there is not any unfinished business or tabled items new business texts amendment to section thirty nine dash to waiting for the zoning ordinance regarding obsolete parking in our tearin district the planning commission is the applicant really parking in the traditional residential neighborhood zone district one of the observations that they brought up is that the the ordinance actually caps the number of site parking spaces per property at six and so we were kind of surprised when we saw that if we should have noticed that exists outside see some sees those things sometimes and we thank them for bringing that to our attention that obviously was not the intention of subtext amendments that we did a year or so ago and the true intention of that was to provide was to allow for six  parking spaces per residential property not just her property because when it did then the existing language of poles and all non residential properties like schools and churches in and things of that nature so they actually are in a situation where they just have six parking spaces allowed on site so clearly that was an item that when brought to our attention we said yes thank you we need to a change that the applicants are also looking property put it that way to actually allow you to to allow them to have one parking space per tenant i believe was do with their original colleville you discuss that measured amount of additional onsite parking for some of these properties specifically ones that are duplexes in the zone district so it's your december meeting  commissioners that requested staff to come up with a specific ordinance language and you also scheduled a public hearing for the cvs need to formally review that language  provided you with some proposed language we have that extent should discussion extensive discussion regarding that your study session between four and five o'clock this evening based on that i mean there's it seems that the commission is somewhat split as to how to move forward with this staff has noted that we are recommended that you do make some changes per  proposed only an ordinance here staff is recommending also that you increase the amount of allow hope parking for residential dwelling units and these would be for properties that have want to for residential dwelling units in the t r n zone district that you allow six parked vehicles to be allowed on site for the first well in unit and then you know that property owners be allowed to have two additional parked vehicles site up to a maximum of eight parked vehicles per property so that is kind of the step recommendation this does require  has and you can say your name and address and you have up to five minutes rather than large parking lots high density housing i mean we have people living in the road for a decade and dictionary was clear from the beginning that property there was not enough space on the parking area to park those fifteen cars so people were finding access in a grass by driving over what would be considered the lawn  we would prefer to see the lead but that is it it was and as it was when he planned the unit at six cars per specked per property property being the piece of land that has built up we think the last proposal is unfair it's an attempt to reward the landlords behavior his actions when he knew full well the limits so what is the responsibility of the commission is it to protect the citizens of their neighborhood their investments their lifestyle or to create opportunities for rich of apollo eleven wards to exploit the city do want to say first thank you for being willing to consider the problem that's at issue here and be willing to take this up that that's important to us and appreciate your willingness to do that when we look at the situation i think it's good to follow up on some of the comments of mr trapp made as well in his note in the letter i think there's a number of solutions that are on the table that are being considered here i do think it's important when we look at some of these solutions to take into consideration the size of the property and i guess what i'm saying by that is  in something that came up i thought was helpful in the study session the discussion that took place about what is the problem what are we trying to solve here why is that a problem if we have parked cars and what's going on with that some of the things i heard about the problems would be quality of life activity preserving single family feel in this neighborhood when we look at things like activity though if you look at this neighborhood and the era here in district there's a minimum lot size requirement there's a minimum a lot footage requirement of forty feet  my client's property significantly larger than that if you consider that under your current zoning ordinance a forty foot wide lot would be allowed one house with six unrelated adults and would be allowed six park cars if there was an eighty foot lot you could have eighty to forty foot lots then you could have two houses twelve unrelated adults and twelve parked cars my clients lots even larger than that being ninety six feet wide but what we're saying here is well instead of having two houses with twelve unrelated adults we have one house with ten unrelated adults but we still only want to say six cars my question is if if you could have two houses with twelve cars and if that's the level of activity that would be acceptable and acceptable to the neighbors why is that not the same if you have a double start was a new one when it would be for six yet you could still have six cars per property right so what we're saying is that six cars per lot would be an acceptable limit right now for activity and if you had a double lot if there's two lots of b twelve cars that's an acceptable level of activity for that street for that size property we've actually got less going on because we've got one house instead of two sitting there and what we've been asking is be allowed to have ten so when you look at the activity issues you know how is that related to the purpose and i think if you look at what we've been talking about proposing the size of the lot doesn't matter if you have a larger lot it doesn't make sense than to take into consideration that you're having less of an impact doing that the other thing i want to touch on just briefly and it was brought up in the letter to is is if we're concerned about the single neighborhood feel and if in one of the comments that we don't want to have parking lot that's not nice to live next to parking lots the problem is we already have that we're in the whole college neighborhood here hope college has lots interspersed throughout this neighborhood where they have a large number of cars parked in that's allowed ok but part the other and not just separate from their parking lots that they have but their housing if they have a single family house that they've converted to a cottage they're not subject to the number of unrelated adult provisions because there is own d they're not subject to the parking regulations so what we're saying here is these concerns are really important to us these concerns about preserving single family feel in regulating the number of unrelated adults but we're only going to apply that to the private landlords we're not going to apply that over here to hope college i guess my question is is that if that's important why are we not applying that uniformly why are we having disparate treatment that's going on between the two i think what needs to happen is to have an ordinance that reflects the size of the property that we talk about one that's applied uniformly and treats people the same way so thank you  here so that's what i'm just i'm just clarifying that it wouldn't necessarily be a presentation by anyone else but us one of us who i said good point of view are right sometimes with these use so you can see the number of people that are there so in other words if they have let's say they have room for eight cars but they only have five people living in the house you could only but most of their cottage is they don't have well i just this is you you're the authority and the so i could say it even though i know but i can trust you know so theoretically that i could have a two family structure that is fifty percent regard coverage i have no problem here's my final foremost when this your option last option than this report i think that's well and good i non conforming at that point in time and so basically what i view this is it's kind of a backdoor way of getting to them so we're granting them some of those non conforming rights that they had  before but not necessarily all of them and i don't understand i don't understand what the rationale for giving some or not so i can pave fifty percent of my backyard and i have the ability to park on that same number of cars best eight let's say what is the incremental problem between eight and ten or twelve that we're trying to solve and that's where i'm going to leave this i would about yes when i see it as a quality of life issue in the neighborhood it is a residential neighborhood and i like the staff proposal i think it's a good compromise  to leave it at eight i don't want to see more than that i do appreciate the name the residents the for living the single family homes there have to say about the noise and the cars and the traffic unfortunately that isn't something the planning commission deals with you have to deal with the police on those issues i mean i feel for you but the reality want and i'm telling you to do it and for the landlord i think the reality is it's all landlords need to be good landlords and you need to look at who you're renting to so i'm speaking to both people here just because we're a community so i'm personally in favor of the last the last piece that the staff recommended with them at maximum of eight see anyway i would i guess if they had there's just very quickly between a study session or regular meeting we ran a report upstairs there are twelve duplex says that have been grandfathered with six unrelated adults or six hundred persons per unit that does not mean there are only twelve forty eleventh's in the city just twelve they have to grandfathered at six hundred eight adults per unit would that be in and i guess is there a possibility you know in this how many how many lots of me if it's just corner lots that are only capable of meeting the the fifty percent paved area which i don't think a regular standard lot is going to meet the paver requirements and landscaping requirements other than a corner lot or a double lot to a lot more than six i know that we support the staff recommendation which is one two or three i think it's four isn't  site for the remaining rolling you know it's up to a maximum of eight vehicles are p with grandfathering the twelve if that's the correct number of non conforming properties now in twelve the twelve x two lots more that are not conforming to the allowing parking but if they meet the criteria we're working on putting putting ideas together i guess we've got to get past this part first and he doesn't seem to be too big of a problem just one more stuff yes i'm here to answer your question it would be right here would be a dump station so we'd probably get the sewer up to this point for the first stuff easy to run water everywhere and then as as it grows you building inspector that's where we kind of hit a roadblock and got a little frustrated he was very supportive working as on ours trying to make it happen but when the rubber meets the road we did build a little cabin out there just to test the family tests but i call the state to get that water that he wanted and the state that i don't have anything here and kind of return phone calls and didn't want to budge on that one either  extent that they apply to other license campsites however local codes may require a building i read a letter stuffed to the local people to decide which then and the building inspector said no i'm following exactly what the state codes are as a forty two inch foundation also if we've got a little sleeping loft and it's a full three foot wide staircase two hundred square foot cabin that kills half the square foot so  everything put them out there but it's again a test do it every week want to back you know another example is if there's only four adults now allowed per unit in the city of holland unrelated unrelated well families friends of friends especially millennial start camp and together all the time everywhere to be on through with that sort of stuff more than four people in a tent but don't you're running a party well that's a whole different all along maybe this is the only section that doesn't have the fence that you've seen on every highway and this is brand new fence here it's not a chain link but it is a five foot you know the bigger mean it looks like there's a pool the idea with the pool restroom area here would be easy tent camping to get to the restrooms and since this is out of the way there's there's a reason to camp here for the from the lake but now you're close to the pool if you're camping back here is playground stuff here and here is trying to and then these would be like little cabins with maybe a fishing dock great over the lake of the land is a little higher on the sand  so it's a little bit of a snowball because of starting it's just a family thing to get a few laps up here and we can camp all the nuts hundred twenty five thousand dollar estimate just to get the water and s up to here without splitting anything we have got to pay for that we need more sites to pay for that where do we stop or do we go and then several times or quest for an eighty thousand dollar fence to go and play some o can't put more than sixty sites and until that is paid or it's one year it's a phase one in your mind because that was the other thing as paving all of a sudden that's an expensive that we're putting in a city subdivision  back in here and then this is done center type of thing there  the roadway the package having the campground ok up and then this is this little red one that's kind of adjoining it is just like a dog walking paths would be more of a dirt road here for these having more rustic country or the country starting where you know some people can camp to have seasonal second garden to you do not need to stay the project is still alive but still at the historic district commission level historic district commission public hearing first week in my first week of this month last year last tuesday to be exact pushing some grudges i don't have a cite plan back here so there was one vote that was denied ok but the overall vote on the certificate of appropriateness for the development was not voted on yet so the project that commission is still alive and will hopefully be coming back to them in february the reason i say hopefully is the developer may decide that they've heard enough and don't want to pursue it we sincerely hope that they stick it out because we can certainly see a way to to get this by the historic district commission but that's for the developer to decide how much they want to it wasn't the last proposal basically the school and single family law or individual wants yes so the real the rule this thing in question is the whole notion of garages ok so the developer very much wants to wants to have this kind of be higher and project ok so their notion is is that they want to start off with it being an apartment complex but they're certainly looking at converting to condominiums in the future they have every intention of doing that they feel that in order to do that they need to have a garage an absolute ground each unit would have to have a minimum of one garage and then they would want to have space for one other parking spot gentlemen if you all are familiar with the property part of your pardon for that so that forty seven grudges or not no i don't know so these would be kind of one kind larger still larger structures so her be a combination of  like five to seven whatever garages per building ok so so those buildings had to go to the historic district commission and that's really what they were t n n about and i guess you know the say that you know they've got a lot of reservations about those garages they don't feel some of them don't feel that it's going to meet the secretary of interior standards for for doing this kind of work and it doesn't a historic district but the historic district commission is somewhat split too so i mean it's and we will we will see once where they land in in february but you know that the net effect is you know it's a historic district commission says no to the gracias and they don't walk in they don't walk into the developer could come back with just surface parking and it's a rental project then becomes a rental project basically from here to eternity so is that one is that really what everybody wants ok i don't think so i don't think that the neighborhood there wants that and i don't think that anybody at the developer doesn't want it but i think that the neighborhood there and some district commissioners are feeling that that's a pressure point that they can exert on the developer to get them to reduce the number  hasn't come into play do we know just for just for comparison here mike's not just for comparison that despair probably being recorded to service is just for comparison the square footage of the crop having because i've missed all of those meetings and fortunately but i think your assessment is correct that this is a we play by those in the neighborhood or those with an interest in that so they are they're going to move forward with those so in a way it's kind of been frustrating just you know for the planning commissioners and you know planning staff we've been getting to billy involved with that but you all just kind of essentially say let's sidelines and you've got to get you know reports from us every month it would be very interesting for you to all deal them to get your opinions out there you know what you see stuff but you know the developer probably very rightly made the decision that that is the historic district commission is the critical path right now they need to find bill what can or cannot be approved with that group and then from there or through  playing commissions city council they can get to that point so that's where we are we're going to draw on our remaining optimistic about this and i think that it would still be in awesome development for the neighborhood and not just the neighborhood but the entire city and something will ultimately be done with the building you know when it's got to be something will ultimately happen it can't go into disrepair we've got ordinances that will require keeping things up to snuff but something's got to be done you know but if this one walks you're not going to get another developer that is looking at that market in here playing again and what you're going to get are developers who cater to a different market and all the tax credits get i think i think the interest of the city in large part is to make this a property where we can acquire some level of taxable income right now although other parties don't see that as a priority so we end up with large properties that are not on the tax relief work and that's an unfortunate circumstance so i mean you look at properties like six one six that what they're doing rehab projects in grand rapids could they do it they're looking at apartments in the same capacity and that's it they're not looking at condo projects anymore but  they need to make the numbers work as well and without garages they just work well don't work well work and work in motion for german so