this is the time in the place for the meeting of the board of appeals for the city of holland we're here to consider applications for i forget that part of my script request you know we're going to go through the criteria that you probably already answered in your your application we asked that when you do come to the microphone to speak that you state your name and your address for the record we typically will hear the applicant first followed by everyone in support of the request after that we'll hear those in opposition at that point we may call the applicant back up to answer any questions or that at that point will close the public hearing will deliberate will will render our decision once we close the public hearing there no opportunity for further public comment you're welcome to stay for the deliberations and and the like if you want if you don't you can call city hall after nine a m tomorrow morning to find out what we decided i think those are all the the major points of the opening preamble so if we could start with the agenda please five seventy eight cell shore drive sixteen point zero seven c rachel price is requesting permission to change from one non conforming use to another non conforming use she wishes to operate a yoga studio fitness clothing store in a place of a former vietnam veterans of america in the building located at five seventy eight cell shore drive the zoning board of appeals may approve this if certain conditions are met thirty nine thirty six already do we have an applicant here email to dan hopefully you guys all about that and got to read that so yeah ok fair enough  that and then just kind of like a healthy living building ok fair enough any adverse effect of that as compared to the prior use as  meeting whole i mean i don't see any problems i mean obviously you are bringing in fitness to the area you know trying to promote healthy living in just kind of obviously  had quite a few people there for their meetings so i think there is a total of seventeen spaces that are available in the parking lots are not going to be a general nuisance to the people living next door i don't think so no i mean obviously like seventeen spaces is quite a few and a lot of people ride together if they come with their friends or so that's kind of helps out too with the parking situation all right that was my  all right anyone else to speak in favor of the application an can you come up to the microphone and public hearing with the pleasure of the board i'm ready to make a motion ok i second you want to wait for the motion but you're all right i'd like to make a motion that we approve the request all right i second that ok so i've got a motion by libya's second but a sucky what are you findings and what are you find increase the density congestion or become a nuisance to neighboring properties doesn't appear that will have any issues with radioactivity vibration noise overheat  no off street parking is going to be necessary there seems to be sufficient parking on the property construction of new homes at twelve o two in twelve twenty two west thirty second street thirty nine one ninety six ok do we have an applicant here extra how do you care to tell us what you're trying to do here yeah there is a existing house there are two parcels one has an existing house on it one is bacon  there are a number of accessory type buildings behind we intend to demolish all those and build a new private street target a new homes on that and the two twenty five a two hundred fifty whole bunch of questions for you ok don't get off as easy as the first did all right all the rear lots are going to have access to thirty second street correct ok they're all go here you're talking about a private road there you're planning on having that road meet the international fire code requirements for access yes i have had a number of conversations with the fire marshal i'm going to go blank on his name right now but  specifically talked about the radius of that cul de sac at the end to make sure sufficient for their largest ok vehicles right maintenance of this association for lack of a better word to handle the ok the maintenance and snowplow it's a very tough and then so knowing that ron needs to sign off on it you're already aware that you've got to have the city attorney review and  enough going to be a firefighter back there yes the various lots i'm presuming the front yards of them are going to face your culdesac yes yes ok what about parcel or the two fronting on thirty second street so on the north west lot so with regards to front yard and rear yard set backs you would want all seven parcels to face the drive with their front yard six out of the seventy six out of the seven with the existing one still facing thirty second street that's correct i believe if you have the drawings of front of you from paradigm i believe they indicate the building envelope and  allen something you want to be aware of to is the difference between facing a street and actually having their front yard with front yard setbacks based upon what you guys designated as the front doors ok so even though the existing house m face thirty second street i'm looking at the setback shown by their surveyor and it it appears that they're putting thirty foot setback correct me if i'm wrong matt facing the be we get to pick but we typically ask you what you want i'm sorry i'm suggesting sorry i'm sorry there is no that that that that's fine we typically defer to your wishes but i'm sorry you know the the you know i just want to make sure we understand what your wishes will access the other new street ok again with the exception of the existing house ok the house has a driveway on thirty second all right sort of keep that separate from the car that often and make the other six that part of the correct but it does so it's got to drive off thirty second and it already has a drive that will go into the new second is about where the new drive goes if that makes sense right yeah but the the remaining l of that you will not tied in to the private c your intent ok so so what we would be looking at for this entire development then would be a cul de sac coming out with a driveway in close proximity for the existing house proximity being within a couple hundred feet yes you just want to make sure we were all getting our mind around that same way any concerns for visibility or traffic congestion with the cul de sac coming up there to thirty second street you know your thirty second street in this area i believe is a thirty five mile an hour speed limit and most of the houses and along that area there i would guess the average is about eighty five wide lab so there's driveways every eighty foot right for a mile in each direction i would say or so anyway but the  other questions from the hitch on either side of the road that that will manage you'll be running off to that ditch then with your road yes it just seems like i don't have my glasses on here but is that just under fifty foot wide any other questions for  thank you anyone else to speak in favor of this application into and they've hopefully followed through on all the things that they need for your approval i don't think it's a hurt to the neighborhood at all i think it will be an actually an advantage to have a few new homes in that general area and i live out there should not affect road traffic and hopefully it's a positive for the community ok thank you sir anyone else to speak in favor of the wexler the prospective buyer this is mike gomery the prospective seller and to my neighbors who have come for this hearing my name is michael short i'm here with my wife donna we own and live in our house at eight ten myrtle ave ours is a property that shares a common boundary with one of the two properties in question here namely twelve o two west thirty second street the northwest corner of our property abuts the southeast corner of the lot for twelve o two west thirty second street you can see the property outlined there and so ours would be on the far right lower corner is where our property of butts and we have the swimming pool in our backyard ok so it's your property there by the finger yes ok exactly thank you  develop and in our neighborhood can be a positive for all of the neighbors but it can also be a negative if it's not considered properly our southwest city neighborhood is unique in the city of holland it contains agricultural land or is adjacent to agricultural property just beyond the city limits from our property we can see hawks herons wild turkeys white tail deer red tailed fox and the occasional coyote abundant wooded cover provides the homes for many of these wildlife animals a subdivision located on the two properties subject to people to appeal here poses questions to me as a homeowner as i am not a lawyer i'm not familiar with the rules regarding whether or not as zoning board of appeals can approve a request for a zoning change from a party who does not yet have a legal interest in the property in question having said this i would like the zoning board of appeals to carefully consider all the aspects that such a development would impact seven homes would increase traffic on thirty second street by fourteen to twenty cars utilities water and electricity will need to be brought in to build new homes with the a sept exception of the neighbors who live in easy court and easy court is to the left to the west on the property easy court is a subdivision that was approved in one thousand nine hundred for many of the neighbors will see property densities increase significantly in the area this will occur whether you currently live on the north side of thirty second street or to the east along thirty second street away from the property or along myrtle avenue along the eastern boundary of the property the south boundary of the property abut eight twenty myrtle which is open past year i do also have concerns that are related to the zoning request for submit subdivision technically the proposed subdivision does not appear to be a flag lots of division should it have been presented as a planned unit development a p u d or a subdivision wouldn't that make it subject to different rules and ordinances in keeping with those owning types for example the minimum frontage for a property in the city of holland in this are one district should be seventy feet three of the seven properties and they're shown there on the drawing are fifty feet wide the ingress egress road is shown  but it seems that this cannot be an accurate representation were it to be an easement one of the seven property owners in this development would retain the legal right to the property under the easement road it appears that this would need to properly become a new street within the city of holland finally i do want to say that we do wish mr wickstrom and mrs montgomery well but in light of the concerns i and others will share with you this evening members of the zoning board of appeals i urge you to rule rightly fairly and justly with regards to the request thank you went else to speak in opposition all these houses or would they put a new power pole in and everything for the whole development i'm not sure we can ask all the overhead lines will be abandoned is what i hear ok ok although the low power will be buried along the easement through the center of the property so you won't see more power lines ok that's a good thing  thanks ok thank you my name is kim de boer i live at eight thirty myrtle lavin you and i own a twenty mile avenue which is the empty farm pasture oh just to the south of us here the reason that i own that property and the reason that i live in my neighborhood is because it's just a very peaceful and just a farm community and i think that putting a subdivision like is being proposed tonight just doesn't that it's just too dense it makes it too dense in that neighborhood and i just don't think it works  things thrown into the treeline trespassing things like that just because they have smaller yards maybe i'm not sure it's just a different a different feel the people that live in our neighborhood have lived there for a long time and it's kind of family owned properties and it's just peaceful and i just i just feel that adding more houses in such a close area it just doesn't fit thank you thank you anyone else to speak on this issue two thirty second the proposed lots seem to be in congress with the surrounding properties in relation to both size and value particularly those to the south and east we bought our house because we like the farmland community we like the space we sit on about two acres he's lot seem to be about an eighth of an acre also seven lots and such a small property seems more like a subdivision or a planned unit development than a flag lot doesn't seem to fit the community in short this proposal is not harmonious or appropriate to the general vicinity and would change the essential character of our area and requests respectfully that this variance be denied thank you  anyone else to speak on this topic just add that i live by myself i live on old evergreen way which is just this one hundred yards north of here so of old orchard so i had to live very very nearby dry bed every day in my opinion i utilities are planning on coming in from thirty second street that's great and being very and b t w was pretty excited about abandoning they don't like those overhead lines as i said no so they were pretty excited to make those go away and write bring it very very very zines don't go out when the wind blows right yes exactly already so thank you ok all right go ahead and close the public hearing any discussion amongst the board i have a question what will we hear from the city about the first gentleman's questions concerning this application regarding the the p o d issue on the basis upon which the misapplication has come in and so dividing land this way correct me if i'm wrong here dan retains all the requirements of the underlying zone district which i believe is are one in this case that's correct if this were for example rezoned b r d you could end up with higher density or lower density depending on the presentation and the planning commission  just on the road because i think another one of those questions had to do with the purchase agreement interest which is acceptable correct we've done it is quite quite often a developer will come in with a purchase agreement signed and then asked for relief because they don't buy the property before they know they can develop  any other discussion on this that's the pleasure of the board i'll make a motion that we approve with a few conditions ok one that all the lots other than the existing house have access only to the private road all right they have a hint as demonstrated that their lights will have access to a public street they will comply with a lot within area requirements for the zone district they will be excessed in earth connected to city and lots whether developed or under the vote in the neighborhood in the effect of additional curb cuts and traffic resulting from the proposed division do we have what we need i believe so i think i think i heard earlier that that the front yards would be facing the private drive right all of the front yards i think we agree it would would face the private drive maximum allowed is twelve feet this gradual be the key to it in the historic district in his prayer to have a certificate of appropriateness as well as meet other conditions conditions for the for the board to approve this thirty nine of this will be changed eventually this group and that i can't say just anything can happen so you're going to meet all the requirements for building fire safety in not going to be a detriment to health safety or welfare or any questions for the board ok thank you thank you and anyone else to speak in favor of this application anyone to speak in opposition to this application approve findings of fact please we have a certificate of of appropriateness condition upon joining approval that has been issued by the historic district commission  all the requirements of the building safety fire and safety and other ethical codes have been met and there is no there should be no detriment to the health safety and welfare for reasonable use enjoyment of the nearby parcels we have what we need rather i just want to clarify one thing about the motion that is to allow the graduate to thirteen feet as is requested that's correct ok they were good ok enough in accordance with the stork district which in recognition right five forty six baby you drive thirteen seventy three baby you drive sixteen point z king is requesting a special exception to reconfigure two existing substandard dogs into two different  substandard diets that would not meet the required with or building area that is required in the are one zone district the zoning board of appeals may approve this if certain conditions are met thirty nine dash ten ok do we have someone here to speak to the  thirteen fifteen be a view drive objects to three mr king was rejected police previously the concept many neighbors are in florida in cannot attend the meeting also concerned about safety in traffic postponed mr king was previously rejected on this concept and again concerned about traffic and safety thank you well good evening bill circle forty two east lakewood boulevard holland michigan i'm here in behalf of my client neil king and as you indicated we're here requesting a special exception approval for his property located at five forty six bayview avenue this will be familiar to you as you heard from several of the letters and correspondence received already as mr king was here last december i think at the time the property is referred to as one three seven three bay do you can i interrupt you for just a quick minute ron do we need to determine that this is different enough from december before we proceed or should we hear him look through for i think he can do it all as as one probably easier to determine whether it's substantially different after you hear the applicant or enough information and what anyone else has to say all right sounds good thank you and so mr king was here before and there's a number of things that have changed since he was last here i think just to kind of recap would be nice to look at what his original proposal was in december i think dan if you've got that up on friday maybe can you zoom in just on the on the lots here might make it a little bit easier to see last december mr king came here and as you can see he owns would have been planted lots fourteen fifteen sixteen and seventeen fourteen is not a complete planet a lot of portion of that a little sliver had been sold off previously to the property owner just to the east the property owner one's lot thirteen but the balance of that property mr king owns he came here back in december and was seeking to to have three lots of  proved out of what was a single tax parcel at the time there was a number of concerns that were raised one of the concerns was that by allowing three lots or be some traffic and congestion problems the other concerns as expressed by you and some of the neighbors would be that two of the three lots of are proposed would be the smallest two lots in the neighborhood and therefore it was thought that that would not be in keeping or in character with the neighborhood after that meeting mr king approached city staff and have three lots created in a different configuration and dan if you can maybe showing exhibit a there you'll see you'll see that under your ordinance when you have a lot of record and planted a lot of record and just for  right to build and to use that lot so long as you can comply with the setbacks ok so even though that that lot may not comply with lot with their lot area if it was validly created many years ago you have a legal right to use that so mr king looked at that and said well i have a lot seventeen that's a that's a legally created planted lot i have a lot sixteen i'd like to have approval to use both of those lots says as standalone building sites and then they would leave me the balance of the property to the to the north which would be lots of part of fourteen fifteen in the alley immediately south of fourteen so he saw approval to do that there's no special exception approval needed for that the zoning board of appeals does not need to be involved in that process that's a staff approval level if you meet the language of the ordinance you are allowed to do that and that's what he did and he applied for that and was granted approval for three lots created that way and dan if you show that aerial photo that's the last exhibit there and it's a little out of order but that might be a good example that shows what that looks like there you'll see the three lots at the end as zooming in on you'll see there is one lakefront lot to the north and two smaller lots underneath that those would be a lot sixteen and seventeen so as we sit here today my client has approval for those three lots that's what he has he's come before you today to ask for a different configuration he has already sold off the southernmost  lot their lot seventeen so what he has left is sixteen to the north yes what you see right there are the two that he has left and he's not asking for approval to create any new lots rather he wants to reconfigure the shape of those two lots to move that boundary line slightly different to make what would be two lots that are more in keeping with the neighborhood than what that looks like so that's what the approval is tonight is different those and then maybe go to the the current proposal that you'll see that will show you what those lots would look like so that's what you would have you would have two lots there fifteen and sixteen would be together in form one lot will call that lot b and then what is mostly a lot fourteen with a portion of the alley south of it would be lot c ok so those are the two lots that we're we're asking for approval tonight instead of the two lots as shown in the previous configuration as you know from your zoning ordinance and this was the issue last time around if sixty percent or more of the lots on the same side of the street within three hundred feet of the property have been developed at lesser standards the z b a or the board of appeals is then allowed to consider reduce lottery and a lot with when you look at the lots in the area if you go back to the aerial photo dan that would be helpful for anyone to see maybe zoom out there there are  eight lots within three hundred feet of the subject property you have six slots that are to the east from the lots in question those first six homes and there and then you have two lots to the s ordinance requires that the minimum lot area be eight thousand four hundred square feet if you look at those eight lots that are next to my client's property you'll see that six out of the eight are less than the required lot area they are less than eight thousand four hundred square feet and i've provided you with a table that shows the size of each of those individual lots with regard to lot with the are the are one zoning district requires a seventy foot lot with and again if you look at those eight lots six to the east to the south you'll see that seven out of the eight have been developed at a lesser with than seventy feet most of them are right around fifty feet forty nine fifty feet in width as you go up and around so clearly more than sixty percent of the lots within three hundred feet have developed at a lesser area and a lesser lot with as a result it's appropriate for the zoning board of appeals to consider the reduction that we're asking for today the next part of your ordinance says ok if you if you establish that if you meet that showing we will consider the reductions so long as those reductions are in keeping with the character of the neighborhood and so long as they're not detrimental to the neighborhood so we've got two additional findings that we need to that we need to look at there and when you look at whether or not they're in keeping with the character i think the key thing to look at is really the size and shape of the property and how that compares to what's in the existing neighborhood the  first request that came before you in december was for a lot sizes were two of the three would have been the smallest in the neighborhood since that time they reconfigure the sizes package it a little bit differently to make it to make those lots larger so that they're more in character  with the neighborhood if you look at it lot b if you go to the proposal dan there would be exhibit b maybe zoom in on on there lot b would end up being eight thousand one hundred seventy seven square feet whereas lot c would be six thousand nine hundred forty three square feet these would be the third largest in the fifth largest lots within those eight that we're talking about so if we had ten lots we're now the third largest in the fifth largest instead of being at the bottom right in the middle or towards the top very similar in size to the rest those lots in  neighborhood which was a desire to get to be similar to those in the other thing to point out is that with this configuration it would allow for two lakefront lots that are very similar in size to the rest of those lots along the if the request that's before you today is not approved you would have what you saw before to nine lakefront lots that are very small that would in fact be the two smallest slots in the area in one very large lakefront lot that large lakefront lot would get developed with a much larger house than what is shown along the rest of bayview drive it would be the largest house along the block if you look at those next six houses going east to be very much not in character the neighborhood approving these two lots like this would ensure that the houses that are built there along the lake would be of similar size and character as the rest of them along that stretch so again to try to to match what's going on with the neighborhood the last requirement then that needs to be discussed is whether or not the approval of be detrimental to the neighborhood and i know there was a lot of discussion about that the last time we were here and there's a lot of concerns about congestion traffic that that stemmed as a result of having three driveways of having three lots we're going to have that regardless that has been approved so that is not the issue today the issue is not do we have two lots or three lots we have three lots there's going to be three lots the question is are the three lots configured as they were shown earlier or are they going to be configured like this so that's really the issue before us so there's not going to be any increased traffic there's not could be any increase congestion we're going to have the same number of houses in the same number of lot so again i don't think there's there's any detriment to the neighborhood now that we're already at at three approve lots so i'll be happy to answer any other questions or that you have or anybody in the audience has as well so i think i have a question several of the people who wrote letters in concerning this application seem to be saying that the that you do not have the legal basis to develop these lots so you are saying that you actually do have a legal basis and i believe the city confirms that is that right that is we're proposing single family use here i presume correct and then it's up it's up to us to determine if it's in character or not detrimental to the neighborhood and those would be our conditions or are our criteria to any other questions for the applicant i guess it looks like he's already proven that as far as the sixty percent of the other three hundred feet that's been proven yeah yeah right thank you anyone else to speak in support of this application can i i have a garage that's right fifteen feet offset back ok i call of a seventy year grandfather sure because that's  garage twenty four years ago we knocked it down we rebuilt with a proper set back side clearance we didn't have to come to any board meeting ok i figure that's thirty seven feet stuck out in the lake and that's not their property it's probably mine if you want to put the a case i just landed in grand rapids from for a little i'm not prepared but if i had my plot map i don't believe one hundred ten feet on the angle i don't believe i don't believe anything o wide and probably a hundred and who knows how long wide and probably three stories tall it will look like crap and it's not so the road after they made a flag lot out of by stealing from lot sixteen into that's my two it's going to look like the dickens what did i go through with it all right so certainly one one question for you if you don't mind dan can you believe that that one with the orange borderlines up the i believe it's in your hand ok all right thank you there anyone else to speak on this topic there's you can see she's right there she says oh i'm sorry my name is joyce baumgardner i'm at thirteen a south shore also have a property at five sixty four west end which is on the lagoon ok we are about to build and so dan has been kind enough to have us figure out what our reality is in building different then being told no when we were here my question is what is the magic to getting these two lads and having only nine feet on the front nine feet in the middle and nine feet by the boughs i on my property have a twenty five foot  setback which was turned out fine we've worked that out i have i was given a thirty foot from the road which was marked down to eighteen where is the thirty foot from the r ad on here because the address will be a view and where are all the set there except protect the bow says and protect the king's and protect everyone else ok and i agree that one on the front maybe two in the back would be fine but how do you get to be that close i can only be as far out as the further west on my street there are no houses on that drive that are nine feet from the road so my question ok thanks all right so you're concerned and use the lower right corner of c well it's it's how is there going to be a an eighteen foot are two sides yards have to total eight hundred feet with no side yard less than seven if you see here on this drawing they are showing nine feet on each side which is equivalent to eat they could push it to one side or the other which would may mean they could put seven have building how does building b then get any setbacks that is not a road that was just an access at it correct the this is not really buildable area once you get thirty feet back they're not going to be able to have enough room in this portion here  to construct a twenty four and twenty four of what dimension to building which is required by code by ordinance they would be building back and in this area here then where's there where's there set back from is it still considered baby over that with their addresses but that's correct see any other people to speak on this application drive the picture you're looking at if you could bring that down a little bit i want it so you can go i live in that white house in the foreign ok and well within three hundred feet of the project sure the math that has been i believe is what the term was used in the compliance so that's sixty percent and you go along the street that the properties are on to think it's between the way it first in the hemingway's after that or from the ges they are vary from one hundred eighty feet at the bios's to mine that's around one hundred fifty feet as far as frontage on the lake and here you're going to be cramming cramming two homes on the lake that is not consistent with what's happening in the neighborhood and especially as you go further to the west it is there a lot to it or much much larger there not of the smaller scale that have been on the baby ok it comes down to the money yes it does is all of it is and and it is it is not consistent with what we're seeing in that neighborhood  my name is terry holden and i have a thirteen twenty five view at this and we did not get a notice because we were not within three hundred feet i just want to be assured that we have a safety issue with our community we have small children playing and you know many people have services and like when the dump truck on the truck comes out for their garbage there are many times you have to wait at least five minutes to get by to get out on to south shore drive and that we do have some elderly people the all age groups in our community have an ambulance had to come down and be able to get down there quickly i mean is this is really going to cause congestion we have an idyllic spot mean this is this is holland this is a part of a historic area many people remember that little lagoon by even the lagoon the neighbors our neighbors we pay to dredge that lagoon our money comes out there just to keep it looking nice and it's a great little place when people come off the big lake to kind of crew was in there and come out and so we take really pride in our neighborhood and we spend the money and the time to have that little dredged and we don't complain about it because it's important to us and i just think that three houses is just very congested and i mean i don't see why we just can't go with two but i'm really concerned about the safety of the people in history and so and see the challenge before the board right now and really the question here is they can make three just to say no and december to three lots and there was another avenue for that so three lots are going to happen here question is what configuration would be like ok so they're going to happen and so what i am we're struggling with now is one who can have a right to make three ok and so we're we're at the point now where all right one of them is already sold off there's going to be once yes i understand that do we  my name is fran johnson and i live at five five six mohawk which is you can't really see me but on the one map with all the houses i'm right there on the lagoon and nearby and this is my and uncle property oh and so i've been going there since i was little and i want to thank all of you for being so kind to come out tonight and taking your time you're volunteering this and it's appreciated and i realize they can't have three lots but is there a way that they can control it so that you won't have one big hug ugly one hundred foot long by twenty six foot house they're really right that it would look like a dormitory and it wouldn't be pretty at all and it wouldn't then when with the neighborhood is there any way to have a say with that being any of us i mean he has a profit margin that's why he's doing it he's well i live there but he doesn't live there now i will say that mr king deserves some credit he and his group have been very neat in the neighborhood they swept it i mean they're out there sweeping the street they did a fine job that way and it's appreciated by all the neighbors but still business is business and money is money and when it comes down to it is there anything that can prevent that house from being a wall for those people over in the corner in a wall for this gentleman right and a wall for these people and can the setbacks like for these people be the maximum  if it were that so it shoved over west as far as possible and can the maximum be shoved over on what seventeen from christie johnson's house was absolutely beautiful home she just built and they now five feet down to five feet setbacks off the property line that doesn't apply here so in this own district you need a minimum of seven feet off the proper seventy men and right minimum of seven feet which means you've got a minimum of fourteen feet look up there person person see they're showing that they're building area b about nine feet from the canes a person like that could go down as low as seven feet or as high as eleven feet or more so if you put seven feet on the opposite side of the canes then the larger setback will be required adjacent to the canes now since seventeen is already broken off there's not much we can do about affecting the location of whatever parcel goes on number seventeen adjacent to her property because it's already broke off and they can follow they can do seven foot on one side or eleven foot on that si zings was very ill this past year and they had a fire truck on the street and they had ambulances and it was blocked right nobody could go through now on that street there's a lot of people that are in their ninety's yup a number of homes and there are some that are have all kinds of medical issues and so safety is a huge concern i have another thought for you when you put that with this one let's say you have three houses there and they have three kids each maybe one has five kids and one has two kids and one is three and the kids are teenagers or older and they all have their own cars and they live at home like millenniums do today you know now you have ten cars here maybe fifteen cars there yet what are you going to do not much room to put on so what what what can be done or what can i mean these are just thoughts no i but there are there are standards or it says this is a very tight neighborhood one of the people down the street now they have plenty of area but they have three kids and they have all those cars that i just mentioned and it doesn't make any difference there but this is on the curve and the curve at the apex is fifteen feet it's really thirteen to fifteen feet on that curve right there you know but it's all no i i understand exactly where you're coming from growing up that was my brother my parents and myself and every been asking to try and get a feel for the neighbors preferences you know that the applicant if we if we turn down the request tonight which is essentially b and c on the right the applicant is perfectly within their rights to put the the house is one hundred one house on sixteen and one house on the larger fourteenth fifteenth lot without coming back and so you know we may not like the fact that there is the potential for three houses on what we were talking about in december but it it could have its lease you're going to the right to do that right it we want a bigger lot on the lake and a very small lot off the lake or do we want to grow grant the applicants request to you know split those two a little differently i don't know what's the best i'm i'm really in favor of the two lots on the lagoon but at the same time you know maybe the other houses would be nicer on the lake front yeah but on the other hand if it's going to be neighborhood and they could put one there and they could put one on those other two might not i'm not aware of any this and correct me if i'm wrong here dan but i'm not aware of any a psychic requirements outside of the historic district of city hall be so one very large home or two small or large homes you know whatever the case but the the safety issue that keeps coming up do you think that having this additional lot on the waterfront might bring some of that potential parking traffic issues up along her driveway and take some of it off now of the street off a view not really because they all have a thirty foot setback right so what do says of me i don't think it would i think that the snow removal has to go somewhere and it's always been pushed it's always been dumped right where those two right were though that whole corner is right it's dumped right on my aunt and uncle's proper i don't put it on the other side because it's fragile the lagoon side is fragile it's not that wide and it erodes and it can right and i think i recognize that you've been put snow on private property all this time some of the houses they've made on the trucks around and they've cracked their driveways a number of times and joy and everything else but i don't know the answer yeah i don't think so though because it's thirty foot setback either way and i don't know if i wan ugly structure that looks like a summit block that's long and narrow and three stories tall ok so i don't know if you could encourage him to put something cute there  have you ever considered says johnson have you ever considered forming a neighborhood association is there one time maybe it's a good idea i think it is that we might be able to help control  everything and kept up with it over the time but whether it's a law that they do do that i don't know they do have a sort of an organization or a deal with that were no houses going to be built on the lagoon line lots of rules they have are already rules more restrictive than the cities by a neighborhood covenant on these proper so see it with these properties this doesn't change that ok but if they don't exist we can't put them there right ok so we don't know whether they exist or not like ron was saying that's that's between a private matter between the landowners at the time that those were developed ok frank you not all right someone else to speak on this topic then we do not have set backs from water water tends to move and so most of our setbacks are based on the actual boundaries of the property ok the reason i asked the question is when don was here it lines in there one of them is the one in one hundred year flood plain that will definitely regulate where they put the house parcels are usually described this as what is on record in this case is that it's drawn in described all the way out to that point which may be under water there's a lot of times that property that someone owns tends to find itself underwater at times based on flood you know the location of water there's riparian rice there's a whole bunch of other things we go are zoning so i can understand better a little better and so we go by the personal description it doesn't matter if it's underwater or not we're that's correct wherever the the stakes are in the corners if you will correct ok all right a comic because i might i think it might clarify that then if you can put up on exhibit a and there they don't you know mr cain was asking about the legal description of whether or not it bumped out in the lake mack in or whether or not it's under water and we had a couple questions on this you can zoom in there and then maybe just point to where where that is don't go down to the left a little bit is ok you see the seawall there up the the seawall extends a little bit north of the property line right now ok so the setback or if you see where that's measured for a parcel see you've got the wrong i think you got the wrong drawing up there if you have a no that one's a i don't know ok well we can see it on there let me here let me give you this yes if you look at the northeast corner if you zoom in on the northeast corner of lot c you'll see where the you have it's for to the very left side of what you're showing there we'll see where the setback is based off the property line not based off the seawall right now ok you'll see right here that shows the twenty five foot setback right here from the from the la property line ok right and if you look you see the line just past that that is the seawall line ok ok so there's a little bit of grass there that you don't know the so it's not this area is not underwater we have more than twenty five feet of grass sitting there right now ok that that one drawing that mr cain was referring to earlier that looks like some sort of tax parcel map or something that's not a survey drawing i don't know why it shows that fair enough thank you or anyone else want to talk on this topic from two really out either here nor there ok let's thirty eight feet that someone drew was kind of off base i don't care how you look at the thirty if they're trying to impress if they show their live fourteen and fifteen stuck out in the like thirty seven feet and then they show the whole rest of the of the year you know all the other lots on long wi anyone else want to talk on this topic and and what's going to be built there in for some reason there is a lot of discussion about a three story home i'm not sure where that's coming from there's not any proposal to build a three story home well what will be built there will look very similar to what is built to the east if you look at all those lot are going to be very similar sized along the lake and if you took any one of those homes that's the type of footprint that's that's envisioned here and those those folks on persons yes those will those folks would have the same rights as anyone else here would have to build on their property right build anything that would fit in our one correct so they would have the same rights but nobody's proposing to build some long three story dormitory if you look at parcel personal being just so there's any confusion i know that that looks like a very long and narrow building number lope there's no plans to build something that would occupy that entire space if you show that aerial photo again dan again the vision would be that it be very similar to any one of the other homes that are there that you could take any one of those and plop them there that's that's that's the concept i think that's what some would want to build obviously they wanted to be ascetic we pleasing for them for themselves as well right that's the vision to clarify that so is it the intention to sell these l potential to be a spec but right now the ideas i think there's something very interesting if there's anybody else here in the audience would be interested there are listed for sale they would they be welcome to buy and they could control would be built there as well so ok thank you all right this is this is going to have to be the last time sir probably i don't know half an hour or so ago now and i think dan actually drew it on this one here where he's got to crosshatch you know the the represented building area for a lot see as shown on this drawing using correct that's they're going to have to comply with that thirty foot arc out of the south east corner ok then would you tonight reject what they have paper them so that they have to come back well we will know we'll put the thirty foot right well that's what what we would approve to night is that dark line between b and c and say all right these are your front yards with the associated setbacks and then the dotted lines are these are meaningless because the city ordinances apply and they can shift this way or that way so long as they meet the requirements said that there are no plans to build a long time narrow home no plans does not mean it will not be bright right so in keeping with the neighborhood as we have to do in central park in keeping with the neighborhood it would be nice if you could have a guarantee going forward that that is not going to happen and everyone would feel a little better about it right because to say there are no plans i answered turning right you know i changed i had like  one else has it right that's what we're asking think ok thank you ma'am talked about with the neighborhood ok when they focus on just a lake front homes it really encompasses a lot larger area ok just three hundred feet that way right and three hundred feet fairly which they don't even do that very well ok so yes we've got larger lots to the west of the great so that being a moot point south yes yes and so going once going twice seeing nobody else close the public hearing what's the discussion of the board i think that we have a an application in front of us you know by someone who has the right to develop on this property and their right to this develop on this property is very well defined by the rules that we used to develop property all across holland you know and so i think that we need to face their application and assume that this is what they want to do this is what they've taken the time to come forward with and i i believe that of looking at the rules that we have in front of us that they are complying with the rules and so as far as one board member goes that's my opinion and i'm i'm i'm very interested to hear what other board members are are thinking about but i think it's clear that they have come to us now not with two applications but with one ok and it's only fair or right to treat them as though we have one application and so i think we have to face that and have to ask the question do they comply with the rules that are governing their application and if they are complying with those and i think we have the obligation to approve think that everything that they presented you know i'm in agreement with that would be better for the community all around so if i can make coming here i i gotta say that fourteen and fifteen the way they have it planned out here it does look in character with the neighborhood it sounds like everybody's concerned about this huge giant wall being put up and blocking views and you know as a board can we make a restriction as to what size or does it have to be well they're run do we go beyond our what restrictions on this or you can impose conditions upon the approval of whatever that you see fit that would be reasonable to mitigate any issues with the health welfare and safety of the the community or to meet the standards under the ordinance for example if you see fit that a condition be placed on  a ratio of with the length or something or height of a house in order to make it to be within character of the area then then you could impose that condition ok hopefully that that i  just where my head is here for for talking through it here you know i'm i'm looking at our condition our criteria is that a pl a lot yes obviously is residential development allowed yes our single family proposed yes those are the three easy characteristics is it in character with the neighborhood and is it not detrimental and i look at you know what the the applicant can do with no relief and then i look at you know which would be on the right and i look at what the applicant is proposing on the left and i'm i'm looking at those two options saying ok i'm being asked to trade off size of lot on the lake versus potential of village to get vehicles the one on the right you know you've got a bigger lot there on the water which would be similar to to some of the other houses that are on the lake but you're put in this tiny postage stamp called sixty so you know it's there's a lot of lines there and it's you know as several of the the residents have said it's not an easy thing it's it's not a clearly obvious call here  well i think you pretty much defined what the problem is that we have but i'm still waiting for somebody to show me the answer here part of the question about character though is is to is also also kind  defined i believe and the application that we have has addressed the character issue in a quantitative way we haven't addressed the issue in terms of the style of the architecture or or the landscape or any of those a static qualities that often are the the character of the neighborhood these are the definitions that we're working with they're more quantitative and they mean they meet the character definitions that we're to work with so i don't think that that's such an open question unless i've missed the boat on that the detrimental issue is i think a very difficult one to do and that's it's actually due to the way the whole thing was designed to begin with the life on that corner the narrowness of the road all of those things are causing trouble that one another which that we can fix so i'm given the time of the evening and i'm i'm ready to to make a motion it too early ok all right everybody say make your motion what you want to so we want to do i my motion is to accept the application who approved the application as we've been given  the the applicant has demonstrated that sixty percent or more of the lights within three hundred feet along the same side of the road do not meet current requirements and therefore it allows this this configuration to be approved backing up a bit i believe this is current application is significantly different than the last up occasionally that we faced and that gives us the right to consider th again this evening it is applied a lot residential as is allowed a single family has proposed it is in character with the neighborhood as we have been given the definition to go to use for that and i do not believe that it's detrimental to the neighborhood but this that this proposal is not detrimental to the neighborhood ok that they're that they're known to everybody here they they control are one development in almost every other part of the city and they should be controlling here and i believe that we should leave it alone but everyone who owns a well i've got one concern in the we're not approving the building area as described on the drawing at the left for percy correct why have the authority did to change yes hughes yes motion approved all right