this is the time in the place for the meeting of the zoning board of appeals and housing board of appeals for the city of holland we're here to respond to applications for variances and or special exceptions this board must try to interpret each application as it relates to the ordinance board is not empowered to rezone nor take any action that could be considered rezoning variances must meet four crucial tests in order to be granted those of you who are here for a variance and have already answered those questions on your application we were asked we will be asking you about those questions again tonight there is a procedure guide out there and we ask that you come to the microphone and state your name and address we typically hear from the applicant first and anyone supporting the application then we hear from anyone in opposition to it typically we do the public hearings on each application and then deliberate and decide on that application before moving on to the next application you're welcome to stay for the deliberations but there is no opportunity for further public comment if you elect not to stay for deliberation and decision you can call the city clerk's office after eight thirty tomorrow morning to learn the results gentlemen we've got the agenda before us which calls initially for us to be looking at some housing board of appeal a housing board of appeals application a couple of zoning board applications and then back again to a housing board of appeals application and i have my dinner tina motion to amend the agenda to move number  five up into number three under housing so that we do those housing applications together so we got a motion from davis to have support or support by when where and all those in favor signify by saying i motion passes great we've got going to make a motion myself and i'm going to move to nominate mr vin we're in as the chair of the board we have any other nominations seeing none i will declare those nominations closed in and we will vote on the motion that we have before us that michael dunn will be the chairman of the board all those in favor signify by saying i i all oppose same sign congratulations and i'm actually at this point going to turn the  thank you mr box at this time and the agenda we also need to entertain a motion for nominations for vice chair are there any motions i move that a nomination for motion passes regulation step for every avenue has not demolished the property in accordance with the order staff has requested a modification to the order to allow the homeowner to make repairs and bring the structure into compliance with the housing property maintenance code of the city of holland the application has been read is there an applicant would you like to speak and please for the record state your name and your address and your land of garza my headers three thirty four and  have washington boulevard in holland michigan thank you do you have any questions from the board or are there any comments you would like to speak on behalf of your application i sure do i already fixed all the bad lesions there were in the house and and i already have the certificate for for the rental does anyone have any questions for the applicant so you've done all of the things that the city requested that you do yes or ok that's i just want to confirm that your laundry is correct when she says she made all the current required corrections in the house she did get a rental certificate of compliance for the property and no longer has any violations there you is there anyone else that would like to speak in opposition to this if not then i'm going to close the public hearing and at this time i think  let's just deliberate on this one and i'm ready to make a motion on this mr chairman if if that's alright with you by all means brown we need to we need a motion to amend the what are we looking for here  she's done everything that she needs to do i think we need to just dispense with this assuming you are and not have the house devours the motion would be to set aside the order of demolition ok i move we set aside the order of demolition we have a motion by box do we have anyone support support we have support by  fact certainly i think the only thing we need to say years of that is that she has complied with all of the requirements that were put before her by the city and because she's done that there is not i don't believe any need for the home to be demolished especially since she has a certificate of occupancy a rental certificate sounds like she's done everything that that has been asked of her in this case and i think you're also finding that's no longer dangerous structure i guess i will take the city's word for it that if she's complied with all of their requirements that it is no longer a dangerous structure yes of three sixty eight twenty four street is requesting variance from the housing property maintenance code of the city of holland the ceiling height is the ceiling height and the second floor is six feet five inches where seven feet is required this result then i got a little diagram here piece that she told me that i could try to do to get this straight or is there a way we could see that number leads to two main floors one the main floor dining living room and one to the up stairs hallway this is my basement here and this is the steps go on down i have a room here and there's another room there and there's a bathroom hears he told me if i could put a smoke detector in this room this room and this room that way i got more time you know to notify me about up stairs and she also told me about putting some fire extinguishers which  ok when anyone else like to see or have any questions about this particular overhead i have a question not in particular with the overhead but just to refresh my memory from from last month you and your daughter living there the main floor you and your daughter living upstairs and there are currently two bedrooms upstairs and those are the rooms that we're talking about with the lower ceiling on my room one my daughter's ok and that but otherwise there would be just the one bedroom in the house if there without those upstairs bedrooms it's just a one bedroom house hallway and in each room to the west but your room is eighty square feet with a window that is two point two nine feet wide and three point seven five feet tall but the openable area's four point two square feet which is slightly smaller than required us the window on the east bedroom is the same size ok so just under that just under what we need for any grass window then there's a spot where drops i'm not even sure how high that would be but attic is currently unfinished and there aren't any other rooms on the main floor that could be used as a bedroom  if if you if windows could be placed there cindy could those with those rooms otherwise meet requirements if they could get a crest there i don't have the ceiling height information for the basement so i can't answer and answer that ok thank you much is there anyone else that would like to speak speak in support of the applicant is there anyone else that would like to speak in opposition of this happen cation if not i'm going to close the public hearing board what's your pleasure it's a difficult one you know it's i think it's one of the reasons why we have a board like this to look at these kind of difficult situations i'd love to be able to say to the applicant sure you know go ahead you seem like you're doing all of th stuff that you can be doing with that structure to be able to to use it and we've asked you to do some some things with it but i'm i'm just not convinced that it's that it's safe to have people sleeping in those upstairs bedrooms in the condition that they're in right now i don't want to have it on my neck that you know there was a fire and and you know his daughter daughter was not able to get out because the firemen weren't able to get through the smoke that had that had gone in  there we talked a little bit in the premier thing about the possibility of him taking some of the lower ceiling out having gold all the way up to the rafters and i didn't ask the applicant about that because really frankly the only way i think i would be convinced to to let  do that is if he met the if he were able to meet the ceiling height requirements with that i think that that ceiling height is level is where it is for a safety reason and i am not willing to bend on that i guess from my perspective i'm always concerned about the president should there be other applications in the future because it will be doubly hard to deny even if circumstances are slightly different because it's my understanding that this is a new low in terms of height that has ever been approved so it would be precedent center setting and it's six and a half feet six and a half it's not that not that high you know bumping your head alone there are much less having smoke in there you know i don't how much more discussion i want to have with it but i'm i'm ready to make a motion to deny does anyone else on the board have any comments questions discussion i  feel a little bit differently about it i understand the safety concerns the other side i think that this house has been that way for many many  maintain maintain smoke detectors in the bedrooms as well as outside the bedroom i think i'd be confident with those items try i move we approve the application with the following conditions one is that a legal new construction style window or an eagerness window that meets new construction standards be installed that all lighting in the room be recessed or flush with the ceiling and that there are smoke detectors inside these rooms and immediately outside these rooms that are maintained you put the the layout please and if you don't mind seems i think the question is are we asking for smoke detectors in all of those places where he's already indicated that he either has or is interested in putting smoke detectors that's that's how i understand it and i'm not saying that's the way to go i just motion if we can modify the motion to just state that the smoke detectors be installed and maintained current construction new construction standard which would be one inside every bedroom and one in the immediate vicinity outside of every bedroom making sure there's one per floor if i can clarify what exists there now there was a recent electrical permit issued an inspection approved for current smoke detector standards there is one on each floor one in the immediate vicinity of each bedroom and one inside its budget room i think what the applicant is offering is to install additional smoke detectors above and beyond the requirements for each room in the basement as well as that's a place where a fire might be likely to start and possibly even the kitchen maybe not right next to the stove but somewhere in the constructed in this manner for many many years and i think that is a structural aspect of the house the location of the ceiling jo i think that we we did we came up with some alternatives that fulfill the intent of the code as far as fire safety i don't believe it will negatively affect the occupants and i don't believe it and they believe negatively affect the neighborhood neighboring properties given i do well if i could make one clarification the african talked about fire extinguishers i didn't catch whether you said ok and at this time this close is the housing court of appeals portion of our hearing tonight and opens up a zoning board of appeals and if you please call the first yard on a side street when seen in that location is limited to a maximum height of three feet written communication in support of this request was received today from katherine van dyke the county at one forty one east thirtieth street so i'm assuming you're the applicant that's correct could you please state your name and your address for the record michael j mulcahy seven fourteen states st holland ok thank you do you have any questions from the board not at this time you know any comments or statements that you not to make well i think i i think it's pretty well if the board has any questions i don't want to repeat what i've got in my application the property is very unique it's pretty much an island it's their streets all the way around it i've been the proposed fenced in area there's already a cement patio and it's yeah it's where she's pointing and what i'm asking to have approval to do is to build a fence around that area the distance between that fence and the sidewalk would still be thirty plus feet which is probably the equivalent of a normal set back on somebody else's house with the side yard  there is no backyard on this house that the the notice actually wasn't quite correct because it says the front yard and the side yard i'm only asking that it be put on one side of the house i have discussed it with the neighbors immediately across the street and i think that it would be a nice addition to the house i've talked to people on the side south side and they feel it's it's it's fine with them as well so you know actually actually talked with the people on columbia further is there anyone else here desiring to speak on behalf of the applican ok is there anyone else here that would like to speak in opposition to the applican fact i believe that there are definitely unique circumstances with this law it is triangular really shaped lot has streets running on all sides i think we can get there in this shape not necessarily topography but definitely a unique  lot the need for the variance is not due to the applicant's own personal economic difficulty but do basically to the shape of the lot in the fact that it has that the streets running on all three sides and it is not due to the fact that stupid factors other than actions of the current or previous owner of that lot has been that way that house has been that way for many many years strict compliance with the regulations governing the fence height unreasonably prevent use of the property for a permitted purpose which was the specifically my reason for asking  why you wanted it i think that the the location of the streets there's definitely a need for privacy there and it can definitely see the reason why it would make it very difficult to use that patio with the street running right there is no no backyard essentially for this property will be the minimum relief necessary to do substantial justice to the applicant as well as to other property owners that that fence is running very close to where the house is now as we discussed in the pre meaning if you wanted to put a two storey addition in that same location he would not have to ask our permission to do that simply because it's a fence that makes it makes him come before this board and has he established that we know ever since packed on the surrounding property or property values we did have a letter in support of that and i don't see where this would be any problem to surrounding property owners in the neighborhood of the zoning district we need any conditions no conditions not sure i heard of it as the condition that it be in the anything i did i did receive a voicemail message at my office from mr mr i don't think saying that they were planning on coming before the board in august they were not going to be here this evening i'm not sure whether that meant that they were going to withdraw their application or table it  but it would be my inclination to make a motion to table that this application so next month so that the oral things can tell us exactly what it is that they'd like to do i would agree is there any problems with that you know ok so support  same motion passes and that includes the zoning board meeting portion of the scene one more item that didn't get on the agenda and that is the central park chapel variance request to extend their audience has been withdrawn they did provide that to us in writing so you are aware of that thank you you thank