this is claypool is requesting to subdivide re subdivided these two parcels moving this lot line here over this way fifteen feet to create a roof for the additional to last lot two and three one six acres of property is in our dash one single family conventional the minimum lot is half acre so it's a subdivision research division that s one thing i felt to mention in madrid poor one any time you create a new law new subdivision it requires a point seven acre open space obligation or you pay a fee in lieu of open space dedication they're creating one new lawyer so there's a point zero seven acre open space obligation or a twenty two thousand two hundred forty dollars fee in open space dedication so we have two options we let me back up we we can require the point zero seven acre be dedicated we can't demand the field the way the m p c is written  so we have two options either have them dedicate point zero seven acres have them voluntarily agree to pay the fee  want to point zero seven to deal with because it's just a nuisance there's a need for any additional right away in that area so we are can we condition it on them paying the fee once they sell a lot i'm just thinking of if there's a fire if it's a financial hardship for them to pay the fee now that they could pay it out of the proceeds of the sale of the property required we have a similar facility number one and we have issues with dogs jumping over six feet we have a sixty six peach aiming fence with barbed wire above it and it's seven and a half but what we're planning to do is build the trucks all right where the fence line is now may have it off and standards it's six or seven foot high fence around there and all their equipment is that they can this is stored outside out the back side we've had it surveyed i've got a new survey and the front of change of fronts actually fifty seven point five fifty one feet which is just over fifty seven foot six inches so that from fifty seven but it's almost the same configuration is a fence line it's already there property if they looked at other configurations to the vision that would well they better are there especially our room and that that entire area now is being used as outdoor storage conceivably loop lose two spaces from if we have sixteen provided fourteen available forty quire scuse me you could lose two and push that building out to maintain your square footage if that was twelve if you if you look at  sermon you tell me i have to lose ten feet and the bill is forty seven feet wide if i move the building forward i move forty forty seven feet wide i'll move forward see move you lose four five post places i'm trying to get your square footage it was you on the left side of the building in the front so in those parking spaces shown here twenty feet five foot sidewalk i assume it says twenty five more feet you could kind of extend out the parking lot  like that and the hillside is totally useless for anything except growth so it's not that you're grown and tender or create an eyesore for anybody west wall running north and south and if you put an angled wall in there obviously you sprays to maintain the integrity of the ten foot setback which obviously the commission because in a situation like that if it gets destroyed beyond seventy five percent of its cost of a concern to reconstruct it it can't be reconstructed so they were refinancing just a quick look at our township in ca and how many other homes are in the same boat trying to find my number here that thirty one residences in peter's are three options make it a committee make single family home to a permitted use in the or to zone make it a conditional use in the order to make a special exception the last meeting planning commission did feel did not feel comfortable making it a permitted use they wanted me to find out whether or not if you made a special exception or condition we use how would the banks feel or talk to the banks and it doesn't how because if it's board and trying to get their own rebuilt war condition we use would be plain commission counsel so the only option if we want to fix the problem is to make it p permitted yes but in the same time if essentially all the land is owned are to has been developed i mean i don't think we have to worry about some big developer coming in buying up well run knocking the unit is over and coming in wanting to build single family homes in reality the biggest risk we take is someone coming in wanting to build single family homes up in the crossings which is a neighborhood we're happy the homes are single family an i mean i don't i don't like it at all but at the same time i don't think we can in good conscience have a situation where we have had taxpayers who can't refinance their property because of something that obviously was a unintentional res so the choice would be if plenty commissions comfortable with that we would do the zoning ordinance amendment take it to plan a commission in council and make single family homes a permitted use in the yard to s