· In 10 years we want Easton (and Talbot Co.) to be the same charming place that it is today.

· We do not want development or retail over 25,000 square feet.

· Yes, developers should completely pay for any road or service additional changes, etc. not the citizens. They should also pay an estimate for hidden costs.

· Yes, developers should pay for traffic impact studies. 'The consultant doing the study should be selected by the town, not the developer. A study must be completed early in the consideration process. The study should look out 10 years and must recognize expected residential growth, not only in Talbot County_, but state wide in the case of flow along Route 50 and 'Through" traffic trying to avoid Route 50.

· Yes, developers must pay for an environmental impact study early in their application. The consultants must be selected by the town. This question really is three issues and implies three areas of impact - historical, cultural, and ecological. We see this as three impact studies, all paid for by the developer but commissioned by the town, This is a very important issue for Easton (and Talbot County) given our unique water/land environment and the character of this town,.

· Yes, citizens have a right to, and must, control big box exterior design. Left to their own devices, big box owners want to make all of their stores look alike to attract as much retail attention as possible and to be as big as their current standards are. Normally, this is not in the best interest of a community. If a big box has to be built it should ennance_, not hurt, the visual landscape; be attractive on all sides, have camouflaged services, minimum parking, use gravel, not paved parking, etc.

· Big Box building recycling must be well thought out

· It would certainly be good if you could define a big box to include other factors beside 25,000 square feet We agree this lets big boxes under 25,000 square feet in under the wire. Perhaps they should also be tested for whether they are part of a national chain or specializing in a particular type of merchandise (category killers). Does some organization maintain a broader list of stores that are considered big boxes?

· Successful for whom? The landowner, the developer, the business? the community, Etc.? Each would define success on their own terms. Our interest must be the community. A big box retail project can be "successful" (and economically viable) and still be bad for Easton!

· A healthy town center must be preserved.

· Growth and current conditions must coexist and we believe it can if growth is very carefully controlled.

· Competition is something few can argue against, but the service and personality of small business is important for quality of life too. Existing big boxes are not far away in nearby communities now. Why should we have them here too?

· It would seem to us that this understanding is essential before your work can be complete, be successful, and the moratorium lifted. Development may have to wait until we "get it right."

· It is hard to believe that more commercial development with acres of impervious surfaces and parking lots can be anything but bad for our creeks, rivers, and wetlands.

· Shopping: We are not that far from Cambridge, Kent Island, Annapolis, Salisbury, or even Baltimore and Washington. Convenience is a red herring distracting from the real issues of daily congestion and loss of quality-of-life that will come with additional big boxes.

· Business perception of town: Another red herring! We think just the opposite will happen in that prospective businesses will consider Easton because it is a town that knows what it wants to be.