I call to order the December 18th meeting of the Charlie Beach land to the flag of the United States of America. America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for
all. Um the 48 hour notice is required under the open public meetings act has been met as notice of this meeting was emailed on January 31st 2025 published in the asbury the coar and the poster copy has been placed on the bulletin board in the borrow office and a copy
has been filed with the borrow cler >> here >> Mr. Mayor >> here >> Mr. Wishbell >> here >> uh Mr. Jagger >> here. >> Mayor Dursi >> here. >> Um, Miss Mahoney is excused this evening
as well as Mr. Mayor. Um, Councilman Nikki >> here, >> Miss Harrison here, >> Mr. Park here, >> Mr. Born >> here, >> Miss Ley here, and Mr. Frederick >> here. >> And also present this evening, Amarie Roso, our board attorney, Gerald Freda,
our board engineer, and Christine Bell, our board planner. Um, Amarie, do you want to swear in Mr. Badley? He was by council on Tuesday. >> Yes. Thank you. >> Do you have your sheep? >> Can you stand up? Raise your right hand
and repeat after me. I, Daniel Bagley, >> I, >> Daniel Bagley. >> Bagley, >> do solemnly swear >> do solemnly swear >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States. >> I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey. >> and the Constitution of the State of New
Jersey. >> And that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. >> And I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. >> And to the government established in the United States, >> and to the government established in the United States >> and in this state. and this
>> under the authority of the people >> under the authority of the people >> and that I will faithfully impartially and impartially and justly perform >> and I will faithfully and justly perform >> all the duties of office as
>> all the duties of the office as >> class 4 board member for a four-year term >> class board member for a four-year term >> according to the best of my ability. So help me God. to the best of my ability. >> Thank you. Very good.
>> Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you. Pleasure to have >> you. Welcome and thank you for attending the December 18th, 2025, our last meeting of the year for the Bradley Beach Landings Board. The board will observe a 10 p.m. time limit with no new applications or
new testimony started after 10 p.m. without a polling of the full board. If an application is not completed during the meeting and the continuation date will be announced by the board attorney. We would like to maintain a civil environment for this public hearing request. No calling out from the audience. Everyone will be given a
chance to be heard. After the board and its professional staff have completed their questions of the witness. The witness will be open to the public for questions only of that witness. This will be there will be a time for questions only and not for comments. If you have a question, please raise your
hand. I will acknowledge you. Please come to the podium. Before asking your questions, state your name and address. Also, spell your last name and please direct your questions to the witnesses. If a person from the public is represented by an attorney, he or she must speak through that attorney. All
attorneys should register with their representation of the board at the start of the meeting. After the board and professionals have finished questioning the applicant and before the board takes action on the application, I will open the meeting for public comments. This will be a time to on the application.
The same procedure I previously described for questions is followed and all members of the public who wish to make a comment will be sworn under oath by the board attorney. Please be aware that the applicant and their attorney have the right to cross-examine any members of the public who make comments.
Written statements or letters from individuals that are not present, petitions or speaking on anyone's behalf is not allowable under NJSA 405D-10. Written statements from the public cannot be accepted as they cannot be cross-examined. Public participation in
your meeting will assist the board in making their decisions. Hope we hope that all the at this public hearing your attendance will be a rewarding experience for all and thank you for participating. >> We have the approval and adoption of our meeting minutes from our regular meeting
of October 16th, 2025. >> The motion second. Mr. Bish, >> yes. >> Councilman, >> yes. >> Missine, >> yes. >> Uh, Mr. Frederick, >> yes. >> Miss Lady,
>> yes. >> Mr. Mayor, >> yes. >> And Cher, >> yes. >> Um, we did have a resolution scheduled um it was not completed in time to distribute to board members in order to
have them review it. So that's going to be tabled till our January meeting. >> Thank you. >> Okay. >> Um and then we have one application scheduled for this evening. It's LUV25/7. Both requirements is for proposed
demolition of an existing one-story single family dwelling and construction of a new 2 and a half story single family dwelling on the central side corner lot. N Housing Company LLC, block 75, lot one, 106 Central Avenue. Um, as
stated, the applicant is proposing to demolish the existing building and construct a two and a half stories single family um with two covered front covered porches, an elevated upper porch, a paver walkway, and driveway. Applicants requesting variances for front yard setback, rear yard setback,
sideyard setback, building coverage, directly the second floor terrace along the sideyard as well as mechanical being located within the setback. The applicants represented by Kevin ID. >> Good evening. >> Good evening. >> You want me to speak into the mic?
>> That would help for the record. Thank you. >> All right. Kevin Assad is a refu on behalf of the applicant. Good evening. Um this application is to demolish a existing home and construct a new home at Central Avenue. Um, you'll hear this
evening from several witnesses. Uh, Pam Kitty, who's um, she and her husband are the owners of the LLC. Cory Command is our architect, Brock Cunningham, our engineer, and Barbara Alen, our planner. Um, Miss Kenny is seated to my left, and
unless the board has any preliminary questions, we swear. >> Okay. Thank you. Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth will help you, God? your full name and your present address for the record.
>> K I >> address you're a member of the LLC that owns this property. Is that correct? And who do you own that with? >> Mine was >> And um when did you acquire the property? in June. >> This past year and what have you been
using the property for since that time? >> Yeah. >> And what have you been using it for? >> So um we've been using it for a summer home, a place for our family to come and um enjoy and have good experiences um and to create memories. That's what
we've been using it for. Also um my husband and I use it frequently on the weekend just to have a place. We really love it down here. Okay. And uh tell the board your reasons for wanting to um complete this project.
>> Okay. So, um when we bought the home when we first saw 106 Central um we met it was on the market for a day and we had been looking for six years with my very patient cousin realtor. Um, and
when we met um, the previous owners, Barbara and Joe, we fell in love with the home. We fell in love with the community. We fell in love with the connection they had um, to the neighbors and all the great things that they had to say, the location, everything. It
just felt really right to purchase this home after looking at so many different homes. Um when we moved into the home in the summer um it was very tight. So we chose like
um community chose location oversized knowing it was a little small but figuring we could just kind of all squeeze in there and just like enjoy it. But um I have my daughter lives with us and she has two children that I'm helping her
raise. I'm a retired teacher for 25 years and I'm helping her raise our her two our two grandchildren and um having them down there along with my son was really tight especially with the sleeping quarters. So the my daughter
and her two children had to sleep in one room and that was really tricky with the baby being 13 months. So it was it was uncomfortable. So we decided that um we thought different ways to maybe like take down a wall and or maybe just
remodel, but it was um very tricky. So, we spoke with an architect and decided that and a designer and decided that we would try to come up with a house that would be a beautiful home for that spot. Um that
would also be functional and accommodate our kids. And you know, if my mom comes down, we want to also have a space for my mom who That's been what prompted the project. So, I was very happy with the home, but
it just became a little it became uncomfortable with the family down there. When my husband and I are down there, it's great, but we do have a family we're really close with, and I'm very close with my grandchildren. They live in our home, so we wanted to have a space for them, and we want to make
memories there with them. So, that's why we decided Do you have anything anything else you want to share with the board or >> our our only goal is to just create a functional space for our children and
>> thank you. >> Um how many bedrooms is the existing house? >> The existing house is three bedrooms. >> How many bathrooms? >> Two. >> Any other board members have questions?
the one the one bedroom, if I might say, um, only can only fit a twin bed. It can't fit furniture or anything in there. So, the one bedroom can fit 10 bed and that's where my son would stay. And then, um, the other bedroom has a full bed in there and a crib. So, it's
my grandson and then the crib. So, it made it a little tricky to And then we we also would like this to be our retirement home. So, I'm retired, but my husband's still working. It's in close proximity to his work, so he can
use the home more often than just the summer. Um, but um eventually we do retire. This would be our this would be our single home once our grandchild get a little bigger and
they're out of our school system there. >> Any questions of our professionals? Uh just real quick if you can. Um the existing home does it have a full basement? >> I guess basement. >> How about add?
>> Yeah. Well, there's a crawl space that you there's an attic that I haven't been in. So, you have to go through the closet to get up there. And I don't believe there are stairs there. So, >> um I asked because um I see your
proposed plans have full basement and we're concerned that um with some pumps and water by groundwater it's sometimes a big issue for us. So we would ask if you can consider the reports of this if uh you can maybe try
to do this without a sump pump. I don't know if that's possible but I'll I'll I'll talk to your architect and your engineer hold it up but it is a big issue and I wanted to bring that. So, we did need some work there because we did have
there was some mold in the basement. So, um when we came in, we had you know as we we did the house without an inspection um that there was some mold there previously and so we did do some but that was looked like it was from the
bathroom above it. So it was in it was in the ceiling of the basement and so we did remediate that and there was um a French train there but my husband had a company come in and and do
like a professional French train that's under the ground. >> Okay. Any questions from the board? Um, seeing none, I open up to the public for questions. Uh, if anyone has questions of this witness, please step
forward and state your name. >> I have a question. >> Oh, yeah. Please step forward and um state your name and address. >> My name >> Cynthia, 21.
>> I'm sorry. You have to spell your last name. >> Sorry. R A N I E R I. >> Thank you. >> Um, you said you didn't have an inspection, but I did talk to the previous homeowners because I was
neighbors with them since 2003. And according to them, there was an inspection before they purchased that. >> That's our >> I'm sorry, we can't hear from Okay. I I was >> just just
>> Okay. So, you're saying you didn't have an inspection? >> No, you had a walk through, which is like you get to walk through like the day, you know, the day you closed, you walked through. >> Previous homeowners misunderstood that they inspection.
>> I I don't I I don't imagine that question, but she said that yesterday. >> Okay. So there was no there was no written report from question. Okay, >> great. Uh, anyone else in the audience? >> My name is Barbara Magosi. I am spouse
of the owner of 104 central. >> Your exact address? >> Uh, I actually 1776 Coral Wing North in Beach, Florida. >> Okay. >> I need your last name. M A G L I O Z I
N 1047 which is the attached property. Were you made aware prior to this of any water history in the basement of that home? Is it in the sellers disclosure? I don't believe so.
>> I don't but there was no water in the basement. There was water. There was mold. The history of the water. They did not disclose any history of water issue in the basement. >> It looked like it was from the bathroom
above it. >> Okay. the disclosure they were trying to there was no >> there was no disclosure of any water in that basement prior >> as being an order I can testify that that basement you're not allowed to make so you
answered that twice now thank you >> uh anyone else uh seeing none I'll close the public forcement for this witness and your next witnesses Before I come up, can everything be presented digitally?
>> I'm sorry. What >> did everything be presented digitally or >> was it provided in advance or do you have a thumb drive? >> Um, I do have thumb. Yes. >> What is it that we're talking? >> I think he's asking if he can display
>> Yes. >> the Is it something that you've already sent to me? >> Yeah. >> Okay. I just have to go put in my password cuz for whatever reason it closes down here because I I speak >> we don't have a mouse today. >> Hold on, please.
>> In the meantime, Mr. Squalifications. >> Do you want me to swear first? >> Yes, please. >> Can you raise right hand? You swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth will help you die. >> Your full name, please. Cory Fernandez. >> You are the architect. >> Yes.
>> And you did the architect, correct? >> Correct. >> C O R E Y. >> C O R Y. >> Y >> I think I just >> Thank you, sir. >> Give the board your credentials. Mr.
>> Sure. Um licensed architect here in New Jersey. Uh licensed in good standing. uh also licensed in uh New York, South Carolina. Uh I am the owner and lead architect of the company to architecture LLC which is
also has certificate to practice in New Jersey and um trained and licensed here in New Jersey as well New York College. I have appeared before uh multiple boards throughout New Jersey.
>> Perfect. Thank you very much. Thank you. So if you'd like to begin. >> Sure. Cy, why don't you take the board through design and uh see what we
So um been working with the applicant uh Pam and and Penny to uh design a home that they hope uh to be their current summer home and future retire retirement home. Um I've known the family from
previous endeavors. So we have history before this project as well. So we'll go over high level um just data about the house and we'll go through the floor plan. So we're proposing two and a half stories home. Uh the habitable floor areas. The first floor we're proposing
1446 ft. The second floor 171 square ft and the finished attic at 697 square ft. Uh just at 697 is less than half of the second floor below 1701. So the total
square footage including the attic 3,844 square ft. Um right now we're proposing a basement height of 8 ft detention not issue but we'll go through some of those. Uh the first floor height we're proposed to be 9 foot ceilings. Second floor height 8ft ceilings. The attic
would have a varying height. At its highest point you'll have 8ft ceiling at the center. Uh the the bedroom uh is Um, I'm sorry. The house rather we propose it's five bedrooms, five bath. Uh, right now there's a study den. It's current use on
the first floor which we're considering the fifth bedroom. Um, the kitties do not plan on using that as a bedroom, but in the future if they retire it, they met as well. End up using that as a bedroom. Uh, the is also a proposed one and a half car garage. It's got all the
other typical spaces you find in a home, but some bonus spaces I just want to review is a partially finished attic and basement spaces. And the overall dimensions of the home, draw a box around it. So, it's about 26'2 wide, 73t
long, including the garage space. Uh, so we had some key design goals uh when designing this home. One was for an open concept for the main living area to include the dining, living and kitchen. Minimum of four bedrooms uh to accommodate the applicants family and
vacation season. Uh to provide a porch on every level and look to maximize views to the ocean. Um provide functionality, sand control basically uh coming from the beach to the house and to design a home that is contextual with
the character of Braden Beach. Um with the challenge of also being line having two funs go home. Um so in order for this last uh fifth part really to uh be realized uh so we we focused on um
coastal New Jersey style elements uh porches for outdoor connectivity shaded spaces allowing for social interaction. uh gamble roofs, shingle style siding,
visual interest, uh flare heaves, large windows, integrated dormers uh to allow for the attic space while maintaining a low a lower roof profile, eyebrow shape, an eyebrow shaped portico uh with chipell style railings to lay
another uh set of details common properties. So, I'll take you through the the home now. Um, you just Okay, that was good. That was a good spot. >> Uh, down a little bit more. >> You want the first floor? >> Yeah, that's the first floor. So, I'll take you to the first floor. So, uh,
page left on the sheet uh, faces Second Avenue, which goes all the way to the beach. Uh, so on the very left, you'll see, uh, covered deck. The engineer, concept engineer has requested that call that a porch. So, we'll call that a porch. Um, and you can come in from
Second Avenue on a stair there, uh, and enter the home from that side. But the the real front of the home is the longer front, which is facing Central A, which is the covered porch you see on the bottom of the page. That's adjacent to the garage. So, if you were parked in
the garage, uh, you come in, we expect visitors, you knock the door, that would be the door. Uh so um if you were coming from the garage, we we made the basement access directly off the garage and that was for one of those functional goals we talked about sand control. So the idea
is that you go directly into the basement where there is some storage, a shower space, uh so you can clean up all the sand before you enter the house proper. Besides that, the first floor uh has the study den which could be serve as a
bedroom, fifth bedroom, uh a full bath, standard size bath layout, closet for storage, and one large open space, which includes the kitchen, dining room, and the living area. Um, we'll see when we get to the second floor. The challenge I
had with this house is its width, its overall width, which is also a result of the lot that the bikinis are on. So, if we can scroll to the second floor, please. >> Yellow. >> Hold on. Um, just for the record, the
initial testimony was on A101. >> Sure. >> Just say the sheet you're talking about. >> A101. Yep. And all these drawings have been submitted previously. Um, so the second floor, you come up the stair there that connects the basement, second floor and the attic space. Uh, the
proposed master bedroom is directly to the left. Uh, there is a private terrace or balcony uh that uh faces the ocean. the idea that um we can have ocean view from the terrace. Um and then that
bedroom has uh bathroom access and walk closet access. There is a laundry space on the second floor, a shared bathroom which will serve three other bedrooms and an outdoor lounge space which is adjacent to the outdoor or the upper
porch rather. Uh so just to highlight uh the challenge here um it's a narrow hallway that that goes it's a 3 foot wide hallway and the bedrooms are 10 foot. Uh so the idea was to minimize that exacerbation of the setback on Central
Avenue keep the house as narrow as possible but still functional enough to have what's pretty standard uh which would be like a double corridor a hallway with a a bedroom on either side. Pretty standard house layout. So keep keep it as narrow as possible with 10 foot 8 wide bedrooms which uh is pretty
narrow. Um so then I can take you up to the next level if we go up that stair. >> You want the basement or you want >> uh next level to the attic? Oh, that's good. The attic. So we can see the number. >> Yep. We're now on sheet. It should be
A12. >> Yep. A12 attic and roof plan. So you can go back so we can see the attic please. Thank you. I know sometimes it's stressful. Um you come up there's a hall space. The idea here the space to the left is a tray ceiling above the master
bedroom. So it's not really usable. Um most likely be used for utilities. Uh you walk to the right. The bonus room we're calling it and the attic. Um has a bathroom right now. Uh The plan is to use that as a uh as a gym space for
the residents. Uh and then you know having those dormer windows uh both for emergency access but also trying to get more views to the ocean just with that one goal trying to offer every opportunity for view.
Um but but overall I I think we we taken a lot of care to design this home to avoid uh modern intrusions and we we drew a lot from the burough's historical pallet um try to create a residence that's
that's timeless and contextual to the neighborhood um to support B's goals preserving inviting small town shore character. There's any other questions from the board from the public for my testimony?
>> Sure. Any questions from our professionals? >> Well, if I could just quick while we're here, >> the B what's the height of the ceiling? It's 8 foot at the peak and at the I would call knee wall, but
you maybe have a different what's the height here? Is it five or seven? Sure. I actually have a section. If you go to A1, >> you could just tell me. >> Okay. >> Sorry. >> It's okay. >> Let me see. So, uh, right there, you see
that's the attic profile. Yep. You see that flat part going? I believe I put the low part at 6'8. >> So, if I could ask you, this wall is depicted on the plan. >> Yes, that's the wall depicted on the plan. >> You probably call knee wall. You probably call something different. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Do you happen to know what that
is? Is it like more than 5 ft? I'm sure it is. Yes, it is. >> That's what I need to know. >> Um, your basement you said 8 foot height ceilings. >> Yeah. So, uh, I I was aware that he's installed the
French drain and additional sump pump for water issues. So, one thing that I took care to do is we're not going any lower. So, the basement level that it's at now is remaining and I think the existing is maybe 6' 8 7 foot. By making it 8 foot, we're
raising the house out of the ground. We're not going deeper into the ground. >> Um, do you happen to know where the groundwater is on site? Did anyone take a test? >> No, we did not do a seasonal sort of test.
>> This is a very important issue. I need you guys to understand this. Um, we have a big problem in town with high ground here. Some pumps kill us. They pump out of the house, the water goes into the streets. In the winter time, they all freeze over and everybody's falling,
slipping, and getting hurt. >> So, we've been trying to eliminate those. So, is there anything in your design you can do to help us? Can you live with a 7 foot ceiling in the basement, for example? Um before you build, you're going to
have to do a um test fit anyway and get us where the seasonal groundwater is because if it's even higher, you may end up losing the basement before you can start construction. Um it's a very important issue in town and we need you guys to be able to agree to address that
issue down the road if it comes to. But I think a 7 foot height in a basement is fairly reasonable. I'm 6'3. I don't have a problem with the 7 foot. It's something you would consider doing if approved. I think that the board
would appreciate that. >> I don't want to speak to the kidneys, but from my perspective, yes, that's a reasonable approach. Um, Mr. Chairman, um, I turned around and my client was emphatically agree with the engineer, so I that representation that I see a
modification. >> Yes, thank you. >> They I know they don't want to deal with water issues as well and if the sump pumps over they're not really deal with it but I understand it just put some water out to the street. So the idea would be to just just practice good design and it's not about the basement
um is a bonus. I think they get some use out of it no matter what. But um keeping it center is is reasonable >> that we appreciate that and that is the engineer going to >> we do have an >> because we want to talk to him as well
because he's going to have to put in a system so that can seep into the ground before it goes out. >> We'll have an opportunity to have that conversation. >> Okay. >> Can can I ask just for clarity for uh resolution purposes? So the agreement is to make the basement change the plans to
make the basement be seven foot max in height and to remove the sump puff and >> no no >> keep the sun puff but a different design. Okay. Is there a full bathroom in the basement? >> Yes.
>> And is that that I think I saw quickly the the attic space the bonus room has a full bathroom as well. >> Correct. And the last thing is Jerry, maybe you're going to address this with the engineer, but I heard Jerry say or board
engineer say there need to be test pits and is that something that should be done before the board proceeds or it can be done as a condition of approval? >> No, it can be done. >> Okay. and and and if they have to lose something
or do something additional that's fine but it's not going to create additional variances. >> No, that will not create. >> Okay. So that so that if there needs to be something in the future to be addressed engineering wise with respect to test pit which there is we're going
to put that in as a condition of not compliance but condition during construction. >> Right. >> Right. And that's going to have to be designed by their engineer and submit for us to >> Y. Okay. So, after um you do the water
test and you find that the level of the water is say at 3T and now you have to bring the basement up to 3 or 4 feet which doesn't really make your basement. You can't push the house higher because then you create so there would have to be some change in
the plans of the house because now I no longer have. All right. See what would happen is there's two options. you eliminate the basement completely or you come back here again and get a variance for building height because you you'd want to raise the whole thing up in the air and that's a whole different issue
that you're not looking for now because you don't think you need to. So, it's a critical item. Unfortunately, it comes at the end instead of the beginning. Um, the bonus is that the existing basement is there and I guess it's dry. I saw some I saw a picture. It looks like it's
finished. So it must be dry with the sub pump working but we can't count on that until we get to that point of construction. >> We looked at the zip. Is it correct that with the stipulation
that the applicant just agreed to the bottom of the basement would actually be one foot higher than where it currently exists? >> Yes. Uh just thinking about it, it does propose one challenge to do that that
existing basement. We want to build on non-disturbed soil. So to bring a basement that's already there up a foot basically put in foot of now new soil. But between me and there we can figure that out. >> Yeah. I mean you only have to do that on your perimeter around your uh your block
wall. You don't have to do that in the middle >> perfectly. Uh yeah said today's practice is done all the time >> and and board members the res resolution will be uh written that if such things come to pass that have to do with
engineering review the board engineer will be responsible for reviewing and approving he will work if this is if they're approved it tonight or whenever he will work with their construction engineer and no new variances will be
created. So the the bottom line is no new variances, but if there is a new variance and they want to stop construction and come back to the board and seek the variance, they could do that. Whether or not you would be granted a height barrier though would be
uh an issue. So >> we're already >> we don't have to talk about there. Yeah, >> you guys will work it out. >> It's either a basement or a crawl space. We're not going up anymore. >> Okay. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Can I ask you to go back to the second floor
layout? So I understand that private terrace in the back. It's on the second floor. That face is that's in the backyard. >> Crazy. You know that's not >> I have learned that since you've submitted.
>> So that's got to they have to give us a plan on what they're going to do with that because in in the uh definitions of the burrow that would be an upper porch. Upper porches are only allowed in front yards and over top of a lower. So that is
neither one. And I know it's just a terminology, but um that's how that's how the ordinances are written. We kind of glossed over that. Just want to make sure you're clear. >> Mr. Chair, Mr. Mayor, um after we received the engineers review memo, um I
had an opportunity to discuss that issue with everybody on the applicant team and it was decided that if the board wished for that to be eliminated, it would be eliminated. >> Consider eliminating. Tell us now what do in this place.
>> I I know. >> Well, that is proposed over the garage. So, it wouldn't change the footprint um by taking that away. So, the plan is to increase the size of the bedroom to take up the space of that. >> How does that impact how does that
impact the garage now as far as makes it bigger? Also, >> uh doesn't change it. So, it's a smaller the garage footprint is this size and it's a little bit smaller over. So, it would just take up the full footprint. >> I'm not sure. understand a car and a half garage with garages. I never heard
about half the cars. >> So, so minimum size for a garage is going to be typically 12 ft. Sometimes they're smaller. So, this is a 14 and 12 foot garage. So, it gives you some availability for storage on our side. >> It's going to open up. You notice it's all about open can of worms without
giving us one parking spot that can come back. Yes. >> Well, that'll come off as that something has to be addressed. >> Go. >> I just had a question for you. No, I don't want to interrupt. I
>> I just want to make sure. Are we eliminating that tax or you're saying if the board wants it? >> We we get the we get the strong impression that the board wants that 180. So, without the laboring that part of this, we're going to eliminate it. Okay.
>> Um and the testimony from our architect was that the uh adjacent room would be enlarged to cover that area. >> That's a master bedroom. Thank you. >> And if I could just say for the record, it's a good it's a nice design. It's
beautiful, but you know, we're not on lots that are half acres in town where you're not you're not imposing on your neighbors. So, we're very sensitive to that and that's the reason why it's flag. Can I ask about um attempts to design a
house with inside of the current zoning or I know you had mentioned you know making attempts uh to having the open concept and having the ocean views um but I'm curious as to the attempts uh because there are 11
variances to minimize the amount of requests Yes. Um, as you know, the existing home is not conforming. Um, because there's a couple challenges to that lot. One, it's it's wedge
shaped. It's undersized for the district and it's a corner lot which has more requirements. Um, I don't think there's any house that anybody would build ever that would fit in the requirements of that lot because it wouldn't be it wouldn't make sense to build that type
of house. So I think anybody who's going to develop that property at any time is going to request from this board to build. There are certainly things about the property where some relief is required. But you know when you have a house that
currently has um building coverage of 35%. And then you increase that by 25% to over 45%. That's a huge increase. that increases the volume of the house tremendously. So each of the 10% of the
4700 square ft is another almost 500 square ft on each floor and then less than 50% on top. So you're talking close to a,000 square ft of volume because of the bar that's being requested. The
first attempt to design this house was to attempt it exact footprint of the existing house and it wasn't conducive to having multiple bedrooms on the second floor. That was the issue. >> Um two
um and the house is 26t wide with the house we're proposing. It's pretty narrow. >> Mr. You referred to the lot as a wedge shape. In my mind, that's a triangle. So, for the record, say it appears to be
a quadrilateral or an regular. >> Yes. Okay. So, it's it's not a wedge. And the uh my other question is this uh this room on the third floor on the front for storage. Um are those egress windows?
Yes, they are. Okay. Then um because that is storage that is limiting the half story on the third floor. Um I would request that the record reflect and the res any resolution of approval
that that space can never be finished. >> So Mr. >> We're talking about the the space that is right over on the left. >> I have approval for my Thank you.
>> Can I also bring up if you don't mind because you just joged my memory. Uh because of your sideyard setback, you also have to meet fire code for all your windows and openings that wall. Have you done that in your plans and notified your point?
>> Um yeah. So the whole house is going to be one hour. the one hour rating you're getting around because under three feet you can't have any penetrations. >> Um I'd have to get back to the board on that. >> I don't believe that's the case. You know, there's a limitation under 5T. Um
but you are allowed to have windows. They're just limited size. >> Between five and three feet, you can have it's limited 25% I believe. But under three feet, you can't have any windows. >> 5T construction.
If we can make that part of resolution compliance that will follow up on that. >> This is fire rating for windows. >> That's the east side. >> Is that for the whole building? >> No, only east side. >> Okay.
>> Because of the setback. >> Okay. By going under three feet, it sounds like you're penetrations. You could double check. >> Yeah, I'm going to double check that. >> I'm sorry. Did we just say east side or is it west side?
>> East side. >> East. >> East on the uh you're going to re remark the front porch, the upper. So that that would run. Correct.
the the upper porch on Second Avenue, if it's it's branded properly as an upper porch, it would not require >> if they if they take it and enclose it and make it part of the bedroom, that barrier goes away. >> You're talking about the one on second >> the upper porch on second.
>> I believe he's he's uh referring to the comment in your letter of >> So that would be rebranded as an upper porch. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I don't think We had we had a setback. >> I'm sorry. Yeah, for the front that
that'll remain. >> This is shorter. >> No, there's a porch on the second side. >> Yeah, you have avenue. >> Yeah, you have a note in your letter. I just want to make sure that Mr. Fernandez was going to, you know, mark that as the
>> Yes. Well, and and we'll make sure that that happens through uh resolution performance and everything else. >> Where's that all? >> Yeah. >> Would you go ahead? >> Um just looking at the plans, uh would
you be able to reduce the width of the garage at all to meet or better meet that uh step back requirement since it is the one and a half car garage. second floor as well.
>> Yeah, that's changing the second floor as well. I have to speak over because it's more than just a small garage. It's also a smaller bedroom on the second floor. >> But you are changing the private terrace to indoor bedroom space now. So yeah, it would change the proportion of the space.
>> Yeah. >> How many feet would that come in? About 2T max. Yeah, I think 2T. So if it's 14T 6 and 12T 6. >> So that would go from being 2.53 to 4.53
where five is required. So you'd still need a variance, but it would be improving the condition. building. >> It also help your building coverage. >> It'll help your width of the driveway. You have a lot of there's a lot of
variance you guys are seeking on the small piece of property. So, we're trying to throw ideas out there, too. >> Um, and again, recognize that we're not on halfacre lots or even quarter acre lots and everyone's on top of each other and everyone gets along great in town. I
suspect it'll remain that way. uh when uh if and when this all gets approved, but we have to take these steps on every application. >> Yeah, I don't believe these are unusable requests or
something that the county is going to have to balance out. I also see because of the dimensions of the house that we had to put the air conditioning units in the yard. So you created your own
hardship. They're there now. >> There you have Are you making it even closer? >> Yeah, just the whole house is getting there. >> You're using the old conditioners. >> No, but but when placing the air
conditioners, there was nowhere else to put them. >> Yeah. If I could uh number one, I'm glad we address the basement because that is a major concern of mine as well. Um but I just want to I just want to comment even on your last
comment about you know their air conditioners. Obviously when you're raising the house they're not grandfathered because you had air conditioners there previously. So when I I I just want to say I I I
think your plans are beautiful. I think the house looks beautiful, but I was struck preparing to come here tonight by how much you and I'm building on your Thomas how much you're squeezing into this relatively small lot. You know,
you're as we said nine or 10 11 variances. Um you know my concern is we're kind of circling around and picking out little Can you shave this off that room and can you you know tweak this a little bit here and there?
This is a really large building on in in our world of zoning on a relatively small lot. Usually if you want a house as large as this, you purchase a larger lot. But I just want to say that right up front because I'm afraid that we're
talking about kind of what sound like nitty items. can you give us support here or and to me this is this is a very large undertaking and it's a beautiful undertaking but it probably should be positioned on a large and obviously
that's not available to you and your client. So, I'm I'm gonna ask a number of questions just real quick to continue to frame this, but but I have to Mitch what you were saying about the volume of the house. For example, it's a singlestory
house. Now, the neighbor to the west, I guess the top of the picture, they're going to be looking at a two and a half story house, right? So, you're taking, you know, Latin space as you build up. Um, but let me just let me
just go through some quick things. The front porch, just while you have it up, why do you have that little bump out? Why aren't the stairs just in the middle of the porch? And why? I know it's a minor question, but why are you extending it that way? >> Uh, we didn't want to um present two main entries. We want the main entry to
be focused on central. So, to remove some of the um kind of formal centered stair entry on second half was a purposeful removal to more prioritizing entry on central.
>> I mean, it strikes me that you're just you're adding a little more building coverage by doing that, a little more block, you know, coverage, right? Because just that bump out, we could have the stairs coming right out of the the center as you say, facing the
second half. Not quite sure why we need a platform. Minor minor point. Um, can you go to the where you had Jerry, you were referring to the walls that >> it's this wall here.
>> Yeah, but can you go to the side? U No, there's another side. >> There's another elevation. Yeah, >> that one. Y >> I guess I'm trying to understand. And I guess because we're calling that a utility room, we're not counting that in
the in the calculation of 50 50% coverage on the third floor, >> right? >> Okay. Because you just eyeball this and say it's well more than 50% if that room were function. So I know somebody said
it was Mr. Grant, somebody somebody said a commitment that that would be used purely for utilities. >> Um and I also had a concern Here's here's just another challenge. I do appreciate that you tried to work within
existing footprint of the existing it was obvious looking at the plans but so much of these variances are being created because you're doing so I don't know how we address this but rather than
I don't know how we address this like room by room but if we want to miss to your point 25% larger than than how zoning would apply. How can we get this to something a little more reasonable? I I kind of ask
this of the architect. Um, and I I'm not going to define reasonable, but taking off, you know, one and a half% probably isn't reasonable. If we're if we would in a perfect world 35% building coverage, I mean, can is there a way to get this closer to 40% instead of 45?
So, I know I'm asking that big question, >> but I just want to better understand before we beat you to death with a thousand thousand paper cuts or something. Can can we just talk at a higher level? Can we get this can we shrink this thing by almost 10%.
I don't think we're at the point where we can shrink anything and maintain the kidney's goals for FAPS. So they have to be intimately involved in this conversation. meaning that as as soon as I think I'm at a point now where there's no fluff in the design in terms of you know we have a trophy room we can
take out or something you know there's there's no fluff in the design it's pretty standard type of house that think any modern family would be moving into understood if the lot is the challenge so any reduction is going to have to be sort of a design process that would be the case because it's it's ultimately
going to trade off and something something functionality is going to have to be lost to make it to reduce this house. >> That leads to my question. You mentioned the design goals. Did the design goals
take in the ordinances? >> I start with the ordinances before I put a pen to paper. So we understood that when we went down there that this like I said before this lies undevelopable without variance. >> So So your testimony is that no house
can be built on a year without variance. I I I take that back. Um the types of houses that that people are looking for today and are building today um generally I would be very very difficult to to place on this property
without any even at two and a half stories with uh over 1,600 square feet of of footprint. You can't build a house that's we you don't you're not familiar with we come in here we have 20 foot wide houses and people build houses on
and and some of them some of them build them with no variances because our ordinances are very liberal Mr. So, and I also want to point out that sitting up here at the board and and seeing this 45% building coverage, we
don't you're probably familiar in many towns in your area with floor area ratio, you know. >> Yes. >> Okay. We don't have that protection here. What we have for protection is building coverage. >> And and I for one will not vote for
anything that's not meeting the building coverage. a lot that is totally clear. You you're proposing in the plans everything's going to be demolished. You have a clean lot. So there's absolutely no reason that you can't design a house to fit in there. And I realize I mean,
you know, they may have different design goals, but we have ordinance protection goals. So just want to make sure you understand it. Uh, any other questions from the board? >> Just for the I just want to add one more
kind of following up on just for the record. I I love welcoming beautiful new homes to the burrow and enhancing our inventory properties. Um, but you know, so much of as I look at this, I'm concerned about
the neighbors. I'm concerned about how setbacks look compared. You know, are they too close to someone's property that we need fire you know protection from openings and so forth. Um the average setback you know calculation I
saw was 17 I don't know where we are forget but but all these little small some small some very large variances to me it all impacts the neighbors the surrounding properties you know what does this do to the neighbors
we do have an obligation to keep an eye out for the neighbors interest so that's part we're not doing this to try to create the problem for the applicants we're concerned about over building in a relatively small area. >> My impression, if I may, um, my
impression of how this proposal relates to impact to the neighbors, I mean, the impact to the neighbors is going to be a conforming 5-ft setback that impacts the neighbors, but that's conforming. Our height conforms. The only thing that
doesn't conform is a maximum building coverage, as you point out. The other variance is we're asking for um two off streetet parking although we can get two but just not per your ordinance. However, any design on this property will not be
able to meet the two because of the width of the property. >> You're not proposing conforming 5 foot. >> No, I know we're we're we're not. But if we were, it would still impact the neighbors almost as much. We're we're I think deficient by
>> half >> two feet. >> Yeah. >> You know, deficient by two feet. >> Isn't the Isn't Isn't the rear setback which is the east side 25? >> Yes. >> 25. It's not >> 25 ft on that on that side. >> On the east side.
>> Rear set. >> I think we have two 25 foot setbacks on this lot if I'm not mistaken. >> No, no, just >> 15 and 25. Um, point being, whatever is built here that conforms with your
height is going to impact the neighbors naturally. And you see it all the time. Conforming structures come in, it impacts the neighbors, whether it's a variance or conforming. So, the question is, if we're hung up on the uh building coverage issue, does that impact the
neighbors any more so than a conforming project might? >> Well, I think the issue here is the the number of variances, right? The the intensity of relief you're asking for. Um because you're not just asking for a
building coverage uh variance. There's 11 variances in total. So while um you know I think you're saying that yes of course a two and a half story house may have more impact on the neighbors than a one and a half story house but
it's the two and a half story house seeking all of the variances associated with the one and a half story house that I think the board is taking issue with >> because you mentioned that the house is 73t wide. So if you took out a chunk
which was 22 feet wide and 22 feet long you have and you took that over you have 20 20 foot less wide. So I think it makes a big difference to the neighbors looking at a 50 foot wide wall which is which could be conforming versus a 70
wall which is not >> I think one thing to point out as well is this is this is a clean clean slate to your point. So typically when people come in looking for relief for a brand new house, they try to adjust for some of their either previously existing
non-conformities or you know make their health their home and their property more conforming. That's an opportunity to improve the status whereas this actually appears to be quite a few changes the other way. So not only
building a new property but you're also now creating more So I think that's where we're coming in. This is a 4600 square lot and foot lot and 4700 um so the home should block the size of the
lot and that's the reality of beach. >> Well I mean to to that end the existing home is half the size and has almost every single one of those same variances already existing. Um the house is what 600 ft doesn't need the size. Doesn't need the building.
Doesn't need >> right. But that is existing on the lot. >> Well, there's a reason they built it that way when they built it >> in 191. When did they build? >> Um also you don't know if the properties were subdivided next to it. It could have been more.
>> But we did reduce one variance. There's existing coverage here means that you only lose the reduce the overall amount of coverage but the impact of the existing house much less. I mean how tall is the existing house? >> One and a half stories. >> No, it's one how how high
>> um that's going to put you about 15 16 ft probably >> but but not 34.8. >> Yes. >> Okay. So so the air and light impacts are much greater. This property on a 72 foot run is tested. So um that is very
impactful to res what struck me because I went I went by there and the houses on either side on second and central it's very close to them very little space between those houses now and as I see them I think
both of those houses are singlestory houses so now you're going to have this 2 and 12 story house rising above the single family homes And you know to me one of the biggest concerns for variance here is you're
going from required rear guard set back of 25 ft to a rear set back of 2.5 and that's putting it very close. >> That's not what that's not what your zoning officer um flagged. I'm looking at the denial. So I just want to make
sure we're all on the same page because I'm I'm finding myself a little confused. Um the denial says front yard setback on second ad requires a 25 ft setback proposed is 24 ft 11.2 in the
central a front yard setback requires a 15t setback proposed is 14 ft 5.3 in the plan is a central a setback at 25 ft and the second a set back at 15 ft. The east side of the structure requires a 5ft
setback proposed is 2.3 or I'm sorry 2 feet 3 in. Um so what I think your impression is that a 25 ft setback is is required. It's only a 5ft setback. >> No, there's something missing there
because there's a rear yard setback. >> The rear yard setback is to your south of your property and that is 25 ft for principal structure. is 5T for an accessory structure. >> Okay? >> So, if the garage was detached, it would
be accessory, it could be 5T, >> but now it's attached to the house. That's part of the principal structure. So, it has to be 25 ft. >> Okay. Um, that's differs from what the uh zoning >> I apologize. >> I mean, I had to do probably a little
bit more digging, but just just what struck me looking at a Google aerial map. All it seems like there's a lot of lots with these tight setbacks in in this whole neighborhood. Three, five feet. You can look at an area and see a lot of houses, which is surprising how close they are.
>> Um, so I don't think it's out of context on neighborhoods that some of these setbacks aren't meeting the requirements. If it was a oneoff, I I I think I could see more coming up. It seems to be sort of the
fabric around Gaza Beach. You're right. There are setbacks that are very that are not conforming, but that's one of the reasons we have the ordinance in place now is to adjust for some of that as construction. >> So, you know, relieve some of that. >> Yes. I mean, I mean, essentially when a
lot of the houses, we have a lot of century houses. There was no zoning 100 years ago. >> So, the ordinances were then set up to protect future residents and what can be built. We grant variances all the time. We design variances for things that are
not in the right location. But, you know, we work with people and and people come to the meetings to watch what what the board's looking for and the neighbors understand the protections that they have. So, on a vacant lot, um, everyone is expecting that it's going to
be unless there's a very specific design and and believe me, I think this lot qualifies for some relief based on compet versus warrant unusual shape because it is unusual shape but not 10 variances. So I think it's there's an
answer out there. This doesn't appear to be >> Mr. Chair, I just put my head together with my clients. I think um I would propose this as a good time to u break and carry this for a future hearing.
While my clients want to build their dream house, they also want it to be a home that the town can be proud of and they want to work with the board. Um, so I think maybe some offline conversations with your board professionals and our
team could be productive and if we submit um a modified plan that would um truncate some of the relief that we're requesting, I think it sounds like the board would welcome that. So we like that opportunity. >> Thank you, Mr. S. Um, you know, based on
that thought, would it be okay if I opened it up to the the public for questions to Mr. Fernandez at this point? >> That might be very helpful. >> Then we can follow your direction. >> Sure. >> Great. So, um, if there's no further questions from the board members or professionals, >> I just have a comment.
>> Okay. Um, so to your point, I was thinking the same thing, but we'd like to give the public the opportunity to cross examine the witness. This way we hear maybe what some other things are. But for you board members, obviously we
do have concerns and we do have concerns, legitimate concerns and there are variances. But what the what the attorney is suggesting is much preferable than having 15 or 20 changes
to plans on the fly here >> uh that then get misinterpreted later or whatever might happen. Uh so and I think the offer that you're going to work more closely with our board professionals who
are intimately familiar with Bradley Beach and the board. But certainly we do have to have uh an awareness of the balance between what we need from the applicant and what we can do about
variance we need versus well you can make it shorter but they already meet the height. We have to be careful with that as well and members of the public should understand certain aspects of the application don't need relief but still
may cause some difference in air light and open space but they're compliant on the height. So that kind of thing you know so focusing on the variances and improving them will help to improve the
uh the public reaction I would think. So members of the public we're going to have questions only for this witness at this time and uh we'll see how far we get with that. So your your question should be to him about the testimony. >> Yeah. Uh please anyone have a question
please step forward. give your name and address, follow your last name, and direct your questions right to Mr. Fernando. >> But one one moment if I may, um because it reminds me and I don't want to forget. >> Yes, sir. >> My client um who Pam, who testified earlier, um alerted me that she may have
given testimony that wasn't accurate. Okay. >> Uh she was questioned about whether they had a home inspection done. When she went back and sat down, um her husband told her that the house was in fact inspected and they have the report. >> So, she didn't want to be on the record
saying something that was inaccurate. So, she asked me to correct that. >> So, I didn't want to forget. >> She did testify about the upstairs leaking and mold in the basement. So, >> she was concerned that she may have given inaccurate testimony. >> My question was a written report. So,
there is a written report. >> Uh, that is my understanding. >> Clarify that for the record. Thank you, Mr. >> Sure. >> Sure. Frederick Magni. Mh. L I O Z I >> I'm the owner of the house at 104 central. >> You and that's I think your wife
>> my wife. >> Okay. Because I didn't understand what that second address is. That's a property you own. >> Okay. Okay. >> And your your ad your home address is in Florida. >> Yeah. It just changed. >> Okay, that's fine. >> Jersey born and raised, but
we will go to warmer climates at some point. Um Okay. Okay, since I got to be framed as questions, were you aware the um east side of the structure that requires a 5 foot setback, you're proposing a 2 and 1/2t setback on the side of the garage where you're building the garage?
>> Yes. >> It requires a specific variance in your overall voltage. >> Yes. >> Are you are you also familiar with that side and that there's a very small access to our backyard through that through that side? You can probably get a person, maybe a
garbage can through there. Now, okay. So, this this will clearly infringe on some of the um some of the access points. >> You could phrase it as a question. >> Would that would not not would that then um infringe on the access the the
ability to get if you're cutting the size down in half, would that infringe upon the ability to possibly get garbage cans and other things through there? Um the same with the existing >> Yeah. So just to to the end there's an
existing carport here. So did we Yeah. The existing carport's 2.2 ft and we we match the same footprint with the garage. So basically the carport became the garage. >> Yeah. >> But Mr. Fernandez, you're not building anything on his property. >> Correct.
>> No. But what I'm saying is it's it's they're saying they're going to cut it down, right? The setback should be five and a half for the building, right? >> 5T, I'm sorry. 5T. He's proposing 2 and 1/2 ft. >> For the record, and just to add context
to the question, I'm sorry to interject, but um >> the current setback is also 23 in for >> Yes. Yes. Going back, we mostly took up the exact same footprint of this home. We've pushed forward towards central.
>> So you haven't extended beyond the the >> not not beyond the existing part. >> Okay. Because that's not the way it looked from what you had shown. I would I would have said can you build a home or design a home by either reducing the garage size shifting a house to the
towards um second half or take a 73 ft house and reduce the size by 2 ft. >> I think we all having that conversation. And that's why my some of my questions lay. Um, and I don't think and that would not
present any um would that present in any way a hardship to redesign it to do that? >> Well, we're going to work closely with the Canadians to design a home that they still want to live in Bradley Beach that is more favorable to concerns.
So other thing I just wanted to address were some questions around which I think this gentleman brought up around drainage and water. >> Sir, this this is your property right here, correct? >> This is the subject. >> I see. Okay. I thought you were right
here. That's the line the property line. That's the park. >> Yes. Okay. The same issues for one foot off the property. >> Okay. So, so we didn't get to the engineer testimony which will cover drainage and storm
>> is the drainage issues. >> There's going to be an engineer test, >> right? And this is the board engineer, by the way. So, he's thoroughly reviewed. >> That's why he's that's why he came up with those questions, >> right? But he's really the architect. I mean, you can ask what you want to ask, but most likely he's got to defer to the
guy, the engineer. as well. This one probably is relevant because it touched on some some of the things you guys were already talking about. Did the applicant representative have knowledge that the higher density of that home creates higher flood risk to the existing neighborhood homes in
the neighborhood? >> Generally, that's controlled by impervious coverage on a lot. And we have reduced impervious. >> By expanding the coverage, you're reducing the amount of of land for that water to go there. So that's measured by
peries coverage which I believe the board also counts PA patios uh to that regard. So the overall coverage if you were to say everything that's not grass on property >> Yep. >> Uh has been reduced as part of our photos of the proposed home show no
gutters, no meters. Where is the water flow from heavy rainstorms going to go given that high density or can you not incorporate that into your design? Um, so, uh, it's a level of detail that typically I will not present when I'm
trying to present the idea, the aesthetic of a home. Um, but, uh, the engineers going to testify as well that all the drainage for this proposed home will meet the board, the the engineer requirements. >> Okay. Let's not talk about testimony that hasn't been given. >> But, sir,
>> that will be addressed with the engineer. So it be a separate meeting. >> Norally he'd be coming right up next, but >> Oh, right after this. >> But I think typically he would, >> but they're going they're going to request.
>> They're they're going to look at the plans again. >> Yeah. So these are just questions. >> I know. We're just raising >> your concerns. I I have the same ones. >> And and also some detail, some level of detail doesn't come to the board. They
go in construction plans later. So, but there's going to be the gutters and leaders and all that stuff. And Jerry's going to make sure the storm water manage. >> I think everyone was raising really good points. >> Yeah. Mr. Mr. has has said that they would have a
planner and an engineer testify, but now we're going to stop the meeting after this questioning. >> I got it. >> And they'll res resubmit plans. We'll get another date whether it'll be noticed or not. I'll leave that up to the attorneys. >> Um, but there will be another
opportunity, but this is just really for questions architecturally. Mr. Fernandez, I think I got my question. Great. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> Yes, sir. Uh, Peter Sharp, 3012nd Avenue.
>> Please spell your last name. >> S H A R P E. >> S H A R >> P >> P E. >> What's your first? >> Peter. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, I understand the format for this meeting is going to be split in two. Does that mean when we reconvene,
we'll have another opportunity to ask the architect questions? >> Maybe on the revised plan? >> Maybe not. >> Maybe not. So, we got to get our No. >> Yes, you will. Yes. >> I mean, if it's a revised plan, Mr. Fernandez will come and walk us through it again. >> Okay.
>> And then we'll follow up with the planner or engineer or whatever. >> Okay. So, I'd rather wait to ask questions at that time. I think more >> just one minute just so we all including the the applicants benefit from concerns that I raised by the by the residents.
This might be an opportunity for you to at least share any concerns you might have. Um, well, I have uh several, but I'll wait to the public comment section. >> Yeah, this is a big question. >> I think I might wait better until with the revised meeting for my comments. Although I have, if there is going to be
a public comment section, I do have one question about the failure of the mailings to notify residents of this meeting. We'll see if there's a public comment section. >> Uh, J, there's no public comment section now. That'll be >> That's a jurisdictional question.
>> I submitted proof of notice. Did you not get notice? >> Correct. Of the four people in my neighborhood, nobody got notice. Nobody received a letter, nobody got notice of attempted delivery. >> My concern is that if there was a
failure at the post office. >> Excuse me. If he can make statement because notice is jurisdictional and I'd like to hear what he has to say, but I have to swear him in. >> Sure. >> And also I have to swear you in so because you're making a statement. And
the other thing is you can't talk about other people. If there are other people that have a problem, they need to come and tell us. >> But we would like to hear what your problem is. Can you raise right hand? >> Okay. >> Do you swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So help you God. >> I do.
>> Yes. Okay. If there's a problem with the notice and it's legitimate, then this board does not have jurisdiction. >> I see. >> We looked at the notice provision. We looked at the notice package that was filed by the applicant, which is only
done a few days ago because that's when the notices come back. We looked at it. Everything appeared to be in order. So, please tell us whether you got notice at your address. >> No, I did not. I found out about this meeting, this uh this upcoming meeting
uh only by accident. I'll not mention other names since uh you would prefer me not to but uh I went to the uh I had to go to the post office once I found out about this meeting. Uh I guess the notice itself when I eventually received
is a spokes marked December 3rd. I didn't find out about it until last Saturday. I forget what day that is. >> So a lot of time went by. >> So So sir, you got this >> because I was lucky. I understand what
you're saying, but from the record that we have that the court would rely upon, there's a certified mailing and there's a record of you receiving it. So, I appreciate that you're saying it was late, it was delayed, and you tracked it down, which is a good thing, but under
the law, you receive notice appropriately. >> Understood. But have you no concerns that of the number of people that were supposed to receive notice, >> they may not have. But you see, you can't testify about people that aren't here. >> But how would they know with me if they haven't >> I understand we're that's something that
we're going to have to address with the applicant. >> Well, I can I can speak to this since I personally effectuated notice. Um notice to all members of the public within who own property within 200 ft. Uh what's today? The 18th. Uh we're supposed to
send that notice uh 10 days prior to the hearing. Those were sent out on December 3rd, 15 days prior to the hearing, including to Mr. Sharp by certified mail, postmarked stamp December 3rd,
uh, 2025, 4 p.m. So, we gave greater notice than what the statute requires. Um, if people don't aren't home when this when post office comes with the certified mail, it they get a tag, they get a notification to go to the post
office and sign up for it. >> Yeah, but we we have to follow what the statutory requirements are and we did and your council has reviewed it, Miss Dickert has reviewed it and found everything to be sure you follow me, sir.
>> Excuse me. For edification of the public, the law requires that they place the mail in the hands of the postal service. From there, that's the proof that they need when they get the certified mailings back. That's what
they give us. The court will look at the date the mailings went out. It is not the applicant's fault if the post office didn't put a tag on someone's door. But I I really don't want to u debate the
legalities of this. We found that we had jurisdiction to start this hearing. If there was some defect obvious from the records that are required, I would have told them you have to renote this. We can't we can't do this this hearing. So I appreciate
you bringing the attention to us and maybe there will be others that will have a similar experience. uh and maybe there was something uh that went wrong from the post office end of it. I don't know. So, we will discuss that.
>> And and Mr. Sharp, we're going to have a little conference about, you know, how to proceed from here. So, um we may just push it to the next meeting or maybe renotic, but we're going to we're going to figure that out right now. >> I just want to make sure other members of the public receive due notification.
That's my only point. Sorry, I didn't mean to delay the >> No, no, no. But we appreciate you. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. >> Uh any other anyone else from you? Okay, we got and it's just questions for the architect. Um you like to step up.
>> Uh just questions of the architect relating to the plans, not any engineering. >> Um I was >> you you have to just state your name. >> Cynthia R1. >> Thank you. So, um, how many 10 foot eight bedrooms
did you say there were in >> three? >> Um, are there any bedrooms that size in the current house? 108. >> I can't testify to that. I don't have the exact measurements of the existing bedroom sizes.
>> Okay. But you did say that 108 10 in are small. >> I guess it's a general opinion, but yes. Um uh the very yard set back I have one I'm looking at this. >> Yes. >> So just wanted to point out on here
minimum reard setback. What are you considering the rear yard? >> He doesn't consider what are you consider >> that's my consider >> the rear yard is so on board lots. It's confusing right? So the rear lot in
Bradley Beach is the side opposite the shortest front >> south. >> So this is the south side >> proposed property. This is So that's the rear yard. >> No, this is the rear yard. >> It's the shortest line across the shortest frontage is the rear. So corner
lots have two fronts, one side, one rear. >> Okay. Um my other question is are you aware that these corner properties were all built by the same person when they were built. >> No.
>> Yeah, that question would be more geared towards the planner. >> Okay. >> We're not we're not hearing the planner. >> Okay, that's it for now. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> My name is Barbara. Yeah, but I have a question. When were
you first contacted by >> I'm sorry. What is the relevance of that? >> It's just architectural. >> It's really not our when they contact. >> I'm sorry. It's really not our business. >> I've known the communities for years. >> No, about this property only related to this property
>> this past summer >> after June after July. >> I don't understand the question. >> It's really not an architectural question. It's a little intrusive. >> That's what he's here for the question. >> What's the reason? After June or after July?
>> Yeah, I mean that was more >> more appropriate to ask. >> No, definitely in the summer. I believe it was mid summer. >> Yeah, midsummer. >> And when was the closing on the property? >> I'm not aware of that date. >> It was in June. >> Midsummer. >> Are you testifying yet?
>> Okay. Was the Well, you're aware when the closing was >> That's not an architectural question. Okay. I'm just trying to relate back to other testimony was made today that they were not aware. >> What we're trying to do is is is create
um some questions that will be elaborate on what the revised plan would be. I believe is that so if it's not related to that? >> Yeah. >> Uh question are you aware of the porch on the property connected to that
property for central it shows on the surface? clearly shown on the surface. You're aware that it's there. >> Yes. >> Uh currently we have a easement of implication to get back and forth through that. It's the only access we have in emergency back and forth to our
home. It's the only one that exists. It has been acknowledged by prior owners. Um are you aware that exists? >> It's not on the but are you aware that the on the survey you showed on the survey that it's within a short period of distance? >> Do you have a copy of that?
There was no actual easement on on records. >> No, we're not aware. >> There was no record at that point. There was not a requirement for um Yes. And homes. >> I'm sorry. There's no there's no legal. Is that what you're saying?
>> There's no one that's on record legally. There's one that exists. >> Okay. There's not a legal determination. >> Is there a legal determination? >> That's what I'm trying to ask. >> Did you priorities? Yes. that no that doesn't count. >> Are you aware that we're right on the
quarter at the point of flood zone X on part of that property? >> Uh so yeah, all the flood zones are going to be um testified by the engineer. They've all been considered budget, >> but just to save the questions. I think I understand what you're getting at is your garbage is on that side of the
house. You want to maintain access to it. >> It's maintain access to my entire backyard. >> Understood. >> Access with the lawn mower, everything. >> That's understood. >> Um And the the other questions that relate are related is we right now you
were testified that it's basically the same setback that currently exists. But right now I'm I walk out by the side of New York. >> I'm sorry. Are you testifying? >> I'm trying to explain what I'm saying. >> There is a porch that I walk into and I see an open concept of a attached open
garage. It's port to go for the door for the garage. Um and you're and you change that and I correct to a multi-story structure with windows facing my home. >> So So uh yes
>> now would those windows need any fireproofing because the properties are that close to each other? We didn't >> know was that that was that was the location we're talking about. >> Yeah, that was covered. Um >> I didn't realize that that was that. Again, there's going to be revised plans
taking that into account because it was raised by one of our board members. >> Yeah. I mean, generally, if you had, you know, a gentleman's agreement with your neighbor that you had to walk through the car park to get to parts of your property, um, that, you know, was not known information for me. It's not
written indeed or required legally, but I'm sure the Kenny would be willing to work with that that situation. >> And are you aware that water was draining from the back of the home through that carport? to the street. >> You're not aware of that. >> No.
>> And where are you where the sun pumps rated to right now? >> No. Those are basically my questions because at the moment there's a lot of water as you said that's very elevated and higher than natural. >> It's no comment but that was very
helpful. That was helpful. >> Any other questions from the audience? Let me get your name, sir. >> Michael Moss, 429. >> Thank you, Mr. Fernandez. Um, the east side setback
is less than 3 ft. What is the actual setback? >> The requirement or the proposal? >> The proposed 2.3. Yeah. 2.3 ft. >> Okay. And the south southern
fac uh 2 foot two in is current. I believe we're maintaining the same 22 in 2.2 ft. >> Okay. How many uh windows you have in those two elevations. >> Mr. Mer, you're aware the plans are going to change?
>> Yeah. I just want to get it. I'd say I don't have plans to find you, but but many, you know, half a dozen to a dozen windows. >> Okay. Are you aware that the current addition of the building code doesn't allow openings in exterior walls less than 3 ft from a property?
>> Uh, I haven't talked to Mr. Bisho about that and I am that uh and testify to that. >> They'll have to be there'll be code in final. >> Mr. Moss, this has already been discussed. We've already discussed and the plans are changing completely. So, why don't you hold your questions to see
what we finally get right now? It's all supposition. I know what you're trying to do. Let's just call it >> I got >> Okay, the gamble projections on the east side, how what's the dimension on that and how close to the
property line are they? Oh, with the flare out, I'd say they're probably six to eight inches more than the the proper than the the foundation. >> So, are they less than 2 ft from the property? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Are you aware that the building code does not allow projections less than 2T from the property? >> Which bill? Talk about the international code. Can I submit the this? >> No, we're going to go. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Hope that was helpful. But I'm going to close the public comment. >> U public questions for Mr. Hernandez and uh now the attorneys will talk about rescheduling and how you proceed.
>> Yes. Um we believe that um the work >> Hold on. Let me just start with this. We don't have our annual meeting notice adopted yet. >> Oh, >> and we we won't have it adopted until January.
>> Let's keep things simple. Give me a date and when you know it and I'll notice >> you notice. Thank you. >> So, there's going to be new notice given in the same way it previously was for the hearing date that is selected.
Generally we meet on the third Thursday that he probably will not make the January meeting because it's our reele but I doubt it. >> I doubt I doubt our plans can be submitted 10 days before
>> this is not a guarantee but in all likelihood this will be heard in February. So, if you remain interested in coming back, you need to check our website and look for your notices and our do we put notices up on our website
yet? No, a law is coming for that. >> Okay. Um, so most likely >> the agenda is generally posted at least a week before the meeting, >> right? >> Tenatively, I do have tenative dates. They're not
adopted yet. So, it was probably going to be closer to February 19th. >> Yeah. >> But we can't You have to look for your notice. Look for your notice and check on our website when our meetings are coming up. You can always just call and
someone will call you back. >> As soon as we um decide on our rework, >> we'll hear about that in January. Okay. >> Yes, we greatly appreciate that. >> No, I I at the end of the year,
>> right? Thank you. >> Yeah, thank you for re noticing. >> We'll go from there. So, we'll >> Sounds good. >> Thank you, sir. >> All right. Thank you. Thank you. >> Okay. This this application is adjourned
and will be heard again. >> Thank you. for 10 years. I started transfer Excuse me. Our meeting is still continuing. >> Can we ask you We still have our meeting
and the rest of the agenda >> which is nonrelated. Thank you all. >> We have new business. Uh the proposed resolution in opposition to the Senate number state senate number 4736
the New Jerseyy's 2020 this was this was introduced on October 27th of 2025 to uh to give to give control of zoning
on religious Did everyone get a chance to take a look at it? It was it was supplied by by the league municipalities as a model ordinance and uh the burough council has approved the
same on Tuesday night. So if we have any questions, we can we can vote on that. >> Well, it's going it will have to if you're putting this into our town code under land use, it will have to come to us as a planning board.
>> No, this is this is a this is just a model resolution. >> Okay. is going to be sent to Senator Gal and our assembly representatives objecting to uh 4736 which which takes away home
rule in terms of properties that are uh owned by religious organizations or nonprofits. So, we'd like to retain that home rule. And um you know, we've had some instances where Trenton has overruled us on outdoor dining and other things which has just created another
mess when we've approved properties with certain variances. Now, they don't apply. So, um we don't want to see this erosion of own I'm not speaking for the board. I'm speaking for myself. But, um we have any other comments on this? I just I said well I I love what this says
because this is we talked about this in the past. This is basically the Californiaication of New Jersey. The same ideas of California coming this way and with the present climate political climate we're getting
I don't want to get into politics but I'll use the word progressive point of view. All well and good we have our obligations we need to do but This is these are words who in trend where in trend who is going to
stand up for us and who is going to actually take a stand make a stand because there always is this agenda and I was talking to the chairman before about this there was I'm going to be caught there was an article in the Wall Street Journal about in the west coast
called builders relief all because of California's done with the ADUs and overriding local zoning this is happening in Bever Beverly Hills um area where a builder actually found a way and he was proud of himself to put a seven
eightstory apartment building in a single family zoned neighborhood and he got it under the building builders relief concept to Cal was passed by the California House or in the Senate. You
got to look this up. It's like a and and in his article, it referenced this particular bit of legislation coming through. I I get a little heated about because I realize this is going to become an issue not just for Brown Beach, but for uptowns in in New Jersey,
the right it is the erosion of control. Well, I'm in favor of reooking at government, how things are done, streamlining, making things more efficient, fairer, recognizing the uniqueness of each municipality.
But this is just how we I just want how do we know how we force the people in Trenton to stand up and do what's right rather than under cover of darkness, pass these bills, and who knows who's supporting them, developers. They're again it's a stupid thing.
Follow the money. >> Well, it's uh I mean the sponsors are not from Mammoth County. So they have less understanding of what takes place in Mammoth County and even less of what takes place in Bradford Beach >> as we have less understanding what goes on in their municipalities. Each one is
unique. You're a suburb of Philadelphia, you're dealing with something else. Your suburb of Trenton, you're something else. Suburb of Newark, you're something else. a suburb of North Jersey that's those small hunter county those small areas with open space
is this going to be are these people eventually going to be overridden and projects slant pushed through under the name of progressiveness and fairness but which we all want we want fairness gez
>> how how's this how we how we this sound great goes It goes off. I agree 100%. >> Okay. Well, where's it go? Does it go to the the great shredder in the sky in Trent? I >> We're going to send it We're going to send it to our representatives uh in the
Senate and the Assembly. And then I would really propose that, you know, our board members and residents should really call, you know, Senator Gala and Assembly people, Peter Paul McDonald, and Donald, let them know you're watching. This is I mean I used the example the other night of the church
property would would according to this statute would be over 20 units 40 ft high correct and we don't we they don't come to us. No parking restriction and only 20% of it is affordable
housing. So when you read it you think oh this is great 40 units of no it's not how it works. So, um there's there's people making money and um also what concerns me even more is is the flexibility of this 501c.
Um if I create a nonprofit, you know, like George Castanza, the human fund, now I can develop the property at 40 units an acre. Uh so I find that to be absurd. religious organizations are one thing, but I mean either way, it it's
simply not fair and it it dilutes the value of the existing residence. So, um I would make a motion that we approve uh this resolution opposing S 4736. Do I have a second? >> Do we have Wait a minute. Do we have a draft resolution?
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Well, it's it's not it's not formal, but >> Okay. There was a draft that had been submitted to me, you okay, along with the proposed bill. >> Okay. >> Um, which did I distributed to all the
board members, >> right? >> Um, because it was going to be a discussion item. >> Okay. >> So, I mean, I don't Did you get a chance to look at uh, Chair Co's draft of the resolution? >> No, I did not. But it's fine. You're objecting to
>> Yes. You're objecting to the adoption of this legislation, correct? >> Do you are you stating the reasons why? >> Oh, this the reasons are very I mean, I can go into it. >> Well, I mean, I just I'll just put on the for the on the record. I mean, one of the the first things they say in the
statement is that they are determining that this is a permitted use, not subject to requiring a use boundaries wherever these properties may be in in your in your hometown. So, it's it's
taking the very basic ability to zone >> away from you and and the the trouble that you mentioned with the outdoor uh outdoor uh uh restaurants and and whatnot. It it was a mess that we had to deal with. >> That was our first foray into Trenton
telling us what to do, >> right? And that was passed under the guise of CO and no one was paying attention that it basically took home rule out of our hands. It wasn't even in the MLUL. It wasn't it wasn't put into
the MLUL. So >> they avoid the whole >> planning board, zoning board. It's not jing like they're we have the municipal land use law. >> Yeah. Right. and they're passing all these bills and they're not J. It's kind of like when you make a change in the
ordinance, you have to make sure it's consistent throughout. That's right. You know, you can't just change it here and not change it there. >> Yeah. And and and the the other thing with this is that um the there it's going to go through a long process obviously and probably but we're in the
middle of affordable housing with a process that appears to be working and and the vast majority of municipalities are working within the time frame and the structure that has been set by the courts. And here's another thing that we
would just have to change our our plans for all over again. It's not that it's a bad thing. It's not a bad thing. It's just loosey goosey hurry up and do this for >> it's not really thought through. So So to let our our representative
politicians know that we're watching, I think is is the intent here. So um I think this resolution does speak for itself. The lead municipalities is against it. Yeah. uh because they want to protect home rule two uh as we do. So if we could have a roll call. >> So this is going to be a motion to adopt
a memorial. >> Yeah. And look, why don't you just I didn't look at it. I don't have it. So I got the ordinance. If you if you think that there's something that I need to change, allow me to tweak slightly. I won't change the content of it. I'll
review it with the >> obviously I'll wait a minute. Let me take a quick look. >> Yeah. The only the only thing it doesn't have is a title block. I mean otherwise it's it's 100% the municipalities uh resolution that uh that we prepared here
>> I think it's fine >> can incorporate something too to get some feedback from the principles this is going to coming back through our councils no matter not just brow feed just uh feedback saying yes we are
behind this or wishy-washy or no what's what's the we don't know what anybody really stands because you know how polit politics excluding me all politicians you know how they stand sometimes it's it's shifting sand depend what works for
them and I don't know where that's what I'm saying what is the feedback what's the mechanism does disappear and as because it's stated who's paying attention to this I guarantee I guarantee nobody's paying attention to this >> because there's no local newspapers
anymore so nobody sees this right >> okay so I did just review it thanks to a handy iPad. It's fine. The adop the adoption of this is fine. I do want to note that this is only a Senate bill so far. You know, it didn't even go over to the House of Representatives.
>> It hasn't, but we wanted to, >> right? So, we're getting we're getting into early. So, that's good. >> Along with self-s served Yes. >> Um, so with that being said, we have a roll call vote. >> Uh, who's my second?
the big >> I kind of figured you were >> the big >> um Mr. Wishb. >> Yes. >> Mr. Badley. >> Yes. >> Mayor Hubosi. >> Yes. >> Um Mr. uh Council Linda Wiki. >> Yes. >> Miss Harine.
>> I'm going to pass holding because I don't feel like it is my homework. I everything you're saying and everything I'm hearing right here tonight, but I don't feel like >> So, you're going to abstain? >> I'm sorry. Yes. >> Yes. Okay. Uh, Mr. Court, >> yes. >> Uh, Mr. Warnett.
>> Yes. >> Miss Lady, >> I'm gonna abstain as well. I'm gonna admit I didn't do my homework either. >> Okay. >> I agree with it, but I didn't read at all. >> Um, Mr. Frederick, >> yes. >> And uh, Mr. Mayor, >> yes. >> And Cher,
>> yes. >> Okay. Very good. And Chrissy, you can forward that to the clerk to send to them or how how would you >> um >> is it going to come directly from the Bradley Beach landings court or does it need to go from the beach land use board? Yeah.
>> Um there is no requirement that we notify surrounding communities about this. Is that what you're asking? >> No. Who's because I as long as you tell me who you want me to send it to, I can ensure that it gets there. >> Oh yeah. It says
>> I don't think it's the clerk's job. >> Okay. I I just know. So you'll send it directly to Councilman Goal and the governor governor elect. >> Well, you should send it to the town council. So I mean the burough council. So they have an official. >> Yeah. They've done a similar similar.
>> Um yeah. So no, I can I can copy um Erica, but just if somebody could just send me a list of who you want me to send this to. >> Well, it's in the last paragraph. And if you need the addresses, we'll get I'll get >> that. I can I'm sure I can. Okay,
gotcha. Copy this. >> Okay, perfect. >> And um so if we could now move on to uh Christine Bell and I see Jake here and Jerry if we could uh give us an update on round four affordable housing. Uh we
have, you know, we'll give it 15 minutes or so, whatever you need, Christine. >> Sure. So, um I have a update from Jen. Jen has mostly been involved in this. Uh but we settled with fair share on our fourth round housing element and fair
share plan uh yesterday. No, today sorry today. Don't know what day it is anymore. Um no, yesterday. Sorry. Yesterday. Wednesday. >> The 17th. >> The 17th. Uh the terms of the settlement
were placed on the record. Um they agreed to accept the 803 Main Street project which generates four affordable units um and nine of the Oxford House units as well as the proposed um overlay
zoning that um uh Chair Cohen had a large part in proposing. Um so it is four stories 48 ft on the west side of Main Street, three stories um 40
feet on the east site. They accepted those general provisions um utilizing the map that uh TJ had provided regarding the three different uh zoning districts along the street. So three different overlays. Um so that fair
share will draft a settlement agreement that the governing body will need to approve in January. Then we'll have till March 31st to adopt ordinances. Um fair share is in the process of reviewing the proposed language now for the ordinances
and uh once we get their comments back we can forward them um around. Uh, Jen has finalized the ordinance for 803 Main Street, which the bureau can adopt in January, which then enables the developer to come back to the land use
board for an amended approval. Um, and once the settlement agreement is drafted, um, that will be, uh, sent around to the, um, appropriate parties. Um and the
program judge will then recommend certification of our plan to the Mount Laurel judge who will have to certify our plan after March 31st, 2026 when all the ordinances have been adopted. >> So that's
>> so we have that March date to the council when we have the mayor and council to get that work done. >> Correct. >> So that we move to the next step. >> Right. >> Okay. And uh I've been hearing you mentioned about the resolution for the 200,000 from the church proceeds. >> Um
>> so that would be in the spending plan. Um I believe uh Jen did not update me on that. >> Okay. >> But I think that has been incorporated into this plan. >> Christine confer verbally to me that it
was included. >> Great. Any other questions from members? I would like to open up to the public. I know we've had some members of the public concerned about this. So, uh, anyone from the public like to step forward, just give your name and
address? >> I'm Reverend Jeff Curtis at 2023rd Avenue in Brighton Beach. >> Can you spell your last name, sir? >> C R T I SS. >> Thank you. >> Uh, I am working on the resolution to allow religious properties to be able to
build affordable housing. Home Rule is the racist segment of New Jersey and it's notified that New Jersey I'm just going to make comment note New Jersey practices the most racist systems
in land use policy. That's a known fact lived with it for 50 years of my ministry. I'm concerned about the Oxford houses. I work for the re-entry program for New Jersey in Neptune. We understand there are no Oxford houses in this town.
Oxford House lays no claim to houses in this town. So I would like to know more about the quote Oxford houses and how you're using income for affordable use in the Oxford houses that you claim the two I assume it's still the two that's
been referred to but they they are not listed as Oxford houses. >> Um well that being said I just I mean we've been over that before about it's it's not the income it's the physical condition these people are in that qualifies them. income is is irrelevant
when it comes to the Oxford House and that's been established and you've heard that already. I I've heard that TJ and I appreciate that side of saying. I work with groups that use Oxford houses and income is not a requirement because they
are dealing with addiction and sobriety and Oxford houses do not have an income requirement for their use because people who do not. So you have now made these nine beds income required. That's the only point. So, if a wealthy person is
struggling with addiction and wants to come back and live in Bradley Beach, my understanding is the way you're doing this, you're not going to allow that wealthy person who comes from Bradley Beach who went through a rehab program because of the income restrictions, that person is not going to be able to use
that house. That's my understanding of the Oxford Ministry. If you've got a different understanding, you can you can produce it. I'll I'll be glad. I've been here when Jen Bean produced it and she did say to you and myself when you raised the question, but they are not
Oxford. They are not in the Oxford network. So I don't know what these two houses are that you keep referring to as Oxford houses. Because if I go to the re-entry program and ask for the list of the Oxford houses and are they in Bradley Beach? No. If I go to Trinity Asbury Park who's doing this kind of
work and say do you use Oxford houses in Bradley Beach? No. That's my only point tonight and I need to understand more about the two nine beds that you're using. That's all. >> But I would also like to address your your other point. I mean, I've said this before. I'm an affordable housing
advocate, but I'm a home rule zoning protectionist. But when you use race as as an issue here, that is not the issue. The issue is building the affordable units. And you know, the previous two administrations did not. This administration's done more in 11 and a
half months than anyone's ever done. And and to throw us into that is incorrect. >> I'm just saying, TJ, that in this state, home rule has been used as a racist construct. >> I respect the I but I'm going to say and
you can continue to talk about it and have discussions about it, but I just want to have another side on the table that this community understands. >> Thank you. Thank you. I'll close the public comment if there's no other comment. And um do I have a
motion to close? Is there any other business? >> I have a comment. >> Go ahead. >> So I want to thank the board. I've been here since 2011. I've enjoyed all my time here, but I am going to be retiring at the end of the
year. >> Which year? >> This. >> This year. Come on. Do you give us any Wait, he's going to give us more than >> So, call me any questions you have in the next meeting. I'm not going to be gone completely. I'm going to remain attached to the company. Uh, but I'm
going to be retiring as of >> good. Well, thank you. >> Good for us, but congratulations to you. >> It's been fun to watch you over the last 14 years that I've come. >> I've had fun. You know, it's
>> TJ, you have a very bizarre definition of >> That's true. We We've all been through a lot. And I think looking around the room, I think I'm probably been attached to the board long more than anyone. >> Yes. >> So, I've seen a lot. You guys have come
a long way. Everyone's doing a great job. You're all attached to the applications. You have great questions and I encourage you to continue. Thank you. And who will be sitting in your seat? >> Well, I think Mike's gonna cover from the beginning and we'll see how it all
works out. Mike Shaf is a engineer with the company. >> Very good. >> Okay, great. >> Nice to meet you. >> And of course, Chris G will remain in her planning position. >> I'm still here. >> But thank you. >> Fantastic. But congratulations to your family also because you've given up a
lot of nights for >> and I've enjoyed doing what I do. We appreciate it. >> Um, do you have anything else? >> Yes, we need to solidify our reorg date because that will be our next meeting. Um,
reorganization is generally pretty quick. So, in past practice has been that we do our reorg with our regular meeting immediately following. Um, I had spoken to Ann Marie um, you know, with the changes that have taken place in her
office and coverage. She does have a conflict that third Thursday in January. So, we were wondering if we could move that to the 22nd, which would be the fourth Wednesday, fourth Thursday in January for our rework. >> Okay. >> Because we're going to have new members.
>> Yes. >> Um there's going to be, you know, some changes. >> There's not a Thursday before that. If you can do the second >> for comment, I know part of part of the affordable housing plan
council needs to adopt that ordinance amendment for the overlay zones on the 1 of January. The intention being that he have a consistency review mid January so that we could I'm sorry introduced so we could adopt at the end of January. Yes.
Whatever. >> Okay. So, does the ETH work for you? Do it the week before the 15th. >> Okay. So, we're talking about Thursdays only. >> That's part of >> I It doesn't matter to me, but I know that Jerry or whoever, Mike and Christine and everybody else have have
other municipalities they work for as well. >> The second works better for me than the fourth, >> the second Thursday >> of uh January 8 worked for me. >> Okay. this and that would give us the
time to uh review that um ordinance for consistency. We'd have to do a hearing that then >> for that. >> Yes, we'll do that. And then um mayor, that would give you the council enough time to get that to Would you do it at your reorg meeting?
>> Yeah, the plan is to expedite. We're going to include it on our reorg. >> What's your reorg? >> January. And then you would do your second reading >> uh >> on February. Sorry. >> No, no, it would be the end of January. January. >> Okay.
>> The third that third Tuesday >> uh 6 plus 14 >> Yeah. Okay. We we have to in in the resolution that I draft for adoptive ordinances, we have to state what the
second reading date is in the resolution. So, um, we we'll make sure we get that from Erica and make sure we do that. >> She usually sent it to me. >> Okay. Right. Right. >> Same. I sent her our consistency right away.
>> Yeah. And normally when you do your ordinance, you would announce to the public the public the second reading and public hearing is on X date. That'll go into our resolution as well. And we'll have a planner's report as well on >> about the consist >> consistency. So, we're going to we all
agree on the Yes, I think that would be great to expedite everything there. >> Um, >> okay. So, I'll do notice I do have Well, now so this might change because you know tenatively it was the 15th because we had that other application that was
supposed to be heard this evening. Um, but they had their professionals had a conflict with that this meeting date. Um, I don't know schedules, vacations, whatever. Um, so they had requested the January, which our dates hadn't been adopted. I told them it was tenative,
but I would get back to them tomorrow and let them know. So if they can notice, if the ETH works for their team, >> they can notice. >> They can notice for the ETH. Okay. >> Yeah. And it's just a is it a use variance application or just a
>> um I don't It was the uh Jefferson Berry application that >> did that involve a use, Christine? I don't remember. >> I think so. >> I I did it a long did that a long time ago. >> He wants to I believe >> because I think they were debate like I
think um Jake had brought it up and then the new attorney was disputing it but then they kind of agreed. I if that's >> I believe he wants to put a partner over the top of >> a twocar garage or something.
It's it's on a very small lot. Oh yeah, there was a coverage issue and >> so we can't really talk about that. >> No, no, no. I >> But what we can say is is that an application that has complexities which will not allow it to go forward or
complete on the end, you know, >> I think we'll probably complete it. >> I would think at least one >> I mean a consistency review and some swearing in and some, you know. >> Yeah. Well, I mean, you know, the Did you do a report review report already?
Maybe not. >> We did a letter. >> Do we want to add it >> for the January 8th? >> 23. >> You can add it. >> Okay. Well, let's just see if the works for them. They might want to wait until
we adopt the rest of our dates. If that if that date doesn't work for them, I just wanted to warn you. We may have an application. >> Okay. Even though they're going to do February, we're >> fine. You're going to circulate that annual notice so you all see the >> I will. Yes. >> I have it drafted.
>> Okay. Thank you. >> And it didn't appear that we had any holidays fall on our third Thursday, so it's it's pretty straightforward. >> We're pretty good then. >> I think we're good. Well, I do want to thank everyone, professionals and board
members for great work. Um, we got a lot done and we adjusted ordinances and we um protected residents when they need be by following the ordinances and um I think you did a lot of good work. So, I want to thank and with that I'll make a
motion to close the meeting. >> Also, merry Christmas everybody. >> Merry Christmas. >> Do I have a second? all. Okay.