Lot17.Lot17isa31,131SFlotwith13,389SFofnetbuildableland.A50%coverage <br />ratiobasedonthe31,131SFlotwouldbe15,566SF(50%of31,131SF=15,566SF).The <br />lotownerwillbeabletocoverthe13,389SFnetbuildableportionofthelotwilla15,566SF <br />buildingfootprint.Thisfootprintequatesto116%ofthenetofthenetbuildableportionof <br />thelot(15,566dividedby13,389=116%).Therequested65%coverageflexibility <br />(20,235SF)wouldmeanthatthebuilding’sfootprintwouldcover151%ofthelot’s <br />13,389SFnetbuildablearea.Whyaskformore?Thelot(at50%coverage)isalready <br />overthecapacityofthenetbuildableportion.Onceagain,theApplicationdoesnot <br />lookatthe“wholepicture.” <br />TheCommitteerepeatsitspositionthatallowing65%buildingcoverageforLots16&17 <br />(evenifthelotownerdesirestobuildthreeunits)isnonsensical. <br />TheApplication’srequestforincreasedlotcoverageforLot16and17shouldbedenied. <br />#### <br />Fences <br />MaxHeightwithinInteriorYardSetbacks6feet <br />MaxHeightwithinFrontYardSetbacks42inches <br />Applicantstates: <br />“ProposedHeightInteriorYardNoneproposedatthistime. <br />“ProposedHeightFrontYardNoneproposedatthistime. <br />TheResponseCommitteeagainpointsoutinconsistenciesintheApplicationandSitePlansfor <br />proposedprojectfencing. <br />The1/19/18SitePlanL2.0indicatesa“Proposed6ft.See-ThroughAgriculturalTypeFenceat <br />PropertyLine”withanindicatingarrowpointingtothenorthandeastboundariesoftheproject. <br />AnothernotationonthesameSitePlanL2.0states“Proposed6ft.See-ThroughAgricultural <br />TypeFencetoTerminateatNeighbor’sLot4,”withanarrowindicatingapproximately2/3up <br />thelengthofthesouthernprojectboundary. <br />134 <br /> <br />