displaying nine for construction of a fifty eight thousand five hundred fifty one square foot four story mixed use building which includes thirty nine residential units and hundred forty six market street they have stepped down because this is my understanding that the parties have reached an agreement on a proposed findings of fact decision in order ratifying a modified site plan proposal approval site modified site plan approval the d r b's rules of procedure for appeals of the administrative officer require sure the project is a three lot a proposed three that subdivision on dorset street just south of say the lane this is the final review and there were only a couple of  minor requests to change from the trees to salt tolerant trees to use directional drilling when the water services were connected that the pump station be approved by the by the the city before it's installed and emphasis that that pump station sewage from station will be a private pump station and i think we've got all of that on the plans and then there are staff comments discrepancy between the lot sizes of my plans versus the plans prepared by the surveyor that came in pretty late we will correct those up and get my adjusted numbers to meet and match these survey plans the second staff item recommends that the lots be approved for single family use only and in talking with a client we would we would request that housing and the density allocations in this part of the city are will allow certainly duplexes and even more more dense growth so our request is to to not go there if we can i have clarified the condition is to not allow anything other than single family without additional approval is the key it's not that it would never be approved it would that be that the applicant has to come before the board again but what the  client is doing is selling bear a lot and would like to avoid having to go back to the d r v if possible just go you know when going for the zoning permit to decide at that point whether the future  ones our multifamily and single family dwellings application hasn't been reviewed as it pertains to multifamily dwelling so there would have to be additional approval the other option that would be on the table would be to continue the hearing and provide the additional information to now the third comment was to require four inches of topsoil during construction which was gladly add the fourth common speaks to obtaining six comments wants to and assure that that these two buildings that are or will well that the two new buildings will not be identical and we agree with these fairly broad requirements and the seven recommendation is fixed looks like a standard exclusion of herbicides and pesticides near weapons and molding of weapons and those in the buffer areas which we agree with the amendment is to phase two cytomel two of the project in consists of increasing the number of residential yachts residential units by forty five years two hundred fifty four units the hundred fifty four units will consist of seventy single family step us through the plan mara will have some comments as well before we get into public comment for we started like to disclose that i live inside a mill neighborhood on winds up lane and if the applicant use that as a conflict  project was in fernie you back in november november first of last year since then the six month period to apply for plenary has lapsed there have been a few changes to the sketch plan since it was last in front ah you could go to the site plan the overall plan the east dorset street to the west solar farm to the to the north and cheese factory road to the south since it was last in front of you we had five acres of the we created a loop road on the eastern end of the duplexes that was previously a cul de sac and we also added in a secondary access to the single family lots  other than that the the unit cow has has dropped all those changes i just i just know to drop the units from one hundred sixty seven i believe to now or at one hundred fifty four those are the major major changes able to reach agreement with nato on that five acre so now we're move that from this current sketch plan application so that's thirteen units less than the scots plan you're here with a one six seven hundred fifty four yes changed the road out the heinz work hasn't changed we've really just changed the multi unit configuration where did the the thirteen hawse the hope that their genomes that aren't there that were in their previous sketch what were they single families they were single families that were part of the nato parcel that we looked at before had a road that came in that connected  so just hoping you are in a little bit if you would mind so that along i guess right of way or interior private road to hell to heinsberg road that's that is there any other general access food can be built or occupied the access from heinsberg has to be installed and then so that there was a phasing plan included so this will go in first we can do up to fifty units and two that's ville village residential and that was reserved for future development the open space areas were identify on this so there's the western open space the mints i open space northeastern open space that were reserved as part of this plan another thing to point out is that when cider mill one was approved if you go up the left a little east so that's kind of one of the things i want to touch on today and get to talking about the wildlife court our as well so just to quickly flip through the from history if you go to the next sheet and we're back from one sixty seven we're down to one fifty four up on the left there those units are gone that was done specifically to accommodate the wildlife corridor and then the other thing to know in this application is that there are you can see the red outlined areas cytomel to there's that light green area just west of that you can see sediment one goes through that so that's the impetus for removal of those few on the corner just a question yeah maybe from the planning commission has in the past we haven't been able to speak with them about this exact issue indicate an interest in creating east west connections through the city however the interest is not in creating high speed east west suspect that the current connection as a low speed neighborhood connection would be what they'd be in favor of and also has been preserving wildlife or so that's what i have to say about the wildlife corridor and then the final topic if you go to the third page is density so there's three zones in cytomel three the north is a village residential have inherent density one point two units per acre however if you preserve other spaces as not dense which is called transfer of development rights there's the opportunity to create up to eight units per acre in the neighborhood residential zone one point two inherent density opportunity and then in the natural resource want the applicants i'm in the legal documents demonstrating that they have the option to purchase t d r s in support of the master plan obligation so what would need to be done in order to build the eight or forty density is actually  if you have that number somewhere in the core of the three twenty six with one forty nine approved setting the want already so it's three twenty six last one for so we're looking for one fifty four months sixty five development has one hundred ninety three units of inherent density and six hundred forty six units of maximum density that's what i was looking for so i apologize i forgot have the answer right for granted type of clarification as is for density purposes is it well you're you're getting to my point i learned from listening that you have a break in what looks like a fairly straight shot across cider mill one of the most direct route to cytomel to would be coming straight across if it were complete one of the points you made is that it preserves the wildlife act having that connection on summerfield rather than connecting cytomel straight through preserves the wildlife corridor is that what you were saying yeah it helps know cross traffic to the neighborhood you know we want to make it is you know this tough as we can you know you know you don't want people trying to go you know development but again it's a part of the original proposal i want to hear at the board of the neighbors that the can but to me that just i almost think that you know for the people that are living in the two neighborhoods to go from one to the other you know i'd rather see that because i still think people from dorset or heinsberg would use it if that was connected just as a minor point offsite mitigation can be an element of the development but that connection is not part of the current it's one project so we can it's it's really not off site i think frank was getting to that when he was asking if they're using land for development density and you know are they sort of interconnected from an approval standpoint now that certain amount of developed parkland space what is your plan for the part of the developed park open space not just my plans which is going to be restricted and protected and so we did a usable calculation on this bottom left corner here doesn't take into account general undeveloped space meanwhile and buffers this calculation takes into account what we consider usable open space i understand and i'm looking for more the structure of open rescues for the the neighborhood i think the intention of that space is that it be you know basically maintain its lawn and be suitable to you know throw a frisbee you know to a baseball you know something on that is a few spaces designating here will be the only thing that's not just you know field there's a small park up here and then this is the small open space that it's being next to the wildlife who are there we met with parks and recreation prior to the original you know sketch plan we discussed just you know what they'd like to see with those spaces you know playground equipment open space and basically the general consensus was that they'd like to see just maintain mode  area that people could get out and you know fly or kite or frisbee or do whatever not obviously not large spaces not going for a soccer field out there but this enough space so people can get out there and use them you know i know and but i want to make sure that you know last happen because it's just my opinion but that the open space is sort of backs up to some and the whole series of backyards and it's only becomes feeling like you're painting on someone's backyard rather than an area that's identified as a neighborhood park which typically is bordered by sidewalks you know little pathways or something that delineates it from from someone's actual property yes and you know we had other open space that we talked about doesn't dating but it was exactly like  said like his fairly large open space here but it would certainly feel like you in the backyards of those condominium units so we we didn't include that as you know some a dozen a little space space like that is big enough that you could probably do like walking paths on either side of it so that you know it feels like more it's like a central courtyard for all of those units and something they could use it would feel like they're in someone's backyard especially if it's a condo not a single family you know make it more of a communal central backyard you know for that whole section of the house if you've been to parks and recreation with this site planner only the earlier one you intend to go back for this one we intend to go back  end of the cul de sac there the staff had some comments about you know just how we were going to use some of those easements and so we like to have that discussion with parks and rec to see doesn't  my lack of precision on this partial record have some kind of rule of thumb or standard for access to an actual park area distance to an actual park one developers if they could approve the access so they placed stone and some it was in the wetland some it was in the wetland buffer to give him access so that he could continue to you know plant corn so when we came to develop cytomel to it i said we had the folks from the state up there the wetland folks they were a little excited about the fact that the stone of the place in the wetland so part of our our wetland permit is that we need to remove all that stuff and we store  question during the last sketch was in november of last year there was a discussion about the property immediately to the east and having some sort of mounds or shading remember that discussion and  save save the other one  way to summerfield ave before permitting for the development second proposal is build a left hand turn lane at the south down turn one obviously from dorset street to cider mill road third proposal is build a continuous ten foot wide wreck past going to connect cytomel one and two i see wrecked path on here on the very eastern side of that road there so i'm assuming that it is your intent to to do what is a build a continuance or my wrong or you can use the sidewalks right now the plan is to build the right path along the el castor i have and that's how it was proposed and approved in the original project  right now we don't have a plan to continue the right path all the way through up on the summerfield but that's something we can talk to the parks and rec me when we nearly meet with them so does anyone know i mean i'm my wife and i walk down there all the time and sidewalks are fine for rush does does anyone have a problem with sidewalks as opposed to a direct path it is the sidewalk kind of do you have t would i would tend to agree with that if you know when you're when you're walking down a sidewalk in your brain you're going from driveway to driveway to driveway i don't think it i don't think it gives you as consistent  runs down here so there are no you know there are no recreation pass you know that come down you know wind sock for summer feel so i mean there is we have this section coming again but there's really you know there's opportunity to connect that let me my take you know i mean you get over lines were growed side and there is no place to go obviously but that doesn't mean that there wouldn't be there are some you land connections when you look t connection up to par force the the the comparison is going going up and over the golf course you come down into butler farm and then you are only on recreation am i missing something here as i was just going naked request topographically and hypothetically where would you do it but the only way it is continuous wetland through there so we wanted to we wanted to provide an easement that was one of things we talked with the parks and recreation committee as to you know the best place to go across because they're you know they're anxious to get across to you know the scott parcel the city what we had mapped the wetlands and we tried to you know snake it between the wetlands the best we could start a little bit i have a question from a different topic come may be the only one interested in this topic you show bunches a little lots what do you plan to do with all those just like it to be aware of what has been a dispute for the list here with the board will continue to be until it's resolved at least one member of the board believes that you must observe a five foot sideline really doesn't matter under the existing under the existing l t r whether they're single family or whether they're duplexes or whether they're tried plexus if you for example if you're selling with party walls an individual lots same rule if that's if it's a single family house essentially the exist in all the arts so you are aware of the dispute i'm not telling you that you won't get a permit i'm telling you if you read the l you will see if you read it carefully that you're not permitted to separate you know to to to sell a lot that does not have a five foot said line setback and that  this body has no authority to disregard those little lines you're in there that you're selling as lots nor does it have the authority to waive a five foot sideline setback i've last night until the l as are amended which i've been attempting to get somebody to pay attention to all year long and really since for about a year i make the note you can do with it what you wou there's also a letter from the owner of the property to the east of the project ted really unable to attend the meeting at a previous meeting i asked if a developer would provide a between our properties and the time they acknowledged by head nodding i hope that for the record they would confirm this at the meeting and for some valid reason not able to do this on their property with a billing be willing to create the berm on our back line could build it i mean a bird could be built on his property built on his property you know provided you know that he obtained the necessary permits so someone half would look at the back of his property make sure what land and make sure there wasn't any other issues where don't want to include it as part of our plan at the state level that it becomes involved and and his property could be included under all right to fit the permit which something that we don't want and i'm sure he wouldn't want that but we are willing to  to fifty permit and therefore you or your view is your hands off is that correct we expect that he's going to trigger that need and so he will be belittled most until he does not your concern in your they would be required to to make that connection to pay for that connection and build that connection out is that correct so we did review the decision for citing the one the original and there was no specific trigger requiring cytomel one to construct the road they did provide the easement which is shown on the plan so presumably the developer of the adjacent property would be required to connect aside a male and have to extend the row that's meant for a future connection you've got to build it to the property line so you know there's two things that go against what we normally would do and i've been on the board long enough to say this is prior to my time on the board you know that they didn't have to means a grass you know it had the odd one which was a pedestrian path which said words of vehicles can use it and didn't connect the road to the future development to the east so i'm still you know obviously if we have our hands are tied the end that's one thing but i personally would rather see that connection because i think it is bad for better you know come back to very through the neighborhood as well we are looking that this as a whole army i mean it is one project as far as there's been a permit in place and we're expanding on the same permit correct yes well of her face sort of no one is not he is not part of this get the signature of the developer side of the settlement one or or should we not be or should we not care about i think we're going to need a i need a legal opinion because i i think i think  think it i think we're looking versus i think we're looking at it wrong unless we're looking at they're not looking at an eight or nine unit development that's hurting underactive fifty here we're looking at one hundred fifty four units that's the first east west connector between you know in the city for quite a while and it's tackling adding on and was originally part of a major development and it's another major development i gree i think you know by saying one is isolated and the other one's isolated yet we're using the land from both of them and looking at them as one project like you i'd like to get i think we do need to get a little more exploration to get a legal opinion as to whether or not they are looked at as two separate projects or if it's one as a whole give the right path to anymore kind of to figure out than just from one sixteen to the corner of you know here and here whether we'd like to see it do some more connection or at least for the little further i'm course park but to connect and then they you know basically show this piece that comes through but don't you know don't show a connection over to further to the west i said but it could prove fairly easily follow a rural road in some way shape or form maybe past that storm and there's lots of choices i think that we should send it back to the right path to any bikes and wreck ok members of the public and please identify yourself and again please make sure you have signed sign up she i find that very concerning because again this looks great but if you look at what's really there that's not really functioning this is really animals and they're going to be really impacted by this and dealing with you know decisions are made in the past but you still have a lot of opportunity to minimize the impact so it's really important to go to the natural resources committee where there are more carter does the connective road have any impact assuming the connective road is built the one the connection to you know cytomel to the existing development to your street be i don't think this is a whole lot different one way or the other getting once you have done the ones that are behind all that the other problem here is that this is also hills which sufficient circumstances or mini geisha in provided to offset the impacts you know there is a there is a city review process as well but the i think the more question is just how the state would probably have a more rigorous review criteria in this case anything to do that if the board can get meditate on this and get the right input have developed a different input about how many units should be in that squeeze point whether some should be removed i think that's really important point to me the second thing i want to say is that  we're now in two thousand and seventeen when certain no one was first approved there were certain regulations it does exist concerning tipping you have the opportunity here to make the right decision here and ensure that we have a really solid white record path that comes from heinz for growth he's deep into this project to connect with the side of the one as possible because that provides for the future and we do not want to make the same mistakes any there are slivers of open space here that do not equal parts and that it doesn't live up to the spirit of regulation so we've seen other projects have come before the world where there have been a large amount of space that have been  large amount of area open for everybody to enjoy it not to break it up into little slivers between peoples backyard over the past god knows how many years so many times and so many different projects you know and the the base inherent density is one point four you're allowed up to four units if the development supports it you know and if it supports it you've got two for each of those device units i know that this phase two is split into two different zones it's the neighborhood residential village residential which is based on to be one point two or up to four up to eight you know and i i agree you know in listening to some of the comments you know that we've talked about the work of the wildlife corridors and we've talked about sort of the restroom movement t it but we haven't spent much time at sketch which is when we should be talking about it about the overall inherent density of this project and the overall look of it you know and in in looking at it it feels like it's shoehorned into every square inch of non wetland or wetland buffer space has a house it has a unit in it and you know we also talk about the diversity in the mixture of housing types and this is just clumps look at carriage houses you know single families that there is a mix to them and there's no real rich diversity in this project you know you've got you know town houses here carriage homes here and single family here you know so if you look at  pure numbers basis there's a mix of them and there's a pretty good mix of them but they're not mixed amongst themselves so you're going to get a little sort of like pocket developments of the same type of housing and to me that doesn't speak to you know i didn't first sort of development and you know him speaking as a citizen but also former de rb boredom every does raise an interesting point about the solar farm to the north and the fact that there is no plan connections or even you know there's no ability to connect to it so you know if ten fifteen or twenty years that project does die away and it becomes develop of land it's isolated from this development because there's no planning for you know where you've got this long strip of houses right here you know which maybe we need to we need to look at whether or not least even giving a right of way easement and separating that a would provide that connection and being would break up this long row of houses that you know it just it i don't know how the press the board feels but this just feels like it feels too dense for what they're what where this area and in addition the density cow turns on this permissible because i don't know if phase two acreage alone times four in times eight i suspect that they still have the density and we still have a i think they still have it i think we're talking about looking at this is one project phase one in two for our ability to review certain aspects of phase one because you know they are like i said that the whole one point two and four one point two eight you know you can get quite a bit of density out of out of a site like this  development on the left and you've got everything off handed on the right being made by the bellaver that's three times removed from the original that connector was approved to the original development because it was all being built by the same developer it was a as i understood it from our honor it wasn't mandated by the city it was asked for proof for the developer we have many people commenting because of their concern for the additional traffic that's going to come through a very very residential area and we have a lot of people who are going to test for that and we have people very concerned about the effect on the wildlife or so the question is why we have this connection between phase one of those two should the developer be looking at some other way of having a secondary access to this development why should it go through there given the concerns that everyone has well i think one thing to take into account is that any east west corridor connection is going to break up the north south wildlife corridor so i mean anyone that comes through with an east west connector you're going at that exact same argument  suggested or intimated that that fixed that connection wasn't going to be a normal with street it was going to be what they do you refer to it bill it was going to be like a i forget the word you use prevents two way traffic so if someone to park there two cars are coming someone's got to stop and yield but that is the whole theory behind slowing down traffic and presenting and eliminating you know east or west movement other than within the development guys that's the city's current standards and that's what side of no two is designed to do so i'm sure it was the answer but how wide is that going to be i don't know that exact connection but it's either eighteen or twenty thousand feet i believe  is asking steph for my information the the concept of connectivity between the elements is this is this an absolute or is it a consideration to be taken into account in the totality of approving for example of asking to wear a the desirability of connectivity against the desirability of it for you know further protecting the wildlife card that would be within the porch discretion the board is fried about i'm not saying which way it ought to come out i'm just sayin the board is free to balance other disease or rotten other policies and other requirements of the of the ars against the policy of the as a practical matter what happens to substantially development is that the developer spends a lot of money on a traffic study it's just pick the traffic study that finally gets presented to the board i'm not going to say invariably because i haven't seen every chaffetz study but i've never seen a developer that didn't present a traffic study that said this is fine all right it is practically impossible to defeat that conclusion unless there is a competing traffic study which is very expensive and most adjoining property owners can't afford unless they band together to hire a traffic study for them collectively and then present that experts testimony that may have way short of that it's generally a losing proposition for the opposing land where the one who wants to your kind of consideration is taken into account that's it that that's a very very one sided point of view and reality based how and represents one person here and i mean i will say that almost every one of them that i've seen has included left hand turn lanes and everything else that's required in order to get to the point that you need so yes they attempt to come up with solutions that's what their job is and and the solutions you may not always agree with residents but me i mean it's an emergency access not in an emergency whether you're a resident or an emergency vehicle concerns i guess i want to speak a sort of i guess the old dog on the board that's been here for ever and has seen so many different iterations of so many different projects that i've seen this happen before you know this project was approved  as a two phase project you know they currently have approval for one hundred nine units in phase two in a certain configuration we've seen in marlow showed that it had it was approved with the connection to hein you know and some general configuration here you know and if they weren't looking to change the layout that's what they could go and start pulling permits for a bill you know and that's what was approved when your project was approved you know so what happens when these projects go on hiatus and they come in to really look at the are there lay out they're asking for more density they're not asking for one hundred fifty four units or asking for forty five more than they were originally approved for so they are asking for more density  that's our job as a board to hear them to look at the how it impacts the development whether the we feel the project supports or whether the studies show it's or it's it through traffic studies through input through these public hearing processes but what happens is that neighbors move into the original development get used to what they're living in and then they see this new development coming in that's not really like it's at a new development per se it was already planned the connection was already so i can tell you something i would not support as a connection between one into doing another one of these emergency you know break away care barriers or just in the event of an emergency we want neighborhoods to connect you know both  so you know i think what we're looking at and that's the way i'm looking at it as a board as a board member is what the applicants are proposing is the change between one o nine and one fifty four does the project support it does the land support it and you know by density it does support it is specially you know one thing i was looking at is that you know that that section of the project up here you know from a big picture city planning sam point that's considered village residential it's planned if it can support it up to eight units it's meant to be a much denser type of development and the one point two four up to four for neighborhood residential so you know the city wants you know a much higher density and type of housing so in that regard you know i think that that is appropriate for what you know we have to look at what the plan character of the neighborhood not what's currently there or what's been there in the past what it's planned character and that's what the city decided the plan character for this development and this location so you know i'm again i often stick my foot in my mouth i contradict myself these meetings because you know you hear comments you think about it you know you start to realize that this is sort of what the city is planning for this location and we talked about the southeast quadrant zoning you know the whole purpose of t v ours and the more much more sensitive land where you're going to have any development it's to send that density to these locations you know to sending in the receiving areas in the southeast quadrant so it's looking at the whole twelve hundred acres or whatever how many acres it was for the whole southeast quadrant not one little area and how one little piece of land is impacted by you know four units per acre and that's my spiel on the big picture developments of historically these projects and w and i know that so but fifty years ago or so i'll see the now these two red bars on that area and village residential with two red bars and i don't remember how much at least with respect to density didn't have a reasonable expectation expectation that what they'd be looking at is one hundred nine units not one hundred fifty four and that that is as material to what we ultimately allow change is requested as is the maximum for the theoretically maximum permitted density of these people but one might argue in reliance unless you take the senekal view that while you can never be live on something that the a has told you about what's going to happen in the future well frank there is a section of that of this i'm not i'm not promoting this but this that top section was reserved for additional development and it's village residential increase in density is coming from but the overall project that are helpful final comments wrap up thank you all very much for coming and for sitting through this and for so we know where we stand right look at modifications to help him and also you know the idea of you know wreck paths him put in terms of do we want to try to get a better east west kind of tiffany on the bike path or  open space i mean i think this is a this is i know that this to say this is only a it's not only it's about a fifty percent increase in much the base tends to be was originally with is going to the future residential development which was set aside really was planned to be about this dense in the to begin with but this is a big project you know and you're coming to us that sketch and i think we have enough to give to that the city to the neighbors and to future you know the buyers of it and we do our due diligence on this you know i think that much as it's just a regional approval with the additional village residential i would like to take it to the as a as massage as well as we can likely nobody is going to use i mean you know these folks really don't have a reason to travel this section you know people coming out of a single family you know are likely going to take the main road out because if you go this way then then you've got to turn you know and come back through you know these carriage so it's a piece of road that's nobody's going to use so we just thought we'd ask the board whether they would consider a covert action with or potentially you know even talk about something that you don't like mark but a potential bike path connection you know for emergency access instead of full blown road not a deal breaker for us just that we bring it up and see what the board if you want to be a bike path connection here would have to run through everyone and be had wanted to be part of an interconnected bike path system not just to use it as your with an active piece but just for for clarity with that remain private then because my understand has it running over a wetland with as the eighteen foot with permissible in that area with with fleet recommendation reduced and the discretion of the board with the recommendation of public works correct is and as well as the n p o seven zero one rusted road is the same exact position as the the the yes roger that's approved right yeah yeah three hundred fifty feet southbound celebration lane is warranted at the intersection with hines ward road and we have commission traffic study that will be submitted to the board along with the plumber plan so we haven't so currently we have we have the sidewalk shown on this side of the street and we put it there because we felt that provided the best connectivity you know with the sidewalk or the path that goes to the open space area here and then continues across to the small square here so we don't we don't see that it makes a whole lot of difference which side of the streets on that that was our preference just thinking that say if you lived on this lo come down the sidewalk you wouldn't have to cross and you could follow that path up through as it was on the other side of the street you know you'd cross wants to get to the sidewalk and they cross again to get to the pass so  that's that's where we picked it we don't have any objections really to being on the other side we just think the north side's a little bit better what was  ectivity and having to cross the street few times as well ok the way we that's why we picked it outside so believe it's ten feet or just over or what is it what's the purpose of just to allow access to the open space you know in the back without having to walk through some create something that's actually a valid park my my request as you go back to parks and recreation show that this si with his biggest difference between this plan and the plan we did go to was the fact that we had the nato parcel included so we actually had more units the plan we met with parks we had more units and what we have on on this plan but the configuration is pretty much the same with some suggested changes that parks and rec have so they haven't seen the plan since we made the changes that they asked for but we concur that it would be appropriate for us to go that information question about six about the solar from i don't quite understand it this has no connection to you you have no ownership interest in it you have no arrangement for direct use of the power there just a money throughout the development we've heard and mark's comments about that and will take that into consideration you know from a marketing perspective i can understand why a mix from marketing perspective process usually you know people you know kind of tend to like to have a section a little bit as our experience but so so that first and then the meetings with committees can come after that because they will be affected by that ruling or that decision sounds great to do it continu this would you like to can do or will it really depends on the how quickly the legal opinion can be turned around let's say we continue it for two weeks and if we haven't gotten it we can continue that's good that's thank you very much next on the agenda is minutes oh o now is there any other business yes ok same business i raise every other actually right thank you very much frank