Welcome everyone. Today is Monday, December 1st, 2025, and this is a regular meeting of the City of Asbury Park Planning Board. Chairwoman Kerzac, can you please call this meeting to order? This meeting is being held in compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act, Chapter 231, Public Law 1975.
Adequate notice of this meeting have been provided to the coaster and park press by publication of the annual meeting notice and posted on the municipal bulletin board and municipal website. All notices are on file with the board secretary. Official action may be taken on the following matters before
the board. This meeting is being recorded by APV for your viewing pleasure in the future. Please join me to uh salute the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, I will now take roll call. James Banano >> here. >> Councilwoman Clayton is absent this evening. Jim Henry is absent this evening. Mayor Moore >> here. >> Jen Solder >> here.
>> Dan Shaneo >> here. >> Bob Zuckermanman >> here. >> Kathy Mclacklin >> here. >> Vice Chair Gunnan >> here. >> Chairwoman Kerzac >> here. >> All right. There the first items that we have on the uh agenda. the um approval
of minutes. Um first uh set of minutes is we have from May 20th. Um anybody have any um concerns, any edits? >> All right. Then can I get a um motion to approve?
>> So move. >> A second. >> May 20th. May 20th. >> Okay. Um all good on that. Okay. >> Eligible members, uh, Yvon is ab this absent this evening. >> Oh, just I'm sorry. Just one second.
>> Yeah. >> The minutes the meeting at was there a different meeting on the 5th versus the 20th cuz I have the 20th. I have the 5th. The meeting the minutes for the 5th >> as opposed to the 20th. Hold on a
second. I have the 20th, but hang on. Don't go anywhere. Or did I look at the wrong >> Oh, I see what you're saying. >> One. >> Oh, yeah. The email here says >> it was the fifth.
>> You're correct. The date on that one was incorrect, but it's the >> Do you want to skip that one? I'm just thinking. Do you want to skip the M? >> No. Why don't we skip? Why don't we because we have a number of edits on these minutes. Do we want to just mention what the edits are or do you want to just
>> let's let's just accept all the edits. >> We'll send you the we'll send you the edits and then we can do this again. How about that? But that'll be 2026. >> Is that okay? >> Sure. >> 2026. >> Yeah. >> Long as we have minutes adopted,
we're okay. >> Okay. All right. Why don't we do that? Okay, >> I'll send you my my edits and I think that some other people have theirs. >> Okay. So, do you want to go straight to the resolution then? >> Why don't we go to the uh the resolution? >> Perfect. >> For the uh the the U proposed amendment
for the Main Street redevelopment. Any concerns about the resolution? Can I get a motion to approve? >> So, move. >> Second. >> Copy. And then Okay. Uh, James Vano,
>> yes. >> Mayor Moore, >> yes. >> Jen Ser, >> yes. >> Daniel Shaneo, >> yes. >> Bob Zuckermanman, >> yes. >> Kathy Mclacklin, >> yes. >> And Chairwoman Barbara Carzac, >> yes. >> Uh, we can move up the uh we'd like to move up the discussion about the 2026
planning board meeting dates. Um, we you've been provided with all the dates that we're proposing. Does anyone have any concerns about the dates? cuz I know that some of them have to be shifted because of holidays and um
election days and things like that. Everybody okay? All right. Can I get a motion to approve the 2026 dates? >> So move second. >> Daniel and Mikeen. >> Yeah. Okay. Okay. Um
>> Jen Ser. >> Yes. >> Daniel Shaneo. Yes. >> Bob Zuckermanman. >> Yes. >> Kathy McLaclin. >> Yes. >> James Banano. >> Yes. >> Mayor Moore. >> Yes. >> Mike Gunnan. >> Yes. >> Chairwoman Carzac. >> Yes.
>> Um, are we close to having >> need a minute? >> I spoke to my client about a minutes ago. He said it was about 10 minutes out. >> All right. So, >> and I'm waiting for my architect. >> Okay. >> I'm here. Well, do you want to begin or do you
want to wait until they come? >> My opening is going to take like a minute. >> All right. So then why don't we wait until they come and uh we just take a recess for until our uh presenters come. Motion to I guess that we just say motion for recess.
>> Yeah. Motion. Motion second. I'll >> motion. Motion second. All in favor? Okay. We'll take a few minutes. Okay. Thank you. Sorry. Sure. back in. Okay. Okay. I'll now take roll call. James Banano >> here.
>> Mayor Moore >> here. >> Jen Ser >> here. >> Daniel Shaneo >> here. >> Bob Zuckermanman >> here. >> Kathy Mclacklin >> here. >> Vice Chair Gunnan >> here. >> And Chairwoman Korzac >> here. Okay. All right. We're uh here to listen to the application for uh 531
Cookman Avenue. Correct. >> Andy, let me let me do some procedural things here. Okay. Uh, a number of members who were not part of the board at the time have listened and reviewed the tapes. Okay. And I have certifications. Bob, sorry. I didn't realize that you were on the list. I
didn't prepare a certification for you, but on the record, I understand that you've re you've reviewed the transcript. I did or video of the March 7th, I think it was, meeting. >> Yeah. March 72. Yes. >> Okay. So you >> I watch the entire
>> That's fine. Okay. But uh Katherine, uh Michael, Barbara, and James, their certifications are in. So everyone here is also >> No objection. >> Okay. All right. So ready? >> Sure. >> Yeah.
>> All right. Um I'm here tonight on behalf of Isabelle in charge doing business as the Asbury Pale House. We're here for an amended site plan approval. Just by way of history of the building, there's a resolution that had been passed previously allowing for minor site plan
approval allowing an existing storefront at the Aspbury Al House which is located on Copen Avenue to be modified with the rollup garage door and also counter at the southwest corner of the building. There are certain conditions on that
application that the garage doors match the wall panels above and below the proposed garage door, the approved garage door, and also the number of stools be limited to five. And lastly, requiring security or police at the
exterior of the premises. The reason we're here tonight for the amended application is that the door panels don't exactly line up. We're going to provide testimony as to what happened with that. Also, we're going to ask for an increase of the seating capacity
um for the 16 ft counter where there are five stools which are basically placed 4 ft apart. I know the concern was that you didn't want people at the counter standing at the counter. By having the stools so far apart, it actually operates counter to that. And lastly in
terms of security police going to ask that that provision be removed as the jurisdiction really for the police and security lies with the state D and Minister council. I don't believe the authority is within the planning board
to dictate in terms of the police and the security >> that ship is passed. I know, but I'm just I'm looking for an amendment just to say that it's the ABC that really is dictating to us what security we're supposed to have there. Um, so I'm going to look for an amendment of that
provision. With that being said, I have two witnesses that I'll be providing um as far as testimony, our architect, Jeffrey Bell, and also the owner of the premises, Matt Kaja. If I can get going. >> Okay. >> Okay. Let's get your witness and we'll
at the same time. >> Sir, please raise your right hand. Please raise your right hand. >> You solemnly swear affirm that testimony about given this matter the truth, all truth or nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Please, sir, please state your name for the record. >> It's Jeffrey Bell. B E L L E F R E Y.
>> Correct. >> Donna Miller, our board planner. >> Thank you. Okay, Mr. Bell, you were the original architect on this application. Am I correct? >> Correct. >> And you had prepared a plan that was approved previously allowing for a garage door at the Asbury L House. Am I
correct? >> Correct. >> And what was installed does not conform exactly with what was approved. Am I correct? >> Correct. >> Why don't you go through what happened? >> First of all, are you still licensing? >> Oh, I'm a currently licensed. Yes.
>> Go ahead. Sorry. >> It's okay. The U. So the door that was manufactured uh didn't match the specs that were given initially. Um the door arrived on site and um decisions involving
ownership was to maintain the facade as it was and not change the divisions to match the door that came that that arrived. >> Explain that again. What do you mean by? >> So this the door that we had ordered had
divisions that matched up with the existing facade vertically >> and the door that arrived or that was fabricated and and arrived to the site had slightly different spacing. >> All right. Why don't you describe the spacing and how it's different from what
was approved. Um there's um one two three four five different sections that were supposed to be um incorporated into the door. >> Five panels >> five panels left to right and um it
didn't arrive with the same spacing that existed. So instead of in change changing out the um the glazing above and below to match what came um decision was made to keep what's there cuz it matched the rest of
the facade going around the building. >> We're referring to this document and we're going to mark yeah your plan as A1 for identification. What's the date of that plan? uh 102125.
>> Okay. And that's what you're referring to. Am I correct? >> Correct. >> So the looking at what's been marked as A1 for identification. What was installed has two uh smaller side panels? Am I correct? >> Correct. >> And did the manufacturer indicate to you
the reason for those side panels? >> They did not. >> But for clarification, so in the upper right P upper right picture, >> that's correct. >> Corner, that's what was installed. >> Yes. And what we're talking about, what was installed is the the black panel. >> Yes.
>> Okay. That's that's the garage door. Correct. Itself. >> Right. But it also has to be the two side panels that are with it, too, because those are different. >> So, it's not only the garage door. It's not only the door, it's the side panel. >> That's what I was. Exactly. So, it was those side panels that were also installed with that garage door. >> Correct.
>> Yeah. >> And they didn't indicate why it was necessary to put those side panels in. >> No. >> Okay. And when you look at the garage door, how many panels are in that garage door?
>> Left or right, there's four panels >> as opposed to the five panels that are are are on the original building. >> Correct. Yes. >> Both top and bottom. Correct. >> Correct. >> So, we're looking for an approval to allow the way the manufacturer had
provided the garage or installed it. Am I correct? >> Correct. Well, they're black as well, too. They're different color as well, too, right? >> They're black. Were they ordered? Were they Were they ordered to be the same color as the >> They were They were supposed to be the same color as the millions were supposed
to match, >> but they had to be painted to match. Am I correct? >> They could be. Yes. >> And what was the So, is I'm looking at that photo and besides you get the little small I guess I assume the two end panels, those are fixed panels, not
part of the >> correct. Yeah. >> Okay. So, so just to the on the the left side, that fixed panel, >> is that one long panel? It's like an up and down pain. Yes, >> that is. Yes. >> Is that one long one or is that two there? I can't see with the reflection. That's just
>> It's just >> That's just one there. Okay. One, two, three, four. Okay. >> Four across. Am I correct? >> Right. It's four. It's six across. Really? Well, it's really eight. >> How is it eight? >> Eight cuz it doesn't matter. >> It's four. Two. It's two rows, >> right? So it's four and four, but you
have two on the side, so it's 10, >> right? And the original application was >> five and five. >> Five and five, right? >> As opposed to the >> It's a different tent. >> A different Thank you.
>> And so was there a reason that they >> Well, part of part of it was they had to have a horizontal break in the garage door in order for it to be able to open. So, um, >> no, but why were the millions not matching? >> Did they, uh, >> we don't know, but this is what showed
up from what was ordered. I don't >> And did And what happened? Did you call them back and say you're not going to pay? >> I did not. No, >> I think you said a decision was made, it sounds like, to go forward with this. Who would have made that decision? Just so that was
>> as I understand it was ownership and I'll have my client. >> So, we have we can ask those questions. Um, also I believe that one of the purposes of this, correct me if I'm wrong, because I did watch this whole thing today, was to um provide a door
for servers or was that um to No, >> I don't believe that's in the resolution. >> Not in the resow service to happen. >> Okay. So the servers on the outside can receive the stuff.
>> It's not just a counter for customers to sit at. >> Let me just hear what >> it's not just a counter for customers to sit at. >> There's also a space where >> for service. Okay. But it's not a door. >> I thought it was Yeah. Okay. Thank you. I'm just looking at the resolution as
far as the service any provision relative to >> I think Donna explained to us but the remainder of the candidate is correct >> number 10 correct any other questions for this
>> what's the feasibility of um correcting this issue, this uh diff this change. >> Um >> was that explored? >> I'm not certain. I mean, what's we'd
have to the whole area would have to be redone. >> It would have to all be removed. Correct. >> Right. All the everything. >> Yep. What was the date it was delivered and installed? >> I'm I'm not aware.
>> I'll have my point test. >> Anybody else have any other questions for this witness? >> Have professionals? No questions. >> Have one one last question. You're the architect, >> correct? So when the wrong door was delivered, did somebody call you and tell you it was the wrong door?
>> No, sir. >> Wouldn't that be normal >> or or who would who would be notified? I I'm not sure the architect would be would be the one that should be notified, but whatever. You tell me. >> Well, he's the one who made the testimony. >> I know, right? You're right. >> Whoever ordered it, I suppose.
>> Follow my client. >> Okay. All right. Um, can we open it up to the uh the public for any questions? >> Can I I I just have one more question. >> Sure. >> So, the two side fix panels was that which was originally approved because
>> No, no, that's the issue. >> That's that's another issue. >> That is the issue. >> That is not the issue. >> Well, if you get rid of those side panels and you can do it, >> right? You can match. >> Exactly. >> And you can match. >> The original approval is for four, right? Four across.
>> No, five. live across. >> It's supposed to be the entire opening. >> Mhm. >> Right. I'm looking at page four of the CC report. >> It does architectural elevation of approved storefront replacement and it was four panels across.
>> Two, three, four. Um, >> it's supposed to match. >> Yeah, it's supposed to match. Supposed to be five. >> Yeah. >> Was it five up and down or was it just five? So, >> it was it was up in here.
>> The base was those fixed non-wind panels and then >> two rows >> two rows >> of windows and then the top transom level and they were supposed to match exactly from >> right. All right.
>> Yeah. Number five on the condition says the top and bottom panel shall match with the proposed garage. >> Oh, I see what you mean. Okay. So, it seems as though that the manufacturer was able to get the side panels in the right color, but they were not able to give the door in the right color. >> No.
>> Well, they got the transit in the right color, too. >> No. Um, it looks like it on the picture. >> So, I don't know if you know cuz I don't Did you supervise the installation? >> Uh, no. >> Did you order the door? >> No. >> Okay.
>> Who do we know? who ordered ordered and super the owners. >> I don't >> from my vantage it looks like >> those side panels may have been modified.
>> They took the originals and cut them down. >> You still need the whole top piece. That's not that that's there that's there that's there that's there that's there that's there that's there that's there that's there that's there that's more there than that. >> There's more there than there was originally. You couldn't have just taken all all the old pieces. So they had to order something the right color cuz if you look at the old if the old
look at the old picture and the new on on this on this it's the top panel is some something got cut off and then you've got the top of it or you call it a transom. I'm not sure but that's right. The five
the five in the black are right on the very top. Then you got five clear. Yeah. >> Which did not exist before and now. So, so there was a lot done here. So, why don't we hear the testimony and see where we go from here?
>> Yeah. >> Cuz there was a lot done here. >> So, that part that's just on in the in the as installed the right picture. So, the clear glass, we'll call it a transom that's under the black. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, is that new or was that
modified from the old glass? I believe that would have to be new because you can't cut the glass. >> Well, did you do did you design that? Did you have it installed? Did you >> I just provided the um the overall design, but the execution I was not involved with. >> Okay.
>> All right. >> That's what we have to know. >> Right. >> All right. So, uh, anybody from the public that would like to ask questions of this witness based on their testimony that it was just given?
>> No, >> not not on this construction issue. >> Okay. All right. Next. >> Thank you, >> sir. Please raise your right hand. Some swear affirm testimony about this matter truth. All truth and not the truth. Yes.
>> Can you state your name for the record and spell it? >> Uh, Matthew Gates. Gu L. >> M A T H E W. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. M A T H E W. >> Thank you. >> Matt, what is your relationship to the Asbury L House?
>> I'm the owner. And you're familiar with the previous approval for the garage door at 531 Cookman Avenue. Am I correct? >> Yes. >> And looking at the plans that have been marked as A1, it appears as though the
garage door that was installed is different than that which was approved. Am I correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. Why don't you go through what happened with this? Um, so the manufacturer of the door didn't build a proper door spec. Um, I
was down in Fort Lauderdale opening up Asbury office when this was installed. And when I came back to do the walkth through for it, uh, they cut it the window to fit it and put new, uh, metal
pieces. So, the windows are pre-existing that were there. They literally cut and framed out the ones and put the door in. So, when I came back, when I spoke to the manufacturer, he said that it's 10 panels exactly what it shows, cuz if you count them, it is 10
panels, but it doesn't match to what the plan were. So, we talked about potentially painting them silver so it matched the the front of the building. Um, and Carter Sackman, the landlord, thought that would be good because we kept the integrity of the existing frame of the building, so the windows match
and we didn't have to move any of that. It's strictly just the door. Um, and then our other option was we called the manufacturer to try to redo this. And he he said absolutely not, and we'd have to purchase a brand new door. So, we thought we would try to go back in and
figure out a resolution uh to try to keep it and kind of adjust it to make it acceptable for the city. Um, so that's why we're here today. >> Okay. Let me ask you, who is in charge of this project for your your restaurant? Who's in charge of ordering
the door making and and the installation? >> Uh, his name was Brian Smith. He no longer works for me anymore. He was my director of operations at the time. >> And when you say you cut the glass, can you explain what you're talking about? Are we talking about that clear transm up
above? >> Correct. So they custom cut the glass and took the metal framing >> and boxed out. >> So they reused it >> pretty much. Yes. >> And and when you say they, this is your contractor. What do you Would you have an in-house contractor?
>> No, this was uh the door company, Neptune Glass Company, who did the door. >> So they did the transom. >> The transom was already there. >> Neptune door up on 33. >> Yes. Yep. Gus was the >> Okay. Who cut the transom? >> Gus's guy. I'm not sure who
>> Neptune door >> his c his guy that did with him. Yeah. I forget his name. >> And he did these two fix side panels as well. >> He did that whole thing. Yeah. >> Okay. And let let the door when you saw it,
what was the the the span of time from this being installed and you actually seeing it? I mean ballpoint >> three weeks. >> Okay. And you didn't know about it before. This is when you first came and short when you physically shore it. >> Yeah. And honestly, to be just
completely honest, which is my fault, I thought it was correct uh based off the plans and then when I really looked at the the difference of the two beams, it's they're offset, but it was 10 panels to 10 panels. They just don't line up and they're not adjacent like they're supposed to. >> I know, but the whole point of it was
the approval was for them to match. >> No, I completely understand. Yeah. Yeah. >> So, did you pay for the door? >> I did. Why would you pay for a door that you did not come to spec? >> Uh Gus requires you to pay in full prior to install >> when you sue.
>> Uh we if we have to get there, we can. >> Okay. >> Trying to avoid that. Okay. >> In terms of the counter, the approval is for five seats. Am I correct? >> Yes. >> That's a 16 ft counter. Am I correct? >> Correct. >> Also provides her a service area. Correct.
>> Yes. Even with the service area having those five seats, does it work? Keeping in mind that the resolution does not allow for people standing at the counter. What has occurred as a result? >> People try to go up to the counter because there's more space. So, we have to tell them to leave it.
>> If you have more seating there, that would would that eliminate people actually trying to stand at that counter? >> Definitely, because right behind it is seating of low tables. So, if it's just the bar and then the seating, it would just be the people sitting at the bar. And if you have five seats over 16 ft,
the seats then are three, four feet apart. >> Okay. >> Okay. Is that in light of a 16 ft counter in light of people sitting at the bar? Does that work or is that not within the realm of the way our seating
should be? >> No, we could have eight for sure. >> How much how much width of foot do you give a a seat a bar story? >> Two feet. two feet >> in between the next. Yeah. So it's it's one seat covers two feet range between
the seat and the gap. >> All right. So eight would be the entire 16. But now you would not have now you would not have any place for this service. So you want your service is what about 2 feet. >> We're actually not even using it as a pickup anymore because it's just easier to do it inside.
>> All right. But keep in mind that it allows for a twoft service if you eliminate those two feet. And would that be the normal area for service around two feet? Yeah. >> So that leaves about 14 ft of bar space. Am I correct? >> Yeah, it should be seven bar stools.
>> Is the request for us to change the number of bar stools allowed or just eliminate the cap? >> No. No. Change >> to what? >> And no, I do recall the testimony about or having seen it today
>> about the service area. So you're saying you don't need the service area after all seem to be >> if I can get eight bar stools and remove service altogether outside it would be more beneficial for us but >> all right the we have to get the numbers straight because what's happening here
>> or if you were to eliminate the service you would like eight but if they still required the board you have a service area you would like seven correct >> yes >> so which are you asking >> two feet is I think >> if the if the count If the planning
board requires that there be a service area, >> this is up to you. This is what you want. >> Our preference is request as indicated the service area. >> Okay. So, you don't want a service area anymore. The request is no service. >> Correct. >> And you just want bar stools.
>> Correct. >> Is there signage that there's no standing at the this counter? >> No, there's just managers and bartenders through it that tell them they can't stand. >> Okay. So that's monitored police. >> Yeah, we and we have security on seven
nights a week as well. >> I think that one of the reasons at least from my notes is after listening to this, one of the reasons why we landed at five was that it was a 14T counter. >> But I see that on here it's not. >> No, it's 16.
>> It's 16 on this done the drawing. It's 16. I get that. But when we were speaking at testimony because it's very fresh in all of our minds because we watched it if not today very recently it was 14 and then we said 2 feet per
18in stool with some elbow room. So fine if it's if if we were incorrect then. So the testimony was incorrect then. Now we're saying it's 16 which the drawing shows 16. That's fine. And so you're asking for
eight stores. >> No service. >> May maybe the 14 was taking out the two foot for the service area. >> Might have been. Yeah. I'm look I'm just looking for the plans. >> Might have been >> to see what the plans survived. I would venture to guess that's what it was. >> Yeah. The plans may have been correct,
but I'm saying that the when we're listening to the testimony, it was definitely 14. >> It was probably based upon the two. >> It could have been. It could have. >> All right. So, we're asking for we have 16 ft. We're asking for eight stools. >> That is correct. >> Okay.
And I believe you just a couple of minutes ago said you have security throughout so that the standing would not be an issue. >> Correct. With regard to the security who dictates the security is that
governed by the ABC. They require that you have security outside andor the city of Asbury department. >> A city. >> The city does the council. >> Yes. Then you compile that. Am I correct? >> Yep. >> Fire police officers as well on
Saturday. >> You have security inside and out. >> Uh on the weekends we do. Yes. >> I mean obviously it's the weather. >> Yes. >> May not permit. But >> that's all the questions I have.
>> Does anyone else have any questions for um the witness? >> Yes. >> Go ahead. >> No. No. Not yet. Not yet. >> When was it delivered? When was it installed? I don't know that exact date. I
apologize. Uh 2023, right? 2022, 2023. >> I I believe it's two years almost now, right? Second summer. The original resolution was since September of 2022.
>> This is our second summer with it, I believe. >> Well, when when were you in Fort Lauderdale? >> 23. >> 23. >> What What uh monthly? >> Uh I was there from Well, I was there for the back and forth
for four to five months in the spring summer and then we opened up the following. I think we're just trying to get to an approximate. >> Yeah, I can't get an actual date. So, we're not guessing. >> They did call for an inspection in early 2024.
>> And that's when it was noticed, >> but it had already been installed. Correct. >> Yeah, it was already installed. >> So, just by when we know when the inspection was in 2024, we still don't know when it was delivered, installed, and noticed that there was a
problem. Taking into account when the request is made for an inspection, how soon after the installation did you request that the inspection be made the door? >> I really don't. I apologize. >> I know the door was installed in
the end of 23 and then we didn't get our inspection till the spring of 24 I believe. >> And again, the inspection is when you found out that it didn't >> No, no. As I say, when I came back it was wrong. Then you noticed that it was wrong or you didn't notice what was wrong. I thought you I thought you said
you didn't notice until you looked at the plans. >> No, no. Like I said, I thought everything was right and then when she told us the plans were completely wrong at in the in prior to the inspection, then I said, "What's going on?" And that's when I reached out to Jeff Bell and then Gus. >> I'm sorry. Prior to the inspection, you found out. >> No, no. When she walked up for the
inspection that day. Okay. >> We thought we were good. >> Correct. >> Now, I didn't do the inspection. I was advised that an inspection was requested. I believe it was just Michelle who saw that it was installed. Um I'm just going back through the dates
I have. Um we issued our resolution compliance um for the plans uh February 12th, 2024. So if it was installed in 2023, that would have been before the plans were
approved. Um but between February of 2024 and Uh May 24th, 2024 um is when >> what was the
>> things started rolling with it's wrong. So, I'm sorry. You said February 2024 is when you gave the approval for the permit, >> not for the permit, but signing off on the um plans
>> and being in compliance with the board requirements. Okay. >> I wasn't working in the zoning office at that time. Somebody else, whether it was Maryanne or Michelle, would have handled the permit, and I don't have a record of who did that. My point is am I you know
assuming are you inferring there should have not been an installation >> prior to the internal record >> correct >> okay thank you >> when was the day that you came and inspect with us or when you walked by >> I I did not I didn't do the inspection I
believe it was Michelle >> or Marian came over to the spot >> I've been there a number of times but not to inspect for the city >> you do your >> I have a bunch of correspondence with Jeff um about the plans and what they can do once they realized it the door
that that it was wrong. That all occurred in May. >> Well, what was the date you came and met me outside when you said this is wrong? When you came to walk through for Michelle at 5:00 before you left on that Friday, >> you came up to me and said this is completely wrong and you left. >> Okay. That would have been in May sometime. >> Oh, that was
>> because that's when I that's when I was covering for Maryanne who had left at the end of April. >> And that was May of 204. >> Four. Do you have to get a permit to install the uh window? >> I don't. >> You would have needed a zoning permit.
>> Yeah. Which cost would have handled correct door company. >> I'm Brian Smith. Like I said, I was open regular restaurant for a year. >> You know, you're being recorded, so please, you know, you have to speak into the microphone. >> Oh, sorry. >> So the public can hear. And I think we
need to know >> when the installation was done. >> He doesn't have time. We're going to leave. >> It doesn't matter. >> Sounds like it was >> I'm not going to speculate. >> Yeah, I'd rather just get the real D. >> I mean, I don't know that it
>> relevant installed. It's not correct. He should be telling us >> Well, issue, but I think there's one issue. If the if the installation was done prior to actually receiving approval to do the installation, that's an issue.
>> I don't plan any and he wasn't cited for doing you, but that may be part of the problem. So, uh, I'm curious to know, um, since mid 2024 when you were advised it's either got to
be changed or go back to the board, what what was the reason for not changing it and instead coming to the board? >> $65,000. >> Okay. And and it's also over a year and 8 months. Well, they've been in the
pipeline. >> That's all. >> I mean, originally, weren't you guys scheduled for July >> in >> Um, >> anybody else have any questions? >> So, so I just want to clarify. >> Sure. >> So, the only impediment to complying
with the requirements is how much it's going to cost. $65,000. >> So, how much it costs? And you're saying it's that much? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. Anybody else have any other
questions of this witness before we get uh to the public? Any planning board people, folks about this particular issue? And that's the seating and the door. >> The lights, the seating, and the >> Sorry,
>> seating. You said the seating, >> right? The seating >> and the door >> and the door. >> Are we dealing with the security? >> We just take the position that it's really, you know, the council is dictating to my client what security needs to be there.
>> So, they have secured in accordance with the requirements of the municipal council. They have security because the planning board imposed that as a condition in response to the neighbors who came out and there was no objection from council or the applicant at the
time. There's going to be a claim that that's invalid or incorrect or not legal. Time to appeal that decision has long since passed. But we're asking for an amendment in light of the fact that the council may have other ideas in terms of
>> I don't care what the council is doing honestly because this was done as a specific ref a specific point by the board in reference to the concerns of the neighbors. >> That was part of the basis of the approval. Council's got nothing to do
with that. Okay. If there was going to be an objection, it should have been imposed at that point in time. Go ahead. >> Is the requirement for police or security? >> Either or. >> Either. >> Any other questions by the me board
members? >> Any questions by the um public about what was just testified to? >> Yes. Any comments? >> No comments. Comments are at the end. >> Okay. >> We'll give comments are at the end.
>> Questions up to the microphone, please. >> All right. >> Hi. Good evening. Just just a second. >> One second. >> I need one second. I'm sorry. >> Please raise your right. We're getting questions now. >> Question. Yes. >> Please raise your right hand.
>> Oh, a question. I'm trying things. >> Stop going through things. >> Okay. Um, please state your name for the record. >> My name is Alisa Bennett. >> And where do you live? uh 601 Madison Avenue um Asbury Park, New Jersey. >> Go right ahead. Question.
>> My question um about the door is was one of the reasons the door was created the way it was is to keep the sound out from a noisy restaurant after hours when it when it was closed. Was there any concern? You know, was was that part of
the reason of why it was created? And has the change affected that at all? No, it was created to allow for service outside. Um, but the resolution does require the door be closed at 10 p.m. >> And has it been closed um regularly
every day uh at every day of operation at 10 p.m. as instructed? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. And this then and then I can make my comment at the end. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. >> You'll still have time. >> Well, we'll cue you. >> Oh, I do have one other question. Go
ahead. Um, is it is so am I to believe that in fact the security has been increased as requested and is currently in place? >> Matt, the security is being provided outside. Am I correct? >> Not right now. We haven't had the garage
door open since September. >> But when the garage door is open, we do have >> We have security on this week. Yes. >> So when the doors open, security is in place on the outside. >> They don't stand on the outside. They stand in our vestible by the front door, but they are present in the location.
>> Is it not true that you don't you usually have somebody on the outside always that that is not something in addition to the door? >> You have somebody that is able to observe the outside. Correct. >> Managers and security. Okay. >> Can you speak up, please?
>> Managers and security. I can't even hear them right here. >> Sorry about that. >> You also have >> What was your response? I'm sorry. What was the response to that question? We have security and managers on. Yes. And >> inside outside again >> all all over. They figure eight the whole night.
>> So outside we have 125 seats outside. So they're constantly going in and out of the restaurant and then they're also inside. >> Does that include police officers? >> Police officers is not included. Uh we're actually in litigation with the town right now for the police officers.
So, we were required um prior when we had night life, we required to have two officers on every Friday and every Saturday night. Uh currently, since we've stopped the nightife, we don't have to have officers on Friday night anymore. Uh just on Saturday uh night as of right now.
>> What does that mean? Nightife nightife. >> We have a resolution with the town that we're fighting with right now. >> No, no, no. But I don't know what you mean by night. >> DJ is in nightife in the location. Oh, >> after 10 p.m. >> After 10 p.m. >> Yes. >> EJS. >> Yes. Yes. >> Okay.
>> So, we're required to have more officers on back then, but now we don't have to have them. >> And I just one final question about the security. So, you have one person outside in front of the vestibule. Is that the person? >> That's not the testimony you provide. He did say he has one person that's the
best. >> So, how many security people do you have at work? Every day there's at least one and then on Saturday there's six. >> On Friday there are three. >> How many people are outside providing security when the windows open?
>> I believe you indicated that you have people going in and out and walking around >> between managers and security on a Friday Saturday. We have five managers and like I said up to three security on Friday, six security on Saturday >> and they're constantly circulated within the premises. Premises.
>> Yep. And those are and those I'm going to just ask a quick question. Does the sick security include you mentioned managers. Does that >> No, on Saturday that would be elected. >> Okay. I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Oh, I was just wondering and those are the people who are also keeping people from going up to the bar on the outside.
>> Correct. >> As well as the bartenders are known to inform them as well as managers and security that they have to be seated and they can't stand at the bar. >> Okay. >> We don't really have that issue right now because of the tables behind it. So people don't go stand there. They're uncomfortable because there's people
sitting and eating directly behind them. That's why we're asking for more stools so we can get more people and people don't think they can go up to the bar because then they won't even go to it cuz they'll just see the eight bar stools in the restaurant outside and they'll be like, "Oh, that's not let's go inside." So that's why we're trying to avoid that gap like Andy referenced
earlier so that people don't feel the need to go up there and us have to tell them to leave. If there's bar stools there, people sitting and the table's directly behind it, they don't even feel like going up there cuz they're uncomfortable. So they just go directly inside. >> Is that your anticipating that or is that has been that has that been an issue?
>> Have people been going up to >> Oh, in the beginning before we told everyone, sure, it was their natural instinct to go see a bar and go up to it. Um, but now with the regulars, they know they have to find a seat or they have to go somewhere else. They have to go to a table. So, >> go ahead. Thank you.
>> Okay. Any other questions by uh anyone here? Are you is is there any more? Uh >> I have a question. >> Oh, go ahead. >> Testify that security is investigator for this location. >> Yes.
>> Were you aware of condition seven of your >> I believe he testified they're not just the best guilty guys walking around. >> It says I'll read seven to you. The applicant shall have security or a police officer present on the exterior of the premises whenever the exterior
spaces are being utilized. So if they're inside, that's what this says. >> Oh, it's the vestibule. Um, and I believe this says this, unless I'm misreading this, it says the exterior
where you're going to put the patrons by this window in that location in that in that area. Is that correct? >> The security stay in one place? >> No. >> Okay. Do they circulate around the entire premises both inside and out? >> Correct. >> Okay.
I'm not going to beat it up. Enough said. >> Is there anything else? >> Oh, no further questions. >> Okay. Um, does anybody have any uh any comments from the planning board that would like to make any comments
regarding this? Well, actually, let's go to the uh the public to find out what the comments are first. >> Let's open a motion to open up to the public comments. >> Second. >> Okay. >> All right. >> You have um you have three minutes to
make your comments about this application. >> Okay. >> You're actually before you do it, you're actually going to be testifying. So, I need to be put you under oath for affirmation. You sleear affirm that the testimony of this matter be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I do. >> Please state your name for the record.
Spell it and your address. >> It's Mary Beth Bole. It's M A R Y B E T H. Last name Boille. B O Y L E. >> Okay. Your Where do you live? >> 601 Madison Avenue, Aspbury Park. >> Thank you very much. >> Okay. >> As you can tell by the address, I live
directly across the street from the ale house and my neighbors are most affected by what happens there. We were not We were opposed to this um garage door to begin with. Um because you know Roman was initially proposed. >> Could you speak into the
>> No, we're sorry. Yes. Okay. And and since it has opened um Okay. Before before I get into that, I'll just say that the stipulations that we were we were told about how it would be used was the counter shall have a designated area for service and seating at the bar
limited to five stools. No standees are permitted at the counter. All patrons utilizing the exterior area shall be seated and the garage door shall be closed no later than 10 p.m. I've been watching out my window and seeing what's happened since June of
2024 when this opened. There were eight play settings at the bar on June 10th of 2024. There was no service area at all. I have con nights when the bar was open at 11:02 p.m. Other nights when it was
open until 12:16 in the morning. More than once this has happened. Um, eight place settings at the bar constantly. Um, all through 2024, there was never a five person thing.
The other, um, what I will say is since 2025, closing time has been consistent. It's been much better. 20 10:00 the bar is not open. However, there's still lots of people standing around the bar in the bar area.
There's there's there is space between where the bar is and where the tables are. And on numerous occasions, there have been people standing there with beers in their hands walking around, being served, walking up to the bar. I can't tell how many seats there are at the bar because when you look out, there's people leaning on the bar.
There's people sitting at the bar. There's people behind the bar standing. So, it's not like it's been the way it's been the way it was approved. That's not being followed. And it's disturbing to us that they're looking to relax anything when they haven't been
following these since the day they were given permission to do so. So, that's that's where we are now. That's how you know being a neighbor and living through this, this is what we're seeing. And we just want to make sure that the conditions are it's they're
they're treated so that we don't have any deterioration in the neighborhood in our life. You know, the rest of us who live there um don't have to have these out outside our window at midnight, you know, have having drinking outside, you know. So, just wanted you to take that
into consideration for us. Appreciate your your time. Thank you. Oh. Oh, yes. I do have photos um if you need to see them. And I also have copies of the timeline that of incidences that I have. If you would like to see those, I'm happy to provide those also. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Any other comments? >> Questions? >> Please raise your right hand. >> You saw me swear to affirm that the testimony about to give this matter the truth, all truth, and nothing but the truth. >> I do. Can you state your name and your address again for the record of the spelling name?
>> Sure. My name is Elisa Bennett. B L I S S A B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B B Bennett B E N T 601 Madison Avenue. I'm fortunate that I have a lovely unit. I have a deck all around Emory. And when
before we had um our meeting a couple of years ago with Matt, it would be not uncommon to have people waiting for a half hour on Emory, urinating, vomiting, screaming, singing, yelling for a half hour at a time. It was very very difficult situation.
We um requested more security, especially got concerned when the door was coming in because that was after we were having issues and we were told that there would be more security in that area and that people would not be encouraged to call Ubers down that alley
in Emory, that there'd be a police officer if need be, and that um things would be better. And I have to say, since the additional security, things have been better. We still hear things, but we expect to hear things because we live downtown by bars all around us. And
as I've told Matt, we are surrounded by bars. The only one we have an issue I'm across the street from Pascals's next door to Raila, next door to Bario. I'm all over. And the only one we've ever had an issue with is the ale house.
So, we requested that um Matt be a good neighbor, then we would be good neighbors. And I have to say with the additional security, at least on my end, which is the closest end, it has been better. And so, the idea of taking away
security is very frightening for me and problematic. And I request that that not be allowed. If anything, I think it would be better to have more security, but certainly not less security. Thank you. >> We're we're not proposing taking away
security. Our position is just that the authority would lies within the council. >> Um but we're not proposing by any means changing security, reducing security or anything like that. >> Your client testified that he has
security anyway. That's not Yeah, that's not >> So you're But you're at So what >> I'm just This is my concern. The council may have other ideas in terms of what they want for security and saying that they're the ones that issued the license
and their, you know, uh pursuant to the ABC requirements. If they come in and the council says we want X and that differs from what is in the resolution, then we have an issue. Ultimately, it's the council governing body that has
authority to dictate that because they're the ones that license it presume to the A. >> So that that's our position, but we're not reducing it. We're not changing it. >> But that that may be, you know, cumulative or and what's in the resolution is in the resolution. >> We're not changing this time.
You got an approval pursuant to a resolution which has a security requirement >> and we're not reducing security. We're not eliminating it. Anything like that. >> Just for clarity, you are asking for the amendment to include the removal of whoever that requirement is. >> It's a preeemption issue that I'm
concerned about. >> Do we know I don't have the resolution for me. Do you know exactly what it says? I don't recall what it says as far as what they're required to do for security wise. >> Yes. Number seven. >> Number seven. >> Is that the only one? That's one you just read before. >> Yeah. child security or police officer
present on the exterior of the premises whenever the spaces are are being utilized. >> Okay. >> And we don't have an issue with that. I'm just concerned with the expanse if the council wants something different. >> If that issue arises,
>> we'll deal with it. >> Sure. Yeah. I was trying to understand what specifically the amendment would entail as far as resolution concerned. striking of number seven >> anticipating either a police officer or internal security >> outside in that area near the bar >> during any period of time that it's open.
>> Okay. >> We have no intention of reducing security. Just so you guys I have security nights a week. It will always stay that way. So >> sure. I for the police officers like I said that's the town's discretion to decide
and we just follow whatever decided. >> All right. Do we have any other anyone else from the public that would like to comment? No. Okay. Motion to close public comment. >> So move. >> Second. >> Okay. >> All in favor?
>> I do. I second. >> All right. We have it appears as though we have three three different issues that we should be considering here. And perhaps we should take them one by one. >> Okay. Um first one was the seating. Um,
it's a 16 ft counter. They're requesting eight stools versus the five stools that were initially approved. Does anyone have any concerns about that from the board or um um about increasing it?
>> I think it's fine, reasonable. I mean, more seating if you want. We just don't want to stand. >> I actually agree with Matt on this one. I I think more the more stools, the better. We've all been to a bar. When the bar's crowded with people sitting, you naturally want to stand at it. So it's kind of like no seat, no service. >> I think if you the more spread out those tools are, the more people will try to
wedge in and stand. So >> So is having eight. No, you actually you asked for All right, let's get back to what you asked for. You asked for you you don't want service. >> No service. >> No service. So with no service, you're asking for eight eight stools. >> I I personally don't think that that's a
problem. But unless someone feels differently, >> I I don't think it's a problem either. I think it's, you know, if it if it helps to stop people from standing, but you know, so I'm in favor of giving the extra seats as long as we we just heard,
you know, testimony from neighbors about people still milling about. >> Mhm. >> This entire area is only supposed to be service for seated patrons, right? and that and you know provo
I'll agree to the extra seats extra stools but let's use them let's not have people standing let it be policed >> so how hard would it be and I'm so so on the eight to put up a sign if you're not seating >> leave no service you could have
prevented half of this by just putting up the simple sign two years ago >> if so I mean can make that part of the >> signage resolution >> get out signage too. >> Oh, yeah. Put up three. Put up one in the middle >> and tell your security and tell your
bartenders. >> No. >> If they're not seating, they don't get served. >> Absolutely. >> Not only not served, your security, if they see a person standing, unless they're standing up to, you know, rearrange their jacket on the back of the seat or going to the bathroom that
if they're just milling about standing in there, they're not permitted to do that. I just have I do have a I have a maybe a different take on this. It sounds as if this was what was the number that that um >> five were five
>> and per the public comments. It sounds as if that was not adhered to from the beginning. >> Um so it seems as >> we're asking for eight. I know you're asking, but we heard um neighbors state
that there were you've already been using eight seats. So, I don't know if there's any way to put any teeth in that. I >> I don't believe there's any testimony that eight seats were being utilized. >> Only from the public. That's that's the only there was nobody nobody testify
public. >> All right. So, we're Sounds like we're okay with the eight. >> There isn't, Kathy. There really isn't much. Eight is eight. >> Yeah, >> eight is eight and no service. You know, >> it's uh >> that would have been an enforcement
issue for this another branch of the city to take care of which hasn't >> Okay. All right. Next item was security. Um I'll I'll mention what I what I feel about. I'll give you my two cents, but
like I said, I'm one vote. I'm fine with keeping the security just the way that we stated it in the in in the resolution. >> So, >> not to change it. >> I agree. I I can't First of all, I can't imagine the council would ever say you don't need someone outside and we have very very basic. If the council required
anything, I I would imagine it would only be why. So, why take away this bare minimum? >> Yep. >> Why change anything? >> Does anybody feel differently? >> I I know I agree. You know the I have an occasional drink myself. The
drinking in the city. The other Saturday night at 2:30 2:23 a.m. a young woman was banging on my rear door, meaning I have a gated property. My my woke me up my back door, my front
door repeatedly until I called the police that she was so intoxicated coming from one of these neighborhood bars. It's it's getting crazy in the city. So the resolution says when that is operated, that outside
space is operated, there is to be security in the exterior, not in the vestibule, but in the exterior and we should it should be enforced the resolution as agreed to. >> Yeah. And there's 125 if there's room
for 125 people. One security person is not ridiculous. It's not an unreasonable amount. It might even be a little short, but I think that that if and we need any more, I think that the city will can uh add to that. That's my opinion on that.
Um, regarding the door, does anybody have any uh feelings about the door before I mention my feelings? >> Just always feel we're asked for forgiveness instead of permission. I mean, that seems to be typical
with zoning, planning, every board like, "Oh, we're sorry. I'm not M. I believe you're in Florida." I mean, nobody inspected it. I mean, the architect paid the architect. Nobody looked at it and said, "This is wrong." I mean, this is You're telling me it's a
$65,000 door. This isn't something you bought at Home Depot. I mean, and nobody looked at and said, "Wow, we got a problem here." Yeah, I couldn't agree more. >> I know. >> Again, I I don't know what the
options are, but I'm just tired of giving forgiveness. >> Exactly. Ditto, John. It just seems like there's a uh an issue or repeated in this city that we approve one thing and
they come back with something else and saying, "Oh, now I need relief." Uh, listen, I I personally I would have not paid for the door. I would assume that they did not meet the contract with
the manufacturers. I know it's a um it's a monetary issue. It's a burden. >> Excuse me for interrupting. >> Monetary issues not relevant. >> No, it's not relevant to me. What I'm saying is I understand it's for the owner, but
>> it was important to the board that this garage door meet match as much as possible the panels and they are totally different uh just haphazardly done. Uh
and it may be a burden upon ownership but it's not what was approved and I'm against uh personally uh approving as built. I I also I I I I agree with you and it's judging from
listening to what that testimony was during that on that on that wonderful day in March on 2022. There was so much emphasis on that door and how many panels. What's it going to look like? What's it going to be? I would have to vote that it has to be
what was approved. I I I I agree and I'm going to tag on this that this is a historic building. The fact that the door got approved at all in the first place was tenuous, right? It it doesn't really match the historical character.
doesn't conform to a lot of the guidelines, but you know, because of all these agreements, because it was supposed to match as best as possible, it was supposed to fit in with this structure as best as possible um for a
use that uh required a variance. Um, you know, I think the fact that it doesn't match at all is is just really not acceptable. It just it doesn't match the the the alignment. It doesn't match the color. Yeah, I was I was here originally, you
know, in the in the original area and it was very important that it match, you know, and we didn't want to really change the building, but we wanted to be able to give the ownership uh the opportunity to make more revenue,
realizing that this was a space and it was a balanced act, you know, that uh to uh give some relief to the owner and also with the appearance of this historic building. And again, it was
very important that these panels matched and they just don't. Yeah, Dan, I think that's so well said. The the appearance matters and this is a very prominent spot in the middle of downtown Asbury. I mean, I think about what we put people through when their fences are off by a couple of inches um on some side street.
And this is a historic building in the middle of downtown. >> Yeah. I mean, and you know, I won't mention the property, but like a block away, you know, something else was done with windows in a historic building and stuff like that. And again, it was, "Oh, I'm sorry." And, you know, we could put a band-aid on. Well, you know, there's
no band-aid. This needs surgery now. >> Anybody else have any other statements? >> Okay. Um, >> I'll make a motion. >> All right. I'd like to make a motion that uh we approve the uh the eight
stools plus signage, no seat, no service. Uh the security stays the same and the door stays the door has to be modified. >> But how about should this be oper should
in fact the door even be operated until it's act should this we're proving eight stools. Why should there even be an operation of this of this counter space >> until we have the door that's built as
as approved? >> That's enforcement. >> We can't we can't stop them. If they operate, they operate. And if the city if the code enforcement section wants to go out and enforce the resolution, they'll f they'll cite them and bring them to >> Why should we be giving eight stools
there? Why should we be expanding the operations? is under >> we do not want to taint our decision making process with an enforcement issue because that would create a nice basis for appeal for Mr. But want to do that. >> Okay. >> I'm on the record of saying that.
>> I hear you. I hear you. I take your advice. >> But we can ask for, you know, additional stools. >> Yeah. >> Right. But we're >> we don't like the door. >> So is there a time frame when the when it has to be fixed?
>> I mean, I don't want to hear 5 years. >> It should be taken care of immediately. If it's not, >> the code enforcement people >> should be out there and cite them. If they don't come in and do the work, then then then they should they can they can
come in and say you're in violation and take them to municipal. >> So Jack, then shouldn't there be a time condition on this? >> What happens is all variances are granted in the city of Asbury Park. You have to complete construction within a
year of the date of the resolution of approval. And if you don't, the variance is abandoned by ordinance >> for variances, >> right? But I I also put it in for design exceptions as well. >> But this is a variance. >> This Well, this is a variance then. >> So is this
>> So this this is still a variance case. This is not this is a a request to amend conditions of approval. So So >> what is the stat? So what is officially the status now? Is this variant gone? >> No. No. The the statuses technically
they could be considered in violation of the approvals. >> Okay. >> Tomorrow. >> Tomorrow. That's a continuing thing. >> And they and my client has been cited for that. >> Yeah. And the city has to the city's enforcement agencies have to deal with that and take it to municipal court or
take it wherever. >> So that's the time frame. That's the time frame >> immediately other than >> and usually I think that it's been customary with the municipal court uh go apply to the board come back to us after the board has heard the application
because if the relief is granted the judge will dismiss the case and maybe find them a small amount. I don't know what the story is because I don't prepare there and if the if it's denied then the judge has to deal with it as a violation. So in this case, if they go back to the municipal court, tell the
judge what's taking place and they show them this, the door is a no no. We can give them relief. So the judge is going to have to cite them or have Mr. Caris talk to his client about getting that door replaced
immediately or they will be paying hefty fines. This will resolve it one way or the other. Okay. >> All right. So, can I ask a procedural question here? So, the application was for this new storefront that was
presented by the architect tonight. >> Mhm. >> And then also for let's say the eight. >> So, can we are we voting to reject the application? Are we voting to accept the application? But >> you're voting your vote. You you're saying to the applicant this is this is
what we're going to do. We have a motion essentially to approve request uh >> number two. >> Number one, let's we'll call number one. No longer are we going to have a service bar and we're going to have eight schools instead.
>> Number two, uh secure the request to omit the security or do anything with security is denied. Condition number seven of the original resolution remains in effect. Number three, your request to amend your application to permit a different door to be installed or to
remain as installed other than what was originally approved is denied. >> Correct. >> Sounds good. Okay. >> Everything else not affected by this remains in effect. So whatever variance we gave them, they still get the variance because without the variance they can't do this, but they're just
giving them two out of three or one or two out. >> And then so I understand. So then their options if we don't approve this new door is they either have to buy a door that conforms with what was approved in 2022 or go back to what can they go back to what was there in 2021. >> They can file an appeal of this
decision. He cannot file an appeal of the first decision because the 45 days has long since passed the first >> I guess my question is if they don't want to spend the money on the the door approved in 2022 can they just go back to what it was in 2021? >> There was no door. >> There was no door.
>> No, that's what I mean. They go back to right. >> Make it look like it did before. >> Make it look like it. >> You mean abandon their approvals essentially? >> That's up to the >> Okay. I I'm just curious. This is more I just said. Sorry. I just question for me. >> Okay. >> But but the door as even not operating
the counter the door can as it exists now cannot stay. >> No, it has to go. >> No, it wasn't. What was approved wasn't installed for whatever reason. valid, invalid, good, bad, and different. Price, whatever,
can't stay. >> So, build what was approved or go back to what was. >> Yeah. >> Yep. >> Cuz you can't they can't operate at some point. They're going to stop the city's got to stop from operating if they refuse to replace the door.
>> And I feel like we don't see this a lot, Dan, but I feel like this happens with single family homes. Not frequently, but it happens, right? People will build something and then you have to be >> taken down or been at this 40 years. It happens.
>> It happens. That's human nature. >> All right. Are we we all all set here? >> All right. I'd like to make a motion to approve um I mean approve the the resolution based on those three items. Uh the eight stools with the signage, no seat, no
service, keeping the security, and keeping the door. for denying the security and denying the request for the door, but approving the eight stools and the signage. >> Okay. >> I'd like to make a motion to um
>> I'll make a motion. >> May I can I just do we need to u mention the security because I think they also asked for that in their request for >> that was part two. We're denying that. >> Yeah, we're denying that. >> Gotcha. And then thankfully Michael
brought up the basis for the original requirement of the door being the way that it was. The board went through great pains with the applicant, the discussions with the neighbors and everything else. And Donna's report to keep it his as close as historically uh
correct as possible. >> Yep. >> It wasn't just something that we're just regularly. >> Okay. >> All right. We need someone to second. >> Second. >> Okay. That was Daniel, correct? >> Yes. Okay. >> Okay. Uh, James Banano,
>> yes. >> Mayor Moore, >> yes. >> Jen Solder, >> yes. >> Daniel Shaneo, >> yes. >> Bob Zuckerman, >> yes. >> Kathern McLaclin, >> yes. >> Vice Chair Dunan, >> yes. >> Chairwoman Carzac, >> yes. >> Thank you very much.
>> Okay. Thank you. U motion to adjurnn. >> So move. >> Is this the last meeting? >> I was just going to say >> Oh, I'm sorry. Go ahead. um discussion regarding the December 8th meeting being cancelled, which then means we do not return until after city
council reords, which will be January 2, >> like 26th or something like that, something. Okay. All right. Motion to Thank you. Okay. All in favor? Okay. No, no, no. It's been good for
raspberry.