Amazing. It's working. Testing. Testing. Testing testing. It's working. My favorite. Okay. like to call to order the June 16th meeting of the city of
Kate May Historic Preservation Commission. It is 601. In compliance with the Open Public Meetings Act of 1975, adequate notice of this meeting has been provided. If any member has reason to believe that this meeting is being held in violation of
this act, they should state so at this time hearing none. Everybody, please join us for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all for all. Karen, could we have the roll call, please? Yes. Mr. Becker, here. Mr. Ta, here. Mr. Carol, here. Miss Pagno here.
Miss Wilson Straight here. Mr. Stevenson, yes. Mr. Hammer, yes. Mr. Johnson, Mr. Curts, here. Thank you. So, everybody should have received via email from Judy the meeting minutes from our
last meeting, May 19th, 2025. Did everybody have a chance to look at those? Excuse me, Mr. Chair. You have May 15th as well. Do you do two at once? I'm sorry. There's May 15th as well. Do you do Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. And May 15th from our special meeting. Thank you. Okay. Thanks, Karen. Sure. Everybody have a
chance to look at both of those? Move approve. I move I move for approval. Great. So, I'm good. Okay. So, okay. You ready? We have a motion to approve for Mr. Carol seconded by Mr. Ta for both sets of
meeting minutes. Thank you. Mr. Carol, yes. Miss Pagno, abstain. Miss Wilson Straight. Yes. Mr. Stevenson, yes. Mr. Hamarind, yes. Mr. Tessa, yes. Mr. Becker, yes. Thank you. We also have
received an invoice for payment of bills to our solicitor, which everybody also received a copy of via email. like to entertain a motion to approve that payment of that bill, please. Motion. Second. Moved by
Jake. Jake. Oh, thank you. And seconded by Mr. Hamron. All in. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay. Yes. Mr. Carol. Yes. Miss Pagno. Yes. Miss Wilson Straight. Yes. Mr. Stevenson. Mr. Hammer. Yes. Mr.
Ta. Yes. Mr. Becker. Yes. Thank you. We have three res resolutions. Heath Coat at 128 1283 Lafayette Street block 1061 resolution 202520. Burton at 302 Howard block 1065
resolution 202521 and McFarland Associates LLC 112 Madison Avenue block 1096 resolution 202522. Like to entertain a motion to approve these resolutions or ratify them. So move
seconded moved by Mr. Carol seconded by Mr. Ta Mr. Carol yes Miss Bagno staying Miss Wilson straight yes Mr. Stevenson yes Mr. Hammer yes Mr. Tessa yes Mr.
Becker. Yes. Thank you. And we also have applications approved and denied in review. There's a list on the agenda. Like to also entertain a motion to approve or ratify these applications approved and denied in review.
So moved. We seem to be very shy. Seconded. Okay. Moved by Mr. Stevenson. Seconded by Mr. Ta. Mr. Carol. Yes. Miss Pagno. Yes. Miss Wilson Straight. I have to abstain on the 10 Congress Street group. So
that's Campbell, Dleski, Kain, Kerr, Mccclleski, and Norton. Um, other than that, yes, I approve. Okay. Uh, Mr. Hamaran, yes. Mr. Stevenson, yes. Mr. Ta, yes. Mr. Becker, yes. All except for
I need to abstain for Sea Shell Properties at 609 Hugh Street, please. Thank you. Okay. Well, that takes all of that standard business stuff off the table. Welcome everybody. You may recall that at the beginning of this year, all
the commissioners from HPC got together. And we've done this twice already. We're planning a third one, what we call alignment workshops. And at the first one, we spent about four hours aligning around what we really believe truly our work is and the core of our purpose or
the core purpose of that work here at HPC. So I'd like to ask Mr. Hamaran if you could please read that purpose statement. Sure. So the purpose purpose statement for HPC's work is to serve as a catalyst for guiding and valuing Cape
May's historical, cultural, and natural resources in ways that inspire and unite our community to steward these resources for the benefit of all so that present and future generations continue to express the unique quality of life in this place we love.
Thank you. Okay, so let's move on to old business, please. We have a representative of 9 918 Columbia Avenue here this evening. Please come on up and state your name and your address.
Dev Jagedon, 918 Columbia Avenue. Great. The floor is yours, Mr. Jagen. Thank you. I'm uh today seeking final approval of uh a deck plan uh and um the railings at our preliminary. You all specified a
particular type of railing stick built um final plans reflect that. We went to zoning zoning approved it and so this is the final condition of um for approval. So you received conceptual approval from
us on April 15th of last year, correct? Correct. And it appears to me at least that the drawings you submitted are identical to what you submitted for the conceptual review. Is that correct? Correct. Okay. So instead of going around the room and asking everybody, does anybody have any questions for Mr.
Jag Mr. Jageden? Jaged Jageden. Thank you. Jagedon. Thank you. Uh no. And for that purpose, I would like to make a motion to grant final approval to this application since it complies with
um our conceptual review and and is complete in in all respects. I'll second that. Okay. So, we have a motion to approve as submitted for final approval by Mr. Ta, seconded by Miss Wilson Stritic.
Mr. Carol, yes. Miss Pagno, yes. Miss Wilson Stradick, yes. Mr. Stevenson, yes. Mr. Hammer, yes. Mr. Ta, yes. Mr. Becker, yes. Thank you. Okay, moving on to new business. And my
Oh, thank you. Have a good evening. Thank you. Don't want to keep that seat too warm for us, do you? All of seven minutes. Yeah. Okay. So, moving on to new business. Um, before we do, we have one change in the
agenda this evening. The second item on the new business agenda, Hobbrow Incorporated at 301 Beach Avenue has requested that we postpone their presentation until our July meeting on July 21st. So, we can delete that from tonight's agenda.
Okay. So, the first new business item is the city of Kate May, 8:30 Canning House Lane, the desalination building. And Lorraine, would you like to give us a little presentation on that, please? Sure. So, this is an application on 8:30
Canning House Lane. Um, it is new construction. The city is looking at constructing a new building for the desalination plant. The existing uh building uh that's back there is going to remain. Um there's
on the second page on the materials checklist, there's a flat uh rubber roof that's proposed. Um the materials, there's brick on the lower part of the uh front elevation, metal trim on the windows, windows um and then glass uh
door with metal trim on the Are we okay to continue from our solicitor? Okay. Okay. Um the third page is the site plan uh which shows if you're actually when you drive in you're the
the top part of the plan is actually how you drive in. So the first building that you hit is the DPW building. Um the one uh the way that we're looking at it on this plan to the right of that is the existing water treatment facility. Um
which is kind of in a shape of a cross. Uh and then the one that is um hashmarked is the proposed building and we move on to the elevations which is on the next page. Uh you can see the brick on the bottom
part of it. Um then it's a metal building. the architectural style is trying to keep in line with the existing um uh building that you see to the right and that's depicted on the very top of that elevation where you see both
buildings and they look like you know similar structures. Um and then the next page is an elevation um showing the uh uh solar panels on the top and the city is here looking for final
approval and if there are any questions. So anybody have any questions or comments? two f first off this this is a city project so it doesn't get formal approval it gets an advisory an advisory report and and I'm going to make a
motion to to render a favorable advisory report but I am going to make a comment first sure um this is a um brick and predominantly metal building um and and someone has done a really nice job to sort of imitate the original waterworks
and so as I said before u to someone I guess it was to John um I I really like the cornice on the original building and and I'm going to suggest that the city consider the possibility of adding a cornice to the new building so that it looks like a building with a cornice and
and it's okay a replication of the original building. I think it adds a little something to it although it is steel and not brick that point and it may not be feasible but I'm going to suggest that that be included as a possibility in the advisory report. And
with that, I'll make a motion to render a favorable advisory report to the city on the project. So before we entertain a second, anybody else have any other comments? My recollection, my recollection is that the in the original look at this, the um
sides of the building emulated the front of the building and then it was changed to get a little closer. Sorry. My understanding uh from the original structure was that the sides of the building emulated the front of the building and that was later changed for cost purposes. They were they were
modified to look more like the back of the building I guess. Is that is that correct? Is is that still in the plan that way? That is um the the front um uh dimension is of course a lot less than the than going you know from front
to back. Um but that is correct. Yeah, my recollection was that saved something like a million dollars off the project or something. It was a big change to sides of the building the other way. There was. So, my only comment is um I I agree that
this looks great. Um although I'm not in a necessarily in agreement with Mr. Testa about the cornice because I'm concerned that that would be a little bit of a false sense of history. And what's interesting about this as opposed to the brick building where the cornice wraps all the way around it. This is
sort of a a western storefront in a way because the the front facade of this is taller and bigger than all the other facades which just have a a coping around the roof. So it would maybe be a little odd. Well, just to remind the chair that a lot of western towns had had large
cornises on their on their buildings, but but again, it is a suggestion. This is an advisory report. Uh I think it's it's pretty clear we all would render a favorable report to the city on it and that's my suggestion. Nonetheless, I still have a motion hanging without a
second. Do I have a second for this motion? Second. Okay. So move to write a favorable advisory letter of appropriateness for this city project made by Mr. Testa. Seconded by Miss Pagno.
Mr. Carol. Yes. Miss Bagno. Yes. Miss Wilson Strick. Yes. Mr. Stevenson. Yes. Mr. Hamarind. Yes. Mr. Ta. Yes. Mr. Becker. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Excellent presentation. So,
Hobbrow at 301 Beach, as we said before, has been pushed to the July meeting. So, do we have representatives then from the next item on the agenda, which is Carney Incorporated at 419 Beach Avenue? So, if you could please state your name
and your role on the project, please. Oh, Dave, press the Sean Carney here. Sorry, did you say this? The second part. State your name and you're role on the project. Uh, I'm serving as the owner of Carney's Kate May restaurant.
Thank you. Can you bring the mic a little closer? I'm having a hard time. Thank you. Oh, there you move. Got it. All right, my turn. Dave Schultz, um, senior partner at DIS Architects, uh, licensed in New Jersey, nationally
certified. I've lived in West Cape May for almost 30 years, and I've been to this commission a dozen or more times before, over the last probably 20 years. So, good to be here. Um, we're talking about Carnies tonight and perhaps a new
era for Carnese that we want to present to you and and discuss. The project is really to renew the facade at Carney's in particular the 411 address which is non-contributing. Um we want to uh complement the historic
streetscape. We want to make carney more inviting to guests to tourists who would be welcomed inside. Um, and I don't know if you know Shawn Carney, but Shawn is the next generation
of Carnese, which is a multi they're really an institution in Cape May. Um, so I think Shawn just wanted to talk a little bit about his vision for Carney going forward, please. Thank you, Dave. Good evening,
members of the committee. My name is Sean Carney and I'm proud third generation operator of Carney's restaurant and bar, a familyowned business that has served locals and visitors in Cape May since 1979. Carney was originally purchased by my grandmother who ran it alongside her
four children uh one of which is my father. Over the past four decades, our family has poured our hearts into this establishment making it part of the fabric of this community. Today, I continue that tradition with deep respect for our history while also recognizing the need to adapt and
evolve. My goal is to enhance the overall dining experience by improving the quality of our food, updating our kitchen facilities, and creating a welcoming open air environment that celebrates our beachfront location, all while maintaining the integrity of the
building and its historical character. We're committed to honoring the spirit of Carney while making thoughtful improvements that ensure we continue serving the community and its visitors for another 40 years. With me today is our architect Dave Schultz of DAS, who
will present the proposed renovation plans in more detail. Thank you for your time and the opportunity to carry this legacy forward with care and purpose. Thanks, Sean. Thank you, Sean. Um, just incidentally, we worked with Sean's father in the 90s renovating this
facility. So, you know, time has flown by. It's now 30 years later for all of us. It's like here we are again. All right. So, um, you should have you should in your packet, just to confirm, you should have our cover letter, the
historic property report, the application form, and u a bunch of 11 by17 slides. Sound right? So, we'll just walk you through them. They're numbered, so if you can follow
me, that would be great. This is the first one. So, just want to point out, let's start with the bottom right. This is really kind of a head-on shot of Carne as it exists today. This is 411 Beach. It's
the non-contributing section. Um, I think your grandfather built this originally, this facade. Am I right about that? It was actually built by Sids. Oh, Sid 64 and then purchased by my grandmother. Okay. Sorry.
for for purposes of historical identification among people who've been here a long time. This is known as Carney's formerly Sids once Arnold's cool. Yeah. I mean, it's an institution. Um, and it's interesting that back in the day, you know, pubs were pretty dark
and they didn't want you to see inside, right? Because it was, you know, stuff happened in there. So we learned we there's a reason for that. Yeah. Well, that's changed. Times have changed. You know, Howard Johnson changed us when he
built all of his hotels with his restaurants that were all glass. The idea being that people want to see where they're going. They want to be able to see in. They want to know that it's clean, attractive, and it's not someplace they might get mugged. So the idea behind this project is to take that
facade in its current position and completely rebuild the front onto uh on on Beach A. We're going to keep the pen roof that's there, but the facade will be taken apart and rebuilt in a manner that's more more of a modern pub
inspiration. The the bottom left photo is kind of oblique. It's from the Proomen. You can get to see the whole property with that view. Um and you also see in the distance 419 beach which is contributing which we'll talk about as
well. Um 419 is the top left photo. It's really all we're doing to 419. We like to take those picture windows out and replace them with operable windows. The same idea. Let the air in, let people see people, let people hear people. Uh
the other thing we're doing is there's two single doors that exist and we want to we'd like to make those one double door in a and you'll we'll talk about materials later but we we're proposing all wood construction. So next page is 002. Again these are
more contextual. I know you're all familiar with this area. Um on the upper left is the corner of Taco Cabalito. They've done a nice job with that building and that ground floor is quite open to walk to people walking by.
Bottom left is the view looking east. You can see kind of the context of the site which we're looking the compliment. You can see the pizza shop, the retail shops with the decorative Victorian windows, taco cababalitos in the background. And then across the street
is the arcade in and primal. Um, next page is 0 of three. Uh, that's looking um west on Beach Avenue. And and and just to point it out, that's also a one-story building, at least the the
string of retail buildings, one story with some pitched roofs, similar to the scale of what we're going to be talking about. And over entrances, they created some peaks. They created some hip roofs to break up the facade, but also signify this is the entrance. bottom pictures
are from the golf course which has also been there a long long time I think. Um and maybe someday that will be built. We're not sure but for now it's a golf course very close neighbor of u the caries. Very good relationship.
U next is the survey. Um we're really not expanding the building. We're not adding any seats. We're not adding square footage. you, if you can tell, you can see the little notch on um the carney side. Um we're going to replace
that notch. We're going to move that to the left with an indent for our new entrance. So, by by and large, we're there's just there will be no no new additional square footage. Okay. Page 200. Um this shows again there's no interior
work proposed. So this shows the profile the plan profile of what we're talking about. So on the bottom left is the existing profile of Carney and then bottom right is the other room they call it. That's 419. So you can see the
profile of what's there. There's an alley in the middle um which is no longer an alley. That's no longer a required exit. Hasn't been for years. We want to put something in there so that it's doesn't become a place to loiter which we'll talk about. So the bay
windows exist on 419. That's what we're replacing with new window sashes. So the upper plan matches that. That's just showing you what we're proposing in plan. All those numbers relate to sheet notes. I'm not sure if you care about that too much. So we'll talk about this
more in elevation. But on the upper left, you can see we indented the entrance. That's going to be the new entrance with a vestibule into the restaurant. And then we have one, two, three, four, four units where we have peers and we
have glass operable glass windows so people can see in. Those are byfold units so people can really see in. It should be very inviting, really different than it is today. Then in that alleyway, we're proposing just a simple
panel, floating panel where Sean can put his menu on just to not encourage people to use that as a place to loiter. And then uh in plan um we're replacing those fixed glass units with operable, which you'll see in an elevation, and we're
replacing the door. So now to the elevations on page 610. Um the bottom row obviously is what exists. You can see the barrel cut out on the bottom with the tim with the sort of tutor style trim. So that's the
bottom. The upper elevation is matched up so that it is what we're proposing on 411 non-contributing. Um you can see the windows. You can see there's a bfolding windows. The bottom row of panels lines up with
the building at 419. Above the window units, there's inset panels where we propose some light signage. Um, and then to the far left there's the entry door. And above that, we've created a little bit of a hip roof. I
don't think it's a tower, but um, it's a little bit it's iconic in that that signifies this is the entrance. And you'll see that from both sides. the existing pench roof will stay. So where everything is going to be filled up to match up with the existing pen roof.
Then over to 419. Um we've changed the we changed the entrance to just a double double door unit in wood and all the windows are changed so they're operable. They're biffolding units so they'll swing to one side so we get maximum openness. Other than that we're not
doing anything except except some paint. I'm sorry. Okay. So, uh, next page is 611. This is looking at the western side. This is the golf course side. You can see the the side view of the entry
element. You can see the windows. Those are those are supposed to line up with existing windows. I know they don't. They may not, but they're supposed to. So, they would be new infill window units that are biffolding. the two units at the far end a units
those are new. So where the brick is and where the barrels are that will come down we so we can get more light and air to the back of that restaurant. Um we're dropping the brick sill down to line up with the new windows as you can you can see in the upper elevation.
So now on 612 we have some rendered versions and we've developed a color scheme around some ideas Sean had about picking up the theme of the ocean and sky and you know pubs were often dark
green dark black dark you know dark red so we wanted to be light more light and because we're on the beach so it's a there's a two-tone blue affair dark and a light blue they're pretty and then a red accent. It's not bright
red, it's kind of a terracotta red for the inset of the peers. You can see the window units themselves and the main entry doors. We thought that was kind of a nice soft color scheme. And then on top of that in those recess panels, we
have kind of a a brown amber brown beige tone in those where we have painted signs that would be externally lit with uh those uh hoop lights. So we've taken the color scheme all the way across to
the underside of the porch at 411 just to make the buildings more integrated and uh let them know that it's they are part of the same operation. So you can see you can really see an elevation the existing and the proposed the the top of the new tower would also be cedar shake.
So we we'll try to maintain the cedar shake that exists because it looks in pretty good condition but we would we would match that with new cedar shake on the new tower. Then on 613, um that's the side view again looking
the golf course view but in color. You can see with the trim with the applied trim and the recess panels, we're maintaining the same aesthetic that we've proposed on the Beach Avenue facade. So it wraps the building will frankly will be fairly visible.
So that's that facade and that pench roof exists as well. That's really more cosmetic. Um, same thing on 614, except we specified our products. Um, you can see the brick, the cedar shake, our our color tones,
um, our wood siding and wood trim, and windows are by Sierra Pacific, and so are the doors. So, they'd be all they'd be solid wood. Am I going too fast? No. Okay. Next elevation. Same thing. You've seen this
before. It just has the spec sheets for the materials. Um, we also prepared some some sections, some detailed section cuts through the front facade. The first one is right at
the entryway. You can see to the left, that's the door. And then that's recessed. So, you can see there's an overhang. And then there's a flubby pier. Again, wood, painted wood or stained wood. um you know, solid stain
probably. And then um and then it's infill above and we have the sign panel with the gooseeneck fixture um and you know trim profiles to give us some shadow. And then the next one is 741
that's cut through a window section. Um it's a you can see the twoft window sill, the new wood window byfolding unit header and then up to the existing pench roof that says western red cedar but
it's existing. And then we we are we are adding some trim to the fascia to make it more solid looking so it's not so thin. And of course there's the panel inset panels above the windows which you can see with the moldings. Excuse me.
And then the the one that's behind that 742, it's just through a solid wall. Um, so it's the same details. Um, we just cut it through the solid wall. So, we're going to be building this wall up up the existing foundation.
Pretty heavy base moldings. Um, the, you know, recessed panels we think will be in keeping with some traditional details. Um, that would be attractive. And again, we're meeting matching up with the pinch roof.
Uh lastly, um I'm not sure we needed to draw this section, but we did. But this is cutting through uh 411 Beach Avenue, the contributing side. All we're really doing here is putting in new window sashes. So, all the other construction
you see there is existing and not that won't not we're not any changes. last sheet is really just a recap. It shows you an enlarged elevation um of of the the two facades which which
will be linked together. The two I'm sorry, the two Beach Avenue facades. So, in summary, um you know, we're looking to upgrade Carney's facade with a traditional Irish pub motif. The carnese are Irish if you didn't notice.
um that will blend in with the streetscape and Cape May and make caries more inviting to patron tourists. Great. Thanks, Dave. Um before we go around there, I just have one question and that is the um the
cross brace spandrel brackets that are existing on the second floor. They're drawn on your drawings differently than they actually appear in the photographs. I just want to make sure that you're keeping them, not Um, so you're not replacing them and rebuilding them, keeping them. No,
they're I guess they're meant to look like what's there, but they don't. Is that what you're saying? Yeah. So, I just want to make sure that that we're leaving those cross spandre Yes. brackets and not because they were specifically called out in the historical report as being Yeah, we're
not changing those. That Do they look different to you? Yeah, they do. Okay. Yep. There's a There's a bit of a member missing. There's a couple things. Okay. Just Yeah. My fault. Okay. Just want to make sure that. Okay. So, with that said, Yogi, do you have any questions or
comments? I think it's wonderful. Your mother was your grandmother. Your grandmother I I I agree with um Mr. Curts. Um I just have a couple of quick questions because there was a couple of things that I don't know if I was real clear with when you were talking about the windows.
They're going to be opening and byfolding inside. Correct. U they actually can go either way. They're they biffold in or out. Okay. Because that just the close proximity to the to the sidewalk. I Yeah, we we thought of that. So, they'd probably be bfolding in
typically. Yes, they go in and out. You'd want them to biffold in. Okay. Um, the current windows are nonoperable. Am I correct? On the on the um uh the golf side, they are not they're not operable. I didn't think so. Okay. Um the other
question that I have and I'm maybe because I don't have a floor plan here but um elevation 615 which looks at the golf course um I guess you would consider at the left side correct it looks like that sets back is
the entrance quite a bit back you know you're looking at it at an angle um you see what I'm saying here if you I don't know if the entrance is quite a bit back Here there's a floor. If you go back to sheet
200 about right here. Oh, about two feet. Oh, back about three feet. Three feet. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe the survey plan would help you. If you look at u the survey plan, um then this is what I'm looking at here.
There's a there's a notch. If you look at the survey plan, okay, you see that notch? A pretty severe notch. Triangular space. Yep. So that that forms the we're not increasing the footprint at all. We're working with an existing footprint. It actually creates a little
covered area right there. A little covered area. Yeah. Okay. Okay. And that's that's nice as far as that small little al cove in there. Okay. I just from the one elevation it wasn't real clear to Yeah, it's really hidden into that view. Yeah.
Tom. Okay. Oh, I'm sorry. Are you done, Lorraine? I am. Great. Thank you. I am. on both 614 and 004 uh you're showing both of the buildings and I'm just wondering why on the conforming building the contributing
building you want to keep white on the second floor when all the other flat surfaces uh in the background are that lighter blue. It it in one thing it makes it sure that that seems like a
separate building but in the other way it's so different than from the bottom that uh you know I will admit in the 1890s sometimes different layers of houses were painted in different colors. But I was wondering if you wanted to tie that in a little bit more with the other
building. I guess our thinking was the building is currently white. It's just recently been painted. Uhhuh. We hate to kind of repaint. Um, and you know that we we're leaving the porch columns white so that whole framework
stays the way it is. And we like the idea because because Carnage is a one-story building of carrying the first floor. Yeah. Carrying just the first floor across in terms of Okay. color and finish. The upstairs is a an apartment
and really not part of Yeah. the operation. Okay. Okay, that's our thought on it. I mean, colors could be discussed, I'm sure. As we say, you're only one paint color away from perfection. Yeah, paint it. My wife always says, especially down here in the salt hair, my wife always says paint is
easy to change. That's all I have, Mr. Chair. Simply, thank you, Tom. Matter of the Mr. Ta, this this is one of the nicest plans I have seen um in a place where a nice plan is really needed. Um
the uh I'm you you referred to it David as tutor style. Um I I really I'm not sure what would refer to the kind of a hole in the wall with the stucco and and half timbers. I I have to say um both in terms of the preservation of the
treatment of the contributing structure which is enhanced and I think the colors make a difference and I think you're moving to windows to provide more air and makes makes perfectly good sense even in the contributing structure but with respect to the non-contributing it
is a remarkable job uh and and uh u I think everyone will look forward to seeing that new identity perfectly good um call it a small tower. It really sets a statement for the building and and to introduce light and air through all
those windows into essentially what was a dungeon or looked like a dun dungeon. I I think it's just I mean this is one of the nicest projects I've seen come in front of us. So I I and I have no no particular criticism with respect to any part of it.
Thank you, Janice. Looks great. And um congratulations on doing your grandmother proud. Thank you. B I wasn't going to say this, but when my
father was the mayor and he would have dignitaries come to town, he was very good friends with Frank Rizzo who was up and coming in the police force in Philadelphia and he took everyone to Sids because in that time it was the place to go. It was very modern etc. And
that's where I met Frank Rizzo myself. However, both my father, God rest his soul, Frank Rizzo, they're all gone. And it is time for this place to move on and to accommodate the streetscape more. My
question was the same as Tom's. Why the white on the top? Also, the columns on the bottom are white and your columns on the other building are painted. And I was wondering about that. I'll probably get the same answer. Well, you know, if
you think about it in three dimensions, the columns are freestanding out by the curb. They're not part of the building facade. It's part of a porch structure. So, we thought that deserved to be white, so it really stands out. But the other ones are, even though they're not
the same columns, the other ones on the entrance to the non-contributing building are painted. Those are well, yeah, they're all peers except for the last one on the left. There's one that's recent. Those are part of the they're really part of the wall, so to speak.
Okay. Um interesting. The two people now have question that, but um I don't know. I mean, we that was just our intuition was to to run the blue treatment through on the bottom and not the top. I think across the bottom. I don't know. Tom Mort knows more things about these
colors than I do, but that's the first thing that comes. Otherwise, I think it's just gorgeous. It really is. It's wonderful work. Thank you. Thanks, B. Jake. Yeah. Long Beach Avenue, there's a lot of buildings that really don't fit into the fabric of the community, the historic fabric. Um, a lot of modern
construction. This between Taco Cabalo on the end, and that's perfect bookmarks. That's going to be one of the nicest blocks along Beach Avenue. Well done. Okay. Thank you, Jake. Kevin. Oh, I would certainly echo the comments about the attractiveness of the building. It's a gorgeous presation. Nice job with it.
Couple of things I noticed. First of all, I guess I'd be number three on why fire and you know four four makes a majority. Excuse Excuse me, Mr. Hammer. Could you turn your mic on, please? Thank you. Sorry, I'm the one that's the worst with
the microphone. Um, so the a couple of other comments. What? Well, again, for the record, uh you know, I I was going to ask the same question about the blue on the top um second floor. Um from my notes, a couple of things. One is if you look at the um the property report,
the picture in there shows those spandrels on the first floor as well as the second floor. They don't exist today on the first floor. So, they must have been taken down sometime in the past. I don't I don't know when. Maybe the renovation in the 90s or something.
sometime after 2007 because I think that's when that report was made. Yeah. Because the the property report says very specifically um page here. It says every effort should this is uh eligibility only the stick style
building carney's other room on the east part of the lot is eligible as a contributing resource in the Cape May historic district. It is a good example of a stick style commercial building and has retained a medium level of architectural integrity. Every effort should be made to retain the special
elements in the building such as the porch posts and the spandrel brackets. So what that would imply to me is that we would I would I would like to see you consider putting those um those spandrel brackets back on the first floor to to
match the second unless they're in the way of the traffic in some fashion. I don't know. Um, but that picture, if you look at the property report, shows them very clearly on the first floor as well as the second floor. And and they don't
exist on your Oh, I know they don't exist today. So, um, that's the only other thing I noticed on that. And then the windows, um, you know, in your in your existing south elevation show, um, picture windows. Uh again, the property
report picture is a little different on the first floor than than what your existing drawing shows. And again, I guess those are changes that have been made to the building. I I think you've done a good job of trying to preserve the look of the building. And you know, so our objective is of course to
preserve that contributing property. Um and therefore, you know, as much as we can get back to that original look, the better off we are. Um but I think this is a a pretty good job at it. Maybe I could answer part of that. Um, there was
re a couple years ago there was a there was a storm roof damage from the property across street hit the car's building. Significant amount of damage. They came before HPC and received approval for what was
proposed as the renovations. This is the result of renovations within the last five years. Okay. I I don't know if it was discussed to repeat the lower brackets or not, but they're not they weren't part of that approval. So, it did go through HBC and
it was stamp approved when the and that was the storm. I want to say April of 2020 when the roof blew off, hit all our columns, knocked them all out. We had 10 tables outside. We weren't even open inside. Um, and a lot of things occurred
in that time frame and it was kind of like surviving. Um, but it did go through HPC and it was stamped approved. As I recall, at least one if not two of those brackets got damaged or if not destroyed by the roof coming through. Yeah. And knock the columns. We had to
rebuild. We had to take the deck off and rebuild it. Yeah. Yeah. That was 2020, I think. 2020. April of 2020. Oh, I guess the question is, do we try to correct for that now? It's an interesting question.
I'm my my perspective is again if our objective is to preserve the historic designation, we should try to keep as much emulated as possible. Um especially since it's even flagged in the uh in the uh property report.
Mr. Carol, do you have any comments about that? I'm in agreement. I'm I'm I'm afraid this this sounds a little bit to me like we're walking back what might have been approved. It may we may be, but that's just correcting a you know an oversight or
something that wasn't picked up on five years ago. So this was this was all I'm sorry. We're okay. We're okay if we we we agree to add those brackets. Okay. Because this Thanks Kevin because this is the one I only had three comments in this. The the only thing that would change my mind honestly is if those
spandrels interfere with public traffic because they're so low or something that they get in the way. I just don't know. I don't think so. I honestly think that's going to be an issue. That's probably what people are a lot taller today than they were. Those columns take quite uh significant beating from the
traffic and cars are constantly hitting them and con the columns. Would would you would you give me the if an approximate height of which the lowest span of those columns? I just measured it. It's to the top of that um
the mid the midspan capital trim is it looks like it's almost exactly seven feet above the sidewalk because I was concerned that maybe they were too low. Maybe that's was part of the problem. But at seven feet they're fine. Yeah, that would be at the absolute lowest point where the angle hits the column at the on the top of that trim. Yeah, we'll
have to measure and detail that. Yeah, we'll do that. It's I mean I Your drawings are to scale at 8 inch scale. Yeah. Yeah. That's exactly seven feet from what I scaled. Yeah. So then I would make the argument that we should try to put the spandrels back. So Kevin, just to to I'd say reiterate what you
said on page 34 of our standards when it's talking about porches. If the original or historic porch does not exist, but there is physical or documentary historic evidence of what was originally there, the new porch should replicate it in both materials and design. So, our standards do
specifically address this. So, would you be willing to rebuild those spandrealss on the first floor, those bracket spandre? Yes. Great. Apparently, the carpenter who built the one on the second floor could
build these. Yeah. John Hass. Oh, yeah. We we know we know he can. Yeah, I assume everyone knows. Yeah, he's the right guy. Okay. All right. Well, with that, that's wonderful. So, Kevin, are you done? Just Just the other thing was to note the change in the windows, and I
don't think that that will affect I don't think that will affect the designation. I would hope. Well, I don't either because it's pretty clear this this this was built in 1880, and there were not big plate glass windows like that in 1880. So, I don't think we have a problem with that. No. Yeah. And particularly because you're using you're
using all wood windows that would be typical of what you would have found anyway. So So I only have two questions, but before I do, our solicitor has a question or two, I believe. Mr. Schultz, uh, the applicant has marked conceptual.
You you anticipate making a a planning board application in connection with this? Um, you you've got a contrast, Dave, between your letter and the application itself? Really? Yeah, your letter talks about applying for final and the application talks about conception. We intended this to be a final which is why we produced all the
details. We still have to go through zoning to make sure we're in compliance. We think we are, but we would do that next. So, um that and we're not here to do zoning, but I'm just trying to get a sense of the project that you're
proposing and if you go to a board, how it might change, if at all. If I'm I'm looking at 01 um and you you tried to put some angles in here about the proposed building. I'm just trying to get a sense for the board
the contrast between and just picture number one streetscape photograph along Beach Avenue looking north. There's the existing contributing building with the porch sticking out and then the current left side Carney's building that's kind of back behind the sidewalk.
the proposed building that you're looking to build and the entrance I think has a projection with some post as well. Is that going to go into the sidewalk area like the current contributing building or are you going to recess that back using the existing
front facade building? Are you talking about 411 or 19? Yeah, because you're going to make you're going to completely change 411, right? Well, yeah. We had a we had a plan profile that addressed that on 200 page 200.
But I can tell you that we're not increasing the building footprint. It would be we would be working off the existing wall and it's straight up. We're not not looking to go further out into Not at all. Not at all. And we're actually I mean that there's one post
that's freestanding that's at the entrance where we have a recess at the far left side. That's all within the building line, right? Drawing 200 shows that that's all within the building line that exists. So it looks like the the area that you're
enclosing where the current inset is looks almost exactly the same as the square footage of the area that you're buying back. That was calculated. Correct. So you're not changing the square footage. There's no new interior changes and it's really just exterior
facade changes in place. Thank you. And have you had any preliminary discussions with the zoning officer about this project? We have not. Okay. That's our next step.
But again, we don't have any we're not expanding it. We're not adding seats. I think the signage we'll have to calculate for him, right? But I don't know if there's anything else he'd be interested. And I'm I'm not weighing in on any of those items right now. I'm just trying to get a sense of what what other factors may be in play. Yeah. But
uh we were hoping that this was a final application. But you don't you can't assure us though that there that no other approvals are needed by any other board at this point. Um we don't think there are. If there are, we would have to come back if there are any changes. We're just trying to
figure out how to frame the So unfortunately, we we can't provide a final approval until you have zoning approval. Okay. However, the final submission that you make, if there aren't any changes, it will be almost as
simple as the prior gentleman because submit the same drawings same. It'll be it'll be pretty much a feta complete. Okay. So, I only have two very very minor questions. Um Kevin took care of the brackets for me. the signage. I'm just trying to figure
out what the signage is made out of because we have several signs. The ones that say food and fun and also the car sign. Yeah, we we were we've been talking about it. Painted, carved wood signs. Great. Yeah. With surface light.
Great. Yeah. Nothing nothing you wouldn't like. Perfect. Thank you. And the and the last one's a really small detail, but the light the lamping in the lights that you're using. Just want to make sure that it's a warm 2500 degree Kelvin light as opposed to a 3500 degree Kelvin light. We totally agree. Got to
be warm light. Okay. Totally. So it sounds spoken like a true leadeds fellow. Leeds is a town in England. No, I I know it's not. I I can make a motion for conceptual at this point. Um so um having had the application in front of
us, I would move that we grant it conceptual approval. Um and among the uh parts of the conceptual approval will be the um the u the um applicant's agreement to bring in back the brackets on the on the first level. Specifically the crossraced
spandrel brackets as it were. Correct. On the first floor. Yes. Because they're on the already there. I think that's the only any other mitigating factor. Correct. Yes. So, because we don't we're not um we're not really taking jurisdiction
over paint as far as I know. Right. Going back to the windows, just a quick comment. I you know, if you look at the upper windows, they're six over ones. Um the ones on the bottom floor are picture windows. We know they would probably never have had picture windows when that was built simply because of the cost of
the glass. But I guess the only other option would be to go to a 60 over one on the first floor as well to emulate the second. I don't think that again I'm going to go back and say what I said. I don't think that's likely to jeopardize the contributing status, but I'm certainly not an expert in that. Well,
my personal belief is it wasn't jeopardized before, it's not jeopardized by this. Yeah. Right. Yeah. So, um anyway, I think I made a motion for conceptual approval of the project. I will second it. Okay. So, we have a a motion to approve with the one condition
being the inclusion of the cross brace spandle brackets on the first floor. Moved by Mr. Testa seconded by Mr. Carol. Thank you. Mr. Carol, yes. Miss Bagno, yes. Miss Wilson Strait, yes. Mr.
Stevenson, yes. Mr. Hammer, yes. Mr. Ta, yes. Mr. Becker, yes. Thank you. Very nice work, gentlemen. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Next, we have Cape Jetty LLC, 62nd Avenue. two submissions, one for
demolition and one for a proposed new three-story hotel building. So, gentlemen, if you could please state your name, your role in the project, please. Uh, sure. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. To briefly introduce myself, my name is Peter Chicanius. I'm actually an
attorney at the law firm of Highland Levin Chapyro. The applicant's representative, Mr. Manny Demutus, is currently out of the country. So, he asked that I Peter Chicanius. Uh, so he asked that I appear here on his behalf, but this will largely be our architect show. Uh, I'm just going to briefly
correct one item. I don't know if it's really an error. It's just more for the the sake of the agenda. It says that the applicant is Cape Jetty LLC. The actual applicant is AU LLC, spelled A V U. So, that's the the correct name of the applicant. Um just some very property
owner. Uh is that the property owner? No, that's who submits the that's who submitted the application with the permission of the property owner, but it's a lot of the key same key players for the most part. Mr. Jane, can you just So Cape Jetty is the owner of the underlying the owner of
the property. Yes. And they've What's EU's relation to the property? They're I believe an affiliate of the the owner of the property. Okay. And they recently filed the application before the planning board as well. So they were also the planning board applicant. So EVU is the proposed developer. Yes.
Yeah. Okay. That's fine. We can note that for the record. Okay. So let's go through these as two separate applications. The first one is the demolition application. And it looks like Oh, I'm sorry. Kevin
Oland, Fenwick Architects. Looks like you're reaching for the seven criteria for demolition. Yes. And basically good start. 2019 this application received a demolition permit a demolition approval from the HPC and
so the criteria would be the same we believe. Okay. Do we need specific testimony? There's already two resolutions I think and we can incorporate them as part of the record unless any of the board members have any questions about it. Okay.
So, you're saying the the earlier resolution stands for now? There's findings of fact in both of those resolutions which I'm satisfied if the board unless the board has any questions entertain a motion to approve the demolition application. Second. I'll second it.
Motion to approve demolition application by Mr. Ste Stevenson. Seconded by Miss Wilson Straight. Mr. Carol, yes. Miss Pagno, yes. Miss Wilson Straight. Yes. Mr. Stevenson? Yes. Mr. Hammerin? Yes. Mr. Ta. Yes. Mr.
Becker. Yes. So, moving on to the second application, which would be for the proposed three-story new hotel. Take it away, Kevin. Okay. Um so um this also received uh approval in 2019 and it's essentially the same
hotel. Um it's a four-story luxury hotel with 53 units. There's parking at the ground level. Um the uh main lobby and the dining area at the first floor. Uh the the only difference is there's been some changes on the location of the
second avenue entrance since 2019. Uh it was located at the north corner uh closer to the residences. Now it's been relocated to the center of the facade. It uh we think there's a number of enhancements that um it makes it uh symmetrical.
It also brings the entrance away from the residences and it also works better in interior. Uh so essentially the massing of the building, the scale of the building, the details of the building, the materials are all the same except the only thing changed was the
location of the second avenue entrance. Okay. So we go around the room. We'll start the other way. Mr. Hammer, would you like to begin? Could could just we have a a clarification here. Um, in my again, I see two X's in my my boxes here.
Conceptual and final. Both have been checked. Well, I can I can address that. We we've formally withdrawn our application for final approval. We're here simply seeking conceptual. This is a conceptual application. Okay, great. Just so everybody knows, this was brought before uh the planning board on
June the 10th and it was denied by planning. So we can't offer final approval. Okay. So you're amending this to be a conceptual submission, right? Yes. Okay. So a couple of things then from my standpoint. There are I think I counted
79 parking spaces. Uh yes. And that includes stacked. There's actually I believe 57 um single spaces with the potential to have whatever that difference is in math as stacked parking spaces. I believe it's 229
only allowed one car. Is that the way that works? Well, the the way it was proposed before the planning board and as the chairman mentioned, it was denied on June 10th. We do anticipate filing an appeal of that. Um it's essentially going to be valet excl what we proposed was exclusively valet parking. So, uh
and in an all-inclusive style uh type business model. So patrons of the hotel would pull in, have their cars parked for valet, and the idea would be they would stay there uh until until they leave because you know, thankfully Kate May is a largely walking city. Um so
that was what we were proposing. And what's the peak staffing complement? The peak staffing was 19 spaces uh 19 uh employees and peak staffing. Is there a restaurant proposed for the site? There is, but it would be one of the proposals that we had in connection with our application before the planning
board was that because the um the business model was to be all-incclusive, all of the amenities, including the restaurant on site, would be limited to hotel guests only. So essentially, if you're staying there, you can use the amenities. If you're not and you're simply a member of the public looking to
walk in, that's simply not permitted. And you would not then permit um I'll call it big venues like weddings or something like that. No either. Okay. So, the staff complement is inclusive of the restaurants and everything else, right? Yes. Okay. Um, the ground coverage on this is
pretty significant. So, there's is there a drainage plan that's been associated with this? No. So, I mean, what happened was right now the the the impervious coverage on the property as it exists today, I believe, is 78 something% which
is actually 3% over the 75% maximum. our proposal lowered that to be uh a little over 74%. So, we actually brought it from not being compliant to compliance. Um because of that, it actually does not qualify. And this is part of and I'm I'm
getting a little bit into um Mr. Hurles's actual review letter in connection with the planning board application, but because we're actually decreasing the impervious coverage on site, uh this did not qualify as a major uh development uh necessitating a separate storm water management plan.
However, what we did propose in connection with the storm water runoff was acceptable to the planning board engineer. Uh that was actually one of the only things that wasn't a question uh in the two hearings that we attended before the planning board. Okay. Are there any rooftop activities on this
building? Yes, the pool I believe is going to be located on the roof. On the roof, but it's it's next to the fourth floor units. So, it's really this area. Okay. And very quickly, um, Kevin, just for the sake of the record, that's a
third third floor and the rooftop would be the fourth floor, not the rooftop. It's really the roof of the second floor. So, it's really third floor pool. Okay. And Kevin, just for the sake of the record, what which document in the plans were you pointing at when you made
that reference on HPC6? Okay. Rendering. Is this HPC6 here that you pointed to, right? Yes. Okay. Thank you. That's okay. I don't have any other questions at the
moment. Okay. Okay. I unfortunately I did watch that epic planning board meeting, so I'm going to limit my questions to Streetscape. Thankfully, I can't lose any more hair. Yeah. Um but I mean I can see what you're planning to do that you're trying to emulate the the
grand hotels of Cape Maze Pass and I think you've done a pretty good job. Um, one problem that that came up in a lot of big cities when they build a tall office building, um, along the ground level of the of the office building, there's no place for real pedestrian
interaction. It's just a slab of concrete and it's really not conducive to a good pedestrian experience. Um, looking at the ground floor, you know, it is kind of a big block of stone and uh, the lattice. I'm just
wondering if you could put something in there that would add a little more something a little more oomph or experience for the people walking by as opposed to just a big wall. Again, we see we we have other communities nearby where there's garage
doors down entire blocks. I can use that as another example. And I mean I don't know whether it could be a landscaping feature. Um and my second comment would be that um there tends to been a lot of projects coming in front of us where they're using board and batten as an
accent and um it just reeks of modernness when you see that. And all the examples of turrets or towers that I've looked in from the period of significance have all been clad in cedar shake or shake siding. And again, uh
just something that that I think would make it could sort of blend into that the grand hotels of the past. But other than that, I think it's a nice job. speaking street statewise.
I agree with Jake. Uh I just wonder I heard have heard so many things I did not get an opportunity to watch the planning board. Could you just explain the restaurant situation uh to us one more time? I was told this is probably
incorrect that you only expect people from the hotel to eat at the restaurant. Yes. So I I'll give a little bit of a background as to the property. Um, and it might give the board a little bit more color as to why we were proposing to limit the amenity space. So, in about
2021, the applicant, uh, excuse me, not AU LLC, the actual property owner, Cape Jetty LLC, filed an application, and what was proposed at that time was to have a restaurant in the hotel that was open to the public. Um, the push back on that was substantial given that there
are known traffic conditions. And I I'm I'm not too familiar with Kate May. I live up in Mammoth County and I I don't come down here that often. So, I wasn't familiar with this myself, but it was very clear to the board, to the applicant, and based on the members of the public's comments that traffic is an issue in that area of Beach and Second
Avenue. So, the public interaction, and this, I think, also goes to your comment, uh, Mr. Stevenson, with respect to why it seems like there's little less opportunity for public interaction. Um that was uh I I'll say discouraged was
because they said listen if this is open to the public in addition to the members of the hotel it's simply going to be way too crowded especially from a public parking traffic standpoint. So when we came back for this most recent application uh with the new applicant AU LLC
taking that into account um we proposed to limit the amenity space strictly to hotel guests only including the restaurant and that's everything whether the bar the restaurant any hotel amenity would not be open to members of the public and then the question became how
are we going to enforce that how are you really going to limit it to members of the public and that's when the all-inclusive business model came into play where and I'm Sure, many of us have been to all-inclusive resorts that where typically you need some sort of key fob or wristband or something along that line to kind of indicate that you are a
guest at the hotel and therefore can make use of the amenity spaces. Again, that application was unsuccessful, but that's what we proposed and again, we're hoping to be uh successful on appeal or perhaps a resolution can be reached uh prior to or during litigation. Uh the
reason we're here tonight is to hopefully get our HPC conceptual approval so that regardless of what happens when we come back before this this commission uh we're seeking final approval. Thank you for the explanation. Thank you J.
Um for me the conceptual issue is the scale and the dominance of the proposed development. Um while it is an attractive building and
the reference to the grand hotels may be considered a justification. The grand hotels of Kate May were surrounded by green space and they had views of the water.
This is a huge hotel in an area that has a very residential character. that is historic. Our mission and our charge is to protect the
historic fabric of the town. And when large even permitted buildings overshadow the existing historic fabric
then we have given in once again to um the denigration of of our historic districts. So I find the scale and the imposition on the streetscape difficult
to imagine being compatible. And I also think that the introduction of an all-inclusive in Kate May is a new concept that I personally and anyone who's visited uh the resorts in Mexico etc that have all-inclusives. It's a
completely different way of doing business. We're a town where people have trouble parking. Everyone who lives here, everyone who visits has trouble finding a parking spot. We treasure the fact that it's
walkable and friendly, that we can that we have access visually to porches and living areas and patios and dining areas. The idea of an enormous all-incclusive that is not open to the public except
the people with the wristbands or whatever, it just to me is like not Kate May, not respectful of the historic fabric and I can't even imagine how that
concept would make sense. Um, so that's my opinion based on what I understand from a long time of treasuring being part of this community and
30 years of defending historic preservation throughout the state of New Jersey, not just here. So I think it's really uh conceptually a problem. Mr. Chairman, um I I would like to agree with Mr. Tritic as far as it is and I
know our uh premise here is supposed to be streetscape, but I don't know if you want to hear a word like heartscape or anything like that. It is not Cape May. I know it just does not exist. Everybody is welcome everywhere and that's the way
we've been. Yeah. I'm I'm not going to comment on the business practices. of what of what's exclusive and what's not. I um that's not I don't think it's my my business to be social about it, but I am going to agree um with Janice that I find that
this is a massive monolith. The the design of it as a design in terms of emulating the ground hotels is I think consistent with with some of those points, but it's it's one story too tall because of the parking underneath.
You've had to elevate it to to get the rooms you need on top. So, it's one story too tall and it is just too large for the space. Uh, again, of no objection to the to the design in terms of the way it looks, but it seems to me
that it is far out of proportion um to the to the existing streetscape and to the residential neighborhood, to the side of it. And I and I really don't I I wouldn't pick on particular design elements because I think they're good. Uh it's it's it's not the it's not the
look, it's the size, it's the massivity. And and I think Jake pointed out um pretty clearly that one of the things that is very impersonal about this is that you walk by a facade of stone and lattice and it's as if you're
I I can remember walking by the Federal Reserve building in lower Manhattan that this reminds me of. It's just it's just so unfriendly from the street that that something would have to be done realizing that you got to put parking somewhere and you're going to have to put cars underneath it. You have to do
something to soften that facade which is very unfriendly to people who are going across the way going to the beach. Um and unfortunately it sounds like not going to your dining room either. But uh anyway, those are my comments. Thank
you, Mr. Carol. I'm agreeing with most of my uh other members here. You when you came in, you described this as a three-story building. This is most definitely a fourstory building. Uh three stories of units above it and a whole garage area. You've also mentioned
that people uh once they get parked that's uh you know, the cars aren't going to be going in and out because it's a walking town. Uh, I've been in business down here for many years and one of my properties did have uh stacked
parking and I tried to just say once your car is in there, it's got to stay there till you're ready to leave because I can't be shoveling things around. That absolutely didn't work and it was a battleground. People want they they use their cars, you know, they go down to
get on the whailing watch boats out to the lighthouse, bird watching, cold spring village. Uh, you know, there's a lot to do out here that that call for the car. So, I think the traffic in and out of that is going to be much worse.
And particularly when uh I'm not going to comment too much about your stack parking inside, but I can see where several cars have to be moved just to get one car out. Uh you're going to need a lot of valets with that. But um I
think it looks like a big dark element. Everything in it is dark compared to kind of a bright colorful seashore unit that we are. And it's to me it looks so pedestrian, unfriendly. It's against all the things we've been looked for. I
mean, look at buildings like Congress Hall, the Shelfon Hotel, the Carolville, some of our historic hotels. You know, they welcome you on the ground level. People want to walk through this town, bike through this town. And to me, like Jib said, it's it's it's just a wall.
Uh, you know, I you you're I think you're just trying to get too many rooms in here and it's going to be a very unwelcome building in your neighborhood and by all of us that
really treasure Kate May for what it is. I would have a very hard time approving it. Sorry for interrupting, but you can't even set it back. I mean, that that would help the the facade, but the way this is is it's right out to the to the max. Yes. Well, I mean it is a 20 foot setback. That's for building for
building four stories tall. Just for this is unanimously approved in 2019, I'm pretty sure. Well, one of one of the things we should point out for the record is that the standards were updated in 2023. So, we we have new standards just because some design was
approved then we have new standards. This is those are the standards that this board is reviewing them on. So, I understand. Um to speak to the scale just a little bit. um and resident to the residential neighborhood. I mean, if you look along Beach Drive, um look at
the other motel, hotels there. Um there are a number that are three or four stories and they're right next to the pro the the residential properties behind them which are mostly two and three stories. So, it's it's it's inscale with hotels in Cape May. I think
that it's not out of scale in that way. Um, and there's some maybe we can do do some things to make the pedestrian access, you know, a little better. But I think moving the entrance certainly helped because now you have a nice element in the middle of the building which which draws people in. Um the um I
don't think really the exclusive uh resort really is really the HBC's concern. That's a planning board concern I think. Mhm. Um, so I don't think this I think in terms of, you know, the hotels, it's it's not inappropriate
scale-wise. Um, there's plenty of threetory buildings and four-story building. Suppose suppose you moved it back to 40 ft and gave it a front lawn. Well, if if I may, very briefly, um, and I'm not trying to to to make this any kind
of contentious thing. I just want to make sure the record is clear. Um, this is located in the C3 Hotel Motel District. The building is 100% compliant with the setback and height requirements as found in the district. Again, I'm not trying to make this contentious or challenge anybody. I just want to make
sure the record is clear because one of the interesting things about prior applications and then the most recent one was and I'm not saying that this is necessarily this commission. It's just in dealing with Kate May, you need a lot of people to get to throw their hat in the ring in terms of their opinion
whether it's the facade or the planning board in terms of the the the actual how the site is going to work and how traffic circulation is always a big item in Kate May. the applicant is getting a little bit of of two separate opinions and in in trying to solve one it tends
to bring up another and then vice versa. Um, in this particular case now, I think what we're hearing from from the commission and um, and we certainly understand it, but it's just what we're hearing is there's not much room for public interaction. And in 2021, when
public interaction was proposed, that ended up being the downfall of the application that Cape Jetty itself filed back in 2021. So when we took the comments of both the planning board at that time and the members of the public at that time it was listen this cannot be open to the public uh and again that
was the public's opinion because it just invited way too much traffic on that on that that part of town which apparently is already experiencing issues there. Now the client has tried to address that and with a building that is again almost 100% compliant is actually is 100%
compliant with again setbacks height and everything of that nature with the site which to the applicant indicates that it's not too massive in terms of scale in relation to the streetcape especially since that's what it's specifically zoned for. Now of course the commission is entitled to its opinion. I'm
certainly not trying to to tell anybody that they're wrong here. I think there's just a a considerable disconnect between what I'll I'll say the planning board given that we were just there last week and and even now it seems like with the commission a little bit and what the
ordinance actually requires. Now, as it relates to the guidelines, I'll leave that to Mr. Oland, our architect here, but I just wanted to to make that clear, but I appreciate the board's comments. I just want to be clear though, I don't I don't the comments that I'm hearing are not necessarily the HPC wanting to throw
a restaurant in here or something like that. It's more about how does this thing look from the pedestrian streetscape. So even when if there's not a public restaurant in there, I think Mr. Carol's comment is more if someone's walking by this, are they seeing brick
and lattice or are they going to see like an inviting building even if they are not allowed in? because there's a lot of houses that people like looking at that they're not allowed to go in because it's not their house. But I think that's kind of the comments that the board members are making. There's there's creative ways to to incorporate
that in the design. I just want to be clear that we're not I'm not encouraging and I don't hear it from the board not getting into kind of stuff outside of our purview. We're talking about streetscape. So there's there's probably some ways that the applicant can address those. Well, that's that would I think be my question to the board because we
the one comment that we we heard that I think Mr. Oent mentioned and I'll piggyback off of that in terms of making it more inviting as opposed to looking at essentially a wall. Um that is something that the applicant is certainly willing to consider in terms of making it a little bit more open and
inviting uh to pedestrians even if they're not allowed to walk on site and we would be more than happy to receive the commission's comments. I have several thoughts on that but I wanted to wait until the rest of my Well, again, we're we're open to suggestions or comments from the commission in terms of how you would like us to do that.
Absolutely. We'll have a conversation. Sounds good. Yeah. Um, you are work walking a tight rope here. I I understand your dilemma. Um, but again, uh, like our solicitor said, we
are looking at streetscape. We look at the residential area that that you're in. Um, but for the most part, I'm going to hold off on my comments. Okay. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Curts. Boy, I agree with all my colleagues. It's it's just not Kate May.
I mean, when you're on the sidewalk there, uh it can be any place in the country except Kate May. Uh there's no warmth. There's no green. U architecturally the building's I like the building. Yeah. Is it big? Sure.
Well, but that's Hotels are big. But from if you're on our prominade looking at it, there's nothing that would attract me to go to that building at all, whether it be the restaurant open to the public or not. So, I'll just reserve my comments until everything's
approved and then we really start to get to the nuts and bolts of the outside, whether it's going to appear to to our tourists and and local people that live here. Uh, it's just it's very cold.
Thank you. Thank you. Okay. So, I have some thoughts about how maybe this could be reconciled that I'd like to offer. Um, there are
five issues that I see worth conversing about. One has been identified by virtually everybody up here and that's the pedestrian friendliness or the need for more pedestrian friendliness at that ground level because right now it is lattis and
there's two nice doors but these are very very long facades. maybe incorporating some sort of firstf floor occupiable space where there's actually people so that it doesn't feel like it's just a barrier even though
it's 20 ft back. It's a common error in in lots of um I'd say other beachfront areas in in New Jersey as well as in urban areas where the streetscape is just unfriendly. I
think that's a pretty easy thing that could be fixed. Of course, the dilemma you have is of course to do that you lose some parking spaces, right? So that's the dilemma. Second, I think there's a pretty easy
way to to work on the scale and the mass of this because there's parts of this that are really quite magnificent in terms of how you've reduced the scale, particularly the west end of the south facade with the way the so if you take a
look at the those classic old hotels like the Chowont like the uh in at Kate May the reason why they can be four stories or three stories and be massive is because there are layers of space. It's not a solid wall or even a solid
wall that is articulated which you have attempted to do. Particularly the space at the pool I find really lovely because what it's done is it's allowed for that to be an incredibly wonderful space to be but
also it's significantly reducing the scale because it's more space than it is solid. So if we took that as a premise, as a concept, and started to play with where else we might want to do that, I see two other places where that could really work. And both of them would
start to, I think, not only reduce the scale, but also help it feel more like one of those grand hotels that belongs here. And that would be at both corners on on Second Avenue. So at the North Corner on Second Avenue, of
course, we have two big problems there. one is the scale of it. Four stories next to the three-story house that's right next door, but actually the loading dock right there is is is a is is a pretty significant issue. Now, we've worked with a couple of other hotels in town. Um, most notably La Mer
over the last year or so, really helping in a collaborative way. At our Tuesday morning sessions, we were able to resolve that loading issue that was actually a fairly sizable issue. I think we could probably resolve that. So, if you were to imagine for a second and and
just playing architect here, if you took a look at the third floor plan and eliminated five rooms, I think you could probably get this to some sort of scale that was uh more acceptable. And those rooms would be
307, 8 and 9, 1, two, and one and two. So for example, if you take a look at those elevations, the turret that is all the way at the west end of the south facade, which is basically not a solid object, it's a
place you can be in outside. If for example that whole pool ver extended across on the third floor all the way to the corner and around that corner to the other main mass in the center. So you'd have a mass in the center at the south and a mass in the center to the west or
the east rather. And then the scale breaks down when you get towards the corners. When I say it breaks down, it opens up because you've got more space to those verandas up on the third floor and the open turrets on the corners. Lastly, big huge move would be to take the
enclosed porches on Beach Avenue, the big ones flanking the main stair and make them open porches so that they're alive and that and that there's there's actual a layer of space between the street and the occupiable space inside. if you started to do that
because I think you've taken or you've in you've included I think some great skill in your design of this in terms of its articulation. It's just the layering of the mass is what likely could make this
I think acceptable. So those are two of the five issues. Um ah three one of the other things that's not helping you I think and that's why I wanted to really look
closely at these drawings if it were all one color instead of two or three colors that would start to really accentuate the scale of this and the and the layering of the space and
feel far less like a bunch of different pieces that got put together in a modern Okay. Because again, if you look at those old hotels, they were very moninocular or not moninocular. Monochrome. Monochrome. Thank you. One big guy, right? Yeah. Thanks, Kevin.
I appreciate that. Yeah, monochrome. Um, and I already talked about the loading space. So, that was item number four. And item number five, those very modern metal railings on the one, two, three, four, five, like a dozen of the balconies. Um, simply
that's another thing that I don't think is being in service of helping you have this structure feel like it was an an old dumb old madam kind of um monochrome.
Monochrome uh Grand Hotel on Beach Avenue. Madam Yes. Say again. Monochromatic. She wants you to use the adjective. See, she's really good. Say that five times fast. Yeah. It's like it's kind of a weird kind of alliteration there.
Anyway, um I actually believe that with those addressing those five things, we could probably get this to a place of reconciliation. Um it it's going to mean a couple things that that are going to be challenging.
One is a reduction in the number of rooms. I'm saying fiveish on that third floor just to open up that those spaces. And second would be the parking to somehow
bring life to that first floor. And I think you're telling things in the stone in we could do brick too. We haven't, you know. Yeah. But we could put windows in there to help in the corner elements make it a little more feel like there's something happening inside. You could if in fact it was it
was um it didn't feel like it was just one solid 10 foot. Basically, it's a 9 or 10 foot wall. Yeah. Again, street friendliness. You Kevin, you know what all that's about. Yeah. And we were looking at burming the ground up a little too, the landscaping. So, it's
not quite as much mason. So, that starts to be interesting. Some sort of a terracing thing. Also, it doesn't feel like a full story. Well, that that would eliminate some of the hype. Yeah. In any case, um, so all so
you you've even drawn in those spaces in your drawings um, people uh, in those open verandas. Yeah. So that's that's where the life comes so that it feels like it's in interactive spatially and belongs here as opposed to stay away.
Right. So those are my comments. I I don't think that we're in a stage that we could give this conceptual approval for the detail of that that needs to be worked on. And I'm going to suggest that it might be appropriate to table this
application at this point to to allow further consideration and possibly um a meeting with the review committee to discuss the ideas in more detail because I don't think we're going to be designing things by committee tonight. No, we're not. But before we before we
make that move, I would like to ask you two gentlemen um to respond to what you're hearing and whether or not you would be willing to come and meet with us on Tuesday morning and to uh do a little bit of collaborative discovery
together of ways that we might be able to reconcile this. Also bearing in mind that these are not the principles of the organization. I'd rather agree. I I don't think reducing the unit count is going to be something the owner is interested in. certainly, you know, other things they would be interested in. I I think Mr.
Ta's um comment was I would agree with it wholeheartedly. Um, of course, the the applicant their representatives would have to be have to weigh in on a couple of the suggestions, decreasing the number of rooms obviously being the biggest one, but I would agree. I think uh tableabling at this time is probably
the most appropriate thing because at least I can have a conversation with with the applicant, see if these are any these are ideas that they're willing. Well, we know we know you're going other places and doing other things um with respect to your other approvals. So, so there's time there is absolutely here to
to work on it and rather than us spend any more time in a roundrobin discussion, it would be better for you to reflect on what's been suggested and perhaps schedule a meeting with the review committee to discuss it further. A and and by the way, um even though
ostensibly it's eliminating five rooms, it could be just a matter of reconfiguration and resizing so you could retain your room count. It's just a redistribution of the area within the rooms and their locations. What we're trying to do is reduce the scale and the
massiveness of this. Um, which I think we can do. So, would you folks be willing to come and and meet with us on Tuesday morning and have these discussions? I I'd have to check with the applicant first, but I think it's a good suggestion for sure. Generally, it doesn't hurt. I I always think the doors
of conversation should be open. So, I I will make a motion to table. May I may ask one question before we make any motions. Just a quick question. Is is the all-incclusive is that a bargaining chip or Well, I mean there's no I mean no it's it's a fair question. The concept of it
kid what I'm asking can the restaurant and the bar area be eliminated and make it a hotel? That that is I mean there's a lot of space there for the restaurant. It I I'll put it this way. One of the at one point during the the planning board
hearing, that first hearing, we heard some of the comments that echoed some of what the commission is saying here tonight in terms of this seems a little big, including some of the interior amenities. Um, we then asked for the opportunity to pretend to go back a little bit to the drawing board, scale
it down a little bit. That was um the request to do so was denied. Um, so that made we were kind of stuck with the plan that we had presented uh at that point. Um, so I can't that I can't say unfortunately. I just instead of giving up some rooms, maybe up that space and
make some more open space there. So when that would essentially necessitate a new planning board application in addition to essentially a new conceptual approval application with with the commission. Um, that's not something that's been discussed with the applicant at any point uh since that hearing. It's only
been a week, so who knows? And Mr. Demutus is in in Greece enjoying that weather and that sun. So, we haven't talked about it since then. Um, so I I can't I can't say right now, unfortunately. Just ask. So, before we pass on a motion to table, I just
there's a lot of moving parts with this one. Um, there's a lot of comments that were given by the board tonight. And at the risk of speaking for the board, I don't think this one's ready for prime time. So, if the applicant wanted to proceed and say, "Hey, why don't you just vote on this?" I don't know that they'd like the result of that. Right.
So with and then anybody with a pulse can probably get that sense. So but what I want to just clear up for the record is if we're going to table this and keep it in quue and what that would allow the the applicant to do is take some of these comments back to their client when
he gets back from Greece and you know go over this stuff and see if it's something that you want to kind of retool and meet with these folks on a Tuesday morning. Um, I don't I don't think it makes sense to put everybody on some fire drill time clock to do that.
And it doesn't sound like you guys are very close to a construction permit at this point. You may be doing an appeal or whatever it is. So, if we just t if the applicant would uh agree to table it indefinitely to pursue that process and
if you decide, hey, we're not going to eliminate rooms and we want to roll with what we submitted tonight, you just let us know and we'll vote on that. But I I don't want to I don't want to put the board on some shot clock. So, that's what I'm trying to avoid. Yeah. Any time limitations, the applicant would wave. Okay. And that's that's fine for Having
just heard that he'll wave the time limitations, I'll make the motion to table. Well, before we do that, oh, Joe, they are you guys accepting the uh suspension of the 45day limitations? He's waving. Yeah, I wave the the time limitations. We're not we're not on We table it.
We're not on a shot clock. The applicant will let us know when they're ready that, you know, and that's Yeah. Okay. So, we have a motion on the table. Do I hear a second? Uh are we going to administer the public? Well, it's a motion to I I assume from
the faces in the audience that some of them would like to comment on it, too. So, we will open this to the public, but after we get through all of the projects. Okay. Okay. Okay. Okay. So, do we have a second for this motion? Anyone? I'll second. Motion to table.
Okay. So, we have a motion to table this by Mr. Tesla, seconded by Mr. Carol. Mr. Carol. Yes. Miss Pagno. Yes, Miss Wilson Strick. Yes, Mr. Stevenson. Yes, Mr. Hammerin. Yes, Mr. Ta. Yes, Mr.
Becker. Yes. Thank you. Thank you very much. You're welcome. So, next on our agenda is Uber at 162nd Avenue. Good evening, folks. Just make sure your microphones are all green. And if you
could please just state your name and your role in the project, please. Richard Umbrech, homeowner. Annre, homeowner. Welcome. Doug Gooseman the Highland Group. The floor is yours. All right. I would
first like to say um thank you very much. We actually live around the corner from the jetty and we appreciate the comments that were made with respect to the prior applicant. Yes. You're two doors away as I Yes. I we were sitting there and I'm
like, did you see who's coming up? So that that was a little uh surprising. You're sitting here now as applicants, but you are the neighborhood. You're in the neighborhood. We are the neighborhood and we're trying to make it look more beautiful. Yes. We're sorry you're not in Greece on the beach,
though. So are we. Before you start, I just have to tell you this was a magnificent document. Yeah. This was provided by the owners to me and And uh yeah, please proceed. Well, that's actually one one of the
premises of why we're here. Uh there's actually this project is actually I'm going to say three-fold. There's three three elements to it. Uh one is uh the existing uh front porch is in disrepair
uh and is has rot and is uh needs to be replaced. And so uh that is one portion of this project is to uh do any kind of structural remediation that's needed to the framing of the deck and essentially
uh replace the railings and the um columns and and the deck boards uh all with uh what's in specified here which is a uh deck boards uh and we have composite railings and um and columns.
I'm going to preface that we are a non-contributing building. Yeah. And that what we're doing is we are uh matching the uh the treatments of the railings and the columns uh on elsewhere on the rear of the house and and pulling
it forward into the front of the house so it is consistent throughout the entire uh facades. Um yeah. Um second part of uh item of this is that we are uh going to repaint the house.
And so uh by repainting the house there will be uh some remediation to rotted wood. So that would be either in trims or or actual clapboard. Uh and it's going to be replaced. Uh as part of that, we're going to remove the vinyl
shutters that are on the uh house. And we had a uh a a pre-me meeting to review this project. Uh and one of the suggestions was to go with operable windows. Uh operable operable shutters.
Shutters. I said operable shutters too. Yes. Uh and so uh the client is absolutely on board with that. And so uh we have since when we had our workshop meeting uh upgraded the
shutters uh to operable shutters. And then uh the third element of this uh project is a new turret. And the new turret is uh brought or is replicating what was in
this historic photograph that you uh see uh or that was provided to you. Uh and unfortunately this turret is one reason we're here for uh uh concept is 10 in the front wall of the house is 10 inches
into the front yard setback. And so because of that we have to go get variance. Yep. So that's why we're here for concept with you all. Yep. Uh and then uh with your uh blessing then we'll
go uh pursue the variance uh for 10 in for the encroachments. We discussed and we felt it was not the correct approach which was to build the turret 10 in back and come up with some some way of making it look uh like it was intended. And
we're like that's not the proper thing to do. And so we decided to uh reject that. Uh I mean it was an option and it was an option that we didn't feel that was warranted to follow. Um
the list of materials are are in here which is uh essentially uh all wood materials for the uh for the re restoration of the uh existing materials of the house. Uh, conversely, the
composite materials are reflected in the railing system and in the uh columns. We want to be upfront with that. And again, that is to replicate what is already uh installed on the rear of the house.
Okay, questions. So this as you know this was um one of a collection of the houses designed by um Steven Decar Button and there are two of them extent over a block from you that were mirror reflecting of each other and
one of them just recently redid the opened up the turret that inspired us. Yes. Ah I was wondering we were jealous. We had tret jealousy. There it is. Yep. I want one. Okay. Thank you. So, um, I'm just going to hand it off to my fellow commissioners. Yogi, do you have any comments? Let's
start over here. Not at this time. Not at this time. Okay. The the only comment I have is the front door. And looking at this picture and then just wondering why you chose to put the door on with the half the half
lights or are you replacing the door? That's the existing door. That's the existing door. Yeah, that is correct. That's relatively new. Okay. Uhhuh. Okay. So then this the front door is going to remain. That's correct. The only new door is up in the uh turret in
the turret area providing access from the third floor. This is um this design is particularly uh wonderful for the seashore uh and resort living too. are um in my travels at other seashore things, Ocean Grove,
places like that, you know, the the open spaces, the porches and the towers were uh just a little bit more of a show of wealth than glamouring uh the front of the house and uh I I think it's really excellent what you're planning on doing.
Thank you. Mr. Um it's it's always it's always um sad to read a report that says that the property is a non-contributing property in the historic district by virtue of extensive alterations to the building
and and while we may not be able to get back to those things that are criticized here um your plans are a step in the right direction. Um there is nothing more beautiful than the restoration of that turret um and with its openness um
for this part of um our area. It's it's it's absolutely fantastic to add that to it. I think your your movement to use working shutters takes another step back in the right direction. I wished you weren't using the intex um uh in terms
of uh your railings, but but this is a non-contributing building. it's not going to change. And we have approved the use of those kinds of materials for that kind of of building. And so I would say um this is
this is something that I could approve uh albeit from conceptual and I guess it depends on what other comments are made but I would wonder if we can move it beyond just plain conceptual with a condition later on. But let's let's go around. Thank you Janice.
Yeah, I think it's great that you're going to restore it in that way. Restore the turret or uh reconstruct it. And it does bring the building into the impression of being a contributing property. Um the technical designation
is something we don't really control. We talk about if change is reversible, you can go back to being contributing. And I don't know enough about your property to know if if there are reversible changes that could be
reversed, but putting a turret back is is is the next best thing. So, um I think it's wonderful and I appreciate that you're putting this into it, especially given the the proposal we just
around the corner. So, thank you for the sensitivity. Thanks, Janice Pete. No questions. I think it's it I just can't wait to see it when it's constructed. So, let's do Thank you, Jake. Okay. I would like to assume the role of Mr. Carol with his
permission. I'm looking at the railings on the proposed um Mr. Carol like shutters. Talking about like the new railing on the proposed um what how big are the ballusters?
How thick are they? If I'm not mistaken, they're two inches. Okay. And how about the top rail? It has some girth. I mean, the actual width of the the top. Yes. The height and the width of it.
I don't have those, you know, I can certainly provide them. Yeah. On on the elevations, it appears to be very thin. And I know whenever we are putting railings in historic district, we tend to like to have a heavy top rail as opposed to just a little thin top
rail. Tom, I know you specifically regarding a heavier top rail, right? We generally look for the the balance tray to be two inches thick. It says it's no more than three inches between them. Not right.
The the rule is 4 in is the maximum opening you can have. But if you have a railing that's like an inch and a half, four inches between it, it looks a little bit more like a plate pen than a a good sturdy porch uh house. You know
that that if you go if you go up in some of the areas up at the north end of town uh you see how massive a lot of these are that go with the weight and the look of the house. really all through the town. When you're looking at original rails, they they have they have more
meat to them that go along with the the whole design of the house. This says it has a three and a half inch cap. Okay. Then specifically, Tom, regarding the heft of the top rail, I know you've made suggestions in the past and this doesn't this looks very thin. The uh the top
rail uh really should be about 4 in. And that also gives you a chance to have a better guard rail up there. even get a little bit of a cap on it and you know water drain away and protect the what's underneath of it more proportionate too. Yeah, I think
you'll find lots of examples in our standards books too that would go along with that. I don't you in in the prefab things I'm not sure if they're going to come up with all the right materials for you. So you might want to consider some elements there for wood to get to to
really get them right. And there's some there's some really good woods that don't rot away. That's my only comment. Okay. So, my my uh comments would be very similar to gems. It's always it's always hurts to look at one of those property
reports and see, you know, why did this house lose its historic status? I mean it it looks like it size and scale of the additions things like that replacement of some of the historic elements in the front um with other materials. Yeah. I think I think as we
look at this um this is probably not a restoration. It's a reinterpretation project. You know, you're you're you're you're bringing yourself to look like the original house. Um but you're using non-historic materials for instance and other things and that's already in place
in the house. So, you know, I think at this point, um, you know, the comments about the railing apply, and since you're planning to do significant renovations to the porch, I think we're grateful that you're using operable shutters, that would be consistent historically. Um, the design of the
turret looks really appropriate. Um, and and I think, you know, is certainly going to contribute to the appearance of the house, trying to replicate the the historical period. Um, I I think this is a good project. Um, I would just pay attention to your material selections and try to use as many of those as
possible that would be scaled and sized and and materials would be appropriate for that period, that historical period or replaced with with similar and inind. Okay. But I think what the is the second floor
porch. It just makes it look I know it's not. It just makes this building. Oh, right. The second floor. I was gonna say that was yeah adding a second floor porch is not we were
looking at and we also couldn't open the front door if we did that given the way it's constructed yeah become too because I thought I thought the same thing but I realized I couldn't open the door should be a problem just like
yeah thank you so items to discuss um one's a new one and the other is uh going back and discussing these railings one more time. So the one question I have is you are proposing using um a synthetic slate
product which I think is wonderful um for a non-contributing house. The only question I have is that Eoslate makes four different slates and I can't tell which one you're proposing. We're proposing I'm sorry we're proposing one to match the existing
meaning the entire house has it on it already. Okay. And so we're just matching what is on the existing house on the turret. Got it. Okay. So I just when when you come back for final just if you can make that clear. Okay. Which one? Okay. So let's go back to these railings for a second. And not only the
railings but also the the columns on the porch because the existing elevations you show they're they're turned columns around and and there's spindle railings which of course um would not have been original. Those were added later. Um
it's very clear from the photographs that this would have been square posts with chamfered corners and you're you're proposing putting for those columns um a PVC post. So can you tell me a little bit more about what that PVC post looks like and why you're doing that as
opposed to putting the wood chamered corners back in? I'm trying to see if you can basically see the rear elevation. It's really small. There there's a on the photo exhibit
rear perspective. It's just that's what we're emulating. Uh which is the pre and what it is is we got these cut sheets from the contractor. You're doing the recess, right? You're doing the the recess panel, right? And and that was what was provided to us from the contractor who
did that porch. And so it's the same product that was done used previously. and that that project would have been approved by this commission in 2011. So of course this is not a contributing structure. So this is this is of course
something that is is not inappropriate. I will say that. Um I I was just wondering if there would be any consideration to going back to the wood posts with the chamered corners to replicate what would have been there originally.
That's a question. It's not a requirement. Maintenance is an issue. Maintenance is an issue. That's the issue. And the other, of course, is the Well, you know, I mean, properly sealed and and maintained and provided your end grains are sealed on the on on wood
post, it's it's really not a Well, I don't know. We've we've had we're expecting a very big bill for wood replacement on the rest of the house. So, uh it's it's been a problem in that site because we're just we're very exposed to it. Oh, I know what it means to be exposed. It's a nice problem to
have, but it's Yeah. So, water's hard on wood. Okay. And the other question would be if you had considered a different ballister because the the ballisters that would have been on this house were the cutout wood ballusters.
I mean, you can see it in the photograph. So I guess my question is would there be any consideration to since you're going to great lengths to try and reinterpret I can't say reconstruct that that's there's a technical definition
behind that what he's talking about is see how these have all the cutout profiles but that's going to have that would have to be wood it would sustain cutout ballusters So, I would just ask you to consider that because if you're really trying to
do what you're trying to do and be as as authentic as you can be, that porch to consider having the wood posts with the chamered corners and the saw cut ballasters I would find more appropriate. Again, it's not a requirement, so we can't hold you to that. It's just a recommendation. Okay.
We can take your recommendation. Thank you. Okay. So um with that all said I don't think we have any conditions. We have suggestions. We have suggestions but no conditions. Those are in the notes. When when we write when we write
conceptual approvals you you you do get an written evidence a letter of concept and and when we have conditions we put them in there. We also can make suggestions and put those into the conceptual approval as as a suggestion. So, I think the only suggestions that we
heard were um potential wood posts and railings on the first floor porch. Other than that, were there any or am I missing something? No. Thicker top rail that would that would go along along with the wood. Yes. Reconsider the the railing
configuration. And and when you do get to to look at the beefier railings, I think you're going to find that a lot of the standard manufacturers don't supply stuff that's that's all that big and beefy. You have to build it up actually. Yeah. So, do I h hear a motion for these
folks to approve conceptual review as presented? I I motion by Mr. Hammer. I'll second it. Seconded by Miss Wilson Stridic to approve. Okay. Uh before I call that,
could I get the name of Are you the architect? Are you Doug? Doug Guzman, you're with the Highland Group. That is correct. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Carol, yes. Miss Pagno, yes. Miss Wilson Straight. Yes. Mr. Stevenson?
Yes. Mr. Hamarind? Yes. Mr. Ta? Yes. Mr. Becker? Yes. Thank you. Thank you folks very much. Thank you so much. Next on our agenda is 1537 Yacht Avenue. Have the applicants here. We are just Oh, look.
Look, look who's look who's here again. And if you could please just tell us your name and your role in the project. Right. Alex Ladderman. Um, assisting project. Can you bring that mic closer, please? You have to make it green. I couldn't hear it. There you go. Keith
Lauderman, owner. Okay, Kevin. Up to me. Right. David Schultz. David. Goodness gracious. Thank you. Thank you again. Coming around. Um, so I'm Dave Schultz. I've been to this board before, so I don't
have to restate my credentials. Um, we're here for 1537 Yacht Avenue. Uh, the project is to lift or elevate the existing boat house uh to protect it from continuing flooding and eventual
rot. As you can see from the photos, um, this is a contributing structure. It's an original boat house. We did meet with the key committee on a preliminary basis a few months ago to talk about the project and I'm thinking we're pretty
much in sync with that discussion. U the owner um I'll introduce in a moment but the owner Keith Lamman received a FEMA grant um to lift the building to protect it from harm caused by flooding.
Um that photo is just one event that was several years ago, but it happens fairly often. Yeah. Avenue floods all the time. Um Keith can tell you more detail, but it's a couple of feet of water every high high tide just about and sometimes
much worse if there's a storm or noraster pushing through. Um, so Keith will explain um how we received the grant, but I just like to note um a couple things about Keith. We've worked with Keith for about a dozen years or so
at the Lobster House doing these renovations that nobody can see, right? You know, just making sure the building is safe and making sure it's structurally sound, but also, you know, cosmetic renovations. We But we've also
worked with Keith and his daughter on the mayor's tavern. I know that's not in Cape May, but in that area, Keith has been buying fisherman's cottages, and we've been converting them, working with Keith, we've been converting them into little rentals and
staffing. And he's doing that. And I really wanted to honor him in in a little bit because he's because if he doesn't do it, someone developer will buy tear them down and build a big duplex because it's lower township and you can do that. So Keith has been
trying to maintain the history of that whole area for many years ever since I've known Keith and it's really really a great thing he's doing. So with that intro, can you do you want to tell them a little bit about how you got this FEMA
grant? I got the uh FEMA grant because we got a letter that said they were giving money, you know, giving grants out to lift buildings that got flooded. and we uh sent away applied for it and it took
probably three years and they finally uh you know agreed to uh give us give us the grant. So something that we've been working on for for at least three years now.
So, the grant is contingent on approval by the historic commission and obviously other building approvals. Yes. I'm looking at the um the recommendation letter from um well to FEMA from the architects that took a
look at your property. Remember we looked at this on Tuesday, one of those Tuesday mornings when you were in? Yep. So, have they granted you the grant with the exception of our approval? That's all they're waiting for because remember they they made recommendations here in their
drawings that we said nah we don't want to do that right collectively you did we did because we can write a letter to them and state that what we've approved is different than what they were recommending I don't know we we've had conversations with a representative from
FEMA about you have he's okay that we don't take that verbatim okay we have a we think a better idea and if you approve it that's all he's looking for There's a letter from this commission. Okay. We didn't really like that one. It didn't No, I mean it did. There have been a number of them that they've made
that have not been all that great. There's a The problem with that one is it's not our property. Well, yeah. On the side where they got you. That's not even And this is not anything like what you wanted to do. No, nothing. Clearly nothing. Okay. But we have in the past written letters
directly to this Gabrielle Pearlman stating what our position is at HPC. So, if you'd like us to do that, we'd be happy to do that. That would be perfect. Okay, perfect. Um, yeah, it really floods a lot down there now, even on a a moon tide now. I mean,
with climate change, there's, you know, it's it's bad. One of the other aspects is, of course, Kate May is armored with a seaw wall. They get a new seaw wall and it's essentially defenseless in the back bays. Yeah. So, water comes in, water
piles up and and this is sort of what you get, but it's getting and it's getting worse. Yeah. So, we understand microphone, please. Thank you. Sorry. That street's very dear to my heart. I
mean, there's old boat houses and you and I talked about it before, I believe. Uh Keith's one of these guys. He's in love with the water there to save them is more important to him probably than, you know, selling them or making
money. Uh, this is a nice project. And I just love I love that street. And it gets it's so overlooked. I don't know how to put it correctly, but it's just one of those streets that when you're there, you just fall in love with it.
And I like this project. That's it's a nice project. Of course, we'd also like David to make his presentation. Yeah, I can. Yeah. Well, I can make it quickly. I had to get it out. You just some some things you feel. Yes, you can. Please. It's pretty straightforward. Yes. So, I'll try to just hit the high points. I
mean, if you follow me again, there's photos on the first page that are existing photos. Um, just one thing to note, the building sits on the bulkhead at the street level and the side. That's also the property line. So we we can't do anything beyond the building phase
but the intent is to raise the building uh O2 that's just context I don't think that's important to us. Next is a survey which is done very recently. You can see the footprint of the building very close
to the property line and and on two two sides it is the property line. the blue section, that's the that's the second floor of the top. There's it's really three bays as a boat house. So, we'll just walk you through just very quickly the
plan. So, the existing ground floor plan is shown on 2011A is workshops. It's all kind of oldworld boat stuff and tackle and boat storage. Boat storage. It's really wonderful. Um
that's on grade currently and but remember a grade at this level is like four feet and the streets at three and a half. So it's way below the flood level, the flood plane. Um so you can see there's some workshops and then at the very end there's water water below.
Those are the boat storage areas. So remember we're lifting the building up 8 feet so we can get head clearance to get in the building at this grade level. So, the new ground floor level is going to be a dock, an internal dock,
pretty much replicating what's there now with the boat storage at the very end. And we've added a sto a stair up at that upper right door to get inside and up. We couldn't do it on the exterior of the building because we don't own that property.
So, then the next page, proposed raised second floor. We're just taking the existing building and lifting it. So by and large that is the building that exists today with the exception that we've added the stair in the upper right corner
and uh because we have the opportunity we've created some these recessed porches at the second level on the water side which which we've set back so you don't see them and we and we've added a railing which you'll see in the elevations.
So the elevations which are next, these are the street side elevations. The top view is what exists. The bottom view is what we're proposing, you know, in in materials that are heavy wood, timber, pressuret treated like
we've done at the lobster house. So it looks like it's been there. It's it's boat like boatyard like material. It's not not shiny, not new. We'd let that age with the rest of the building so it's all age. We've got timber post.
We've got x-racing that are 3 by8, so it's heavy duty. Um the the fencing behind that is 2x8 timber with one inch air spaces so air can breathe. The remember the water's right there. We don't want people trying
to get in because it's be dangerous. We have a door at each end. Those are those are wood doors. And the doors on the second floor that exist would just be sealed shut. So we wouldn't be we wouldn't be changing anything from the second floor up. The next page is 601. So the upper
level the upper plan elevation is what exists and the bottom is what we you would see from that b the bulkhead extends to the left where you can see we have that fencing screening at the bottom and that is open
water from there on out. And we're just replicating the timber that's there that supports the boat house up above. Um the next page 602 upper view is the existing water view elevation. You can
see boats come in. Um there's a there's a a second level and then once the building's elevated, boats would come in at this lower level. If you remember, we talked about a dock inside that would have a rail. We're showing that in elevation. That's re that's recessed
back about 24 feet. And then on the the new second level, we've kept those cutouts that you see above, but we've set back an interior wall and put a rail in that place. And the we're proposing a cable rail because it's innocuous. It's
pretty fairly transparent. Um the upper rail would stay. We then lastly have a little detail sheet through the bottom of the building, the new fencing. Um, we've labeled the materials. I also have a cut sheet if
you're interested in that. Um, so you're looking beyond it up here. Um, you're looking at you're cutting through that a 3x8 timber brace and then the fencing behind that is 2 by8
heavy timber cut with the 1 inch airspace and then there's a beam that supports the building above. We're been working with Hawk and Suns as the contractor who you probably have seen around. He's done a lot of the house
lifting in town. Um, I have I don't know if this was in your package. I have cut sheets on the doors on the and on the timber materials and on the rail. I I honestly don't know if that was in your package. It was. No, it
was. Okay. Okay. Open for questions. Thank you. David Yogi, since you started, do you have any other comments over there? We'll go around the table. I apologize for jumping the gun. I was concerned about the raising of the building. My first
Lorraine I just going by here whether it's on a boat or a kayak. This is one of the typical boat house um on that area and so many of them have been you know redone overly done. Um, I think what you're proposing here is just
charming. And even the way you're raising it, um, bringing in those timbers and making it look like it's always been there, it just it just has a really good, um, appearance. Um, and
no, I I think it's a great project. I think it's a great project. I love it and I thank you for doing it. I can see three old crisscross speedboats. I hope one's mine. Yeah,
I'm done. I'm good. May there be as much mahogany in the boat as as this is a great way to make sure that this um humble boat house lasts for a long long time. Otherwise, it would be washed away and and and it would just it would turn
into mush or it' be swept away in in a flood because you have to go higher because they're not going to protect you anywhere else. So, that's it's a logical response. It's a beautifully done project. My only question is um the uh the railings. Uh did did you get those
from Lower Township? What? I'm sorry. The the cable railings. The cable rails. No, you don't like those? No, I don't. But but I can understand where you are and how they promote should be they'll be black. It'll be I don't think you'll see them and and but I only would just point out
that you've got typical traditional rail at the top, right? And then you have the cable rails down below. I mean, it's it's a little inongruous, but I understand it promotes the view and they're also hidden. Yeah. Back. We wanted to downplay those rails and that's where the boats would have gone in. Yeah. I mean, and if you had put
them in like I'm talking about, all white, they'd all be standing out as if it were another floor. No, it's a it's a great it's great design, and I wish you really luck with it, Dennis. Well, as unhappy as I was a few
minutes ago, I am the opposite with I drove around that neighborhood because, you know, it's not somewhere you walk all the time. So those of us who aren't voters, we don't see those
properties, but we do see the the large very fancy homes that have been built. And at our meeting on the 9th, there was a lot of push back about the HPC having
anything to say about that neighborhood. And it made me wonder, do we are we overstepping? do we need to weigh in on that neighborhood? And so when I came into town today, I drove through and I
saw mayors and I thanks for the context because I noticed all the buildings that still had their character and and that there is an investment from the community to save the historic
flagships of of the marina. And um this is wonderful. And my only concern when I saw the plan was it looks like a fragile building and we've seen too many projects where a contractor comes in, raises the building and then says, "Oh,
we couldn't save anything." And they rebuild it in place. But I already know you're not going to do that. We're not. No. So thank you. It's authentic to the street. when I was
a little girl, that's all that was there was buildings like that. And I know your dad would be happy and yes, he would. And uh I think it's wonderful and I am so glad you're going to such lengths to preserve it and keep it because that
street was once all like that. So it was I I'm sorry I have to jump in just just to comment on that. Um my uh wife's family had the property at the end of Texas Avenue and Yacht Avenue was a street that we always walked on for a
little relief and a and a return to what we thought looked more like a little piece of New England more than the than than Kate May. So So and we've seen it deteriorate from time to time with development that just is not consistent with it. Um,
fortunately it is in our jurisdiction and you have a project which promotes the continuation of the kind of things people walk on Yacht Avenue to see. And I'm sorry for jumping in on that B, but I I I walked on I used to walk on that street, too. Yeah, I loved it. I also
love the big S on your on her grandparents house. Yeah. Well, we had a view of of other things as well. I just wanted to thank you guys for saving the place. you know, it's really about the last one left. And I mean, we can't undo the past, but you know, that
could have been our boat house row. So, I mean, I really appreciate what you guys are doing here, saving that. Yeah, I agree. I think it's a uh gives a whole new meaning to preserving a contributing property. So, you know, I just think this is a great project, you know.
You're up. I want to just remember one old thing. Spatz McDuel and the captain and Yes. his workshop and he used to let uh people like us bring our projects in there and use some of his equipment and with good instruction and everything,
but uh spats was a character. I used to send our guests from our inn down. I said, "I don't know if you're going to buy anything, but you got to meet Spats, right?" He will. He's gone, I guess. Wow. Yeah. So, I have no further comments. Very
nicely done. Thanks for coming and speaking with us on Tuesday. And we'll get a letter out to to Gabriel. Shall we vote? Okay. We did it from another Yes. I'd like to move that we approve this project as presented.
Second. Second. Sorry. Okay. So, beauty before I This is a final approval. So, we have a motion on the table to for final approval of this project by Miss Wilson Strick, seconded by Mr. Stevenson. Mr. Carol. Yes. Miss Pagno. Yes. Miss
Wilson Straight. Yes. Mr. Stevenson. Yes. Mr. Hammer. Yes. Mr. Tessa. Yes. Mr. Becker. Yes. Thank you. My wife and I try to get the mayors at 10 to 4. Oh. Because we have we have our favorite seats at the bar.
Yeah. Yeah. Exactly. He he thinks it's all his. Thank you very much. Thank you everybody. Good night. Thanks for coming. Okay, last on our agenda this evening is Matelli at 307 Congress Street.
Hello. Hello. Can I start since Good evening. Green. If you could just tell us your name and your role in the project, please. Matthew Mazatelli, homeowner. Susan Mazatelli, homeowner. Uh Paul Farnon, architect. Okay. Hopefully, we saved the best for
last. Of course we did. Well, uh, I'll kick us off. Uh, thanks everyone for your time here tonight. Appreciate it. Um, we're here to talk about, um, alterations to, uh, 307, Congress. It's
block 1031, lot 55 and 56. Um, we're here for conceptual approval. because of the existing conditions of the site and the property, the structure uh will require zoning board relief. So
again, we're here simply for conceptual approval. Uh we did have a lot of um interaction. My partner Cassandra, who cannot be here tonight, did meet with the uh review committee uh at least a couple of times to discuss this project.
So what we're discussing is uh are things that have already I think been um seen by at least a few members of the commission. So the idea is um to add a second floor I'm sorry what will be a third floor to
this structure after lifting the property. Um so again as we look at the zoning board approval that is required and another approval that is required or um I guess work that is is required due to the
substantial improvement of the proposed work would be lifting the property outside of the flood plane. Uh because of that and because of its proximity to the street um we had to re-evaluate
access. um specifically eliminating access from the front and really focusing access to the side of the structure. It is a non-contributing structure. It's single family. Um historically the earlier reference the earliest
reference to it was the 1932 Sanborn map. 1909 corrected to 1932 Sanborn map. Um it is shown as an accessory structure to I believe 203 North Avenue. So the
adjacent property that's fronting North Avenue. Um or North Street rather. It's a two as it exists now. It's a twostory front gable roof. Um it's three bays wide, three bays deep. It's a rectangular plan
and there's a twostory deck on the northwest side of the structure. If you look at pages 12 and 13, you'll see some of the uh some photos of the existing structure. It also
resides on kind of the opposite of a flag lot because of the way it was subdivided over time historically. Um the wider part is where is closer to the street and that's where the building is is cited.
You can move through 14 and 15 of uh the booklet. You can see uh neighboring f neighborhood photos including the adjacent structure which was recently uh reconstructed um and some across across the street as well.
Page 16, some more neighborhood photos and page 17 are some perspective renderings that we developed. Again, this is a conceptual uh application. We will be uh continuing to refine the detail in in
the drawings as we move forward through the zoning board uh application. Uh again referencing some of the bulk standards um which is not really uh focused per se of this group but again
it's it informs really um dictates the zoning board application and the requirement to get the variance relief that we're seeking. So I wanted to also focus on um the site
plan which is on page 25. All of the new construction and new improvements to the project uh in the house will be constrained and restricted to the existing footprint. Um
that is in large part due to the configuration of the lot, right? We can't there's really no room to expand the property uh in any direction without encroaching further on neighboring property lines or impacting a driveway
for parking. the parking requirement. All of the uh materials proposed will be effectively synthetic. Um it is a non-contributing structure. It's basically going to be a new house. Uh we'll be using
cedar uh I'm sorry uh J Hardy cedar siding or Hardy board siding. Um, we'll be installing Anderson 400 series two over two double hung windows to emulate what exists there. Now,
um, the porch will be composite decking. There'll be AAC trim or PVC trim. Um, the same could be said for fascia and sophet elements as well. The porch uh rail assembly will be vinyl
and it will be a black ballister. The roof will be asphalt shingle roofing to also to match what's existing. Again, the sight and the building volume I think um and the configuration the orientation with respect to the
streetscape changes considerably because of the front approach. It's just not practical or feasible, we think, to create a front approach to this now raised first floor building without
significantly impacting the streetscape. And when I say streetscape, I mean the building volume that's really right up against the sidewalk. There's an 8ft set back presently I think um more or less from the front facade to the sidewalk or the
property line which is in effect the same. Bringing a front porch front stoop or stair all the way out from an elevated front door I think is going to be very imposing. And I think
that's what our goal was to to not really um do that. and and to reorient the structure to the northwest deck side. Um if you look to page there's existing
floor plans that we have on um page 27 as well as page 29 for the second floor plan and proposed floor plans thereafter. But I really want to focus on the elevations that are shown on page 37.
They start on 37. This page 37 is indicative of what will be facing the street. Uh what's proposed to face the street. We understand also that um lifting the building
and any building in town to deal with the flood plane issue um generates in some cases a pretty dramatic foundation elevation. Um we believe that masking that with
vegetation plant planter beds which already actually exist there on site. Um, but to enhance those with vegetation that will maybe mature and grow a little bit larger to mask more of that masonry foundation.
Otherwise, the intent was to still maintain that front gable and to uh replicate some of the colonial revival elements that were implemented at some point between 1930 and 1960.
So, some of the detailing, the railing, um, lattice work, shutters on this front elevation are things that we wanted to incorporate to, um, again replicate some of those colonial revival piece uh,
features. The page 39 is the elevation that would be facing um, northwest. That is where there is a two-story deck. Presently, there is not there's no intention to replicate the two-story deck, but really just to make it a single uh I'm sorry, a
one-story covered porch um which again will provide primary access to the structure to the residence. Um both from the front and then also an opposite stair coming down the back side of that porch. We move to page 41. It shows the rear of
the of the structure. Um, similar uh treatment in terms of the siding and the foundation and the lattice. Um, again, all of which would be synthetic materials. Understanding we are in the historic district, but it will be brand new, effectively brand new construction
um of a non-contributing building. That that's the gist of it. be happy to answer any specific questions. Um the the cut sheets and materials uh specifications and information are at the the end of the booklet. Um and
again, just want to reiterate, we're here for conceptual approval, have met with um members of the commission a few times already, and are certainly happy to discuss the project in detail, answer questions, and take suggestions while
we're here. That's why we're here. Okay. So, Kevin, why don't we start with you? Okay. So, first off, am I to understand that the back of the house sits right almost on the property line? That's that's
correct. Okay. Because the reason I asked that is the u the proposed new shower first of all is visible through the porch. Um, typically showers, you know, should be on the back of the house or somewhere not visible from the street. Um, second item just to note is as I
looked at the pictures is you're going to have to pay very close attention to the landscaping uh to partially at least conceal that elevated um brick face. Um, you know, honestly, I mean, I think the project is probably actually pretty
pretty nice given the, you know, the idea that you're trying to raise the house and and, you know, and take advantage of that. I think it makes a lot of sense. I would say honestly if I were looking at it and saying, "Well, you know, money's no object kind of a way to look at it," the side porch I
think would actually look better if it were a two-story side porch. Um, instead of windows in the bedrooms, there would be doors that would open out onto a second floor porch. Um, and the only reason I say that, and I and I don't know if those bedrooms would work with a with a bed that then goes to one of the
sidewalls. I I just don't know. I I didn't pay that much attention to it. But the reason I say that is if you're looking at the house, what you're seeing is a very nice structured twostory and then a sloped roof coming off the side that doesn't really add to the appearance of the house. And so, you
know, the making that that porch a twotory makes a lot of sense to me. It it cleans it up. It straightens it up. It it pulls in you can actually, you know, deal some things do some things nice with the roof and a variety of other ways to do it. So that would that would be a you know just a recommendation if if that's within your
means. Um if not I understand you know the the appearance of the house. I just think the the slope roof does not add to the to the look of the house from the front. I don't have trouble with the moving the entrance to the side. I don't think that really there's nothing in our standards that suggests that that
couldn't happen. Um so um I I don't have any other real real questions about it. May I ask you though, um, when you say twotory sport porch, um, would it just be the roof off the roof line and elevated or just have two? No, you
you've already got a first floor, right? You know, with with the proposal. So, if you duplicate that on the second floor, take the columns up and then take it up again, now you've got a straight roof more or less on the top. You don't need that angle. You could change the roof pitch and and incorporate that if you
want. I mean that's that's again another option but but I think by by creating that appearance of leveling with the house I think that would have a better aesthetic look to it. Okay. Um just funny that that particular block of
Congress Street, you know, it you go down Perry Street, if you go down Windsor, there's lots of historic properties there, but the that block of Congress, there's really not a lot of historical properties there. And um as current as you have it currently, it's not historic. You know, it doesn't
really blend in with the fabric, but I think what Paul's done here really helps it blend into the historic fabric of the community, you know, and again, it's non-contributing. Um I actually think this would fit well into a Charleston streetscape. It's that good. Yeah.
Actually, yeah, on that on that item, if you go up to Washington Street, I can never remember if it's east or west. I get the two back up every time. There's a a house there on the corner that is like a Charleston house. There's a there is a front facade to it on East or West,
but if you look at it from Washington Street, there's a side porch that is is built into the house. It's actually very much I think what you're suggesting Charleston, South Carolina. Look. Okay. I live around the corner, so it's going to be a great improvement when I walk my
dog at night. Oh, let's Yeah. No, we that we wanted a porch because that our street is so social and that's how we talk to everybody and see everybody and we're just very excited to only be, you know, 5t off the ground rather than eight or nine which we are now. So,
yeah, I have one question and that is why did you choose the black metal ballisters? You know, it's because I felt like the it would be if we use white, it's so much white up against the house and I
thought you could kind of see in a little bit better. I mean, we're open for ideas, but I had seen it on another house and in, you know, more of a historic district, so kind of just gave me an idea, but Well, I um walk by your house all the
time and it and you have taken something that was a little sad and made it look really nice. So, I I um I I think this is and I understand you want to expand it. I
mean, especially given what's next door. Well, um that's okay. But, uh the the only question I would have is the window on the third floor in the rear. Um page 39. Um it it doesn't look like the kind
of window that it everything else about the design really fits in and looks um appropriate. Uh exactly what you would hope for. Um but that one window maybe it's I I
understand you had to meet the height and so you know it's one of those third floor issues but yeah we could modify. You know what it is? That's actually going to be our bedroom. So our bed is on the plans underneath it. I mean, we
could Yeah. So candidly, I have a similar feeling. Um and I it is because of the bedroom and and the configuration of the layout. I think um
if uh we consider like a um a a double hung more arched or or or something. Yeah. Something with a little more height given situated in that gable end. It's a little squat so to speak. Um and
so we can certainly look at at another window option. But I think um to Mr. um Hammer Hammerman's point um about the roof and the second floor porch. I think if we explore that a little bit um we
might resolve that window issue. Okay. Um and I think that's something that we will look at after tonight's meeting. Um, I definitely trust you because what you did with a a house that the side, you know, was a utilitarian type side
and you you made it into a really um nice, inviting, it wasn't a porch so much, but a sitting area with the curtains and all. And um, this looks like a a great a great
addition. Thank you. We love our neighborhood and we love our neighbors. Yeah. So yeah, we can definitely work on the window. I'll be unusually brief. More shutters. Okay. and consider the
lattice as diagonal and not perpendicular because when I look at it, it just looks like it's kind of a it's not it's not contrasting with the brick peers. Done deal. That's
easy. So that that's that's it. Otherwise, great job. Thank you. I also have uh problems with your black ballusters. Uh I I know there could be a lot of white there, but if you took the
framing of the porch, like the top rail, the bottom rail, the columns, and if they were white along with the the top uh corners around the uh porch, and then maybe pick up a shade close to your body
color, you know, maybe just a one one tone lighter of gray or something and did the ballast with that. Oh, listen. I'm easy. We I whatever suggestions you make, you know, I just kind of threw that out there. So, what's that? Oh, I said when the day we were choosing, I
was like, "Oh, maybe we'll" But we're open to ideas. When you say a shade lighter than the body color, you're referring to the siding, right? So, you have a combination of colors, right? Correct. Uh if you look at the Kate May stage, there's two tones of gray. Okay.
and they they work very well together and they separate elements of the Okay, I'm done. I I've walked by this house many times. Um what you've done with it really charming. I agree with everybody's
comments here. Um yeah, and I'll be excited to see it, you know, go through the process. Thank you. So that's all ditto. Thank you. Uh the only I who I I don't know who brought the shortest Yeah, I know. I was
trying out that want to go home. I was just I don't know who said about the uh the shutters, but I think it needs a few more shutters on the house. Great. Because it's such a big space there just to tone it down. But it's a beautiful project. Thank you. Yeah. I did have one additional thing, too. You need to
submit whatever your exterior lighting just a catalog cut what what fixtures you're going to put up. Okay. Mhm. Yeah. We weren't I'm not really sure on the front because we don't really have a door. I was thinking of like uplighting.
Um instead of fixtures on the front because we don't really have a door, but we have Was that to illuminate the birds flying by or Yeah. But yeah, we have we'll give you the fixtures for the rest of the house, right? The fixtures exterior fixtures will be included in the final application. Absolutely. Also,
just take a step back to the initial comment from Mr. Stevenson. Uh, I can't take credit for this. Cassandra worked very hard on this and uh, she couldn't be here tonight. So, Cassandra's been great. We love her. I just want to tell you thank you too
for everything you do because especially sitting through that conversation with the jetty. This is why we love Kate May. It's not Wildwood. It's not Ocean City. Our when we we've been coming for 35 years. We bought our house in 2017 and we actually said to our kids, "Is would
you like to be here or do you want to go somewhere else?" And they said, "We love Kate May." This is where they've grown up. So, we appreciate it because we love the charm of Kate May and the fact that it stays the way it does because of your commission and committee. So, thank you.
Thank you for being part of the review. things go a whole lot better when the architect or the builders can bring the people in if we can talk together. Oh, thank you. Yeah. So, that that's wonderful. Well, I work I've worked with municipalities and FEMA and the
government for over 30 years, so I'm very used to this process and I appreciate everything you do. I know it's not easy. It's not. But even for me personally as well, you know, I've had over 40 years of coming to town and as a as a younger man painted many Victorian homes in my
summers here. So I again have a great appreciation for what has gone in, you know, here in the last 50 plus years. you know, we we really we really do appreciate your your input on um you know, on on the view of what we do
because I'm finding it ever more enjoyable um to make a transition for being one of the less well-liked bodies in town. It doesn't matter to being perhaps one of the better liked bodies if if if you will. I mean, and and I think that's because we we we we think
that um cooperation and collegiality is a lot better than um than not having it. Yeah. Thank you. Given you enough time to prep your I'm ready to roll. So, um, not to throw a wrench in the works, okay? But I'm picking up on something
you said earlier on, and there may be another approach that you may find brings you even more of what you're seeking. I don't know. You said something like, "We really want a porch
because everybody's out on the porch all the time and it's very social." So my question to you is and and just hang with me here for a second. What if the porch was on the front of the house? Would that be preferable to you or not?
I don't think we can do it. We are Yes, you can. We're nonconform. It's possible, right? But we would need approval. Well, hold on. you're going to need three variances because you have three um existing existing non-conforming
setback issues, but I don't think that this is going to in any way impact what you already have. The only reason you have to get those those existing non-conforming ones is because you're correct increasing the height of the house in that same plane. Correct? I'm not suggesting you do anything outside the existing footprint. So just for
kicks, if you were to take and if you were to look on the first floor, if you were to take this right here and push that wall back 7 to nt and put three columns here,
still keeping the second floor right where it is, you'd have a beautiful front porch and the living room or the living room kitchen/gr great room space. You could make up for that by actually enclosing what is actually the porch on
the side right now. That way, if you wanted a front porch, it would be a different configuration, but you could definitely make it work if you wanted a front porch. Yeah, it's a very interesting take on But I don't think we were told that we can't expand the footprint. We're only allowed 400 square
feet, which that would mean we can't have the third bedroom. You're not expanding the footprint because we're you would just simply be enclosing where the porch is. That's a deck right now. Is a deck the same thing as a porch? Well, we're I think is a footprint. So the question So what So there's there's
three issues. Okay. One is the percentage of of lot coverage. The second is floor area ratio. So you would have the same you just have to figure out that you'd have the same amount of enclosed habitable square footage. And the third is footprint. Footprint
doesn't change. Okay. Right. So, what I'm suggesting is you might be able to pull off a front porch here. And there's only one other house on that block that doesn't have a front porch that I recall. And when I looked at this the streetscape photos, they all have front porches except for the one because I
think my guess is that other one, like yours, was a garage at one point. That's why it's so close to to the street, right? It was a garage. So, I'm just suggesting I know it's a wrench in the works, but you could pull it off if you wanted to.
Did he do it? Certainly a possibility and it's something we can certainly explore if if you guys want to look at that. What that does impact on the f on the um with respect to pulling that um that front facade in at the first living
floor level. Yeah. I think it will have impact on the proposed interior stair. The stairs. Yeah. So, you're building that stair brand new. Brand new. You're absolutely right. gutting. And so you're gutting the whole in interior. So that just becomes another design issue
that you're solving. You might actually like it better if let's say the stair turned or anyway. Yeah, I'm just suggesting it would be a really fun thing to explore to get a front back to the house on the street. You could. I I tend to agree with you and I think it is
something that we can certainly explore. Again, being as that we're at this point in conceptual approval. One last thing, of course, you could also He's never quite through, is he? You can also get you can also fix that weird window on the side elevation. You could do that very easily. You're building a new roof, right? So, you just make the gable a
little bigger. And if the bed is a is a king-siz bed, a queen size, it's a queen actually. And that's how our current bedroom is. Our bed is in between two windows, right? So, the queensiz bed is 5t wide, right? So, give it three inches on each side for the cover, right? So, five and a half feet. You can put two clear windows there over top of your
side table. There are and actually you'd probably like it better because you can actually see outside. Well, we'll have more light. There are there are two things I'd like to point out. First is our chair is not giving you legal or architectural advice. Second, the second is if you're serious
about exploring this, it's not really very productive for us to vote on a conceptual approval tonight. Um because you you've got a lot of things you want to think about if if you truly want to do that. I'm going to be honest with you. I'm going to say no. How how close are you?
I mean, it's it's June right now. You know, how close are you to going to the zoning board or plan? Are you you're going to you sure you have to go to the zoning board? Yes. We were hoping that after this meeting, if we got a yes, we would we've already engaged a zoning
hearing board attorney. Okay. So, we were hoping that if we put our plans into final, he would make our application and it would take three to four months to get on to zoning. Um, I'm very familiar with the construction process because I do FEMA elevations and
acquisition and so, you know, I already have contractors lined up to bid on my project. We were hoping to get it done over the winter months. So, that was kind of our goal. So what one of the beauties of the the feedback that you're getting
right now is you could probably get some in more instant feedback than the next monthly meeting of HPC by coming to a Tuesday meeting. Okay. If you wanted to just table it tonight to maybe if you wanted to explore some of these things
you could and we could move this to conceptual next month if that turns out not very easily fruitful. Okay. like if it you you may come out of that Tuesday uh review committee conference and say you know what we're going to stick with what we did and we throw it back on next months and you get a conceptual because
I think I again I don't at the risk of speaking for the board the the concept I think they're receptive to the current concept with some comments and maybe some conditions on that. Okay. But this is a big undertaking undertaking and a huge expense for you folks to redo this
project and maybe taking a second and see if you want to explore another this design alternative, but that's completely up to you guys. Yeah. I mean, I see dollar signs, right? Right. I know what they cost. You also I mean, you also though have you also can
see the time span laid out for you and and our ability is to work faster, right? I know. Than some of the other elements. Yeah. So, in other words, you could come back with a a revised conceptual review next month and I'm certain it would get approved because
Right. Right. Um I don't want to throw a wrench in the Oh, no. It's okay. I just was hearing what you were saying. I know. Wait a minute. But we're on the we're on the side now anyway, so everybody knows us. And even and even if if you were to come back next month, you're not ready like you're not going
to be on the zoning board agenda next month. No, no. We need these plans to be put into final design drawings to go to zoning. So, we're we're the HPC works a lot quicker than the zoning board. We can we have at a conceptual next meeting. You'll get a letter and it'll be in time for whatever hearing you have. So, I just want to Okay. You won't
be waiting on the HPC at this point. Just just to let you know that I I have a kind of a side question though before we get into that. There's AC condensers noted on here. Yes. Is that on the side? Is it going to be on the side? Is that the final location? That would be the
final location. Okay. Well, there's a couple other issues that I didn't get to, and that's one of them. Um, so if it is on the side, invisible from the street, we need to screen it. Okay. So, I I think it would probably be better to try and locate in the back if you can.
Yeah, that's or if we're now doing the front porch, it might give you a place behind the enclosed first floor structure on the left side of the house to hide it in that L-shape back there. And it's exists back there
currently. Right. So, I have two more issues. Yeah. Um, you it looks like you have four bedrooms in this house when you're done, which zoning is probably going to require you have at least two, maybe three parking spaces. Two. Right. I believe it's two. Yeah, I think it's
two. RSIS. Say it again. The RSIS. Whatever that is. Whatever that is. I just don't have that in my head. So, what it means is the the driveway that you're showing on the left side of the house is going to have to extend back because you can't, according to our standards, have a car parked in front of
the front line of the front elevation of the house. So, that site plan would need to get revised. Third thing that I need to say is um it's really going to be important for us to see an existing site plan and a
proposed site plan. Existing elevations and proposed elevations because right now it's really difficult to see because we don't have any existing elevations. Just need to be able to compare what is exists to what's new. And then lastly,
the only other thing that um I think our other commissioners talked about which would be a condition of approval if we were going to approve this tonight instead of table it is the black ballasters. I I I can't approve those. So that's fine. Yeah, I don't have an issue with that. So it's up to you guys.
Um if you'd like to table this and come back and see us next month with uh maybe coming and talking on Tuesday morning about exploring another design issue, great. If not, that's up to you. So, I think um really what it boils down
to is a couple of things. One is do you, the two of you, truly want a front porch or are you content with the side porch as you've been living, you know, since you purchased the property? I'm content
with the side porch because I like it. I, you know, the size. This is what we're used to in this our house and I just, you know, going to redesign the entire inside of the house and then building another foundation on the side of the house. Unfortunately, I see
dollar signs of foundations and for me I I'm I'm in full agreement with that that you know based on the way the driveway is going to go, based on how far we will end up going back, that's where we park. That's we go up the steps and enter the house on the second floor and as it is.
So fair enough. And if we change any more, our daughter will probably who's 26. I think we have our answer. I think we have our So it sounds like we're entertaining a motion to approve. Do you mind with one condition and that
is revising the ballasters? Well, the window. Oh, this is a window. So there's there's a couple thing. Do you want to address something? I'm sorry. I can you can you expand on how you park presently? So we park in the driveway. Yep. Get out of the car, walk up the
existing steps to the second story deck and enter the house. Understood. That that's where the living area is now. So that's how we normally enter. The bedrooms are downstairs and I can count on one hand how many times in the years I've owned it that I go in that front door. Well, I'll also note the steps
from our front door are not to code. They are I don't know how they were ever put in, but the steps are too short. They're only about six inches. So we don't go in and out that front door. Okay, that was just provide clarity, I guess, for the with respect to the
parking comment. Um, we we understand that we do need to extend um the driveway and also create more space uh beyond the building frontage. Um, so if I understand correctly, and it
sounds like the um the owners here do not want to uh entertain the idea of a front porch. They're content with the side porch. It's how they are accessing the property. Now, my understanding, I'm sure um Mr. Gillan Schwarz will
reiterate this, but um we from my notes, we're looking at the ballasters. Um we're looking at additional shutters and we're looking at an diagonal lattice. Diagonal lattice. And we're also looking at um a different window for that gable
end. Yep. Yep. My question lighting too. Yes, for the final for the final for the final approval. Correct. Um for the HVAC units, you know, some kind of screening for the HVAC units on the side. It'll be on the
side. And if there's visible HVAC, it's got to be screened. Screen. Sure. Um my question was specifically. So if if otherwise this remains consistent with what we're representing now, how much of an impact
would a second story porch add to this conceptual approval? Mr. from the first comment that we received. Meaning if we were Go ahead. I'm sorry. So I don't think that'll that wouldn't really impact the conceptual review. We would
re-re it for the final review, but that would be something you would want to make sure you have documented before you go to zoning. Correct. Of course. Yeah. That may be if if you want to keep the side porch, but you want to like explore the concept of making that usable
instead of just a sloped roof. Now, that may be something that you I don't know that we're going to be in the position of saying we're okay with the concept even though we haven't seen it yet, you know, but like I said, you may go to a Tuesday meeting and be on
the next meeting for that concept and you're you're really not losing anything in terms of the zoning in terms of the timeline, right? Yeah. Yeah. Got it. And I know I know it's it's kind of like you're looking for the relief of okay, we got conceptual, we can move on to the
next thing, but it might benefit you to take the time to do that and just evaluate it and eliminate it or evaluate it and and propose to include it. So I I can be really clear about this, please. From what I'm hearing from my fellow commissioners, it's pretty clear that
you would receive conceptual approval tonight as is with that list of I actually have seven things, right? And it's highly likely that you would be able to configure a second floor porch that we also would find acceptable. So
the idea here is that if you would like to just not proceed this evening so that we could be more convinced of the second floor how you want to configure it of that porch then we can talk about it on a Tuesday and you can come back next month and we can give you the full conceptual with all these other things
involved as well. Again, that's up to you. I still not I can't visualize the porch, but because we had So, so the question he he can do. Hey, wait a minute. I'm going to need you to draw it for me.
Same. This is the same as the front porch idea. If that's something that you don't find appealing, we're not going to force that on you. Yeah. I I do I personally do not see it. I have rationalized for quite some time. Yeah, that's I mean, it seems to me pretty clear that we've got a vote here for
conceptual approval to be made with the conditions that we've So, let me let me just say what I have are the are the seven conditions. Um, one, no black ballasters. Two, making sure the parking configuration is adequate. Three, seeing
comparative sight plans and elevations. Four, the left side bedroom windows on the third floor. Um, five, uh, additional shutters. six diagonal lattice and seven exterior lighting. There was a comment about the screen
screening visible back unit. Oh yes, I think it's 7 7A 7. Yeah. Screening the um HVAC unit. Did you get the exterior lighting or was that exterior lighting number seven and and when and and when
you get your conceptual approval, it's a written Okay. letter. I don't want to jinx. It says what it is and it it contains the conditions that we're putting on the doc and and that document you take wherever you're going. Okay.
So, do we have motion? Who hasn't made I will make a motion for conceptual approval with the seven conditions listed on it. I think eight eight conditions. It's eight. It's eight. And do I hear a
second? I'll second it. Okay. So, we have a motion from Mr. Carol, seconded by Ms. Wilson Stritic for conceptual approval based upon those eight items of conditions that we just articulated. Do you need them again? Nope. No. Thank you. Thank you, Chair. Well, thank you.
I'm ready to call the vote. Don't vote yet. And also, I need this application signed. No one signed it. Yeah, that's that's a technical point. It's It's a beautiful application, but it needs a signature. Mr. Carol, yes. Miss Pagno,
yes. Miss Wilson Straight, yes. Mr. Stevenson, yes. Mr. Hamarind, yes. Mr. Ta, yes. Mr. Becker, yes. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. And anytime you walk by, come say hi.
We'll see you over there on that side porch. She was okay. Uh so I think the the rest of the public has disappeared. We have nobody present for uh public comment which means we can move on to our internal discussion.
So briefly um guys so so briefly if we could just have any comments anybody has about the HBC special meeting that we had on Monday. Um, I have a few comments to make. I I'm meeting with the Spicer Creek folks
tomorrow um to look at what the conditions are there and take under consideration excluding at least a portion of that area from inclusion in the map
amendment. I also need to understand I think we need to understand better the impact of and relationship of those properties to the marina properties there. So I want to take a good look at that tomorrow so I can come back and report to all you guys. Anybody who would like to come with me tomorrow,
you're more than welcome to do so. A meeting at 3:00 at um at the president of the HOA's house. So if anybody would like to go with me, I'll be happy to tell you what I'll be having a busy morning. Yeah. Okay. It's three o'clock. It's not morning. How about your
afternoon? No, no, my my morning's taken up. Okay. Um, second. Yeah, we we Go ahead. Just it whoever meets it would be less than a quorum. We know that. Correct. But just want to make sure there can't be any more than two of you that can come with me. Well, so anybody
would like to and and this is to So I've been exchanging emails with u uh John Mills Miles. Miles John Miles. Yes. who is the president of the HOA. And um what I had said to him were my concerns
were that Lafayette Street definitely needs to stay within the historic district. That's one. two, in taking a look at their covenants and their architectural review board, there's not really anything in
there about materials, but there might be a way that they could incorporate, at least we're going to converse about this, perhaps some of our materials issues into their covenants so that internally they could handle that. However, my third issue is how does that
get enforced? now unfortunately by by them which is I mean I'm going to make a a possible alternate suggestion and and since we're going to be addressing the map um and and the inclusion of the historic district local historic district it
might be possible to go forward with inclusion in the district but reach an agreement or an arrangement with the association as to how those particular properties within the district will be administered by them. I don't know if it's a legal delegation. Um, we might
have a to have a legal opinion with respect to our ability, but I was had in mind a a working agreement between the HPC and the association with respect to um how they'll go about doing the architectural standards but not giving
up the jurisdiction of including that area within the district. So that's all possible. Tomorrow for me is just a listening session. Yeah, understand. We're not going to make any decisions. Are the condos part of the the housing? Yes. That's all part of Spicer Creek. But what I what I need to get a clear I
think all of us need to get a clear idea of what exactly is that boundary because they also were stating that our map is incorrect and what's showing what is and isn't already in the district. So I need to get a really clear understanding of where is it wrong because I think we need to make three I'm going to suggest
we need to make three changes to our proposed map amendment. One is whatever mistakes are made up at Spicer Creek. Two, there was a block that got excluded from the map that Paul caught the I
think it's the day before our meeting. And three, the properties on the beach side of the prominade, which I aren't clear to me are included in the proposed map amendment. Therefore, in talking with Chris about this after the meeting,
likely needing to send a letter to each of those property owners to be equitable with everybody else to whom we sent a letter and then likely having another public meeting at which we would then vote to approve or not the map amendment
based upon whatever comes of those three issues. Spicer's Creek, Prominade, Missing Block. John, question. Yes. Um, would we be setting a precedent where any area that's administered by an HOA
would be able to opt out of HPC? So, I would ask Chris that question. So, the only reason I'm the only reason I feel open to at least exploring this is because this is a very anomalous situation. um where they're located
specifically, not visible really from any place other than inside the HOA itself and the water, right? Um this this is a very unusual circumstance. Of course, it is the case that much of
Kate May and some of its historic properties are viewable from water. True. So, it's not water is not an automatic exemption. True. And I don't understand yet really the configuration of and the locations precisely of there are actually two marinas there. Not one
but two. Well, I would love to go but I can't go tomorrow. And I was thinking after that meeting that uh I don't think any of us on the president board were involved in the actual walkound and
decision about the new map. It happened so long ago. I think Zach did it with Tom Catalo if I'm not mistaken and I don't really have a good sense of when people were making these questions and
I'm looking at the map. I don't have a good sense of it and I would like before we have another meeting for anybody else on the board who wants to but to do a walk around or a drive around or something so we can physically understand what it is we're we're saying
how we're going to who these people that we're impacting why are they coming and saying I I don't want to be part of it and I want to I want to understand that better Isn't one of the problems the parking too? They're
very upset about that. Yes. From what I understand, I I I'm sorry. I I think that by and large the the reasons we're doing this and the smoothing of the the reduction of the teeth and the smoothing and the general overall gist of each of those blocks.
Those are easy to understand. The special areas, yeah, would be, I think, something you'd want to look at. I I don't have to walk a whole new map to see why we're doing what we're doing. Is that how did certain properties
get carved out of it originally or place? I've never understood that. I don't think any of us knows for sure, but I suspect it was I suspect it was individual input. I mean, I'd like to know why by
you. It's a mystery. I think that's Shakespeare and and like the Spicer Creek question whether whether they were in or not or there's some mistake on the current zoning map. I mean the the important
analysis right now is does it make sense for them to be in the district? Yeah. No, is there some logical because we need to come up with some rational basis for line drawing now. um if it didn't make sense then, which we did. I mean, I I guess my feeling is that if Spicer
Creek is non his nothing's historic in that area and it doesn't impact any historic buildings, then just having it on our agenda is more work for us that doesn't really make sense and they don't want it either. Now, seeing um mayors
and some of the historic properties in the in that marina area, it's clear that they deserve respect and they deserve us to defend the neighborhood and the streetscape. So, I'm I'm I'm really
confused about I don't even I mean my my impression from the from the uh points that were raised is really that they simply thought that we were excuse me an unnecessary administrative layer, right? That that's really as I as I understood the objections. Uh my personal belief is
that we have um every interest in making an expansion of the historic district to be as as large as it can be for for good reason. Obviously, there there's some places outside of clearly not going to ever be in the historic district. These
are pieces at the at the ends, but but I my my presumption is that it it should be in until someone proves to me that it oughtn't be. That's the way I I look at it. Doesn't time tell you when they should be in as far as military for example in
50 years. But that's actually There's some interesting things coming up about Village Creek. Did you Did anybody see the the webinar that Judy um told us about that happened recently? I mean, there's there's
properties that were significant that were built in 2000. And um you know, the the significance of a property is not only timebased, but it's also like the African-American
district. It's it it's use based. It can be with a character, a person. It can be with an event. Um, architecture, good architecture can create new designs that we would want to protect going forward.
So the the year time thing is not as as strong of a cut off as it used to be. I think we have and then we also have sustainability, climate change and and adaptive reuse. Like we we we have to take this one step at a time and and we
saw from the meeting that there's a little roughness around some of those edges and and I think John's um course of action in in in meeting and understanding and coming back and us discussing it further is in order. I don't see we can avoid another meeting. We're going to have to vote on a on a
map. It's just I hope it's just One more. One more improved design by HBC. No. Farmer code had some type of plan that had followed. I thought
you say yeah. I mean, a number of a number of developments have had HBC approval or review, not because they were necessarily just in the district, but because private covenant said, "We give this to the HBC to do that." The R1A block that's on the old Admiral
Hotel, it's by private covenant to submit those plans to the HBC, and they have been. So, guys, I'd like to propose a couple things. one is um I've looked at this pretty carefully and I can't find any other let's call it development
within some sort of HOA structure that we are trying to incorporate other than Spicer Creek and those two marinas in our proposed amendment. These are all individual properties with the exception of that development. Second, I would
like to suggest if you haven't done so is to take this map, go yourself and go out and walk these streets, particularly New York and all around SU and those blocks between where SU comes together at the point to Madison. Yeah, that's the big me. Those are the those are the
places that you really need to understand for yourself. Is it appropriate or is it not and why? And I think that um what hopefully was helpful was Kevin's photographs because Kevin did exactly that. And I' I've walked them myself and it the these absolutely
make sense to me. But I think for all of us to vote in good conscience, they have to make sense to you, too. And what doesn't make sense to me yet is the marinas and spicer creek. I just don't understand it because I actually don't think we've documented these correctly. I don't think they're properly shown on
the map. So, I want to that's what I need to go and understand from the HOA exactly. I don't even know what all properties match Spicer Creek and what's on this map. I don't I don't know. We need to go see it. Where will our city manager be
in this process? So, our city manager, unfortunately, is unable to attend tomorrow, but I'm hoping to be able to get documentation from them and then come back and speak. I I spoke with Paul about this today and I talked about the three issues that we definitely need to work on. That's the other side of the
prominade, the missing block, and Spicer Creek. And Spicer Creek slash the two marinas. I don't really understand there too. Yeah, there's some buildings owned by one family. There's not an HOA
there. Correct. And of course, the other issue is street address because I don't understand the map and the block and lot. I I would like to walk around or bicycle around and look at everything. Jen, do you do you want to drive around
one day? Yeah. We can take the big map with us. Okay. Take the big one. John, you houses on talking about the three. Yeah. So, when you come where John Well, actually before that when you come across the bridge there just past that
the the first larger condo, there's there's three houses, two of which are clearly historic. And then there's the big red one that got built. And then there's two or three more that are actually new, but I think the third one might be a historical one. Yeah.
Yeah. So, what I don't understand is what of those properties is Spicer Creek and what isn't. I Well, the two the three the red one Y the red one is one on the corner and then the other one. Okay. Three of them are part of that HOA. So, when you make the right into um
between the red one and the white one. Yes. Both of those are in Spicer Creek. Correct. Yes. And the one to the left of it as you're going into Kate May further. Got it. Okay. Okay. So those two but one was that was already there.
Is that what what I would say just John are you you're talking about s let's talk about the southern boundary for a second. Yeah. Yeah. You you're talking about now the local historic district ends at the prominade on its south side. Well because we had this discussion we did about two years ago. So hold on. When we when we all approved the last
time we voted on this at HBC we approved making the historic district to the waterline. Right. That's what we approved. What I can't I thought I thought exactly the opposite. Nope. Because that's really what I thought we were gonna I wanted to do. We did do that. Make it to the water line. We did
do that. Well, fine. However, what got unclear is the water line moves. So there was there was some issue about is it really the water line and so that never got resolved as to because it kind of doesn't make sense to be the waterline. It should be the properties
that are on the other side of the proomenade. And that we can define. Yeah. Well, you know, I mean, the state actually has a solution for all this, right? I mean, Chris, the the state high the mean high water the state the state defines its jurisdiction
from 1664 and its whole claim water line. It's going to incorporate all that stuff that that make it really easy, right? And and that's what I I think I remember us doing or trying to put that on the map. Yep. That's the way. And we got a map that falls short of that. Yep. it does
fall short. So that that was those are the three big issues and there might be others if you all go and walk the perimeter of the jagged teeth and you see other issues but from my perspective those other streets are all individual properties and there's
nothing that's particularly anomalous about them that would in my mind justify excluding them from being within the historic district by cleaning up these edges particularly Yeah. On the um I'll call it the west side of Madison. Yeah. As you go as you if you if you take the
walk or drive around as you look at really it's New York and New Jersey a I think on in those what you're going to find is they're you know they're they're they're almost obvious when you look at them. you know, there's chunks that are in the district now and then there's a
chunk that isn't in the district and then there's another chunk that is in the district and it's just you kind of got you kind of look at and go, "Now, why would anybody separate that block?" you know, and and you just you automatically think to yourself, you know, that side of the street should be in the in the historic district,
especially because some some of that is some of that, Kevin, when it comes to New York and New Jersey, since those streets were originally al along with some of the other streets in a concentric series of circles as part of the East Cape May Real Estate
Development Company east of Madison, they were sold as lots at about the same time. And a lot of those buildings were put up at about the same time. The majority of the buildings were put up at about that time. So to me, it's very
clear that those ought to be straight lines in the streets. How they were tooththed out just not New Jersey. It's really only New York. On New Jersey, there's only one property on the corner of I was just referring to the major streets, Beach, New Jersey, and New York. Crazy. Yeah. Yeah. and and and
Washington has some of that same effect when you get further out. You know, when they sold clearly in the district, you know, when you're close in by the physical estate, when you get very far out, now you're getting into some new homes that are like reproduction homes or So guys, what I'm going to propose is um let's all do our due diligence with
regard to going out and looking at it ourselves, making sure that we're clear. I'll find out what I can from Spicer Creek and and the two marinas. I'll also find out what I can from Paul. And I think this ought to come back on our agenda for the um our next alignment
workshop which we've all agreed just verify is the 17th of July, correct? Yes, everybody can come, right? Karen, thank Karen, even though I haven't said it. Yeah, I know. Yeah, Karen, you did say yes, didn't you? No, but that's
okay. I'll Okay. All right. All right. So, there was one person. It was you. That was me. because we rever we reserve both the 17th and the 24th just in case. That's okay. So, we can take the 24th off. Okay. Thanks, Karen. Okay. So, yes, that'll be here sooner is better from 10 to two. Um, and we'll figure out lunch.
Why don't we do that now? Who's going to bring lunch? I'll be I'll do it again. I'll be happy to. I have lunch. You have lunch? I'll take care of lunch. You'll take care of lunch. You need help? So, does anybody want to help Lorraine? Because one person It's kind of hard. I did it and it's like oh
great. Okay, we're right down the street. Okay, so Lorraine and Kevin will bring on Okay. And lastly, um design awards. So let me I'm sorry. Let me talk about work alignment workshop number three.
I have created a long list, very long list of a whole bunch of stuff that we've all talked about. People come up with ideas of what we ought to be working on in 2025 and 2026. It's about 20 things right now. So, I'm bringing that list. Anything else that you can
think of, what I'd like to do is throw that list out and for all of us to discuss what are the priorities for 2025 and 2026 that we should be working on. And I think there's some pretty clear candidates. I would say number one is the bylaws. We got we have to get our
bylaws redone. uh I think also is the 2026 celebration of the 50th anniversary of HPC. Big big deal. And right on the heels of that are the design awards. Those are my top three.
So with that, I'm not going to state that that's what it is. We'll determine that together. But that's what I'm holding. Jonathan, you'll have I know. So guys, if you have anything, email them to me and I'll add them to the list that I'm already keeping. Okay.
Um, so that's a perfect transition. I've already emailed one to you. Yes, you have. The bylaws. The bylaws in draft. Jim Jim sent me draft bylaws in March. Have I gotten a chance to look at them yet? No. So, um, that's a perfect segue then to the design awards. So, I would
like to hand it over to Janice and Lorraine to talk a little bit about the design awards. other than we knew we have a we we've reconstituted the committee. So the committee is is Janice and Lorraine and Pip and Judy and they actually let two men get involved and
that would be me and Jake. Yeah. So please Well, did you want to wait until we have the um alignment and discuss it there? I would just like to um have you guys
to me, yes, that's that's where we really need to work on it. But um there were a bunch of things that you guys did as a committee that we never got to hear about because it got Okay. and and one of them to me one of the things that I really wanted to hear about was the
research you did for other areas in their design awards that you used as part of what you did to design and structure the design awards and I I think if if I recall and I don't have my file with me but we went and looked at
like five or six different um New Jersey historic towns as well as other towns throughout the you know um looked at their design awards And then we were kind of picking and choosing based on what Kate May is about and what we what
our vision was for the these design awards and we came up with those categories. Um I did send them out to everybody. Uh there's it this is still there's some question marks on the on the last two pages. Um but for most part
for the most part there was um there were five different design awards which didn't have to maximum 10 awards a year. We didn't have to award them based on the applications that we received during
that year. Um and then we came to the meeting. We were originally going to do a look back on what two years I think it was two it might have been. Well, we sort of made it almost three because of the pandemic. So, as Yeah. continue to
procrastinate. Right. Right. So, that window of time gets wider and wider. So, that's why I'm saying this this is a pretty high priority. Yeah. We want this to align with the We were thinking between three and five years. Well, we won't have any if we can expand the
amount of time we're looking from when we started this process and and have it ready for next year, I don't think we'll have any trouble. And also the awards would include we we talked about something we'd called I think maintenance but we changed it to stewardship. But just the idea that
people who haven't been before us but who have been faithfully maintaining historic buildings in impeccable condition for years. I mean that's to me that's like a big one. Um and adaptive
reuse as well. Yeah. Is this going to be determined by this board? Yes. Well, I know what commission I mean we don't know that yet. We were actually looking at getting some uh
architectural historians involved. Um we had some ideas that we floated around but um so why don't we make this a significant topic of of that okay our next alignment workshop and then well I
think we need to give you guys um the basic info before then because it sounds like you're the alignment workshop is going to have a a large agenda with trying to prioritize and developing this
program and making sure everybody understands it and you have a chance to sort of weigh in. Um, you don't want to try we can come up we can come up we can like the four of us can meet again we can come up with a presentation
and give you ideas of what what our thoughts were and then we can revise things from there. I think that's a good jump off. And Lorraine, I think you sent out that document about the design awards. I did. I sent out like four Yeah, I sent out four different documents. Yeah. Yeah. So, did everybody
get those? Yeah. Yeah. So, review those because they're really they're really good documents, right? You know, John, we've had quite a few meetings already. Yeah. Yeah. We have some info there. Well, Lraine sent that out via email last week. Everybody got it, right? So,
open those up and read them in preparation for our alignment workshop and then you can we'll do a presentation. Perfect. Yeah. Then we can have a little work session on the design awards. Okay. I think that's it. You sure?
Oh, got to give you the money. You can do it on the installment plan. So, do we have a move or motion? Motion for adjournment, please. Second. Second. Second. So, all in favor? Thank you. Behind me.
Very good.