well go ahead and get started this is the time in the place for the meeting of the board of peel's for the city of holland we are here to consider applications for variances and or special exceptions this board must try to interpret each application as it relates to the ordinance the sport is not empowered to rezone nor take any action that could be considered rezoning applications need to meet a number of crucial tests in order be granted those of you who are here and of already answered those questions on your applications we're going to go through those again tonight there is a procedure guide available we ask that you come to the microphone to speak and that when you do so you state your name and address for the record we typically hear the first anyone supporting the application that in any one in opposition to it will close the public hearing and deliberate once we close the public hearing there is no opportunity for further coming public comment you're welcome to say for the deliberations but if you elect not to stay you may call city hall after eight thirty tomorrow morning to learn what we decide so with that can we get the first application read please one twenty two west eleventh street seventeen point zero three see skippers construction is requesting especially exception to construction accessory dwelling unit at twenty one twenty two west eleventh street the board is authorized to grant such permission if certain conditions are found to exist thirty nine dash one eighty five b two i do have a letter that came in that i would like to read actually a two part letter so read the second half that was concerning this with regard to one twenty two west eleventh street seventeen point zero three z we do not feel this should be permitted we operate rail units in the holland area in find that the rental market has only recently begun to recover from a long slump mark but more capacity is not needed at this time sincerely bill and helen mirren do we have someone case and a lot by the historic district commission we believe that it meets all the qualifications that are set forth ok so you your single family dwelling in a residential zone district correct and you're only planning to have it be used by two or less occupants correct those occupants will be there for more than a month at a time they will be ok you've been through either the residential infill process or the historic commission historic as the appropriate certificate or what have you we have or we've got a site plan in here i believe showing the aid to you is there a designated parking spot for the applicants there is they will have one of the garage spaces and there's also a parking space in front of the ok it was highlighted here just i was looking at the wrong one you're at least one hundred twenty square feet less than seven hundred twenty we will be ok they do use going to be connected to city water and sewer it will be all right you meet the appropriate set backs we do ok it's a third of the square footage of the principal structure correct of living you know it's a third or less ok it's less than twenty four feet tall yes ok we do have a floor plan in here that are going to be any windows along the side or back on the sides and on the front both sides and on the front so rick with regard to the future bedroom then how do you screening then with respect to your neighbor's yard much like the house you would put shades in the windows ok already do you consider this compatible and harmonious with the the neighborhood than we do in this story district commission also felt that way ok any questions from the board ok thank you sir thank you anyone else to speak in favor of the separation and he want to speak in opposition the historic district if they get a certificate of occupancy or certificate of appropriateness within the historic district but also in the same condition that they're in the same section it talks about aid use getting approval and that's one of the reasons why the the goldenrod which is not an historic district need to get in and fill in the proper process of the infill review or the purpose of them phillis for neighborhood compatibility and then that is why the interpretation of this point was that because the section talks about the  that if there's a picture to fit of occupancy required anyway that that that that function is served by that section ok so why would you need to interpret ok is whether it's a language that says you shall be reviewed and approved pursuant to the in residential infill regulations and the question is does that mean only if it falls within the other section or does that mean everyone every eighty so that sure ok decision because you interpret the word it's all right so i would entertain a motion from the board along these lines my personal opinion is that holly hughes me to be reviewed and they can either go through the whole store commission or the infill but i'm curious what requirement is there any more discussion or i could entertain a motion somebody want to make a motion on that matter for tapes yes ok so just to make sure we're we're clear the proper emotion would be that that the language of the ordinance does not require in bill review and approval for an eighty has the certificate of appropriateness it doesn't need to go through the infield know what you're looking for is a motion to interpret the language right yeah yeah to not require infill approval if it's in the historic district ok so somebody want to move what r i will make a motion that the to interpret or ordinance that we do not require in fell if the a t u is in the historic district and there's a certificate of appropriateness is that what you cetera yes all right now back to the topic at hand right ok so be used for the eighty's going to use by only two occupants or no more than two of the occupying for more than a month we have certificate of appropriateness from the historic commission we've had the site plan doesn't need parking the square footage requirements are mt city water and sewer setback requirements of the map the footprint is one third or less than what the principal dwelling is in the title be less than twenty four feet we've seen floor plans kitchen bathroom and sleeping areas as far as any other you know conditions i mean aside from blinds in the windows we're talking second floor there's not much else we can do that we need rug ok which are the endurance ok fifty four in forty fourth west eighth street seventeen point zero four eight jim friend construction is requesting a variance to allow for two buildings to use the same sewer  ordinates shows relief from these requirements if the board concludes they have methods standards for the variance twenty nine deaths thirty eight twenty nine yash forty six yes we have someone here speak to th variance for the same sewer ok we early on met with city staff just because we're working on the apartment building and knowing that we're going to have a tenant in this and the lower level of the sent building that would have a kitchen and we have a need for a thousand gallon grease interceptor because that system has an existing sewer line that goes out to a street that's actually above the elevated sewer we worked with city staff and said is there is there a way that we can put the the grease interceptor on the backside of the building because there obviously isn't any space in the front and the front nor side of the building because the buildings are all situated right on the right away like and so that the b p understood that as well saying they don't want to grease interceptor in there right away along a street and so we were able to coordinate the solution to put on the back side of the building that allows us to meet the pollution control requirements which are important to to meet as relates to the b p w so then that that kitchen the line from that kitchen will go through the grease interceptor and then come between the two buildings which are for all practical purposes are connected essentially a three foot gap between the two buildings the sewer will run through there again the only says the only the only sewer from the adjacent existing building is just from the kitchen all the rest of it will continue use the sewer that's already there which is practical and able to be used and then the sewer will run between the two buildings and the proposed apartment building will have its waggles connected to that line and goes out to the street ok the hardship there is just because we need to meet the pollution standards the pollution requirements of having a grease interceptor we need to have a space to position that somewhere here in the building without tearing up existing building was three compartments st that's that's coming out the back side and that was i can just an elevation thing we're not able to get that to be too up into something that's that's at the first floor so the only thing that's going to be going into the joints or that's not part of the building  who sort is is the three compartment saying that's it because i think the utility company will require it as well they need to be able to work on it they out they need allowances for this and if the properties do ever sell one of the one of the buildings owners is going to have to have control over their sewer some ok we've got documentation from the b p w saying yeah they're in favor of this so i don't have any more questions than anybody from the board have a question all right thank you thank you anyone else to speak in favor the application any want to post ok close the public hearing what's pleasure the board a movie appro i think you also should be specific that it's only a connection that services the grease trap and that the whole building i believe that's what's intended correct three compartment sensory compartments thank you now the approval is conditioned on the three compartment three seventy country road seventeen point five building men for life has requested a special exception to provide reasonable accommodation to operate a recovery residence at three seventy country club road for sixteen unrelated persons with disabilities the ordinance prohibits more than four unrelated persons in a single family dwelling unit thirty nine seventeen point four thirty nine  to fourteen dash four point fourteen i do have part of a letter here i need to read that was submitted today begins we are raving regarding items seventeen point zero five three seventy country club road we have no issue with allowing individual individuals with disabilities to live there sixteen but we regret that the unit earlier i'm sorry we request that the unit be restricted to individuals with disabilities in not be allowed to fill vacancies with low income individuals and that was from bill in helen do we have someone to speak to the accommodation i know that for most of us we've been through this process before for the single family homes it's a little different project here we're looking at acquiring the two story building which is an old school house at three seven a country club road and turning that into apartments on the first floor i'm sorry offices on the first floor and residential on the second floor are sufficient to allow sixteen people all of whom will be disabled people in there that would not otherwise qualifies disabled people would like the record to reflect that i've given you all a copy of three pages of document titled of community psychology bottom line on this if you want to recap of the it works better for the social model of recovery to be in for the people that are in treatment to be in treatment with more than eight people as opposed to only having four six or something like that and the reason for that is it's greater accountability and there's more of a social network built up that allows people to benefit from that require a significant amount of investment for level one city three charity but we're looking at a bit of a blank slate inside the building so we're working with the city to make sure that everything  that second floor is meeting all of the building and safety standards  with that and being sensitive to the board's time i know there's going to be some other people that want to come up and talk about the need for recovery housing  the difference between this request and the requests that were done roughly a year ago is that we're going to have the offices for building men for life the operator at the same physical location is where the recovery residence is going to be also we're going to have a house manager that's going to be there he's going to be staying there sleeping there who's going to be there twenty four seventh's so they'll be more countability and across united states recovery elements and then also mr brower operates building them for life and i believe you'd like to say a few words ok any questions but i've the office manager and living resident does that count towards the sixteen at least the live in person or is that in addition to see the live in person would count within the sixteen but not the officers it designers and the city involved a little bit with some some guidelines for us and we're hoping to build something pretty special you know and it could imagine all building men for life has been kind of the fo that's probably about all i have to say is i think i think this is going to save lives you know i think we're going to more carbo the community i live up in the heights so it's only going to be about three blocks from my house which is kind of nice  drugs and alcohol in the community and we need to help to put a stop to it you know and raise you know these guys get treatment centers they're right back into the hospital right back into their addiction but if they have a safe place to live you know a safe environment that that can be the key and that's what i have all right and so oh yeah so this property is currently zone c one and one of the permitted uses under c one is residents that translates to effectively and are two zoning which would allow you to tension the two units on this house or on the slot and each unit having four unrelated  i can get to eight help me with the walk from eight to sixteen on this person well you know we've we've got a set up with eight eight rooms two man aromas usually works best for recovery more accountability so that's kind of how we you know the more people you can help you know in the project the better it is i know you guys you know the ordinance i don't know all but we need your guys blessing on that well no we understand and what we've got to understand or come to a determination is what's reasonable and ok fine you know that's if you were to put two kitchens in here you're obviously here wanting more than eight and that's i'm i'm trying to understand what level of reasonable commendation is necessary to meet the purpose of  the ordinance of the applicable regulations so i'm trying to understand from from your standpoint beyond more people is is good helping each other and having a larger community there is i can't change the bathrooms and the plumbing are situated in the center of the building up in order to put a kitchen on the far side so like to divide it into two separate units you know  with that type of a set up it seems to be the most feasible it has a large industrial kitchen big freezers you know and then on the far side there's going to be the house that's basically the end and the far left side that's just a single floor there's no basement underneath that so you know as far as to put plumbing and anything like that i think it's pretty all right so there's there are certain practical difficulties for putting a second kitchen and a fire wall through or something in sorry  being just a next step just outside of a treatment center now we have i trust or a unit here in holland they house fourteen men at that house as a single family house on washington boulevard same  it's more of a treatment center but you know we're talking high volume of people in a small in a small area right ok and then there's the gal's house that they also run which is that environment it's helpful to him there's more accountability and i think all in all this this would work it's not a it's not a middle of the neighborhood like we have with a lot of our recovery houses  we're hoping to probably shut down some of our smaller houses in the city of holland which will move some of that saturation out of the other the mainstream in town which some folks might like ok a couple other questions i suspect i know the answers to but i'll ask them anyway is the recovery residence a certified member of an established entity that your current operations are fully in compliance they are ok with with mar with the requirements we set forth when we have proof that i can have my attorney answer that correctly but feel free to back up and yeah go ahead i guess i asked about that ok and he had a great answer all of the all of the valid legal requirements of been placed upon us are being observed by billing and fraud for the prior reasonable accommodation approvals that were given roughly ok you also asked the question about why we didn't ask for two different buildings as opposed to one and the answer that is because we want to have it make sense it's better for operations to just have one and the spaces is more than sufficient to accommodate sixteen related people right and so if you can have sixteen related people in the space my my counter point report showing compliance on the previous properties that we've approved for for building men for life because that's in our study session a number of concerns were raised and so i'd i'd like to give the city and building meant for life an opportunity to get together dot the i's cross the t's and ensure that what we've agreed to already is operating and then move forward on this one  for the record i'm going to check to that ok and the following rationales for that one is i've got i've got time requirements where i can't wait for an extensive period of time because this is also linked to getting financing ok for the project you know and also we're buying it and there are some time constraints there so i would ask the board respectfully to render a decision this evening the only issue in front of the board this evening a first off i think you know the applicants time you know coming in here is the timing of when they chose to apply the other applicants choice of compliance with the other requirements was is their choice to comply or not comply  and they've had that approval for over a year roughly a year and last i heard the inspection report showed noncompliance it three three locations out of the the group  and you know you know documentation to show that if you table it for one month so that inspection can happen reinspection and they can bring it into compliance there's nothing before you that shows that they would not be able to go forward with th that in terms of the maximum number of people the said they put down as a requirement that no more than six that we do have an opinion from mr polson who is a washington d c lawyer specializing in doing nothing but litigating federal issues of a b a and federal fair housing act that in fact that that's not a valid legally required permissible thing for the city to have done at that point ok so i'll tell you that we've we've met all of the women for life rather has met all of the requirements but for no more than two i'm sorry no more than six people residing  so there's nothing to change with that and again i'd ask you to consider what's in front of the board this evening ok so your lungs all right so what i'm being asked here is last time i was asked to come up with a reasonable accommodation for building men for life we provided what we thought was a reasonable a dation building men for life feels that wasn't reasonable it has gone beyond that and now i'm being asked to approve a nother reasonable accommodation that if i approve anything less than or even what you're asking for if you feel it's not appropriate you may go beyond opinion and therefore you don't need to comply what here's the message ok what are turning is that the issue is better framed in terms of the physical accommodation how many people could that residence or that building physically accommodate if they weren't disabled and they were all related right yup yup and i think max the max that we're asking alive to come in and say well gee we need to put seventeen people in there we cannot do that what was done roughly a year ago was we present no more than six people in that residence that is the single discreet issue that once i get a letter from the city says you're not in compliance we're renovations that were made at four thirty nine west twenty first street with the new bedrooms in the basement we're still shy i want to permit for the smoke detectors that were installed in the basement we cleaned up all of the previous wiring but we're short  not your that is probably not a building code violation however that came right out of the market buying spree you guys have to our standards for a rooming house o basement room at one thirty one west seventeenth street you know we remove that as it's no longer a bedroom it's a storage room but again the work was was done without a permit so you need that to be permitted for the us window i wasn't aware that that was something that we were waiting to get done i just thought if we didn't use it as a bedroom we would be fine but i know it would be great to have that back as a bedroom living space so we'll get down that we need to pull three permits for bring all of the documents with you because i didn't know that we would be discussing this i guess my opinion is that that was from all the requests that building meant for life came but for me it's very important to ensure that when we provide a reasonable accommodation and there are conditions and requirements placed upon that the veracity of the applicant would dictate that those conditions were met and i would feel most comfortable if there was subsequent inspection to ensure that applicant has fulfilled those requirements so therefore i can view this one then in good faith know that the applicant after paying an electrician almost four thousand dollars to take care of the smoke detector issues at all of the properties why it's still open you know and so i don't know answered and the other one i thought if we close the room it was fine add an extra bathroom we got an exemption from now or that says if you guys are working different shifts there's a bath and a half is sufficient so i think we're pretty much in com if trish wants to come through and check them again she can ensure that you get that letter also marinara yes i have documentation and i have a letter dated violations that thirty days which would have been september again at least for me in my position as a board one of the tests we look at it's for the health safety and welfare of the occupants and the rules be marinara the city of holland put those up for the health safety  welfare so while we want to provide a reasonable accommodation at least certainly in compliance with the eighty eight at the same time i want to assure that reasonable accommodation does not negatively impact in other areas the health safety and welfare of the occupants just again just for the record this is a discrete separate application has nothing to do it's physically distant by probably three or four miles from any of the other locations i was unaware that there were any deficiencies terms of like the electric and those things on the windows and all those things will have to be taken care of if what the city is saying is you can't put more than six people in there and that might be a decision that has to be reviewed by a federal judge and that's according to mr stephen paul and from what that's not uncle just saying no no no i understand so again i'd ask the the z b this evening simply render a decision on the request in front of the board tonight witches we'd like to have sixteen people all of whom are disabled to reside in the residence that's going to have a bedroom two people per bedroom actually that's not true there's going to be fifteen of those and there's going to written letter it's twofold as one as his or a financial reason to have us yes or is there a therapeutic reason i have this yes and i and with that i think it's which is put all of the information from the if actually there's nothing more that you're going to find from looking at anything else and i would ask respectfully for a decision to be made th anyone else to speak in support of this application previously i was executive director of lake shore coordinating council and you know we kind of managed all the medicaid and block grant money and the outcome money coming back from the state for five different counties including out of a county so i spent a lot of time about four maybe five years ago working with building and for life and they just and even now i mean with all  the oversight that we have not from your perspective but from a clinical perspective and from the kind of work that they do and make sure all that's in place and they do an excellent job when with that but the main thing i do and i know this has nothing to do with your ordinance and all of that but there are just such a tremendous need in this area there's a tremendous need everywhere but there's a tremendous need in this area for this type of a program this is the only program in ottawa county the only residential treatment program like this in and out of our county and and we put about over a thousand people a year through our treatment program and the out of our county residents that come through our program i mean i don't i don't know the numbers but we we put a lot of people into building that for life and just very very pleased with the outcomes of those people i mean a lot of people come in they stay there long enough to really get on her feet mentally and and get the help that they need to go to  patient programs and they all get jobs they become employed they become productive members of society you know which which gives them some feelings of well being inside hell and it's the outcome will absolutely and it keeps them off the go from going back that it's just it's a process of the environment that we're in but the amount of money that's available to fund these kind of programs and the pay for these kind of people is is negligible is negligible in programs like building men for life do it do a tremendous job with a very small amount of income that comes into their facilities and that's really all they have to contribute so when any questions you know ok thank you thank you anyone else to speak in support of the application want to speak in opposition to the application but i do have a question for you close it to us here and maybe i missed it was a financial statement or prospectus submitted by building mental life building men for life for this property myself but i do know last time we received historical financials to ensure that the accommodation didn't produce any undue financial burn and i'm not sure i can make that analysis now walker's one of the it's really hard to take the financial reform bill they can for the whole program just because some of our homes lose a great deal of money and some make money and saw the whole thing holds itself together so it really depends on where the guys are at when they move in so quite frankly we might go a month or two months without receiving payment from anybody  the whole house could be laid off christmas is extremely tough nobody works christmas new years types so it's really hard to say this one building right you have consolidated that  range down by property because i imagine it's tracked by property not by people you know we never we never really did that correctly we we made up things it all it's really hard to budget one piece of vibe there's five people on this is what they pay or that's not the case we're nonprofit we're out to help people who are flat broke when they get here and there's many period there's at least told month history for each of those properties to determine what revenues were generated on a per property basis there was and we presented there are three or even in some cases right we presented that to the board and there was a separate we try to break out here's our central  however this building has gotten zero generation of any revenue it's got no history at all it needs to have a significant amount of money put into it before it's even going to be usable i would think you know there's no past history  look at church sure i understand the past history but if i were going to invest that amount of money i'd have a pro forma myself of what the five year run rate going to be not only in expenses and obligations to lenders  investors but also what i could expect a return on a per occupant bedroom you know there's a pro forma that's been done there is nothing that  in looking at the architectural drawings that you've got for this building it raises a question that i have that we've talked about all year ago also and that is the standards that are being met for accommodating this number of people just a number of general standards that are a bathroom center of kitchens in our space just the amount of space that you might need for for relaxation for what it whatever i mean so much larger facility that we've looked at before and so i don't know that i don't have the confidence myself that this is these are other this is this space is being provided that meets those standards  i don't know if i'm missing something i mean i could look at these drawings myself but i don't even know what the standards are but i'm curious about whether it does and i don't even know what all the standards are obviously the number of bathrooms is an obvious one that we talked about a year ago but any number of other standards that need to be met to accommodate and provide a comfort if i could put place if i could put that into the basket of building standards   unrelated people in that building on the second floor of the building not asking for any billing of any other variances it's a need to sell them it's separate and apart from both distance wise and from a physical setup from what we've run historically in a single family residential building and  i can't think of i can't think of anything else i could add to say i think this is a wonderful use of the property and i think it's going to be something that this so they're saving lives we're going out and trying to get this done shoestring so be very helpful to get the result combination on this specific location th evening so that we can go ahead and prepare and try to get the financing lined up in the contractors lined up and go building thank you and i actually have another question you stay i know you're asking us to consider just this property and i think some of us still are stuck with the violations that we're talking about that might be related to the other properties the you're asking us for sixteen and when we went through the trying to you know do the headcount that count whatever you call it on those other properties before we we're looking at financial and i don't know if i heard this correctly earlier or not and that's what i just want to clarify with you so there may or may not be a property or two that have more occupants or have have this year than we approved and did i hear you say you were just waiting for the city to notify you and then would file some sort of case about it yes there are some that are over occupancy that i understand that  correctly i believe there's at least one that has more than six people and there's another one that's got more than six beds and it all goes i i'm not sure that's my living in the thing but and i'm asking that just because if we're you know you're asking us for sixteen what we did last time we looked at those properties we gave you different numbers of mike does relate to this property that if we said fourteen tonight right would you consider that reasonable more people that are in a recovery residence together in the study first the seven it's the therapeutic basis for doing that you get better scientific outcomes from the second reason is financial if there's a financial resolve to allow this the city needs to consider that in this case we're getting roughly one hundred twenty five bucks per week per person think we're not making money and we just relied so heavily on those things before when we were coming up with our numbers that we thought were reasonable accommodations which i'm hearing tonight you didn't agree with and our lawyer doesn't agree  would allow ten people or eleven people be physically accommodated in the house that's that's the issue that's an issue the whole plight to a limited number of other operations of the property as a right for the offices and so you know what we what we thought we were getting here was something that made sense and would be looked upon family by the city of ho ask that the board make a decision this evening our requests for no more than sixteen people in the residential section of the building which is that's going to be the maximum number of people that can be allowed to be housed in the building if they were related you mentioned one of the tests was financial you know words do you believe that we have sufficient materials to make that assessment side i would also argue to you have sufficient financial information to look at it and say is there any financial benefit to having sixteen people in there paying a program fee as opposed to  person and sure that's in the context of a reasonable accommodation not not in the context of profiteering necessarily beyond what's required for the reasonable accommodation ok there's no but if you want to have some evidence in terms of profiteering i think that was a yeah it's a it's a non it's a nonprofit so bill i'm in for life is not in the business of making a profit anyway  what is the requirement for full bass to the number of occupants on those i don't recall from a year ago connected to an approved water system and a good working condition should be supplied for each four rooms no one full bath for each for four rooms ok for those bedrooms you know it's much more effective if they meet them before they get approval because afterwards they sort of drift along like i'm not saying they will or won't but a lot of times without we can say just sort of drift along with the violations because it but given the relief they've asked could pro forma a company that was well you could require that you had that information last time when you review their application i believe there is some indication that they would be shutting down a couple the others houses and maybe you could they could indicate whether they i think me personally i would like to see a pro forma and evidence that the city's inspections turn up positive or or pass just lines in compliance is the word i'm looking for i do think the in this case it's inseparable from the applicant to continue to come back to the board and ask for benefit to table it as opposed to bringing it to a vote which which might lead to a rejection just based on the lack of evidence we have i know that they want a decision tonight but i do think it's more than fair to not bring that to a vote which would then draws upon other rules so in my opinion i think i would like to table it and get we have assurances from the city that is inspections can be wrapped up in completed a month is more than enough time to put out perform pro forma for mantles and i would feel more comfortable because ultimately when we make a decision between the city ordinance which is designed for health safety and welfare versus a reasonable accommodation we still want to make sure that bring other properties of life to the city and provide a performance for us to review for that i mean ok so what i'm hearing then is a request to the applicant  considers are in violation a pro forma and i also heard of a proposal for what if if any properties would would also be impacted with this location sure which would should be wrapped up in the pro forma ok and then i want just think that would be the ones we addressed that may be all that it should be all building and for life properties  understands what we're going after here all right so we've got a motion by or is there any support for said motion second ok we've got a second vyvian it to work but i don't think we need findings of fact next month i think we've got some unfinished business do we need to read it first run and then take it off the table or give me a motion to take the table and then zero six goldenrod avenue seventeen point zero two zero mike bass craft is requesting a special exception to construct an accessory dwelling unit at seven o six goldenrod ave the board is authorized to grant such permission if certain conditions are found to exist thirty nine dash twenty five g already do we have somebody that waited all this time to speak to this application sorry guys single family dwelling in a residential zone district yes ok the eighty you will be used for only two or fewer occupants yes they're all going to be there for periods of one month or more yes ok you've gone through the residential infill process this time yes aright we've got a site plan very nice by the way i think i'm jealous the eighty years going to be between one it's no more than i think this is single story right so it's no more than twelve feet tall it's a i think we're calling it a two story has a lot it's twelve feet tall ok which meets the two story  right i believe we've got a floor plan showing the kitchen bath and sleeping correct and he screening requirements that you see on this property you'll notice to the north is a barn which is my barn yes so it's directly to the north there's a barn followed by property i own property to the west is seven acres that's undeveloped  property to the south has its own screen from my property and then my house street from the road ok any other questions or concerns from board approved right i don't know that we've got anything else on the agenda meeting minutes from where we'll get up and leave the meeting minutes and