround them but certainly to show you know for instance if we look at the public space in the top on the west side we could definitely see you know providing a fence to say you know this is backyard and this is your space but we really don't see a lot of reason you know completely go around the area in a fence so you wouldn't wouldn't it be perfectly perfectly reasonable given the first of all there doesn't seem to be a path to it to right particularly this one personal top right if there was a path to it in and some type of marking that would make a difference and obviously given where it is if the homeowner's documents required it to be mowed so that it was kept you know some of those units so it's so obvious that there's a path so you know some there's a path there that's how i get there i'm entitled to walk back there so yeah because i mean obviously it's a big enough area but it's also not off the public way so my concern is that it would start to become like a very generous backyard for one forty one one forty two so i think there has to be some way of defining it so it's clear that it's a a neighborhood park open space community garden people i mean ideally there's water there and ideally this is some way to park next to it because people people need to be able to drive to those so i'm just suggesting for final that maybe you work on the little bit that that section and from the units would have on street parking ok on streets with street in mind we can provide we can provide a staff recommends the board discussed what the op can propose road with and whether there is a compelling reason not to widen the roads by two to four feet to allow on feet parking so maybe it would be appropriate to the next item staff considers are the intersections and not designed to reflect the slow traffic and would do things with this recommended figure nine point six stuff recommends the board discuss with the applicant how they proposed to meet this standard so we've eliminated them on this planet thinking that that was what public works wanted to see right now we have fairly narrow roads to start with twenty six feet twenty four feet eighteen feet so where you middle of page twenty two staff recommends a board discuss with the applicant whether higher density like pictures are necessary in the single family on shared lots portion of the development and also discuss we're looking liked to reduce lead into the wetlands comment also applies to the se hubie or district so just to clarify there are higher density like fixtures in the single family man are too similar to each other to potentially have thirty two look affectively the same so that's what this comment is getting at and boys welcome to look at t design so the board has much more latitude in dictating what buildings look like a messy queue district than a dozen other district and so like group someone pointed out what would be helpful in increasing the distinctiveness between some of the designs like maybe staff for example variations within type so those are supposed to be the same but then the third one on the page is supposed to be dramatically different than the first two and staff would agree that the third one is sufficiently different if you had sixteen of the third one and sixteen of the first or second then it would look like you had two sets of three i would agree with that but then if you go to i believe it is page four those are the i think that the problem you'd run into if this is same probably ran into on market street when we thought we were going to be getting a differential of design yet it looks like a wall of the same town square grounds and while i agree that these these definitely have far more of a differentiation to them this one definitely have issues with in terms of just throwing a dormer up on the roof isn't going to make much of a change your mind is a much mark then i guess i i mean the problem with colors in materials that you still end up with the mats and you know when you look at a structure you first see the mass and the fenestration the windows and the you know the roof structure and all that so even if you have you know a certain number that splitting them up i would say the same thing of the duplex especially i don't remember the planet enough to remember are they all grouped into certain areas so the problem with that is you don't get a blend of the you know than one unit count you have a good mix but with then the development they're all sort of congregate into the same area so it's not like you the ability to have a couple duplexes than a single family or carriage and a few more duplexes which would allow itself to blend itself and you wouldn't notice the you know how could how you h similar they are i definitely like to see a lot more work to do facts they don't all have the same you know two story with the gable top whether it's an actual gable or hip but it still gives the same you know same sort of overall feel to it which is you know two story with one story in the middle like that to see a little more work and personally so i think that the two do parts in the carriage homes i think you need to get a lot more mix two of them especially if they're all in the same part of the development the single families you know you definitely have they've got to mix to them so that i think that they actually i think that they will work you know in terms of a blend of them with diverse hous wider and some of it has to do where where they are in the plan you know for instance a duplex is on the top you can see that you know physically you know you have to reconfigure all of roads to fit one of those carriage homes up there because there's just not so you'll take a walk up to take a walk at both the duplexes and the similarly while proposal cases of the two family homes meet their standard the porch is a located ten feet from the earth on the south side of the street and seventeen feet from the back of the curb on the north side of the street where there is no recreation path because it is of the neighbors old unbalanced feel to the street and recommends the board discuss where the homes should be located an equal distance from the edge of payment on both sides of the street so so let's start with the carriage home of the single family homes on shared loft so currently they're thirty feet from the green space have a fire for sidewalks and now that puts the back of the sidewalk twenty feet to the front of the garage if we do stick from thirty feet to twenty five feet that would put it to twenty three feet  and i guess our opinion was twenty three feet was a little too tight particularly someone's got a pickup truck pulled up and now you're you know you're close to overhang so we you know that's essentially how we pick the thirty feet by looking on the sidewalk side you know what you know what's the minimum length we'd like to have the driveway be and in this case where we're picking twenty feet so obviously on the other side your driveway is longer but that's the rationale for being thirty feet and third of twenty five on the on the duplexes maybe bring up that plan and the road is offset as it is but that that kind of contributes to unbalance look you know you've got a five foot green stripping out a ten foot wide path on one side and then you have what we've talked to staff about is actually that you know we really didn't have that block you know type feeling that the regulations look for and staff i commented that you know potentially by adding a pedestrian connection either here or maybe off the end here that would this public area which would kind of help feed you've got that half of ice a separation between the anion a public area and kind of feed people in the here and then would it would come across the back outside the wetland buffer and then out south but right now coming down that eastern right now it's like this this is how it goes here now and so by moving the tent for a path to come down this street with a ten foot path so this street and then coming across the back with laws to balance this better because we don't have a five foot sidewalk instead of a ten foot path and it would help walking no longer have such convenient actions by what sidewalks that they could so i mean if you're in this you know you can either take that sidewalk here to get on the thing take the sidewalk here to get on the path your district well we will dimension those plans modify the other conditions we didn't get into traffic at all right and that is planned for this sort of plume are going to and finally what's the what's the fuck that i know you have traffic in the back here we just didn't get into it right the hundred nine lot development as part of our act two fifty permit and there was traffic report but this was done december twenty eighth two thousand and fifteen and at that point time there were quite a few was different so when we came back with the current plan we asked mr dickinson to update his traffic report and did that july seventeenth two thousand and seventeen and then it so in the report basically for one hundred forty two units proposed he is projecting based on i t e land use category for single family dwellings that the a peak hour production will be one hundred seven trips twenty seven entering and eighty x a day as you would expect in the morning more trips going out thing coming in and then the pm peak hour would be a total of one hundred forty two p peak trips eighty nine would enter and fifty three would exit south growing and the year two thousand the census data tells you where people who live in south burlington work based on where people work traffic engineers like to use that to model the two thousand u s census so there were directional patterns in u s census two thousand journey to work that the data tabulates locations by town were south going to residents distribute trips so based on that he basically have basically predicted that well thirty seven percent of the trips from  to travel through cytomel one in the remaining sixty three percent would come and go the lines of the road now he did not estimate or did not include predicted the level of service for the different scenarios in the year twenty twenty five evaluate adding separate left turn and right turn lanes on vansickle and it was reported that that did improve the performance of that intersection they also noted that been circling is one of the intersections that the town currently collects traffic impact fees for and so you know any work intersection pretty things with traffic and intersection improved significantly by adding the right turn lane and and that was one of the comments that justin then made about leaving that condition and that we evaluate the factory road and that we contribute traffic count goes from sixty two to one hundred nine pm peak trip so that is basically a car every thirty seconds equals one hundred nine vehicles per hour this is less than two cars per minute and less than the peak hour traffic volume observed traveling cytomel drive between dorset street and crispin drive presently  not uncommon or considered to be quote unquote high traffic on local residential neighborhood streets we therefore have no reason to conclude that this maximum estimate pm peak of volume would create adverse levels of traffic congestion or unsafe conditions on winds up lane it should also be noted that while side a mill drive somewhere feel that a new connection would reduce traffic volume for the fifteen residential units i want sap lame it will produce a corresponding increase in traffic volume for the nine residential units summerville north of breaker intuitively that's an insupportable sumption if that's the assumption that's in the i'm not making a judgement about the ultimate effect on traffic i'm just saying if that's the assumption it strikes  or almost any time and you know anytime there's heavy traffic or in the pm and you have traffic going up for a mile going west there is one there already is one that's going to get worse like the west east i mean i i can i don't know whether the numbers are right or wrong but i can see how they could be right now i will comment that is what pork was submitted to and again basically you know agreed with the solutions or there's a chronic problem let me be clear i don't know the answer and i don't know that this and i don't know that my gut instinct is right about truly i don't and it's a chronic problem and i say this for the public for those who have difficulty did jestina ridge stepped into traffic conclusions that it's always problematic because it's very expensive to do with traffic study and we can we are permitted to go with our independent judgment we are not bound by the traffic study but in the absence of significant evidence other than our gut feeling to the contrary we've got a problem so that those who feel strongly about it think they have reason to unfortunately are faced with only one serious prerogative which is to hire their own expert at least discuss it discuss the conclusions you least are the expert to discuss the conclusions made by the developer's expert and then if there's more warranted then you have to get serious about spending the money to do it we don't we don't present you with a viable alternative this is not not responsive to you frank but but i see heinsberg road there ought to be a right turn lane you're going at a speed that will have people right on your tail when you're trying to turn into this and so i understand that it may not be a or any of these cross streets would be concerned about going from sixty ish to one hundred ten cars per hour these are there are a lot of kids in these areas and this is the one reason i feel like maybe we do need to open up this this road to exit i understand there is ways to wind through this this this property and get out but there are more direct turn lane is necessary but i've got to tell you i use it already it's already it's already in use as a shoulder i would agree with you john because i mean i live in the creek village but my farm is development and there's a right turn lanes even when you use a car still fly into the left lane to pass you because you're trying to slow down to an adequate speed to turn into vellum and and yeah you're right there is a large shoulder but i would see where a right turn lane heading south on one sixteen would be much appreciated i guess i would ask that you speak  be trans about this you may not choose to want to do it but i think it's i think realistically it's a that's going to be a problem people are going to be you know the i don't know what the speed limit is they're fifty but fifty's fast past ten years you know traffic has just gotten ridiculous i've never still never seen more than two or three houses two or three cars stacked up waiting to turn but you know you just see floods of cars from going from the heinsberg  what what is the would you help me with your position i'm sorry if i forgot on the cut through just cutting through cider mill road as john just mentioned coming all the way through the room what is the problem with you know extending s i understand completely why the people want sap or are happy about it you know that but it's always been show shown is that connected when they bought their properties i wanted sap there was no question that that connection was going to happen and that development w cytomel one was before my time on the board so i can't speak to the rationale or discussion points like i can for a lot of the projects we see about why that connection between you know the cytomel wasn't required or proposed it was required as a connection to the property to the east there was a development being proposed is actually i think proposed even before cytomel one came in for a review called marshall meadows and that development was going to have a connection that would that would connect to this property and then with sudden little kin then they made those two basically lead up to each other but that more so meadows development has never happened because they just i agree with john and i agree with you know the person of earth better about this connection and while going from sixty to one hundred might still technically fall under small residential traffic you know i've been through the neighborhood i've been through winds but you know it's gone through down to it and it just it feels wrong it feels wrong not to have that connection happen  and it just logically doesn't make sense why it wasn't required as part of this project and not just as a connection because you know when you get this little extension of the hammerhead to allow for a turnaround also seen people think that sutter mill drive does have a connection i've seen car spin out turn around get stuck in the mud and have to you know creep back to civilization my fears that if it is built  to sixty mile an hour highway because it's a straight shot and then you impact the people that live on summerfield over there because they're going to take a hard right you know to make that turn also fair that if it's and it shows the document in the packet says that phase one is thirty four units it's the duplexes it includes the cut through to some fill and then i have an all document that says initial it was a requirement that the cut through happens at a certain number of units and is that it's more than thirty four isn't it forty nine would be the maximum fifty that would have to have a connection so if your intention to do is develop that cut through before you get to construction traffic has come in data across you know we're just basically making that connection to this brand simply pick up water at that intersection so we could not we could elect would be fine but not actually constructing the cut through discussion as one to make this cut through right so we could hold off until we get forty nine years to make that connection you could start building this character but she would get to it these two when you start building the carriage so so there is an increase in traffic from this just hope people public there at and as was mentioned earlier is as today's that thirty seven percent of the trips from here will go to stay or go in or out in order to get amount of where people were is in your hill section it's in shelter it's located in downtown burlington tertiary area business district and i have been question many times here but they are server river revered as the top travel folks so you seem to be avoiding telling us who your drive out of this tree i can you see your name again oh my wor tried to to expand their bike paths and the bike that committee has has a letter in her package as well so you know this is this is just normal life operating procedure for us is is to try to expand it is that population know that's the correlation between where people live and where they work and so it sounds like either there's not enough money into that kind of study to make it  tax dollars is equally not equally but many years behind you know you were just now getting two thousand and twelve two thousand and thirteen so the correlation between her people live and where people work that is the property we knew about the connection intentional connection central was to the north of the solar arrays to a future neighborhood we made sense and you know we were told it probably that everyone everyone knew that there was going to be here was going to be developed right well as the lady says everyone expected street or the other i stick it to some of them well you could though know you could the reasonably relied on that because that was entirely speculative what was settled what you what you what you had a right to what you what you should have expected is that cytomel too will be developed and that  el road will be extended with no assurance that anything to the north and east would be would be built now i've the biggest question i have coming out of this debate and  probably neighborhood rick a neighborhood kind of activity problem and yet how do you balance that out against the arguments for exactly that or is it a matter of balance are we wired to provide the kind of activity or do we have this question about providing the kind of activity i think it's one of the goals of the conference  response well that's what i'm saying you know otherwise but the the argument that people are making the things that the people who have a traffic problem shall we say and the people who have a wildlife card a problem both agree on is both of their problems with the best mitigated in that area where if if if what is now the connecting segment were limited to emerge she accepts that would got that house i did remember half ago thinking this is wonderful all this season already so it'll be an access road which we were told you know there was going to be something big but we have been hearing since we moved here which is very i mean we love the area believe me we can work for you know the chamber of commerce everybody hears this coming from new york b y it's very disheartening when you get this after the fact and equally even talking to our developer when we walk into a seder meal and we said you know gee we w harvest maybe we should have gotten a little more information at that point because then we certainly didn't have to choose that house you know to be built we could purchase another lot  i understand s hero this is if people are barely down on summer field if there's some sort of curb or something between just for that little piece at the corner if there's a curb or something between the you know we talk about you know not wanting to impact people and some are felt some are field you know at the end where i mean i'm not trying to get no punish them but it's like you're talking about like eight units here but you're talking about like twenty plus units over here for a road that that should have been built initially and will eventually be built when the project to the north gets developed which most likely will so eventually this will get built and you know there's there's there's factors we can do to mitigate traffic going through there that we can put in place now you know neck down you know other features but you know i just think that you know adding to them that of traffic for a winding way through isn't going to reduce the amount of east west traffic flow it's not you're still going at the same amount of traffic and i can certainly have people saying well i don't have to do this so i can you know because this is built on a lot more traffic is going to go i just think that you know that the amount of traffic that you can increase through here for this neighborhood interconnectivity is a negative impact and i think that the people that we're here to begin with probably did you know when they said that cytomel too is going a built in vision this road is going to be part of the connection of that phase and you know we had to have that we asked to whether we can open this up for this level we're will need to go to the city council first for a while because right now the city council has not accepted that right lawyer opinion said that you could require us to build start so it really is going to come down to you know a bit before agreeing to many improvements many modifications of the plan and so at some point requiring them to do one more thing applicant is ok with us if we continue to threaten my gosh it's like three pages up in my notes if we continue to february fifth we need all rise materials by january twenty sixth and you're sitting in front your clients are going to say yes of course and that's why we've been asking for a plan for laying out where they're going to go and being told that they don't have to do that so they have to secondly and we just don't and we just functionally agree with miners and i think that if they want to get the bonus density for afford