hello everyone welcome to the july twelve twenty sixteen planning commission meeting i need approval minutes for the june fourteenth meeting so  support calls in favor i opposed communications from the audience for items that are not listed on the agenda as a public hearing just a clarification i will be doing a public hearing for item d under new business so if anyone would like to speak now for anything that is not listed as a public hearing can  speak we will move on to unfinished business and tabled items the first being proposed text amendments to create residential short term rental regulations and the zoning ordinance planning commission is the applicant we did discuss this at our last meeting and we did open a public hearing and that public and joel is going to come up and speak to this item ordinance that would create and allow for the use of short term rentals in the city of holland short term or atolls as defined in the ordinance is a dwelling unit that is offered for rent in part or its entirety for less than thirty consecutive days at a time more commonly known and world these are known as air b n b vacation rental by owners exce currently these are prohibited in the city of holland and over the past six months city staff planning commission they've heard improvement committee and members of city council discussed the possibility of working with our zoning ordinance to allow these type of uses to occur in front of you is ordinance that's really divided into three sections first section would allow owner occupied homes to rent out a room three hundred sixty five days as a short term rental so this is something that's less than thirty days at a time typically but could be longer or they could rent out their entire house a total of sixty days over the course of a twelve month period so if the homeowner is going away on a vacation negative rent their house out by their own vacation for that week it's becoming a common practice in the world we live in the second part of the ordinance would allow non owner occupied short term rentals the opportunity to rent in certain districts so if you own a condo or an apartment and see one c three which are commercial zoning districts or neighborhood commercial zones such as washington square or south shore village which actually do then the third one would be able to allow a non owner occupied properties to have the ability to rent out their unit and always own districts the difference between our zone districts and certain districts if it's in our zone districts it has to have a separation of five hundred feet between the units plain commission spent june fourteenth reviewing this ordinance and then in your study session earlier today you spent quite a time reviewing this ordinance as well there are two items that came up for discussion that should be put on the floor and the first one is under the owner occupied section the ordinance as written now would allow for access we do all in units the ability to be used as short term rentals we have one access we don't you know in the city of holland that's eighteenth and pine it was just constructed recently when the planning commission passed an ordinance to allow access we don't need to be created there was some discussion amongst the commissioners that you would like to discussion there in the study session there's a lot of discussion about non owner occupied short term rentals this is the last section of that ordinance and some uneasiness approving that so again if you feel like making a motion to night or for this ordinance on the city council for the review and approval and you don't want that last section included your motion would have to specifically strike that you have an ordinance in front of you that has three section if you like one of the sections you know now going for the city council you will have to state that any questions from the commission for me on this ordinance no thanks troll as i said before the public hearing for this item is still open so if you would like to say anything to this item you may come to the podium and state your name and address and you have five minutes to do so right you will close the public hearing discussion and questions from commission members or motion required by state law planning commission is the applicant mark you need to say anything to this or if i need to keep my comments really brief  planning commission along with staff in there are consultants that was hired to help us do the rewrite of the holon master plan we've been working on this for over a year now since a fair to worry of twenty fifteen and we're we've got probably about ninety ninety five percent of the process done we're at a point right now where we have a draft master plan completed and we've gotten a lot of public comments in regards it but the next required step that we need to do under state law is we need to if assuming planning commission would like this to move forward the draft that we have right now would be make a recommendation to city council and city council then would have to review the plan and actually make an approval to send the draft plan for distribution in comments to all of  city along with the the railroad line believe it or not they all get a copy and the opportunity to provide us with comments there's a sixty three day period that we need to sensually wait and in get those comments back at the end of the time which will be sometime in september then the planning commission is to review whatever comments or the route we receive and you can make any changes at that time if upon further reflection we want to make some more changes you have the ability to revise the plan at that time then we need to hold a formal public hearing and then make another recommendation to city council at that time it'll probably be october or november by that time but the city council is the one who has a reserve the right to make the final approval of all master plan  items for the city hall so that's really kind of what you're being asked to do tonight and this is really kind of an interim approval all the steps to getting final approval of the plan ok so we need a leo holdings is the applicant there is someone here to represent th good evening i'm john ten past and civil engineer with dreesen gun associates and i'm here representing the applicant on this project if you'd like i can just give you a brief summary of the project can walk through some of the basics on it and if you have any questions we're more than happy to answer those the project is as mentioned located at three ten east sixty fourth street currently vacant ten acre park my ten point eight acre site within the i one industrial zoning currently the zoning on either side of it to the east and west is also i one and to the north and south is owned ag we are proposing to put a new industrial facility approximately forty two thousand square feet on that site comprised mostly of manufacturing space as well as some office space toward the front  site would be accessed by a single driveway off of sixty fourth street for both truck and vehicle traffic the business would employ approximately fifteen to twenty people and we've provided adequate parking onsite for those employees as well as visitors to the business we are proposing to construct a stormwater detention basin towards the south end of the site the site naturally sheds from north to south and we would put a basin there at the south and we know that that basin needs to be approved by the transportation and utilities apartment brian white as well as the tulip in our county dream board we have submitted that plan for review and we don't have approval back from them but we are understanding that any approval we get tonight would be contingent upon receiving approval from the to a board in from brian white's office  sanitary and water both exist in sixty four street and we would be connecting to those with all the requirements for the holland border public works and i think that's basically  a summary again if there are any questions about the project to be happy to answer them yes question for staff normally this would be an administrative review but because we're near the airport yes that is correct  this does fall within the the west michigan airport review area so that did require that this come to the full planning commission for review and approval and furthermore the airport authority met yesterday and provided some comments and recommendations to the planning commission and those comments could be viewed as potential conditions you might want to include well that was basically my question i was saying as we got it from the airport yesterday if you see there's always that one little but yeah yeah they mention rooftop height thirty five i think we're proposing twenty gate detention shall be mobile yeah i think of this is is well within the realm of what we're proposing we shouldn't have any issue with any of these murders thank you does anyone else have any questions for the applicant all right this does require a public hearing at this time i'll open a public hearing if anyone has anything to say on this item and i will close the public hearing discussion questions or motion from planning commission members sure i'm aware prove what the staff recommendations incorporating the recommendations from the airport authority the port i was in favor post all right thank you very much c r regarding the same project we will do a combined public hearing but make motions on them separately be proposed to lot condominium planned to be located the two ninety one east nineteenth street hilltop cottages l l c is the applicant and see site plan review for a new four unit residential building to be located a two ninety one east nineteenth street hilltop cottages l c is also the applicant mr my name is dan terp sure i'm the owner and a developer of hilltop cottages just so over a deal we bought the property probably a year and a half ago it originally had a church on it we took the church down and at that point split the property by meets and bounds we created three lots of my eighteenth street and constructed three duplexes there that left us one large lot and nineteenth street so that's what we're asking for now is to be able to divide that one parcel that we have and nineteenth street into two units one being a little over nineteen thousand square feet and the other one being a little over nine thousand right it's nine thousand six hundred square feet the reason we're looking at doing it split is one or larger piece and one smaller piece what we'd like to do is unit to build another duplex like we did on eighteenth street and then on unit one excuse me is build a fourplex which is basically taking the exact same duplex that we have in or just going to put it together as one unit the primary reason for looking at doing a fourplex and you know one is there's a lot of pine trees and vegetation and landscaping that's along the excuse me the west property line and by doing a fourplex that allows me to move plex to the east property line and retain all that landscaping and pine trees on the west of the base by doing fourplex of the inmates two of the side yard requirements and allows me to have a lot bigger side yard on one side these do require a public hearing i would do them together if anyone would like to come forward on these items he may do so now and i'm a resident at for twenty seven days a street which is located kitty corner across from the property city just developed and i guess i don't know if this is the appropriate forum to air some of my concerns or not is this is only dealing with a parcel split but my main concern is that while the fluted pictures are the unit had already completed what he failed to show was how they relate to the other structures in the neighborhood and they are built approximately ten to fifteen feet in front of any other house in the neighborhood the rest of the neighborhood is composed mainly of single storey houses whereas these are two and a half storey duplex is that stick out like a sore thumb hearing his explanation for the lot split in wanting to keep vegetation on the west side is interesting to me since his son owns that lot and it's awfully convenient that he wants to leave vegetation right there when he didn't care about the neighbors and the rest of the neighborhood  our neighborhood is seeing a great increase in traffic that quite frankly i don't know that the roads were designed to handle i don't know how this project fits into the city's stated plan of keeping an area only thirty percent rental properties as the neighborhood greatly exceeds thirty percent rental properties already and those are my main concerns like i said i don't this is the appropriate for those or not but whether regards to the split i do think that's very very interesting to me so thank you for your time thank  but the turin allows that sucked back from the road yes it anywhere between ten and twenty five foot setback and i believe these doobies are sorry duplexes are set back at twenty five feet from the right of way tonight and i sort of got somewhat of an education before we even started this part of the meeting by listening to what was actually the goal and it's a split red that these are the single family homes and they're right up to the heart of hazel avenue if you if you over here on the side of the fairbanks condos and if you want sixteenth street but everything in green has a duplex these are the lots that have the condos on and this is the block that needs the split all the black is all what i guess i'm hearing here tonight is duplex however and i have this beautiful speech but it doesn't really pertain to the split a duplex that we're referring to on eighteenth street is a unit with eight bedrooms and eight unrelated people living in a unit and that's twenty four people in three units twenty four cars parked in the back coming and going on a dead end road off of hazel avenue if anybody's pent up in that neighborhood can be a possible big problem now or he's asking for is to continue with this development behind there and i understand it seems like he's going to be able to whether he's applied for a building permit or not i don't know whether we're going to have another hearing on the building permit my biggest concern is i read the home ordinances for the house and city and learn a little bit on sixteen thirty two thirty six and sixteen seventy one biggest problem i have this you know that that does does the development fit in the neighborhood the traditional residential neighborhood the tear or is this sort of just another duplex but it's not just another duplex what it is is in my opinion it's it's kind of educational district zoning which is what whole college does it's what they did with the fairbanks condo project where they built one and it stalled and stalled for a couple of years somehow or another somebody came in and let's just get this project done and you know get some students in there that was not the intention of the herb and soon when i first heard of the duplexes you know i'm thinking of you know family on one side family on the other there's a lot of just a ton of duplexes up there one term people this is not what what we're looking at here what we're looking at is twenty four new residents every nine months come and go and that will continue to be the situation behind me so i know that probably isn't going to make a difference on the split because i know the split is probably for the possibility of maybe a future sale  or to hope college possibly and the same thing with the front it's not going to add any value to my property it's actually going to do the opposite because now i'm going to have twenty or thirty cars come in twice a day down one thousand street memory right on that corner there's a stop sign there cheerio nursery schools across the street during school that doesn't really address the split so i guess my question is can anybody answer it is this what i sounds like already a possibility whether it's split or not these buildings are going up and i'm not sure if that's what i'm traditional residential when i bought my place eighteen years ago i was an expecting and i know i'll probably live there until they take me to the nursing home so it may be doesn't hello my name is christy small and and i live in a poor five zero hazel avenue and i'd like to tell you that our neighborhood is unique in we are at the top of a hill with many dead end streets in our neighborhood all ready i can tell you how many cars i have had to chase down and get license plate numbers because people tear up that hill there are no sidewalks there it's irresponsible to be bringing all this new traffic in the where ice pray that no one gets killed because constantly people are walking their dogs children go by and cars are tearing up that hill and it's just a nightmare waiting to happen thank you thank you the merits and i live it for nineteen hazel avenue i've lived there for over twenty three years now i've seen a lot of changes in the neighborhood some good some bad we've already established this is a duplex zoned community we have plenty of duplexes in our community he's explained why he wishes to go for a quad or four plex whatever the term is and it makes sense but i don't feel that it really fits with the character of our neighborhood our neighborhood is one of the older stablish neighborhoods in the city of holland it is an old fashioned community where neighbors know each other they walk their dogs we talk to each other we know the dogs names it's a family oriented system and i'm kind of curious if this rezoning is  proved what that lead to down the line mr does own that entire strip between the bike path and hazel and if this is approved would that allow for more of these clods to be built in that stretch they wouldn't really fit the duplexes they fit more with the community in a single family houses the cards are going to be more of an apartment like sterile thing just up there and online in our neighborhood and what's this going to do to our purpose he values and as it's already been pointed out this is temporary housing for these students which we all understand the hope college students need safe comfortable housing but should it really be at the expense of the permanent residents were cycling through a noose a new cycle now where we're getting younger families and with children and it's really good to see but if we have all of this big department like complex up there i think it will deter them from staying and it's going to be really sad to see that some of the concerns of already been pointed out and that's not going to change because they will go ahead with the development but there are safety concerns as the school year progress is the college kids will be in school elementary through high school kids will be in school and we've had people walking to black river to east kids catch the bus through three bus stops on hazel last year one of the corner of sixteenth and hazel one is seventeenth and hazel and one of the very end of the street so there are a lot of kids coming and going cars coming and going to college students will be coming and going it's just something that i don't know what it's already in the plans to build these two plexus but i think if we can kind of rein it in a little bit more and just not go completely crazy maybe we can keep the character of a neighborhood you know we shouldn't really you know served to help one group at the expense of at the other hi my name is and hildebrand i just came i didn't bring anything with me and if you forgive me english is now my first language i'm a stutter a little bit i lived on my husband we live on eighteenth street we are on for seventeen years our son was born there that is home and the whole neighborhood is very just family oriented and my biggest concern with the duplexes on top of all the other mentioned no offense i'm so many of you here might have graduated from hope college but we have seen a lot of college students drinking with the families setting with all it it's a calm very peaceful quiet cul de sac all the residents as they have a lot of reasons and wish to make sense explaining their concerns but i just want for coming from i just don't express for as this is our home for this gentleman here i'm sure i'm no offense there is profit in it i understand that there aren't that many duplexes with all the students coming in i understand that for fall of us this is our home and we are concerned may not be something relates to you but if you can at least  consider a little bit where we're coming from and our concerns and also like like these that apparently the seems like it's been decided already that we've a few that and were voicing our opinion this is how we feel anyone else to speak to this item member also you know township one of the things we all as consider new to is how well a project fits into the neighborhood and when you come up  neighborhood of modest homes and duplexes but the duplexes are all single story and i really think that particularly when you get to that fourplex that son characteristic of the neighborhood thanks mark if i may just say one quick thing i the reason that can you restate you need my i'm sorry aaron vanderbilt for twenty seven hazel in talking with some of my neighbors and stuff one reason that there's not more people here and why some people have stated that we feel like it's sort of a losing that it's already been decided is because excavation on the site has already begun and i know that because on two separate occasions now my wife and i have been awoken at six in the morning by a dump truck going through our neighborhood so that they could start digging sand out of the site so that's why many residents feel like it's just kind of been decided and they didn't bother to show up so that's what them when they talk about feeling and where they put the line in dividing the law has nothing to do with whether it's a duplex or for plaques for that unit wanting you to they have on the screen there they they do need that because that determines the minimum lot here and for each one of those lots so in other words unit one has just enough land area to qualify for four units to be on that lots divided it into three lots i don't know with the setback requirements if they would be able to get three duplexes there or not i haven't done that analysis so  also by right gotta meet minimum library requirements in the vast area of the city where they are allowed they also need to have the residential infill review done just so happens that the whole avenue neighborhood falls side of that review or review area for having a residential and we'll reveal how far outside sixteenth street a dividing line east and west and then i believe west to here it goes down lincoln avenue and then it kind of goes up fair bank seven so as part of our site plan review can we consider over things like  i would have to look at them i mean i wasn't anticipating this question so thank you yes no question because i heard some comments about side fox and appears that are on there are not sidewalks in this neighborhood so mark i heard something about twenty four cars parked if there are four units how many people can live in each unit four people per unit so sixteen in a fourplex correct yes they'd there's no grandfathering here correct that's correct so four unrelated in per unit no does not move this in the hope college distributed how far is it on the whole college district i believe it's sixteenth street also is the dividing line for parking is the only issue the correct the four apply to everywhere a dwelling unit or a building doing you know space per dwelling unit so but i mean obviously that isn't going to be enough with the intended use and the applicant is providing if he combines kind of the the two parking lots the one existing he's basically provided for each person living there can have a parking space means you're going to units but each unit can just be two bedrooms with a bathroom each four for four unrelated people can live in a unit so when he set up this our t n district where and there are a lot of duplexes there are some three places and there are a fair number of four places there's a couple more than that that are higher i think in a couple of areas but that was probably intended to reflect what was am now the question from my perspective as you know you're allowed to do all that stuff but for whatever reason the infill review doesn't cover th so they don't have to go through a formal and full review process i have great sympathy for the neighbors and i think it's probably way too much and i think we've created a problem i'm not sure how to resolve  any of that but i really would like to find out from staff how much of the infill review process standards that we could use to evaluate a site plan a work up to that just let me quick to kind of piggyback on what you what you said marvin to you know back before we created the t r n zone district some of you probably remember the city was really kind of divvied up i mean especially the central neighborhood area and that's where the tear and zone district is now there was a lot of our five in our six zoning which basically is apartment type zoning so we had large areas of the central neighborhood that were zone basically for apartments and so when we came up with the the t r n zone district in in essence we counted down zoned a lot of the cit especially that the central neighborhood area so but so we got rid of a lot of that apartment zoning came in with the t r and we still felt though because as marvin noted there's a lot of not conforming situations we still wanted to be able to address those non conforming homes and we wanted to be able to provide for people for they wanted to to have a duplex  or do a new one also noting that the vast majority of the area was going to be covered by the residential infill requirements so we'd be able to look at you know mass scene issues and  stuff like that in and see if it meets the minimum conforming requirements with the other homes in the neighborhood so that was all really kind of set in place and maybe totally clarify one thing when you saying non conforming one of the things that we did when we did that was we associated lot size with you know before that you could convert a house to a two family on a standard city lot you know the traditional up and down two families and when we did that ordinance would increase the amount of square footage you needed them over from if you needed to take into account that increase density on a piece of property and so we further downgraded it in those cases too and so that's where those square footage requirements came of you have i forget now forty two hundred square feet per growing at sixty foot in front of it was for two family forty two up before i mean it was a whole lot less than  well and a lot of these homes up in this neighborhood they weren't the lots are larger you know they're not the typical forty five fifty foot wide lot the neighborhood was different it didn't  have you know curb and gutter and stuff like that so it was kind of the it's it seemed like at the time it was really kind of a little slice of suburban home was in right in the middle of kind of the more central neighborhood area with it has smaller lots so it was it was left out we just missed it well i think i hear the table emotion coming up so i'd like to say one thing and maybe mr or could look at what the duplex lights would look like i rode by there today and we looked i looked at the the houses there are large duplexes up there i don't know if we can make i think i don't think those look out of place there but maybe this fourplex will and maybe after i hear a motion here in a minute and we quit discuss you know maybe i could recommend you take a look at that prior to our next me any opposed it will be table to our next meeting which will be just something from me and you know what we're looking for the night i think it is august done correctly thank you neighbors an applicant for coming in so your comments and information thanks next item letter d amendment to the you'd like to come forward and explain this item situation is my clients they purchased the lot in the intent to build the house fifty seven when i went to the amendments that had been submitted by cobblestone to the notice same if there developed so it was kind of phase one phase two and phase three in two thousand and two they submitted phase one in two thousand and three they first submitted phase two which both have that same wording and in two thousand and three or six than they did the rest of the lads believe forty nine through seventy nine so we went to look at where yards we noticed that the four lots to the north were all had written in it a fourteen foot setback and being the fifth lot we were wondering ok was it something as the development they read numbered or something and that became an issue so we went to the city and mark and we found out that none of the lots were required were given a fourteen foot setback they were all twenty foot setbacks we brought this to the light of the cobblestone so that had they if they were purchased were they going to run into issues with prison the owners of those lots as they came up the board then boarded and said ok we'll allow the lights to be those fifty seven through fifty three to be the fourteen foot setback so then we came to your tech because it's none of that had been presented to the city they didn't have any record of the fourteen foot cell that's why we're here representing ourselves as well as cobblestone to to do all five so that you don't have four more meetings dealing with this fourteen foot setback issue history on the owner is we'd like to develop  a single story residence as opposed to a two story which many of them are in their accessibility is as as we age and things like that also would like to put a three stall with maybe a ball storage but keeping it under under enclosure at that point so that's a reason to put a three storey plus two bedroom house and then there's also a requirement my cobblestone that we have an entry porch and open port so we lose about six minimum six feet for that so also the house started squeezing down and became difficult for us to get all those those items in place we do have the option of just putting it to stall could put a slab out there with a fence stud to hide everything but we're trying to keep it under storage which also helps with keeping the neighborhood looking nicer and things like that so that's a little background if you been out there the two sides of the houses that are or are adjacent to these most of their windows have been directed towards the outside this is sort of the the back side of of those homes as well as far as window finest ration and things like that so that's just a little backbone and the reason why we're would like to make it that the fourteen extra six feet helps us develop a little bit nicer floor plan cobblestone declaration of covenants back in two thousand and two and they were written they wrote that lots i mean twelve and then fifty two through fifty six if they were developed were the only lights that were given the fourteen foot rear yard set back ok so at that point one would question what's the difference between fifty and fifty seven  left us out and so we didn't know if the cave why they do the four of the north and not the fifth one or because the forty two is actually around the corner and so we were it was it just a and that was written during phase one development  plying but there seems to be some kind of cobblestone owns i believe they still own the other four lots they have gotten and sold to individuals yet so they're kind of once piggybacking over th but we've got all the names on the application cobblestone do we we don't need never haitian if it makes sense can't we just change the development i just i guess mike my question would be for the homeowners association the condo association owner wishes to have everything and we haven't but our thought is the extra six would allow us to keep the third stock raj as opposed to eliminating that and then you're allowed to on the property lines sell the neighbors to the to the west of them i believe the one that's up fifty seven they have a five foot setback the other one may be more of a seven foot but they're going to be in time planting vegetation along that property land as well so it's not like they're going to enjoy yeah there are six feet and i guess we could typically pave up to the property fourteen feet i mean it just typically i mean when we have set back room for men to seek out of water you know you have it of five foot intervals or whatever and i just you know the rationale for the fourteen maybe there's a great rationale maybe the but also some clarification the other buildings there are lots they have a fourteen foot step back are not interior lots to the plan correct there on the perimeter they are the right perimeter anyone would like to come forward state your name and address and you have five minutes to speak investor years ago with the understanding they were in a buying back well that didn't happen because the whole economy thing and so there has been little activity for quite a few years and now it's starting to pick up again a little bit the a lot owners anxious to get rid of them and move on in the neighborhood would be you know just assume see it get filled up those last appear with all the documentation that the developer expected to have a fourteen foot setback and it didn't happen so i guess that's the first thing that i have that i saw that says well actual slabs behind rodgers for boat or parking and grass which is against the rules and as an association if we see an option of saying either they're going to park a fishing boat on a slab being a graduate or in a third star we just assume see it in a third stall and you have to get it covered up it looks like the last couple years ranch homes have taken over the development those are the ones that are selling and unfortunately when these are ten foot sites it's not working as well to put everything together and the people have two stories you really don't have a problem unfortunately yeah the people that are the people that are opposed to it at this point one of them hasn't moved in yet one of them moved in this winter and they're kind of used to the whole thing and how it all lays out and i can see where i can see their concern but i also can see there everybody else here has a five foot setback or a five foot buffer at a minimum and it seems like it works out pretty well and most of the homes in the neighborhood you see on the one side is where they live and on the back side is where the neighbors live and these both appear to be on the back side in the way these houses are constructed so i don't think it's going to be as big a deal for them as they think it might be so for those reasons i i think it's it's a good idea i talked to the lap owner and he's all in favor of it because he wants more flexibility in those home sites so he can sell it and then get out of that the investment that he made a number of years ago thank you thank you going to put a fence or some type around it you know what's the difference between that and the third stall that the owner is willing to hold and requesting to put up a roof over it so they can store year round as opposed to typing it i just think you know six feet i mean twenty feet fourteen feet we're talking six feet of grass or a concrete you know it just doesn't make any sense to me the neighbors that will be off that were requesting the twenty to go to fourteen foot is tacit earlier the oh there's only like i think two windows on the  stall in the to be able to go from the twenty foot to the fourteen foot especially in i think had mentioned that that the lots to the north of there all four of them you know were initially intended to be fourteen foot lies all the whole they were not recorded in the cities within this last lot on that same street is the one that's in question where you know it was because basically we're being asked to adjudicate a problem amongst the condo association itself based on their recordings of what is and is and you've got a least two people there but condos based on the premise of this is what it was a condo association committed any point in time and vote to change things which apparently they have done and in the course of that we get to amend a site plan so i'm not exactly sure what to do with this  you had your hand up slips by now well if we're going into another country but i was i really like the idea of a one story option in the cobblestone development i think that's great to have intergenerational possibilities and in that community as well as people that just don't have the physical capacity at whatever age to be able to accommodate a two story dwelling self and i and i do think having three style enclosed is much better for the look of the area and if it is that it is against a weapon land and the original plan was fourteen i don't see a problem with it myself these linda ar and or potentially just offense to be in that area versus what you could potentially be allowing no i mean because of the mass scene you're essentially saying the mass scene of the twenty very high home could go right up to that fourteen feet and that's a whole lot different than a one story garage that might be fourteen feet or fifteen feet something like that so but just just you keep that in mind is this application for parking lots or just the one this is going to be we're treating this for lots fifty three through fifty seven if you want it to be just for one lot you can make it specifically for that ok but it seems in seem to make sense that they all share the scene situation that you would treat them all well actually of the they don't because of the what's fifty four fifty five  so because my other job i think that's a big deal i'm fifty three and i'm fifty four do agree of people have backup on fifty two that they're going to have basically two stories a house you know fourteen feet off the property line yeah i mean that you know i think one of the rationales for including all them is because they are shallow lots of mean there are a lot hundred ten feet in depth so that's that's quite small similar to the hundred foot deep a lot along the north side of the development most all the other lots and here are and the hundred twenty two hundred forty foot range in depth there are some hundred fifteen footers but these are the smallest lots you know in the development i think it makes it's sense to keep it consistent on all five lots there's there's a consensus on the board of cobblestone that you know it's probably going to be their their problem if someone goes down the road and i right thank you for coming so that will get that's just approved that is just to prove all right this is the end stop for that i don't communications and petitions scheduling a public hearings there are not any communications from me so members you need your microphone oh i have i have a communication and you can sort of blame droll for this  one joel asked me a question that i couldn't answer which was really surprised me oh yeah you know why do we limit fences to six feet why not eight feet and then about two weeks later i had somebody else ask me that question well that's exactly but i actually started doing the research and appears that the more west you get the higher the fences ago yeah yeah well i don't know i especially if they all do a foot missionary fences for some poor reason and there's a smattering of them but it is joel's desire at some point in time hopefully after i'm off this board that you guys are going to go through the entire zoning ordinance at some point and so i just thought it would be a real interesting thought experience for everybody to just sit there and quiz all the sex for a fence and what's the difference i have a right to a six foot feet and the neighbor has a right to have not more than six feet so but if you're going to go through the whole review of the ordinance you might you're going to run into these situations as to why is it six feet because we cut and pasted it from somebody else instead of six feet at one point in time that's that's my only comment any other communications from commission members communications from staff yeah i would dare say that the six foot probably comes from i mean what's the average