of the zoning board of adjustment was sent to the park and the coar official newspapers and posted on the board of the school building. Mr. Ross >> here, >> Mr. G >> here, >> Mr. Ma >> here,
>> Mr. Mr. and Mr. Fitzgerald and Mr. >> Pledge of Allegiance. Shall we >> 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. >> Good evening. Welcome to our zoning board meeting for this month, Mr. Kennedy. want to square up some business. >> Sure. >> So,
I have a motion to approve the minutes of the January 22nd meeting. >> I'll make that motion. I will second. >> All in favor? >> Opposed. Next item is the resolution approving the application of Donald and Patricia
616th Avenue. This was for the installation of a driveway extension and curb cut at the site. Uh based upon the unusual scenario there with the fact that they don't have a driveway on currently on 16th Avenue rather they
exit through the commercial alleyway in the back. And basically the testimony was sometimes they can't always get through there. Sometimes there's garbage trucks. Sometimes there's loading and unload loading go on and uh basically they said we're getting older but even
if we weren't aging uh it's a health and safety issue not to have access when you need it. So this was the approval and the conditions were fairly straightforward. Um, I think uh uh you wanted confirmation that the updated and
confirmed building coverage and impervious cover coverage calculations are actually on the plans and that um inclusion of gate details for the 16th Avenue side of the driveway should they want to include them. And I think that
was the gist of it. It's pretty straightforward. >> Yes. I'll make a motion to second. Mr. Ross. >> Yes. >> Mr. Greg. >> Yes. Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. O'Neal. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> The next one is resolution approving the application of Brian and Cecilia Matthews 109 11th Avenue. >> Okay. So, we sent this in draft form. Uh we needed some confirmation uh from uh the applicant's attorney and architect and Mary her and the architect is here
tonight if we have questions but we got so this was an approval to install several improvements on a lot containing an existing single family home and the improvements were including the detached garage, the pool house, the pool generator, gas fireplace, grill,
driveway, patio, pergola, outdoor kitchen, front walkway and outdoor shower. Um and basically the gist of the approval was further testimony. Um was given the uh Belmar insight development
that is going to uh take place. Uh they would like to have some uh privacy privacy for them uh and privacy for the people who will um ultimately occupy the uh the units in the former Belar
Insight. Mary gave me and Jeff Be gave me the technical information and we did say that they might have installation of a sewer lateral lateral for the cabana and pool house and um the driveway for the materials for the plans. portion of
the new driveway will be semi-pervious pavers with a center grass strip and the rear portion will be stabilized grass and see revised impervious coverage calculations for the entire driveway um which we have on the varian section and
then we're just clarifying that the building coverage is going to be 25% allowed and 33.06 6 proposed I don't think that changed really and the impervious coverage is basically 50% allowed and 55.32%
proposed and it basically is saying revised impervious coverage calculations um are based upon the breakdown of uh what's going to be semi-pervious papers what's going to be the grass strip and what's going to be the stabilized grass
and the conditions of note were uh we had a couple of them and I'll just go over the highlights of them. So, confirmation that no cooking facilities in the pool house garage. Confirmation that the pool house garage
shall not be utilized as living space as a second dwelling unit absent further approval from the board. Pool house shall only contain a half bathroom. The pool house garage shall not be utili or shall be the top portion of the pool house garage shall be utilized for storage purposes only. The fireplace,
outdoor fireplace is going to be a gas fireplace. It's not going to be wood. I think that affected the setback. Um, and they do comply. Uh, uh, no gray change at the site. Use of semi-pervious papers for the testimonial and plans.
Confirmation that the coverage that we just talked about, uh, inclusion of pool and height compliant fence and gate details. Uh, existing shed to be eliminated. The stabilized grass in the driveway as reference on the plan shall
be green but nonetheless capable of having vehicles drive over the same even though the area will be calculated toward the total impervious coverage according to burough ordinances. We have the outdoor grill shall comply with prevailing construction code requirements. No cooking facilities oven
stove in the garage or the pool house. Uh no heat or HVAC in the garage or the pool house. Uh the applicants reserve the right to have hot water, cold water connected to the pool house, outdoor shower, garage, and outdoor kitchen uh for the outdoor shower that is separated
from any half bath. And let's see, um we have in here that they shall arrange for the deed restriction to be recorded per our ordinance. Um and let's see um no further intensification or expansion absent
further approval of the board and that was the gist of it. You had mentioned there shell the sore lateral first sore lateral is obviously required there right bathroom I think you term there just not it's
obviously requirement something to that effect >> no problem so we can adopt that as amended if that's the pleasure of the board >> where where was the >> put there is All right. So, there is no half bath.
>> We were saying like, "You sure you don't want a bathroom?" >> Okay. >> And they're allowed to have a bathroom, >> right? They're allowed to have a half bath. So, we'll say no. No bathroom, Mary. Correct. >> No. Can Do I need to be sworn in to talk? >> Sure. If it >> uh Mary, just state your name.
>> Mary Hearn, >> you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide will be the truth. Best your knowledge to help you guide. >> Yes. >> And just for the record, you're the architect on the Matthews problem. >> That's correct. Project, correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> So, there is no half bath. There's no bath at all being added in in either the
garage or the the proposed garage nor the proposed cabana. There is an attached outdoor shower at the back of the proposed poolhouse cabana, but because they're going to deed restrict it as a requirement of your ordinance,
the way that the conditions are read is that they could have a half bath and we'd like to not remove that. They don't intend to put one in, but should they sell it, a future owner is allowed by your ordinance to add a half bath. So, we don't want to say that we give up
that right if that's okay with the board. >> That's fine with me. Anybody else? >> Therink? >> No, for the shower. >> We have to bring the sewer line back from the shower to the house. >> Is there a sink too?
>> There's uh no sink planned? >> No. >> None. So they should >> no matter what they're going to put on. >> No, Mary, right? >> Yeah. >> They don't intend to put one in. They just don't want to give up the right to
a future owner. >> I personally support that. >> So if that's okay, we can adopt that as as modified and thank you for that. >> I will make the motion. >> Mr. Mel, >> yes. Yes. >> Mr. Lib. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Mr. Chairman, the last one is uh 2043rd Avenue and this is for an unenclosed poolhouse/C cabana with an outdoor kitchen on a lot containing a single family home. And just I'll just
read one uh point uh to you. It said, "As is always a concern with the pool house application, the board members worry or have concerns that the structure could be utilized improperly as a separate dwelling unit. violation of the pre prevailing municipal regulations as indicated within the pool
houses unenced. The unlossed nature of the pool house clearly limits the possibility that the same could or would ever be utilized as a separate dwelling unit. Typically, the burough's prevailing pool house ordinance requires the applicant to sign the recorded deed restrict restriction preventing any use
of the pool house as a separate dwelling unit. In the within case and further on there the record discussion, the board finds that because the proposed pool house is an unenclosed structure and because there's virtually no possibility that such an unencloed structure could ever be utilized as a separate dwelling unit in the within situation, there is
no need for the applicant to sign recorded deed restriction. However, for record keeping purposes, if in the future the applicant ever to enclose that unenced house, then in that event they do need to sign and record the deed restriction. I think that was consistent. And the other conditions are
no interior cooking facilities in the pool house. Um not be utilized as living space absent further approval of the board. Um uh I have here that it only contains a half bathroom. The pool house shall only be serviced by electrical, water,
natural gas, and propane. No heating or air conditioning service in the pool house cabana area. Um no internal kitchen, although we recognize that an outdoor kitchen has been approved. no change of grade, use of semi-pervious papers for the approved plans in the testimony, confirmation that not
utilized as a dwelling unit, and confirmation that they comply with the applicable pool house regulations. And I should say unless otherwise because of that restriction, >> this is an open air, Mr. How does the half come into play that
you can't, right? >> Oh, I guess so. >> They don't intend to put one. >> Okay. Am I allowed to speak on this? >> Absolutely. Just state your name again. >> Mary Hearn >> and uh you you swear that the information testimony you're about to provide will be the truth, the best knowledge to help you go. >> Yes, I do.
>> And you're familiar with this project? >> Yes, I am. >> Okay. >> So, one of your conditions cuz I didn't have time to read that one today when you just read it was no cooking facilities. We do intend an outdoor grill, >> right? >> So, as long as you're outside cooking facilities,
>> it's never going to be enclosed, right? let alone no oven or range. But a grill I think is >> an outside kitchen is permitted and a grill clarify sounds good to me. Anybody else? >> So we can adopt that as modified.
>> I'll make that motion. >> Second. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mr. Mr. >> Yes. Mr. O'Neal. >> Yes. >> Yes. Thank you again. >> All right. So, now we're up on the um
Suzuki application 207 9th Avenue. Is there anyone here who had any questions, comments, or concerns regarding the sufficiency of the notice they received? >> You see any April? >> Okay. Uh the board secretary and I reviewed the notice and found everything
to be in order. So, it be my humble opinion that we have jurisdiction to proceed tonight. We will mark into the record what we as a board have uh before us. So A1 is the development application package
and that is dated uh January 30th, 2026. A2 is the minor land view zoning permit and that is dated January 12, 2026 January 13, 2026.
A3 is a survey prepared by Morgan Engineering and my friend with the good eyes will read that date. So that's A3 and A4 floor four plan floor plans and
elevations prepared by MB Hearn Architecture and that's dated January 9th 2026 consisting of three sheets and uh we will swear in Ted Bianke our our friend our zoning officer and our
construction official Ted you swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide to the extent you provide any will be the truthst knowledge to help you guys. Okay. And I think we have a refusal. >> Okay. So, um the law suggests that and
you at least respectfully remove yourself from, uh so this is a use variance application. So, we have 1 2 3 4 5 six. So, uh Bill, we have six people tonight and uh I'm assuming you'll proceed and then you'll call later on if Mr.
Chairman if you want to give uh Mr. Shipers uh an opportunity that he wants to hold the vote until he has seven a compliment of seven members. >> Thank you for the record William on behalf of
Chsky right >> chsky I'm trying to get it exactly right >> Mr. Kennedy is correct. I acknowledge his representations. Uh I do reserve the right on behalf of my clients that perhaps have comment
necessity seed another >> want to proceed. Do we have to swear in we're done swearing in there? >> Yeah. before. Well, I think we should swear and then Miss Hearn has additional exhibits that I believe she's going to
want to mark into the record and to distribute. >> All right. So, um if you could just uh state your name, please and address. >> Edward Shumpsky, 207 Avenue. >> And just spell your last name, please. >> S U M S K I.
>> Okay. And Miss Hearn. >> Mary Hearn. H A R N. Okay. And business address >> 100007 Main Street, Belmar. >> All right. So, if you could both raise your right hand. Do you both swear that the information and testimony you're about to provide will be the truth of
best knowledge to help you guide? >> Yes. >> All right. Let the record reflect both witnesses have been sworn and uh Mr. Chairman Mary here is a recognized architect. I think we we've accepted our credentials in the past. Both her and Mr. Sher
>> maybe even two minutes ago. And um hey Bill, if you don't mind, can I just ask your client a couple real quick basic questions, >> please? >> Just to get the resolution done. Uh sir, so are you the owner of the property? >> Yes. >> And how long have you owned it roughly?
>> Uh it's been a trust for 2013 is when the title transferred. >> Okay. And are you a part of the trust or? >> Uh now it's full ownership. >> Okay. So, it's been in the either the trust or your name since 2013. >> Yeah.
>> Got it. And it's a two family home. >> Two family home. Correct. >> Okay. And is this it's one structure containing two units? >> Correct. >> And is it up and down or sidebyside units? >> Up and down. >> Up and down. And then what is it? Is it uh one and two or A and B? >> Uh one and two.
>> All right. So, let's just go for unit one for a second. Number of bedrooms in that unit. One I rented in the past as a twobedroom, most recently as a onebedroom. >> Okay. And >> so it's two bedrooms.
>> Yes. And then technically uh I'm sorry. Unit number one, how many bathrooms? One bathroom. One bathroom. And is that is unit one occupied right now? Yes. Okay. And then for unit two uh number of bedrooms
>> that the last rental was four bedrooms I think was seven. >> Okay. And is unit two upstairs or downstairs? >> Upstairs. Upstairs. >> Upstairs. And so it's four bedrooms and how many bathrooms? >> Uh one bathroom. >> One bathroom. And is that currently occupied?
>> Yes. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Shers. Miss Hearn, would you like to uh identify exhibits that you'd like have marked and distributed? >> Yes. >> All right. So, we start with A5. >> A5 is a handout.
One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. A lot of pages. 9 10
11 12 13 pages. >> And mark that what? A5 >> A5. >> So is it a pamphlet of Ariel or pictures? >> So it's Ariel's photographs of the existing
and the back rendering of the proposed. >> So I'll give one to you. >> Thank you, >> April. Would you like one? >> Ted and the rest of the board. And then there is a uh two mounted boards. >> All right. So the first is A6 is a
mounted board of >> the existing conditions >> photos. >> Got it. and uh >> consisting of four photos. >> Four photos. >> Were they taken by your office? >> I believe they were taken by Mr. Zumpsky. >> Jumps Shumpsky.
>> All right. And when roughly >> uh within the one was >> in the last week. >> Yeah. I mean recently storm I don't know probably a couple months ago. Sorry. >> All right. So the last >> They're sunny so they're not in the snow. But the uh I guess the most
important thing they're accurate depictions of of what currently exists. Correct. >> Yeah. >> Got it. >> And then A7 is a rendering of both the proposed front and rear of the home >> prepared by your office >> prepared by Mr. Shsky. >> Okay.
>> Isn't that nice? >> And is there date on that? >> Uh that was >> Well, we can just put today's date on that. >> Really fancy. Got it.
>> Okay, we're good. >> Okay. Um, I think in lie of me uh having an opening statement, I think I'm going to defer to Eddie and let Eddie just tell the board a little bit of the history of the home, the trust himself,
his wife, his desires, and his retention of of Miss Hearn, and what what the intent desire were. >> My name is Chsky. I uh I'm here with my
wife Michaela. We recently married in September. And uh we're excited to be here. And to give you a little background of the home, it was in my family since the 60s. Uh my grandparents
were the original owners. Um they had as a multif family dating back to the 70s. And this was the house that I was born and raised in. And since I was around 10, it became more of a rental for
myself. Um, and now we're at the position where we would like to take the opportunity to make it our own and kind of build the space and grow into the home and it's something that we're excited about and
look forward to. >> And you said when you were about 10 it went into a trust. You lost your dad's property was put in trust for your benefit growth. Is that accurate? >> Correct. My grandmother grand
grandmother and father I lost them within a probably a year time frame and that's when the trust was established and um since then it's been it was transferred in 2013.
>> Now you talked to Miss Um part of my engagement I understand about whether your proposal would be to demolish the home its existing homes and its history and your attachments to it to build a complete new modern
perhaps two family as is often applied for preexisting family versus renovating. Is that correct? It sounds to me like based a lot on your emotional attachment to the home, what it represents, you're start to save the
existing home the best you can and give it to the capable hands of Mary to bring it into compliance, convenience, and contin to um give the board your typical
presentation as to your retention, what currently exists, any challenges you had, your proposals, and at some point time I'd like to go over with you the zoning chart
>> and feel free to respond to any questions asked of you along the way. >> Wonderful. Um, I'm going to walk you through this real quick if you don't mind. The cover is an aerial downloaded
off Google Maps. The home labeled 207 is the subject property. So, right in the middle, it's a home, you can tell, that hasn't been renovated in a while. And the homes on either side look as though they have been. Um, and you could just
see how the property sits amongst the other properties on that side of the street. The second page is a straight forward, more straightforward shot. I would be lower, but the trees blocked it. Just to give you a sense of the volume of the
structure, the height of the structure, the fact that the porches are similar or the porch on this home is similar to other porches in the immediate neighborhood. You can See, there's a detached garage at the back. Not uncommon for the block. The
next page, which we're going to use in a minute, and I apologize that I did not submit this originally, but when I walk you through the house, we're going to use this as a comparison. New to old. You can set that aside for a second. And then the next page is Mr. Shumsky
put together. Call him Eddie if you're okay with that. um just showing you the condition of the exterior um of the home and what they hope to clean up. And I'll walk you through what we hope to do in terms of
amenities we hope to renovate, remove, replace with all that in a minute. But just to give you a sense of what the house looks like now on the outside. And on the very last page again, Ed has put together a rendering of what the front
of the house could look like based on our architectural um elevation. And then the last set of the last um stapled set are just other homes that have a break to the front facade similar
to what we're hoping to build here. and you can thumb through them. Um, uh, we're hoping for a break in plane and not a flatness when we're done. And they just show you other homes in in Belmar that are similar in nature that
we think are attractive. >> How many of these attractive homes do you recognize as being pend Who are you asking that question? >> I think one of them is not mine. But I didn't put it together actually.
>> I'm saying it's an advertisement for >> No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. That wasn't the point. >> Um, so if you'd like, I'll I'll walk you through. Um, if you can now grab that floor plan sheet that I asked you to set
aside that was in the packet and go to my second sheet and what was submitted and we're going to show you what exists versus what we're proposing. The existing home is two and a half
stories. It is 2500 square feet almost exactly on two and a half stories. So say it again two and a half stories. >> Yep. >> And 2,500 square ft. >> Thank you.
>> And it is two units. The first floor is one unit and then the second and half story is the second unit together. Okay. And in if you look through the photos of the existing, there's a um a fire escape off the east side out of the third
floor. Okay, half story interchangeable. It is the third level. So if you look at the existing small plan versus what the second sheet of mine you can see on the small plan, if you walk in what is the front door off the front porch, you go
immediately to a stair to upstairs. So that's the entrance for the unit number two. There are two entrances and exits to unit number one, which is the first floor plan. One at the rear to a deck and one off the east side to the covered
porch. So there's two ways of getting in and out of the first unit. And then there are two ways of getting in and out of the second unit by way of that emergency escape and um the front door. the units. There's a
there is no way to get from one unit to the other inside. Okay. So, um what we hope to do to improve the first floor because Ed and Michaela hope to live there on the first floor as
soon as these are done and approved and built is make it more today friendly and meet how they choose to live. Um there are two bedrooms off to the east side at the front and in the middle which looks where the bay is. Those are the two
bedrooms today. Even though one is only really used as a bedroom, the front room could be a bedroom today. What we hope to do is open up that bay room and make it a dining room and then put the kitchen in the middle where it maybe was
once was and then put the family room at the back. So today the back room is a kitchen with a table and one door to the outside. We'd like to put the family room at the back and fill that with light and then open it up
to both the kitchen and dining room and again give them today's amenities. Put a little walk-in pantry. Put a mud room with a little half bath off of it at the back. Add an outdoor shower. We hope to remove the rear deck and put on just a
landing big enough to accommodate all the doors at the back with stairs down to a patio on grade. So remove a dilapidated deck and then get down on the ground with a simpler patio, no railings. And then at the front of the house, the
entrance to the second floor unit would remain as is. And there'd be a door between that could stay locked. um between the two units and then at the front which is a bedroom. Now we'd like to keep a bedroom and put a private bath
to that so that um Ed and Michaela have that room as their bedroom and this is all their unit in the near future. So, we would like to rebuild the front porch, take the back deck off, replace the back build door, put a new outdoor
shower, all complete renovation in and out. Mary, while we're on the first floor, >> uh it appears that by doing that also had previously testified
your redesign >> Uhhuh. >> uh will constitute a onebedroom um one and a half bath unit, >> right? >> Where a twobedroom pre previously existed. I'm >> correct. We would be removing a bedroom
and adding a half bath >> by All right. Can you uh just say that again? >> Y. >> Which unit was that? >> The first floor, unit number one. >> Okay. >> We would be removing a bedroom and adding a half bath. >> So now it has how many bedrooms again?
>> One bedroom and one and a half baths. >> One and a half baths. And it will have >> No, that's what it will have. >> What it is today is two bedroomedroom, one bath. >> Two bedroom, one bath. And it will be one >> one bedroom, one and a half. Got it. And
as you mentioned, it's a full renovation, full code to both electric, plum, fire >> codes, correct? >> Yes, that's correct. >> Okay, >> continue on. >> Yep. So now if you look at the middle of
the sheet is the existing second floor and the hope is to render that floor more modern for a tenant now and hopefully for Ed and Male in the future when they want to take over the whole house. So we've planned a master suite
up there for them in the future or for a tenant now. So you come up the stair and there's a k eating kitchen at the back of the house very small that would remain. The bath at the back is existing that would remain. And then the front
living room is a bedroom now. That would become a living room with a door to a new second floor front balcony. And then the whole east side of the house is two bedrooms. Now it would become one bedroom suite. So you could have a
primary on the first and a primary on the second. >> And so so for Mr. Kennedy, the proposal on the second floor >> well >> would be be also eliminating a bedroom. >> Yes. >> Creating more of a master suite.
>> Yes. Now the third floor half stories all the way to the right on the sheet that has a a room at the back that's used as a study now and a bedroom at the front. And those could be an office and den in the future. They could be
bedrooms now still, but we'd like to add that bath. If that bath gets added to the hall at the east, we remove that um egress. Call this again. >> Fire.
Excuse me. Sorry. >> And Mary, can you So, right now the uh second unit has how many bedrooms? >> It has four bedrooms today. And how many bathrooms? >> One bath. >> One bathroom. >> Right. And we're proposing three bedrooms. >> Got it. >> And three baths.
>> Got it. Thank you. >> So from an a bedroom occupancy perspective on this property, we're removing >> two bedrooms or potential four occupants photo from the structure. Correct. >> Right.
>> Okay. Same question for second and third floor relative to bringing this up to all sub codes through this renovation. >> Yes, everything will be brought to >> uh before it slips my mind. Um
just please discuss and elaborate on materials for the porch, the exterior, roof, gutters, leaders, those kinds of things as to what type of renovation this will. >> So all new and and relatively similar to
what you see on the home is that we design a Party siding, white trim similar to those. Yes. A good trim package. Some board and batten at the top gable. Brand new roof shingles. Um did you decide on any metal? Did we show
metal? Some metal roof. >> Not the color but the >> but we have metal on the porch. Um standard bigger square columns, new railing, new flooring at the porch. So everything revamped if approved. We're going to talk about this in a minute.
Um, also a new balcony on the second floor with railing, new updated railings. >> And before I forget the garage, what is the treatment if any to the existing garage? >> You want to redo that from the outside? >> We're going to uh have it match the front,
>> right? And you wanted to add a man door on the side that you don't have now. >> So, the overhead doors would be replaced with newer ones. Are they in good shape or decent shape? >> Okay. So, right now those would stay, but we'd like to add a man door on the side. And then the exterior skin would
match what we're doing on on the house. >> All right. So, if you would take us through the balcony >> uh and also um discuss the discussions I had with you, even though that's a level of hearsay,
I'll I'll affirm to it if necessary. and may be edible about his conversations with Arie, his neighbor, >> who's an attorney who I spoke to at length on the telephone today. Please talk about your original design and
let's say the army neighbor said, >> "Right." So, I did not talk to this neighbor directly, but we've had a lot of conversations back and forth. Ed went to his neighbors and showed them what he hoped to do and everybody was okay except the neighbor to the west was a
little concerned about a pop out that I didn't even talk about yet that we hope to add to the front. So, if you could look at the last page of my drawing and you're looking at the color rendering here that shows there that shows the new
but on the west side of the home, we hope to add a bump out to create the small gable on a to add some attractiveness to the home and a little bit of extra room in the room. although
the attractiveness was more important to us and we'd like to add that balcony on the second floor. We're also rearranging windows and redoing the whole house, adding the pediment to the porch. But what to get back to Bill's point, this
pop out I put at 18 in. I felt that was a sufficient pop out for the aesthetic improvement, but that requires a variance, a setback variance. So I had to play with how far should we go or not. >> And for the for the record, just so the
record is clear, you use the word order from this pop out. So the record's going to read this pop out. Okay. >> And he even more particularly describe this record, >> right? The added pop out on the second floor at the western on on the front at
the west side of the front >> as per your detail. West side elevation >> as per my north elevation. front and and shown on the west side elevation. Yeah, you see it from the side. Now,
when um Ed first talked with the neighbor, the neighbor was concerned about that pop out and the fact that we need a bearings just for the setback of it. And they have come to an agreement amongst themselves, should the board be
favorable, that we would reduce the the distance that we top out and reduce it back six inches of the 18 that I have it. So it would give him six more inches of easterly view from his home. And that
seems to be what they've all decided he would be happy with should you approve. So >> yeah, for for the record generally I'm not a fellow who likes to repeat your Mr. Kennedy
to um Mr. is lack got his name I think it's Arie Line okay the neighbor um spoke with Ed uh he's an attorney licensed in New Jersey he did the attorney attorney phone call he
lives in North Jersey his preference was not to drive down two hours to have this 6 in discussion so I had talked to uh both Eddie and Mary and Eddie was gracious enough
give up six inches and uh that's our agreement with him and the neighbor's happy and Eddie's happy with that and Eddie's happy that the neighbor and he will be happy neighbors and not engage in any kind of other trips to superior
courts or courts or supreme courts. So >> while I'm thinking of it just so I know does that eliminate the need for that variance? >> No, it doesn't. It does not. It reduces it and I'll walk through the variance specifically. Go ahead. >> Okay. So, that was the answer to your
question. If I could, I'll walk through the variances. Not >> that if you don't mind because I see we're all looking through our plan to try to really narrow down where this is. I'm looking at your north elevation. >> Yes.
>> Not just myself, but everybody else. >> Yes. It's right over It's on the second floor over the front door and it's the smaller gable of the two upper gables that we would be adding >> directly above the door >> right >> the front door >> on the second floor though not on the
porch >> everybody got >> and the concern of the neighbor he's on the >> side >> if I do this >> this is what I'm talking about. >> Can you see? >> Sorry.
>> This right here. >> Okay. >> So, it's forward forward 18 in >> and now conceding six of those 18. So, forward 12 in. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> What happens?
>> Um, well, we need a variance for it, which I'm going to go over. So, we're not we can't do it by right. And out of courtesy when talking with the neighbor, he >> felt he'd be happier if it was not 18 in but 12. >> The answer is yes. The answer is that he
indicated that that 6 in notwithstanding being on the second block, you still had a partial ocean. You were those six in. And I had informed um Mr.
that we all know certainly experienced members of the board but I think the whole board knows of Mr. Kennedy that preservation of a view is not a right of any homeowner if one needs to preserve
an important view such as an ocean view one can take matters in their own hands and buy ocean properties or buy properties that could ever obstruct a view I've submitted multiple briefs to this that I think the board is aware of I choose not to but I just for reference
I think Mr. Kennedy will affirm to you is is that a neighbor is not as of right guaranteed a view but not withstandard standing Mr. Zumpsky Shumpsky wants to be a good neighbor and said I will not
obstruct that 6 bill >> uh thank you there Mr. very considerate of your >> I would say one of my most considerate clients can go over these >> Yes. So I'm on my cover sheet and the charts at the bottom.
So we have on the first column are the existing um amenities and everything with a light X is a pre-existing nonconformity. So you see we're pre-existing non-performing in terms of building coverage imperous coverage front yard
set back to the house front rear yard set I'm sorry front yard set back to the porch rear set back to the garage and side set back to the garage because we hope to add this 12in bumpout. We're
technically increasing the size of the house and it's a non-conforming use. So we are expanding the non-conforming use. So the big dark highlighted box in the second column are the proposed amenities and that top box
that's bigger than the others is the expansion of the non-conforming use. The second box is building coverage. If we're allowed to add now 11 square feet instead of 16 square ft, we would be at
28% not 28.2%. 2% where 25% maximums allowed. We are already over at 27.9. The reason for that is it's still a modest house on a modest footprint, but
the detached garage is more than 440 square ft. And so we have to count every square foot of that against the building coverage and we'd like to save it. >> I'm sorry. Would you just tell me which one here? >> The 28.2 goes to 28%.
>> All right. So, That's under the proposed building >> building coverage >> from 27.9 >> to 28 >> to >> 28 >> which causes a devariance. >> Yes. For the expansion
in correct concern. >> Yes. And um again to support that ask, we're already over because of the size of the garage and we're not hoping to change the size of the garage. But I will point out the
footprint of this home is significantly smaller than the homes on either side. And we're not increasing it, but only on the second floor, 12 in for a portion of the front. And then the next item on the proposed list is front yard setback to
the house. >> Oh, please return to impervious. >> Oh, okay. >> I want you to take credit. Credit is due. >> Uh, what we hope to do is remove a lot of the hard surface on the site and replace it with semi-pervious papers.
And if we are successful tonight and can do that, we would bring the existing imperous coverage from 55.1 which doesn't meet the requirements down to 43.3 where 50% maximum is allowed. So we'd be
removing that non-conformity and helping storm water management. Um so then to front yard set back to the house that existing is to is 19.6. I want to point this out. The first floor
existing is at 22.2. The second floor is forward of the first floor today at 19.6. 20 is the required setback. So, it already is slightly forward of what's allowed. If we are
granted um approval tonight, the new front setback to that new bump out would be 18.6. On my chart, it says 18.1. And so, that would require a front yard setback variance, which I alluded to
previously. And then, um rear um front yard set back to the porch or balcony. The existing at 11.9 12's required. We drew the balcony level or aligned
with the front of the porch at 11.9. If it's an issue for the board, we can move it an inch and meet the 12, but we have it lined up at the front. We think it's aesthetically proper and easier to build that way. So, we're also seeking
that minor variance for front yard setback to the proposed second floor balcony. And then the the setbacks to the garage would remain pre-existing non-conformity. So we're seeking four variances tonight. Three bulk and one
expansion of the non-conforming use. >> Um I'm going to um because it is a D2 variance, >> I'm just going to ask you a few questions for the record and put for any
members of the public. Um, as you're aware, Mary, there are requirements for us to discuss first by something called special reasons >> and then we are to evaluate and the board is to evaluate positive and negative criteria.
>> Special reasons. One of the special reasons is that the proposal will benefit the health or welfare uh of the township and or the occupants of the home. understood. >> Yes.
>> Your renovation from its current state to its proposed state. Is it your opinion that this project will benefit the health and welfare of not only this owner and the lot but also benefit the
block and the burrow? >> Yes. regarding um positive and negative criteria. One of the positive criteria is often discussed that it brings a deferred maintained home in structure
into modern conformity with electric water uh heat sewer things of that nature. Does this proposal uh do that satisfy that criteria? >> Yes. >> Uh also uh the aesthetic criteria is a
criteria positive criteria that allows a board solely based on aesthetics alone to grant a variance based upon aesthetics. In your uh humble opinion being the artist uh designer, do you feel that the
proposed aesthetics of your proposal far outweigh due respect to the existing home and family structure that exists there today? >> Yes. The rules and law also require us to
consider the negative criteria if any. Uh the main negative criteria we always look to and the board looks to is is there do you believe that there are any substantial negative effects to the zone plan if the board
was to allow uh this proposed structure to be approved? >> I do not. >> And do you find uh that would be any substantial detriment to the quote neighborhood which means not only immediate neighbor but any other neighbors down the street or in the
area. Do you feel that there would be any substantial detriment by the granting of this variance to the neighbor? >> I do not. >> So I have nicely done. >> Let's go straight into board questions
and then we'll open it up to the general public. Mr. First, I really don't have any questions. >> The only question I've got from one of the pictures, it appears as though the fire escape is wooden. Is that allowed?
Wooden fire escape. Is that is a fire escape? >> I kind of don't know if it's allowed or not. It used to be a metal and the metal was very rusty and then there's still one portion of the metal which is still there
but >> we're and tied to that is the hope to add this balcony on the second floor so there's a way for people to get out. >> How do you get up the balcony on the second floor? Well, the living room
>> and how do you get to this? How do you get to the second floor then? >> Front door. >> The front door is is the entrance to the second. >> Okay. So, it looked like there was a almost a common hallway between the first floor and the second floor and then you can enter the first floor also.
>> There isn't. Now, we hope to add that door. >> If it's a rent, is there going to be a rental on the second floor? >> Yeah. >> How do you secure your downstairs from your renter? There'll be a locked door. >> Okay. I didn't see it. I just I missed that.
>> And there is not one now. >> Okay. But that fire is coming off. >> Yeah. >> That's that's all I saw. >> Before we go any further, that's comp. >> Um >> I'll go. >> Okay. Um
when I looked at the plans first, I did not see that interior door in the foyer. So that was my confusion of how it's still a two family. But once you started
showing we went through it, you know, because all you got is the curve in the line right there. >> I honestly didn't see it. >> Right. So that explains an awful lot. And also on the third floor,
you're calling an office and den, but they've got closets. Therefore, >> if we're counting them as bedrooms, that's how they they had >> and that that explained also the confusion. Why are you going from a onebedroom? Why would you move
upstairs to a onebedroom, but it's actually >> three bedroom. >> That's correct. >> So, so it's all good then. It makes sense now with the explan doors to get down there. >> Uh well, there is a door from the first
floor unit to the basement >> and that would remain. There's a stair >> there's a Y. >> Okay, cool. No, no other question. question I have is like you're going to start out on the first floor and then
eventually go to second floor and then that first floor becomes either maybe a rental or you just turn it into a man cave or or something or whatever. But having a door there gives you that ability. >> I think their hope is to take over the whole house down the road including the
first floor >> and not have only that tiny itty bitty kitchen. No questions. >> Firecape taken care of existing uh basement block. >> Yes. >> And you feel pretty confident there's no load issues there.
>> None. We're not adding anything that substantial might be decreasing. >> Correct. >> Do we have a general gauge age of the home? age 1912 I think >> nice aesthetic
square maybe um and this question might be for Mr. Given it's a knock down multif family, is there any other requirements besides double 58 on the ceiling on the first floor or is that requirement?
>> That would be a requirement here. >> That's it. >> Only one one exit. So that's all. >> Okay. And you're going to comply to that, correct? >> Um I don't have any other questions. We'll open up to the general public if
anybody would like to come up and comment and have any questions or add detail. No. You sure? All right. We're going to close the public comment section. Let's just go straight into further questions if you have.
>> Right. Yeah. So, just to summarize my thoughts, you're here because you're expanding.1% But it really in actuality you're kind of decreasing the usage with the reduction in bedrooms. So my mind I feel like this is a net positive for the
community and aesthetically upgrading the site. So I'm in the application >> for the same reasons I feel like I'm in favor of the application. No reason to not be. Um, I think that the benefits of this
project appear, you know, significantly outweigh the negative. Some of them include being comp. Thank you for that consideration. The overall aesthetics compared to the existing building, although it is nice looking. Um, significant decrease in the
amount of bedrooms. It's a strong candidate for positive criteria. That also lends itself to decrease in potential populous on the building and the burden of the municipality. Um, and then complying with sub code and
bringing an old historic home back up to my legacy. So that's my absolutely no nothing to add to any of that. >> Keeping me in the family. I like that.
It's great. So with that being said, I'd like to just fast forward and proceed to a vote. Do that unless better than seven. >> I'd like a vote. >> I'll make that motion.
>> All right, Mr. Chairman. I wrote down some potential conditions. I'll just go quickly go through them. >> Sorry. >> Uh compliance with all the promises, commitments, and representations that the team made tonight. compliance with all the bureau's affordable housing rules regulations, contributions and directives. There's usually a 24-month
time frame within which the applicants need to secure uh building permits uh receive any outside approvals with the caveat that if there's the nature of the application maturely changes as a result of any outside approvals, they would need to come back. uh we get a a
professional certification from Miss Hearn uh prior to the final co that the improvements have been stalled in accordance with the testimony in accordance with approved plans and in accordance with uh the resolution um grading and range of details if
required but might I'm assuming they're not by the burough engineer and then Bill just I saw out of an abundance of caution I saw that there was a at one point there's a rooming house used Just to the extent necessary, to the extent it's not already done, client, your
client is clearly officially perpetuating any possible brooming house use at the site. >> Correct. >> All right. It's always good to uh here. And let's see. Um now, just because this is going to come
up in a different matter in a little bit, but this is clearly not a demolition and new construction. This is a renovation. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um, and then let's see,
uh, comply with the fire egress regulations. Um, and you said that the new materials for the garage will appropriately match and complement the the renovated uh, siding for that house. Um, and let's see. Um,
per your agreement with the neighbor, you're going to reduce it's the front setback for the second floor balcony. >> No, for the second floor dwelling >> dwelling front wall
>> from 18 in to 12 in. >> Yeah. So, the setback that we were asking for is 18.1 and we're asking for 18.6. Got it. >> The the proposed addition was 18 in
deep. Moving it back to 12. >> Okay. Um and then um let's see. Um we have those building coverage
calculations that uh you clarified use of semi-pervious papers for for the FL plans. Um reducing the implant with any FEMA flood regulations and compliance with the building and construction code. And then just so that
I'm sure at one point uh Mr. Chairman Mary said 11.9 versus 12. I think that was a front setback >> to the balcony. >> No one had a problem with that. >> No. >> Got it. >> I'd just like one more thing, Mr. Frank. Can we confirm I think we should have it
on the record. Is this property? >> It's not today. as of today. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> And then um not today. And then I think uh compliance with the fire separation requirements
for the building and construction code. And I think that's in addition to our general conditions. Bill, are you okay with those conditions? >> I agree with >> So Mr. Chairman, if those conditions are acceptable to you all as board members,
we can have a vote. >> Anything else to add? No. >> Let's proceed to a vote. I'll make that motion. >> Mr. Ross, >> yes. >> Mr. Congratulations. April, >> but that's actually a very entertaining
thing to talk about. Correct. >> April, I'll take these since they're in the packet. Is that okay? >> Yeah. Figured you wouldn't mind. >> You can have this back. She has the small. >> No, we have one more item to talk about.
Um 503venue recently came before the board. Um January two single family house and then the rear structure
on the single family garage is you Was this the foundation house or no? >> 123, excuse me, 5032.
>> So what he did, he tore it down first. >> So we tore the house down and we didn't have plans for that and it wasn't in the resolution when it came in front of the board. >> So we stopped the job and I told him he needed
the board's decision what they want to do. >> Can I ask a question real quick before the procedures of trying to get my parents was this uh this gigantic it was a front home and then it was a gigantic rear structure west side of the house in which the one thing that sticks out to
me is we we did something regarding the stairwell. >> Yeah, Mr. Chairman, if I could just read I'm just reading >> in the findings of the resolution after this debate and discussion the applicants agree to revise the to create a two-car garage on the first floor of the rear structure by removing the
existing garage. I'm sorry, by removing the existing storage room. The applicants also agree that they would open up the first floor stairwell of the rear structure and remove the partitioning doors so that the entire non garage portion of the rear structure would be part of the second floor dwelling. So, you're absolutely right
that everybody. >> Okay. So, Mr. Bianc, go ahead. They tore the front dwelling down. >> Yeah, he tore it down to the floor. >> Yeah, it was only he left about a six foot or seven wall. They think that's okay. And that's what was in the
resolution. So, we stopped it. Alcheo was the architect and I told I told the contractor to give us new plans and it's going to probably come. So they they submitted new plans and
it's just a matter of do they need to come back and present them to you or can we move them administratively? >> You know I plan much different than what it was. >> No, we just ripped it down. This happens
you know how you know we go through this all the time. They start at the second floor then they decide, oh well look the wall doesn't look that good. Let's take it down. the contractor complained that, "Oh, my guys tore it down. I didn't know they were they were doing that." You know, it's the same old stuff all the
time and they ripped it down. So, I got pissed off and I told them that's it. >> We're all done. Now, you're going to come back to the board. So, but the board's decision what they want to do. And I'm just going to say one thing, not to sway anybody, but at least one
finding was that the board is aware that though the front structure has a pre-existing non-conforming front setback, approval of the within application will not result in the front structure being any closer to the street than that which currently exists. It's this. Oh, we like
I said, we run into this issue and that's why sort of knowing that this topic is coming up, I said, hey, this is not demolition. Um, so anyway, I just, you know, arguably, and I'm not taking any position because it's just as long as you make a fully informed
decision, but arguably if the place were going to be demolished, there's a school of thought that you would have said, well, then make it conforming with the front yard setback. I don't even know what the setback numbers were. >> The side, it's in the sideyard set back, >> right? And what he just did,
I was called up by the guy next door. They done the footing there on the side of the house. Now this is three foot property line. >> So now we're into and they have no permit for no plans. So now we're into protection of private property.
>> Sounds like we need to come back to the board. Now, with that being said, before anybody else makes a comment, I would just like to say that I'd prefer in my best interest potentially that of board members to re reread the resolution in its entirety um to make an informed
decision. However, seems to be a common occurrence in our municipality. We might have to put a foot down on this one and say come in. I can say relatively before anybody else does that um
renovating a pre-existing structure in its entirety is certainly more expensive than in my opinion building brand new and building brand new is certainly a lot faster than renovating an existing
structure as well as bringing it up into compliance. So the incurred cost uh to renovate and frame around existing walls and everything else. They probably did it out of ease to be able to build it back then. With that said, I personally would
stand behind Mr. Beyond and say that maybe they do have to come in front of this board and or provide some resolution regarding why this matter. >> Can I ask you a question? Wasn't there a recent uh
council resolution ordinance or something that was put in place where there's fees associated with new construction? Now if you build a new construction home, not renovating what it's pretty for affordable housing. >> What was the amount? But it's not just
for >> it varies based on the size of the house. >> It could be a couple thousand >> percent or something. It depends how big the house is. >> The only reason I'm saying this is is is that deterring people from doing full
knockdowns. And so the way around it is, hey, I'm only going to renovate it, but I'm going to knock the whole thing down, ask for forgiveness later, so I don't have to pay this fee. >> So thinking out loud here, I mean, because we're seeing that I feel like >> Yeah. >> Um, yes, the affordable housing, but is
there also now a upgrade to the sewer with the new build as opposed to >> No. that that space were in the order. >> I thought there was an charge for reconnect. >> Well, it it would have been if he was
going to do that, he would have done it on a renovation anyway. He was going to build it. So, it was, you know, it wasn't a new house. It wouldn't be required. >> Okay. Not open. I'm just curious because like it seems like >> people were leaving a wall. So, they call renovation.
>> Yeah. What they do? What do you do? You let 8 foot of the wall and he says, "Oh, now it's a renovation while he t and >> the architect sent a letter. I was just going to read >> before you do just to clarify because
I'm not going to understand." Is it Mr. Kennedy had said it's a percentage of the assessed value of the house or is it actually a percentage of the cost of the rep? >> There's a formula. It's not. It's a little bit
>> and I only know it for new construction. I don't know >> but it has to do with this the cost to build it and there's a whole formula. >> Does it apply to renovations? >> Only additions and new construction >> only additions and new construction >> where you're actually adding living
space. >> Any addition that you're adding living space but in this in this uh previous application as an example >> that's a res and They are stating that there was a renovation. >> Right. So, I'll read what
>> Yes, ma'am. >> The letter said, "The original dwelling on the site consisted of a two family house and a garage apartment. Our proposed project was to create a single family residence at the front of the lot and a garage and apartment to the rear. We proposed to remove a section of the
rear of the house with an addition to the left side. Once demolition began, it was discovered that most of the framing was severely deteriorated and had to be replaced. The exterior walls suffered water damage due to leaks over the many years of neglecting his repair.
Additionally, half of the floor joists were split and since the floors had to be leveled, it was determined to replace the framing for the safety of the resident. When the rear portion of the house was removed, it was discovered that the foundation for the rear wall was non-existent. The mortar in the
foundation at the front had deteriorated to stand and had to be replaced by three new peers. Did we ask is it part of the thing? Because we were pretty good I feel like about asking the condition of >> the foundation always is no good.
>> Yeah. And that's but that shows substantial like that should have shown up. >> I mean they could have they could have realized that this was the case when they came in here. >> Oh yeah, >> you know I mean there's all the look at the house diligence and find out what exactly they
need to do before they come in here. in the crawl space or basement. You can see that >> there was no excuse for this. He just told me the contractor. Um, >> oh, my guys got carried away. That's his whole house. >> Yeah. Do they do they have any
supporting photos, evidence of the wood rod? And >> I don't know >> because it's easy to say, but if they can show it, it was gone now. >> Yeah. I mean, do they take, you know, documented prior to tearing it down? >> There's nothing there now. I walked by it today.
We had no plans, no update on plans before they do stuff like this. >> They're supposed to notify the building department, give us updated plans to show us exactly what they're doing. We got none of that. >> Yeah. No, I'm saying with their statement saying that there's water d, >> right? You can ask for it ask for
documentation >> just >> to see if they're right >> and and I'm I'm just going to remember and the good thing about this list there was technically three overall dwelling units at the site and after it's all done they it was down to two. So that was like a big a big plus and a lot of
times I'm not saying it happens here but a lot of the times um or at least the story is told that the contractor just knocked it down because he or she said oh yeah this is is bad. So that's sort of why you asked Mary, hey, is this, you know, can you handle the load capacity?
So we we typically do ask those things and my first thought when Ted brought this up was, hey, maybe I just didn't write the resolution as as well as I should have. You know, I wrote conversion. I mean, should we send you construction? And I said, Ted, what was
on the plans? And Ted said, no, no, the plans don't don't say that. But again, if you want, why don't we get April to submit the resolution to everybody and have um you know, you can ask uh Mr. Alenko to, you know, give more detail
and give pictures so you can make a you know, better a fully informed discussion. >> That would So, we're looking at a potential for an additional 30day stop record, right? How far? How long
have they been stopped? >> Perhaps more than that. >> Well, if they can get that all done and presented to us by the next notice. >> No. Mr. Kennedy is saying, right? >> Oh, are they going to have to notice? >> Oh, I mean, if they come back, they'll
they'll have to notice. So, I mean, you you can either tell them, hey, renotice, or say, renotice. Um, and then but maybe you'll do it administratively. I mean, I I don't know if you want to see bring him back.
>> I'm of what Ted just said, make him angry. It's And then I'll use it for your word. It's not dimminimous, >> right? >> Um my opinion is they need to be noticed and come back
>> because it's not the same word. Theoretically, and I don't know if this is the case, so I'm not trying to sway you, but theoretically, someone could have received this notice from back last year, and someone might have chosen not to come because they're like, "All right, it's just a renovation. I don't I
don't care." Or maybe they were here and they saw this that I don't care. And maybe they would care had it been a demolition. And >> this has been a concern for quite some time. And I thank you for seeing it and stopping it.
>> We We've discussed this. Um I want I I swear uh Milo Construction Mike was here not that long ago and we asked him the question on the renovation and um he had engineers look at it prior
to coming here and that's the way I believe it should be done. Here's >> fact Mike called me up about this today. The guy put a footing in a foundation layout. He he he dug it, you know,
boarded it on the side of the house. Now, he has no burgers for this. >> This is something different. >> Yeah. >> He He just decided to do it and he's got a stop work order on the job. I'm going to find him two more thousand bucks. >> He's already got two. He's going to get four.
>> He paid the two. >> Just so we got two more. >> So, so we're all clear as a board here. It's just um I don't want to mix potential issues with the foundation with removal of framing. Right. So, Mr. Be, am I correct? This is a framing
related issue, not necessarily something associated with the basement girl. >> Well, I'm not sure exactly what he's doing. I guess he's going to put a new foundation up on that side of the house. And this is the short side. It's only 3 foot away. >> But the but the stop work order is
because they brought it all the way down to the existing, >> right? and we had no plans for that and the resolution didn't say >> the only reason I'm bringing this up is if you're if you're occupying a dwelling right and you're going in front of this board I don't necessarily expect the
applicant to open holes in their walls to look at existing framing and you follow what I'm saying where the basement can be evaluated from the outside the inside and potentially everywhere else so um >> I mean the the grout itself turning the
sand depending on how the sand needs to be pulled from the beach with it. you can use. Um, and for one other thing, just for this word, I seem to recall that last year at some point, and I don't know if it was this application,
it could have been another application, but I think um, Chairman Fitzgerald was getting frustrated with applicant or and again, I don't think it was this one, but an applicant or an architect because they sort of seemed to suggest that they were going to just knock it down and uh, or
keep it like, you know, one wall and do that. So they didn't need a variance and and it seemed like some people were being encouraged to go to extreme measures to retrofit a house because they didn't want to get a new variance and and it wasn't I think
the chairman was upset that was frustrated that people were making not necessarily were making substantive decisions you know form over substance >> and to sum this up and then I think we just go to a vote here Mr. Kennedy on what body would like to do. I'd like to
just bring up an application. This is the one I was talking about, which everybody may recall I believe is also on 12th Avenue. It's a front house, back house. Uh the board approved the renovations of a rear structure and the
renovations and addition on a front structure. And what happened is the applicants renovated the rear structure in its entirety. It did come out very nicely. They proceeded to their front dwelling and then they found out that their foundation was not
>> they were forced to come back to this question from this one. >> That is correct. >> So I don't think I don't see in any circumstance why this would be any different. That's Tony's opinion. Um unless anybody has anything else to make a comment on just proceed through a
vote. Before I say that like to ask you have they done any work in the weird moment on that Not I'm not sure. I guess Chuck Chuck could >> do we
>> do we stop work on the entire parcel? >> I'd let him continue on the rear. >> So that's what I was going to say. So continue in a good faith effort on behalf of the board if because that was mostly interior remodeling in the next year. Right. In a good faith effort, we
could say you're allowed to proceed with your renovations, interior renovations, or what what happened because there's no additions there on that roof, right? >> No, >> I don't believe there was either. Inside there was a conversion of a garage. I'm remembering all this. I have no idea.
With that being said, maybe we would consider allowing them to proceed with renovations on the rear, but put a full work stop order on the front until they come back here. >> That's a separate permit the rear. >> Did they take that permit out?
>> Oh, well, yeah, they have that whole each structure permit. >> Yeah, but in my I look at Mr. one block. So if we're going to stop work, we're going to stop work. Especially if the same general contractor be doing work on both sites and illegal footings, then finally question official. That's
>> Are they currently dwelling in the back house? >> I don't know if it's occupied. >> Probably not. But >> but I I think >> that's a compromise. I frank if they wanted to. >> But I think the the the the point is
that you know we should continue to sort of make it a point and and physically ask them again just to you know make sure that they've done that analysis. >> Okay. So we have new construction, renovations
and additions are the terms we use as a municipality or predominantly for our zoning. Um I mean I actually my without any um thought recollection without any thought about construction
and building code regulations. I just sort of say what are you applying for? And I read their notice and they say we're proposing to demolish and build a new. proposal to renovate and convert and so I just sort of go on what they say. >> Yeah. And I would agree with that. Mr. actually uses the word rad a lot, right?
which is the demo of the existing >> and um and uh and then uh but yeah so if if the thought is um that uh you're you do essentially unofficially because this
is onlyformationally brought to us this is not any action but I mean if the thought is that uh you agree with Ted and uh that it is under these circumstances at least with regard to the front house. This is beyond the scope. They would need to come back. I
mean, I think you just need to give Ted direction that with your recommendation that, you know, nothing, you know, barring something unusual, it would not stop the back the work on the back structure. >> I'm I'm okay with that, but I leave it
up to everybody else's. >> Question I got is this is this a case now where he could bring his home into more compliance because of what he's doing, or there's not really room on the property. has to go really where it was. I mean, he's 3T from the sideyard. Could he make it 5T?
>> Yes. >> But then it would substantially reduce the size of the house or something. Or can he move it over? >> I mean, those are fair questions to ask. >> Rather, it's going to draw up plans for a new home, >> right? >> Can I put it where it belongs? And I
would respectfully suggest that that question really didn't come up during the first hearing because he was just going to renovate. >> Correct. >> Correct. And that's a common thing that we see. Um I'm also in the belief that if you're down that low, why would you
not found that's my own cost to build new? Why would you put it in foundation? Right. Is he a >> No, probably not. >> Probably not. >> All right. I uh I'd make the the motion
to have uh to not stop work, allow the opportunity for that applicant to continue work on her rearing and uh make them come back with advised plans and proof of
the damage associated with the uh the need to rent to bring the house down. Second Mr. Kenny, will that suffice? >> Sure, absolutely. >> Can we push it to a vote then? >> Yeah. >> I'll go first and then we'll work our
way this way. >> I say yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> They're going to come in with plans showing variances and everything. >> Yes. >> Start from scratch >> because they will essentially need a use
variance to basically put a second dwelling unit on that because That's the thing. When you demolish, you you lose, you know, a lot of times people have the pre-existing non-conforming rights, which are very valuable, and when you demolish, you lose those rights, but you
know, there's going to be a lot of reasons that you'd consider this anyway. Um, >> you want to reconsider before? >> No, I have a question. >> Once we once we take all questions out before we go to vote, >> his right to have a rental in the back.
>> No. Uh no, but but technically he's a pre-existing non-conforming right and you know by law you're always you know you can keep you know your grandfathered in so you can always keep you can't expand. That's why Bill was just here earlier because technically what they
did is an expansion although as Chuck said in many ways it was reduction but so you're always allowed to keep what you have but you can't expand unless you have approval. And then the other caveat is if it's demolished, whether it's intentionally or burned down, storm,
whatever, you you lose your rights and there's no automatic right. If it gets a little damaged, there's an automatic right to rebuild the pre-existing non-conforming use. But if it gets totally damaged, there is no automatic right and you have to come back to the zoning for it. >> Now, what is the the steps on a
renovation when there is significant damage and they do have to do something? Is it like bring it to the town and say this is what we need to do because of X Y and Z. >> Yeah. It's like they they would typically all all in the world of zoning
we have our queen and our king. In the world of zoning, it all goes to Ted and before anyone issues a construction permit or a building permit, zoning have to have has to sign off on it and and say, "Yes, this is a a conforming use." And if there's if it's a pre-existing
non-conforming use and they're expanding it, TED says no. And if you know if they don't have zoning, construction and building are not supposed to any issue any permits unless they got the sign off from the zoning. >> No, I mean when they start the demo and
the construction, they realize that the damage is so severe. >> They're supposed to stop and ask first and demolish later. Most people don't do that, but that's the the the that's what they're supposed to do. >> Now, is that made clear?
>> Make it clear like in a resolution when it is a renovation that we state that >> if significant damage is found and more demo or has to be done, you need to >> probably not, but I can include that as a standard condition that just sort of
says, hey, be aware that if there's a deviation, don't you know, just do it. you need to come back and and I think that's a good idea >> like photo evidence maybe Ted can go out and actually view it himself >> because the answer is if they
ask I mean if they don't ask first they just do it >> it can lead to a lot of frustration it can lead to a lot of heartache and lead to a lot of hard feelings it can lead to litigation and it's time and it's costs so I think it's a good idea that I put that those conditions in that condition
in and just at least we're advising ing people just giving them one more opportunity to avoid that situation. >> Yeah. Because I think at that point you're advising the homeowner so that you know if he's listening to the contractor that says this is what you need to do, they're going to do that. But if he knows he's sitting here
>> and hears that I need to do this, this happens, >> then he can kind to help prevent a problem. >> Yeah, >> good idea. >> I agree with it. But it should be common knowledge to a contractor to know that he can't just tear the house down.
>> Well, and and and that's the other thing, and I don't want to go into and I don't even know who any of the people are, but sometimes contractors don't necessarily have to say it. Sometimes architects don't necessarily say it. Sometimes attorneys don't necessarily say it. And sometimes
engineers don't necessarily say it. And I guess Ted, is that a diplomatic way of cutting it? Yep. You know, so you know, >> sometimes change order is good, Mr. >> Right. Exactly. >> Any other questions? If not, we'll proceed to the same same. We're going to
do it again. So, we're here because we're on the record here. We're being recorded. So, um recommendation I'm going to make a motion for this is uh uh maintain Mr. uh stop work order on the front
dwelling. Allow the applicant to proceed with work associated with the rear dwelling and request them to come back to the group and we're going to make the suggestion that they bring photo documentation regarding issues that they've had.
>> And then just if I may as an administrative matter, I'm just going to include as in parts of our resolution Disclaimer. >> Yes, please. >> I'll just put it right in the resol. >> Oh, to them. >> Yeah, sure. >> Do we have to make them read?
>> Yes. If if if we're having a hearing, it would just be a little wonky if we didn't make them. >> And I'm just trying to be accommodating. >> Absolutely. >> Can we uh do we know that if they got their ducks in a row, would they be able to get it next month or?
>> Um I do have four other applications. It is what it is, but let's be proactive and make sure that they know that they're going to come back that let's get them on the following meeting so they can >> So, we're going to I think what you're saying is we're going to subject to all
the other moving parts that you have to deal with and subject to their um need to get plans, but we're going to try to get them on an agenda as quickly as possible. >> Yes. And I'd like their fines to be paid too before coming to the hearing. and I would make the construction site
maintained in a clean and thorough manner while we waiting for them. >> Got it. >> I'm sure Mr. Fitzgerald is going to be super excited to >> any other questions. >> I got a phone call about this also.
>> There you go. Is everybody good? We'll just proceed to a vote and we can lock it down. >> All right. So, do you want to summarize that, Mr. Kennedy, or should I? >> Sure. I I think you just did ask uh to the extent this is an informal uh discussion but with the uh you are affirming the circumstances under which
Mr. Bianke had to issue the stop work order and um we uh were not in any way intended for them to stop anything that they're doing with the rear. So they have to just comply with the regular rules and regulations. they do need to come back uh to the uh board for relief
for um basically construction of that new front uh structure. Um we would like to see photo documentation and any other written documentation they have regarding the nature of uh the items which made them feel that they had to demolish it. Um we will add just as a
disclaimer for our resolutions um compliance with any uh and payment of any fines. We have nothing to do with that, but we just want if there are any, we'd want them done. Um, we're going to try in good faith to get them on the agenda as soon as possible knowing that that's a a whole other uh issue in
itself. And um the construction site should maintained in a a clean and thorough uh fashion and in accordance with our uh construction code requirements and property maintenance code >> and their fines paid up to date. Got it. >> They come back.
And I'd like to make a motion to vote on this. And >> second, Mr. Ross, would you mind? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> I'll send a letter. >> Thank you. Make a motion to close this meeting. >> All in favor?