testing. Testing. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. 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 this meeting is being held in
violation of this act, they should so state at this time. Hearing none. Have the pledge of >> 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. >> Mr. Bizair, Mr. Jones >> here. >> Mr. Riggs >> here. >> Mr. Crowley >> here. >> Mr. Gone >> here. >> Mayor Mullik >> here. >> Deputy Mayor McDade
>> here. >> Mrs. Reed >> here. >> Mr. Lholm >> here. >> Mr. Produces >> here. >> Mr. Krippen. >> Thank you. >> We have one resolution for approval this evening. 12-09-205 one Swain Property Management LLC
305 Jackson Street, lot 1040, lots 2.01 and 3. 313 Jackson Street, lot 1040, lot number four. Is there a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> Second. >> I'll second.
>> Okay. Um, can I know who motioned? Mr. G. >> Mr. Greg, did you motion? >> Yes. Okay. >> I think two of us did. >> You can give you can give it to Dennis. >> Oh, Mr. Crowley motions.
Deputy Mayor McDade seconds. Mr. Gargone. >> Yes. >> Mayor Mullik. >> Uh, abstain due to my absence. >> Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Reed, >> abstain due to an absence. >> Mr. Crowley, >> yes.
>> Mr. Lhome, >> yes. >> Mr. Riggs, >> yes. >> Mr. Producus, >> abstain due to my absence. >> Mr. Jones? >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> I have minutes for approval. First set we'll vote on is for October 28th, 2025.
Is there a motion? I'll make that motion. >> Second. >> Mr. Reg's motions. Mr. Garone seconds. Mr. Garone. >> Yes. >> Mayor Mullik. >> Um I apologize. I believe I was absent for one.
>> Oh, let me see. >> I I abstain. I'm I apologize. >> We're just doing the 28th, right? 28th. Okay. >> Okay. So, you abstain? >> I abstain. Sorry. >> Thank you. Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes.
>> Mrs. Reed, >> I abstain due to an absence. >> Mr. Crowley, >> yes. >> Mr. Lhome, >> yes. >> Mr. Riggs, >> yes. >> Mr. Padus, >> abstain. >> Mr. Jones, >> yes. >> Thank you.
>> Finally, for the last minutes for November 10, 2025, is there a motion? >> I'll make the motion. >> Is there a second? >> Second. Deputy Mayor McDade motions. Mr. Gorgone seconds. Mr. Gorgon.
>> Yes. >> Mayor Mullik. >> Abstain. >> Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Reid. >> Abstain. >> Mr. Crowley. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lhome. >> Abstain. >> Mr. Riggs. >> Abstain due to my absence.
>> Mr. Producus. >> Yes. >> Mr. Jones. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Are we one application for this evening? Uh it's SP Kate May Marina LLC 124 Roseman's Lane block 1061 lots
101.05 5 for site plan preliminary and final and waiver. Uh, Mr. Chairman, I am a uh I have my boat at the marina and a member of the paddle club. I'm going to abstain from the application. >> Very good. >> Would you like me to sit in the audience
or what's best? >> I think you should sit in the audience. Yeah, the audience can go home. >> Okay. Is there there's no other conversation after this? >> I don't I don't think there's anything else on the agenda, is there? Maybe like bills or
>> bills. That's it. Very good. >> Yeah. >> Can you turn on your microphone, please? >> Get a green button. Get a green. >> There you go. >> Oh, there you go. I'll start over. My
name is William Kaufman. I'm a an attorney with the firm of Nemad Davis and Goldstein in A Harbor Township. to represent the applicant on this particular matter. Uh the applicant here is SP SP Kate May Marina LLC. The
property is at 124 Roseman's Lane. It's developed with the Kate May Marina. It's in the C6 zoning district. We're here this evening on an application made pursuant to section 417-3C site plan ordinance. We're seeking a
site plan waiver. Uh, as indicated, the uh, property is developed with the Kate May Marina. The marina includes 210 boat slips, a marine garage, and a three-story marina building and clubhouse. Um, what is proposed here is
the um, renovation of the first floor or a po portion of the first floor of the marina building and clubhouse into a members dining area. The Kate May Paddle Club occupies the first floor of that building and portion of the second floor
of that building. Um the members dining area is already subject to an alcoholic beverage uh club license that was issued by the governing body. that club license or the um approval of that club license indicated that if the paddle club wished to outfit
a portion of the first floor, then it would need to for as a member's dining area, which is permitted under your ordinance. Um then the uh paddle club or the owner of the property would need to seek whatever approvals that were necessary from the planning board or the
zoning board or the construction official. Uh, and that's why we're here this evening seeking a site plan waiver. We have two witnesses this evening. Uh, one Sean Scarro and the other uh, Jason Schulo and um, I guess Mr. King if you want those witnesses sworn at this time.
>> Yep. I'll swear your witnesses. I also swear our board engineer for his testimony. Do each of you if you please raise your right hand. Do each of you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and not the truth be God? >> Yes sir. >> I do. >> Very good. Um, additionally, I should note that we also seek to add a porch
roof above the entrance to the first floor. Um, so it's a it's a two-part application. Part uh is the uh renovation of the uh first floor for the members dining area and the second part is the addition of the porch roof. Uh our first witness this evening would be
Mr. Scarboro. Sean, would you um describe your position with the applicant SP Kate May Marina uh to the board, please? >> Uh yeah, I am uh the managing member uh majority owner of Kate May Marina. >> And do you also have an a relationship
with the uh Kate May Paddle Club? >> Yes, I'm a trustee in the chief executive officer of the Kate May Paddle Club. The Kate May Pow Club was formed in 2014 as a nonprofit corporation. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> It has been in existence ever since. Is that correct?
>> Yes. >> And it is a private membersonly boat club. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> It's always been located um at the Kate May Marina. Is that accurate to say? >> Yes. >> And it uh occupies a portion of the
marina building uh at the Kate May Paddle Club. Is that right? >> Yes. And currently what portions are occupied? >> Uh we would call it the first floor ground floor um which includes the the patio porch area around the pool and the
first floor interior. And then the um the second uh the second floor uh we have office space um associated with the marina and any operation that we uh would need to undertake for operating
the paddle club management wise. >> When did your company acquire uh the property? >> Uh January of 2013. And going back um when you acquired the property um what is your understanding as to the history of the property dating back to 2004?
Uh originally the property was uh uh approved and planned for um I think it was 20 28 condominium form of ownership uh buildings
I think it was 14 buildings 28 units. Um when we arrived it was um basically defunct. Um there was financial problems. There were 160 boats uh out of the water on the hard that winter. A lot
weren't going to go back in. Um and that's when we entered the fray and purchased the property from the previous owner. >> And you've had the opportunity to review some of the resolutions from this board in connection with the history of the property. >> Yes.
Um, based on your review of the, uh, resolutions, do you understand that the marina building and clubhouse was part of the original approved site plan going back to 2004? >> Yes. >> Okay. And in 2013, the uh, prior owner
uh, we understand based on resolution uh, from this board in 2013 had two applications that were presented to the board. Is that correct? >> Yes. And the first one, the prior owner sought preliminary and final amended site plan approval and subdivision
approval. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And the purpose of that approval was to separate the residential component from the marina component. Uh is that your understanding? >> Um and that resolution was submitted to the board with this application. Is that correct?
>> Yes. Right. And then in 2013, there also was a second application by the prior owner. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And that application um sought an expansion of the number of units to be
developed on the property from 29 to 37. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And at that time, the board uh based on the resolution granted preliminary and final uh amended subpl uh site plan approval. Is that your understanding? >> Yes.
>> And that uh memorialized uh res memorializing resolution was uh resolution 4-8-204. Is that right? >> Yes. >> And at that time um the site plan um was amended and it has
not changed since that. Is that correct? >> There's been no change >> and we have that Mr. Schula brought that site plan I believe with him. Is that correct? And is that the uh site plan that was approved in 2013 as set forth in uh the
2014 resolution? >> Yes. >> Bill, let me go with that. >> That was that was part of the initial >> mark it. You don't want to mark it. Okay. Yeah. Um, we is that you want to mark that or >> it's up to you. It was part of the submission.
>> It was part of the submission. I guess we can mark it as P1 now. >> It was in the submission. >> Okay. It's it it was >> what's the date of that document though? >> It's easier to mark it than last March. 2014.
>> What? >> March 19th, 2014. >> Thank you. >> And it was at around that time that your company acquired the property. Is that accurate? >> Yes. >> All right. And uh you continued to operate the marina and the paddle club
then came into existence at or about the time that you acquired the property. Is that correct? >> Yes. And when the paddle club came into existence um and began occupying space in the in the marina clubhouse building, what where was it situate in terms of
first floor, second floor, third floor? What was the situation at that time? >> It was initially situated on the first floor, ground floor, both inside, outside around the pool areas and uh the third floor. So what was going on on in uh the second
floor at that time? >> It was office space >> and um since the acquisition of the property uh by your company. Um did you then subsequently come back to this uh board
in 2022? >> Yes. >> What was the nature of that application? Um that was to uh reconfigure the third story or the third floor of the building >> from space occupied by the paddle club
into what? >> Right. It was space occupied by the paddle club into a boat >> residential use. >> The boatell is a permitted use in the marina district. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And this uh your company sought the site
plan waiver from this board. Is that right? >> Yes. >> And that was granted by this board in 22 as more particularly set forth in resolution 05-24-2022. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> And um after the board granted the site
plan waiver for the hotel, how was the third floor then configured? >> Correct something there. >> Sure. >> I I don't think we granted site plan waiver. >> Um and this is something that Mr. Mr. Hurles has taught me over the course of our 10 years together. We granted the site plan but waved
all or nearly all of the requirements for the site plan and the resolution does carefully make that distinction. Um and I just want to continue that distinction because it's important to Mr. and >> so you will you do have site plan approval. You did submit a site plan but
we waved the requirements that are in the checklist. >> Yes. >> Did I state that correctly? Section 417-3 is our site plan ordinance. Um, and under that section C allows for a
waiver of site plan review requirements. >> Okay. >> So, we typically grant site plan approval but wave the requirements thereof. >> And that you're absolutely correct, Mr. That's exactly what the resolution indicates and that's the exact nature of
this particular application as as well. Um, after the board granted its memorializing resolution in May of 2022, was the third floor reconfigured then? >> Yes. >> And what happened with the space that that was being occupied by the uh by the
paddle club? >> That space was reconfigured into uh a three-bedroom residential use >> and that use has continued since 2022. Is that correct? >> Yes, that's continued. And the paddle club at that time then uh was occupying
the first floor. Is that right? >> That's right. >> And some of the second floor, >> right? And well, some of the second floor as it relates to office management of the club. That's where the office was. >> Okay. And that that's remained unchanged
since 2022. Is that right? >> Yes. >> All right. Let me go forward then to 2024. Uh in 20 in 2024 the uh paddle club made an application to the governing body for a ABC club license.
Is that correct? >> Yes. >> What was the situation at that time with regard to alcoholic beverages at the property um and club members? At that time we were a BYOB situation uh for club members.
>> And did the club members and trustees and the officers confer relative to the application that was made to the U governing body? >> Yes, we did. >> And why why was that application made? What was the motivation?
It was just to make it a better experience for the member group um that we had uh at the club. >> And in uh March of 2024, the governing body uh approved that application and
granted a club license. Is that right? >> Yes. and the license premises as uh indicated um by the sketch that is currently on file with the city uh clerk indicate that all of the first floor is licensed. Is that correct?
>> Uh yes, with the exception of the bathrooms, >> but for storage only. >> That That's right. Inside the building for storage only. >> And the exterior area around the pool deck is licensed as well. Correct. >> Yes, the exterior area around the pool and building. That's uh in that
particular area service of alcoholic beverages and food occurs for club members. Is that right? >> That's correct. >> And that area is not open to the public. >> No. >> And indeed none of the club none of the areas occupied by the club are open to
the public. Is that right? >> That's correct. >> And the resolution that the governing body adopted with regard to the club license included a special condition. Correct. >> Yes. >> And essentially it says if you want to
outfit the interior uh uh for a member's dining area, go get whatever approvals you need from zoning, planning, construction, and then report a change of facts. Is that how you understand it to be? >> Yes. >> All right. So since 2024,
the club has operated with a club license for exterior in the exterior area around the pool deck. >> Yes. >> All right. And the incidentally the second floor is also licensed by the uh governing body. Is
that right? >> Yes. >> All of it. >> All of it. Yes. >> Right. And how about the third floor? No, the third floor is not. >> And other than the area, >> the second floor is licensed for the alcohol. >> Yes, it is. >> Storage only or just anything?
>> No, I'll I'll explain that. When you have an ABC license, wherever you keep your books and records must be licensed. So, it's not licensed for any s we're not doing any service there, but we have to have it licensed because that's where we keep the books and records.
>> Thank you. And in terms of alcoholic beverage storage, that all occurs on the first floor. Is that correct? >> Correct. Yes. >> And um can you explain to the uh board what the
current proposal entails with regard to the first floor? >> Uh what what we're uh proposing is to have a small area um that members can eat undercover. Right now, we're purely
outside. Um the only cover we have is uh really umbrellas and a slightly covered couch sitting area. Um this would give us a little more shelter um and obviously connect to the existing
patio and porch around the pool. And it would be the area is really quite small. It's um approximately 375 square ft. It's about 14 by 26 feet long >> and that was depicted on the plans
prepared by Mr. Fenwick and submitted as part of the application. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> J that >> is that is that square footage referring to the current outside location or the uh proposed inter inside?
>> The 375 is the proposed inside location >> interior. >> Yeah, correct. I'm sorry. 375 square ft. >> The area depicted as yellow on that plan. >> Yes. What plan is that? >> So, this is the floor plan that was
submitted as part of the application sheet A101 dated May 6, 2025. And Sean, if you can just um with reference to that particular uh plan, take us through um what's existing and
what you're proposing um with regard to the first floor >> area over here. >> Can you bring the mic with you? >> Oh, there we go. The area right here is existing storage at this time. The the
proposal is to open up this space such that you can access it from the storage which at this point in time we we go out this back door here and over in this area is the pool and um patio and the
grill. Um this would be a door into this from the kitchen area or storage area here. And then this would be the actual room that would be accessed uh across the front existing porch right here and
through that door. >> Now that existing porch is shown on the approved site plan, correct? >> Yes. All of this is currently uh approved and standing the whole perimeter of the building. This is just a simple reconfiguration of that space right there.
>> And there's some restrooms and showers and whatnot on the first floor as well. Yes. This right here is the uh the restrooms for the facility. Right. Right in this area. >> And and the restrooms are not licensed. Is that >> That's correct. None of none of this is is is licensed in this this box on the
ground floor. >> And nothing in that regard is proposed to be changed. Is that correct? >> No, nothing. >> I think you indicate the yellow area is comprised of about 375 square ft. >> Yes. >> And you're looking to add a a bar area
in there. Is that correct? >> Yeah. This is approximately 8 foot long bar. >> Few seats. >> In terms of the number of uh seats that you're looking to have in there about what >> I would say it's about 18 to 20 seats.
>> 18 20 seats at the bar or that >> No, the whole thing I there be four seats at including the four seats at the bar. >> Is that area Oh, I'm sorry. Is that area that you're indicating as the kitchen exist as a kitchen? Now,
>> it's not a kitchen. It's really a storage area. We have refrigeration in there. >> So, how's food prep? >> It Well, we cook out on the grill, >> but you're going inside now. >> But we're not going to cook inside. We're we're this what we're doing in
this area is we're still going to cook and all the food service comes from the grill still, but we store our food back in this area and can prep it to bring it out to the grill. >> So, what are your hours of operation proposed to be now with the suggestion? What are your hours of operation proposed?
>> No change. >> Okay. So, you're just summer months? >> Yeah, it's just summer months. We generally try to open the week before Memorial Day if the weather holds up. We're not going to be doing this during winter hours. >> Oh, no. No. And then we we run into the fall as long as the weather holds up.
Sort of. >> All right. >> I have a question. U How many members do you have in the paddle club? >> We have uh 160 families right now. >> So, that would be >> It's about two 2.1.
>> And uh do are they all residents of that complex? Yeah, >> they're not all residents, but it's the boats and the residents combination of both. >> Come off the boats and they come off the residence. Suppose they drive in. Where do they park?
>> Well, the boers they they park in the marina lot. >> Yeah. Do does your membership include only boat owners that that dock their boats in that complex? >> No, it does not. It's open beyond that. members of the basically the general public
>> who members of your organization and they come and use this. Is that right? >> Well, there's no requirement to be a boat owner to use the facility. There never has been. >> So, your membership is open to the public. >> It's Yes, it would be open, but it's a
private membership club. So, we limit the access to the club. But not all boat owners that come there are members of the paddle club. >> No, not everyone. >> And the restaurant and bar that you're talking about is strictly for paddle club members. >> That's correct.
>> How are you going to police that? >> We police that through a membership tag system. Everything um at the facility has a there's a you if you're a boat owner, you get a passc card and let's say you weren't a paddle club member.
Your card would only work to get into the bathrooms, but it wouldn't work to get into the paddle club. >> Okay, >> that's how we've been doing. >> Paddle club members, uh, are they permitted guest day passes, things of that nature? >> We do have a guest policy, um, for
paddle club members that we, uh, there's a state policy when it comes to club membership and then we have a policy as well. >> Are they permitted to have alcohol at present? the guest from the member's stock.
>> If they're with a bonafide member, >> okay, >> they can purchase alcohol with the member. >> Okay. >> Pursuant to New Jersey law, I have a question. Back in
April of 2022, resolution 524, 2022, you converted your clubhouse into a boat. Correct. And from my recollection
and tell me fellow board members if I'm incorrect that this uh boat now called the mermaid house is that the correct name? >> Yes, that's what we call it. >> Was to be limited to people who had
boats and that only they would be able to rent this boat. >> Am I correct on that? >> Yes. Yeah. That should be in the minutes.
Do you rent that hotel to people who do not have boats? Well, we we have reserved what we did was we reserved a slip at the marina for the
mermaid house. That's what we that's what we did when we did that resolution, which I haven't read in quite some time, but and the purpose of that was to always make sure that there was a correlating parking space related to the
house upstairs. From my recollection, and tell me if I'm wrong, the only way you could run rent that condo was if you had a boat. Am I right or wrong? Well, >> and that boat was staying was staying in
that reserved spot. >> Let me ask the question this this way, Mr. Scarboro. Do you operate the is the boatel the boat is limited to the third floor? Correct. >> Correct. >> And the boat is operated as you indicated to the board it would be. Is that correct? >> Yes.
>> And there's never been an enforcement action taken relative to the boat. Is that correct? >> No. >> Okay. >> I'd like a yes or no answer. You rent only to somebody who is there with a boat that wants a a residence to sleep
in rather than their boat for the night. >> No, there are people there that have stayed there that didn't have a boat, but they had access to a boat slip. >> Can you explain that a little bit more because I'm I'm a little perplexed with
that. >> Okay. So, we have we went into a situation where we also rented boats for people. If they wanted to stay, we would have a boat for them to use. >> Sure. >> When they were there and we've reserved a slip for that and we also have a slip re reserved for people if they come by
boat. >> We we put it out there both ways. >> Um so some people come and they use the boat that we have available for rent and some people come by boat and rent that way.
So, I mean, I think the board would have to look at clarifying anything if we were to grant any approvals this evening on exactly what we intend for that third floor to look like and operate like. >> Well, I have Wayne, I have another
question. Hold on. If I go on Airbnb right now >> and I'm scared of water, >> no, I'm not personally, >> right? >> I would don't want to go near water. Could I rent that mermaid house if it was available like by click of a button on Airbnb? We we would accommodate you
and tell you you can bring a boat or rent a boat. Yeah. >> Would you require the rental of the boat? >> We don't require it. We just think that the board members are getting to is this is really in fact just happens to be an
Airbnb at a marina. I think that's the way it's coming across. That's I think why there's this discussion. Well, so essentially, I mean, if if I'm understanding this correctly, the intent of the board at that time was to say
that third floor unit, the intent is, hey, I can come by boat, stay for the evening, and then get back on my boat, and then off off I go, right? From my recollection, and I know a lot about boats,
um, and I have a very good memory, when you approach this board in April 2022, you stated that people come with boats and sometimes there's no room for them on the boats and they'd like to rent a room
for their guests or people are visiting them. Um, they have a boat, so the people don't own the boat. The people staying in the boat don't own the belt. It could be their children, their parents, even friends, but they're associated with a person who's either in
that reserve spot who or who was a member of your club. That was my recollection. >> Well, fortunately, we don't have to rely on recollections. We write this stuff down. >> And what it says is pretty clearly, actually. >> Okay. >> It says, uh, and I don't mean to say
it's clearly because I wrote it, but I did kind of listen. It says it will only be, this is Mr. Sulo testifying, it will only be used as a transient unit by marina customers utilizing an existing boat slip in the marina.
There will be a onebedroom a one there will be one three-bedroom unit and is contemplated that the transient users will be boers who are storing a boat or boats in slips that are not occupied at the time of the slip owners. This meets the concept of a motel which seems to
say that it may be a boat slip or a combination of boat slip and parking associated with the transient stay. And this is where it gets interesting. Um it says it was ultimately determined that there will be little impact on parking as a result of this use. It was
agreed by the applicant that the intended purpose and only purpose of this three-bedroom unit is for transient use associated with Marina stays and it is not a three-bedroom residential unit to be leased for other purposes nor is
it to be a residence >> and and and by the way >> it continues then there was a motion granted and it says the board accepts as fact that there are no external changes and the board acknowledges this appears
to be an appropriate boat use so long is as it is clear the three-bedroom unit is not to be used as a residence or hotel, but rather as a boat tied specifically to boats that will be mored in existing slips without an increase in intensity
of parking at the site and that it is truly it it is a truly quote transient use as contemplated by the ordinance. So, I mean, I I have to say that I I envisioned it being people call in. Do
you have a slip available? Yes, we like to stay for the night. They dock the boat. They stay overnight. Transient use tied to someone boating at the marina. And that was pretty clearly represented and I actually wrote it down. Well, you're
saying now that it's a Airbnb and if they happen to have a boat, they can put it in a slip. That's not really what we're >> Well, that's not really what I'm saying. What I said in the interpretation from Mr. Schuler's testimony was we related it to a slip and parking. And what we
did when we got through the process was we took a slip and carved that out and associated it with this unit permanently instead of well maybe we have an slip available maybe we don't have a slip available. That's what we tried to do to
accommodate that resolution and we left it that way since that time. >> You have it backwards. That's not the purpose of a boat. The >> purpose of the ordinance is that it's not where as long as you have a boat slip, then you can put an unlimited number of units tied to a boat slip as
if it's a parking space. That's not what it was. The board created a motel, >> right? >> And made this exception for boats in an effort to encourage transient use by Boers, not as a Airbnb where someone can put a
boat in if they want. So, you kind of have it backwards. It's supposed to come from the ocean to the land, not from the land to the ocean. So, I have to say that what you're describing, the way you're using that is very inconsistent with this resolution. And the reason why my board apparently thinks it's
relevant, I did not see this coming. Your testimony has really put a point on it. Uh, is that the concern at the time was intensity of use and parking. And if you're not using it to encourage the motel use, then you shouldn't get the
benefit of this maneuver that they've created in this in this ordinance that says, well, we're going to pretend that a Airbnb with three bedrooms is all have going to have not going to increase parking because they're going to have you be using a boat slip and they don't generally have cars. So now it's all
messed up and now you're talking about putting a barn, a restaurant in there and you have everyone's attention because this thing was talking about how great it is. We could have 120 people up there and now there's not going to be 120 people up there and now they're going to really focus on parking which is what you've kind of backed yourself
into. >> So you're absolutely correct. You you're relaying that is absolutely what happened. But in addition to that, this is the first time this town ever had a boat and it's a transient rental
and uh we we regulate transient rentals through the licensing merkantile licenses. >> Yes. >> Do you have a license for this? >> Yes, we do. >> You you file every year for a mercantile license. >> Oh yeah. >> For the boat. >> Yeah. We for every use on that property. There's multiple uses with
>> and and you describe this. I'm sorry, Dennis. You described this in your application to the city clerk. >> Yeah, we well I I don't I can't I can't tell you exactly what's on the application here it >> we are kind of delving in and
questioning because it seems that although the planning board gave specific criteria as Mr. King has said it's sort of been applied in the reverse and that u the board at the paddle uh club made a decision. Sure, we'll put
aside and identify a boat slip so that we can have it associated with this, but in fact, you've opened it up to the the to the public to say you can come rent it. If you need a boat, we can rent you one, but it's not it it's not the criteria, which is I think what this
planning what the planning board agreed to in passing it in 2024 was it was the criteria. So, that's why I think there's a little bit of confusion, clarity. >> If I may, The nature of this application is whether and the issue presented by
this application is whether or not the applicant um should be granted a waiver from the site plan requirements for the member the indoor member dining area for the paddle club. We're not here relitigating
the boat. And if the municipality thinks as though that there is an issue regarding the operation of boat of the boat, then I would suggest that the uh person that should deal with that is the zoning official because it's an
enforcement issue, not a site plan issue relative to the member seating area for the paddle club. I do believe if if I could just speak for for on the city side of it, I do believe it's it's relevant to what we have going on at the property though and I think that's what
the board is trying to say right now, at least from from my perspective and we're trying to make sure that we're going to have consistency in application. So, whatever you're telling the board is what's actually going to
happen out there. And I understand that the zoning officer is the appropriate party, but we also need to make sure that what you're giving us is reliable testimony, too. And and the other thing, too, is that you you've indicated that
your site plan is 11 years stale. And uh since that time, things have happened to this property. City has approved them. It's expanded to a point where the site plan itself is stale. that that p that little piece of property you showed in
your site plan which was that building it was just a little building. Now it now it's a it's a a paddle club with 200 and some members who can also bring guests and they all come in cars and you have a boat which you're renting
on the uh the Airbnb market to people who drive cars and and and so the whole concept of what happened at that site plan review in 2014. It seems to me as though the whole site plan ought to be reviewed because you're doing stuff to that property. you're
you're you're shoving uses into that property which were not envisioned in the site plan. The the uses of that property in 2024 don't appear on a site plan anywhere. >> Well, I would indicate um if we look at
Mr. Hurles's narrative report to this board and we turn to page five of it, we haven't heard from Mr. Herurles yet. He's got the zoning chart there and the stat and the column entitled status. Every aspect of this site plan conforms
with the city's ordinances including the parking. >> Well, it is it doesn't it doesn't. Um and that's what I'm trying to figure out. >> Well, if you want to argue with Mr. us about that. But his his report, >> did I inter
>> his his report indicates that this property conforms to the city's ordinances. >> I thought that's what you said. I thought you were done. Okay. The part that I'm confused about though, and I like Mr. Hurles to address this, my general recollection, and I'm not
certifying to this, okay? My general elect recollection is at that meeting I write down as much as I can but I don't write down everything that this clubhouse normally would have a parking element itself. Okay, it it has seating. It's a
it's it's it's a it's a clubhouse. It's a restaurant. And but the idea at the time that we talked about it then was that its activities were members so that they either live there and had parking and would walk there or they had boat
slips and attended from the boat. Okay. The testimony that we just heard though is different than that. That the membership is not tied to being a resident and the membership isn't tied to having a boat slip.
So, so now it's basically where are the people parking that are members who don't have a residence and don't have a boat slip and how many of them are there because Craig has nothing in his chart for the 18 parking spaces
inside and the however many are outside and if those aren't tied to a boat slip and they're not tied to a residence. I I admit that I'm a little confused about the parking. I had understood previously when we talked about this before. The idea was and well, it's not
the idea. It's in here that there was this upstairs clubhouse and that could have 120 people in there for an event and they were condensing that down to being a residence >> and that that that residence would be
only used by boats that came in and then they could stay there. And that made sense to the board and they kind of didn't get too they were concerned about the parking that calmed them about the parking. And I have to say at the time it was my general impression that the reason the parking wasn't an issue is
because the parking was dealt with in other aspects of the site plan because there was housing and marinas. Once you have the membership that aren't boats and aren't residents, I don't see how those that those people are tied to a
parking space anymore. We've been, this has been the case since 2014. Let me explain something. That was a hole in the ground up there. It was a nightmare. It was a pit. The mayor and this board was so happy that we came and did what
we did and and regenerated what is the nicest marina in the Cape May market without question. That's what we did. There was there was 168 boats on that ground. 50 of them were never going to go in the water again. >> It may be,
>> but no, no, no. Let me let me finish. You're cutting me off now. Go ahead. >> All right. I have operated a $15 million property around a marina. If you can't park to go to your boat, you don't rent
a slip. We've been sold out from year one since I rebuilt that marina. and the customers that we have at the paddle club that are mostly from homes in the marina, but there were no homes there. But I built $75 million of property that
gets taxed every year forever. Everything works fine. Everything's fine there. We have we have open spaces. It functions. It has to function. Otherwise, I won't have a marina. It won't work. When you show up to a boat,
if you're going light, you bring 40 pounds a person. You can't you can't not have a parking spot. So, the point is that it it works. So, I think like to to to ignore the fact that I've been there
and part of this community for going on 12 years and turn this thing around is a little one-sided to say the least. I'll answer anybody's question, but I've been there for a dozen years. I don't have one complaint
in in all those years from the zoning officer. >> Let me let me ask you this >> from the zoning officer, but I know there are complaints from the people who go to the paddle club. I live in town. I was a member of the paddle club at one point. And when you started that paddle
club, there were no houses there. So, there was a lot of parking where there are now houses. No, there wasn't. There was never a permitted parking spot where those houses are. Not a permitted parking spot. Never once. Never. Never once on that plan that was up there. >> So, where the houses are?
>> Yeah. >> In Spicer Creek, I guess it's called, >> right? >> Cars didn't park there. >> I'm not telling you that a car didn't park there, but it's a grass strip, right? It somebody could have parked there. We even stored boats on it. But
it wasn't part of the plan. this. It's been in this configuration for six years. If you're if if the parking fails, I fail. The marina doesn't work. >> So, how many parking spaces, if I went
to count them right now, actually exist for >> 126. I'm glad you >> Yeah, I'm sorry. Yeah, >> it's a little >> I don't vote. >> Okay. I understand that.
on approving or not approving. My job is to make sure the right approvals are requested and then the approval is granted if that's what they want to do. That's my job. >> The part that is you have 105 required spaces and you have 123. Your parking
may be awesome. Okay, that may work fine, but I we have to know what number are required for the use you're proposing. And then if it's not enough, then you can give all these great reasons why it functions awesomely. Well, and they can grant it, but what I can't do is have you come in and say,
"We're going to do this with this building, this residence, and that's how it's going to operate. So, don't focus too much on the parking." The board agrees with you, and then you don't do what it says. And now you come in. That's the bottom line of that. That's not really That's not really disputable. Okay? I was there for that. I was there
for your testimony, so I know what I know about that. Okay? Now when you come in you are we aren't talking about sure there may be plenty of parking for boat slips for boats and boat slips there may be plenty of parking for residences okay but now we're trying to understand what
goes on in this building and it may be that when we do an appropriate analysis based on the number of seats that you have adequate parking I have no idea all I know is this you just testified under oath that there are essentially non
residents and non-boat users using this new bar and restaurant that we're about to >> I did that 10 years ago. >> Okay, hold on. Don't yell at me. Hold on a second. And all I am saying is we may I need to understand the parking calculation for that. Okay. And how
what's the permitted number? What's it's based on the number of seats, not the number of your members. That doesn't matter. >> No, it's not. >> It's done on seating. >> No, that's Mr. Schul. >> Is it not? >> No, Mr. Schuler can address the parking. >> Um if we want to isolate on the parking.
Um, let me first ask some preliminary questions of Mr. Schula. Uh, Mr. Schulo, you're a New Jersey licensed professional engineer. Is that correct? >> And planner. Yes. >> And you're a New Jersey licensed professional planner. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> You previously appeared in front of this
board to testify with regard to a variety of projects. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> Including um on this particular property. Is that right? >> Yes. >> Um I would ask that Mr. Mr. Schul will be u recognized as an expert in the field of engineering and New Jersey uh planning.
>> Thank you. >> Um Mr. Schula, you testified in connection with this uh project in uh 2022. Is that correct? >> Yes. >> You're familiar with the site plan. Is that correct? I am. >> You're familiar with the Kate May ordinances? >> Yes. >> And can you explain the parking
calculations for this particular property um as it currently exists and as uh it is proposed to be utilized? Sure. So the original approval from 2004 which carries into this updated version in 2013 and then again in 2022.
Generally the parking requirement was based on a number of boat slips and it was based on an old number that D used to enforce that's no longer in place at 6 spaces per slip. That's the only parking requirement that exists at the site the aside from the separate residential. So Rich, when you were
talking about number of seats generating a parking requirement, that applies to a public restaurant or bar, but it doesn't apply to a club. The club is permitted in the zone and there's no separate parking requirement for it. The membership, you said it doesn't matter. >> So that can't be that can't be the rule. >> That's not
>> because it can be it can be based on the number of slips if the club members are slip owners. That makes perfect sense. >> I'm I'm not saying that I want it to be this way. That's the way it's written. cannot say we are now having membership open to everyone in Kate May. No sane person would say that you could have
they could have 480 members under that standard. That can't be the rule. I mean what am I missing? >> There's confusion over there. The number of members you were saying the number of members don't matter. But that's the only thing that drives the parking and it's not changing. It's 10 years it's been the same number of people. Nothing
is changing. All we're doing is putting space inside the building for them to get out of the weather. >> Where's the testimony at the number of members the same? He just did. >> Yes, I I did. >> If if I could if we could just take a moment and say >> are the number >> what >> can we just resolve that factual thing
before I type it in my thing? Mr. Schulo has just said that the number of members hasn't changed since the 2014 approval >> since they started operating. Yes. >> Let me let me hold it. Yeah. The 2014 was the last time you did a site plan.
The the paddle club didn't exist until when? >> 2014. in 2014. >> After the site plan was approved, then you put the >> It was part of the site plan. >> It was part of the approval. >> It was part of >> We didn't put it in before it was approved. We put it in when it >> wasn't added afterwards >> in 2014. >> You sure?
>> I'm absolutely sure. >> All right. Can I get a Your engineers represented that the membership hasn't changed 2014. Is that accurate? >> I I'd rather be more accurate and say we have 160 families associated with the membership in 2025.
>> How many were there in 2024? I'd have to go back. Maybe it's 160 families. That's how we do it. Um I I would have to get the data for you. I don't have every year memorized, but I
know this much. That's the number that works. And that's what I wanted to get to. If we're here to do you think I have a parking problem down there right now? I think what we're trying to establish
is just making sure that we as a board understand the conditions in which you're operating. This is not a challenge on you or how you operate your business. This is a clarification to make sure that we understand the conditions so that when we're evaluating the site plan, which is what was brought
before this board, this application tonight, that we understand all of the conditions. The other piece of it is is the the 160 families. Is there a charter document within your organization that that that shows that that indicates that somewhere?
>> Yeah. >> That your board >> We're required to keep that record for the ABC now, but we've always kept that record for our nonprofit status with the f for the federal government. >> I would suggest that you have that sent to Mr. King. This is part of what is
becoming the official record. I, Mr. Pet, I I so appreciate what you just said because I think I can solve the problem if if if I'm not being attacked for not having enough parking like I'm a merchant downtown and I don't think I
am. >> Right. >> No one's attacking you for the parking lot parking you need and then you can get it granted. But but so no one's attacking you for having bad parking. I have no the park could be awesome there. I have no idea. Nothing is changing on parking because I'm not adding one more
person to the mix. But let me here's the question. Here's the solution to this discussion. What will I limit the family membership to? Because you made the point it could be 480 people. You are absolutely right.
I'll never do it because I'll destroy my marina. So I'll tell you right now the most important thing if I'm on the other side of this trying to get to a resolution is say will you just keep it at 160 families >> be a condition of use that
>> I will do that I will tell you right now it solves everything we just discussed >> except for I think that there's still the question for this board to get clarity around the conditions for the boat >> and so it may be another consideration
that you also consider that that is not available as a transient riddle that it is that you apply the rules that this board put forth when it approved it understanding that you are either coming in by boat and or that's it you're
coming by boat or you have a boat in that marina and you want to use it outside of that I would say to you that is where we would continue to kind of question because I think where Mr. King was going is if that's used as a transient rental, there is a parking
requirement for that unit. And to avoid that, in case your number doesn't fit within the chart, you could, you know, put forth a condition. >> Clarify that. That's not accurate. >> No. Okay. >> If trying to make up a solution, if there's not a boat parking there and
then using the unit, it's not a motel. Therefore, it's not a permitted use. The only use that's allowed in that location that doesn't require a use variance to have a house above a club, okay, is a a a unit that is used with a boat that
comes in in a transient use and then stays there while their boat is docked there. That's what a boat is. If they want to get approval for a Airbnb above a um club that serves alcohol, then Craig has to do an analysis, has to determine if that's a permitted use, and
then you grant it or deny it. That's just how it is. The motel is what was allowed there. Am I misunderstanding that, Craig? >> So, the the parking analysis up to this point, just make sure my mic's on. the parking analysis up to this point and I think
this is the Jay that exhibit that you have up there is the 2014 site plan. >> It's the one. Yes, that was the one that was approved under that resolution. >> So as part you gave you submitted three sheets as part of this three sheets of that site plan were included in your
application for this application. Um to my knowledge there has never been an parking analysis done for the club. If you look on this sheet there's a marina calculation is required.5 spaces for the
city 6 spaces for caffa times the 210 public slit slips and you get that that information. And then on here it says provided public spaces at 123 spaces. And then there's a residential calculation. Okay. So, and I've never
remember the board or myself having that conversation at a at a board level with how many members there were or or anything like that. So, as far as I know, there has never been a parking analysis done for the club. So the the
reason why the board is struggling and that the fact that we're questioning how many members you have or whatever is whether it fits in with the parking. Now as part of my review I ind I do indicate that the parking was conforming and that is just based on the information that we
have. Um I I have the marina calculation in there with our our city requirement and I also have in parenthesis there's no requirement for transient parking accommodations. That was how the board approved the last >> right right >> approval. >> Right.
>> But as part of that, if you look above the zoning tables that starts on page four of seven and five of seven. So, and I start talking about the uses. So, it says marinas, boat clubs are and are permitted uses permitted uses subject to section
525-65. And then it says boats or other transient residential accommodations for boat travelers when located immediately adjacent to boat docking facilities are permitted uses in the zone. So that's our permitted uses. Now I also copied
and pasted section 52565 which is you're permitted a club but it has to be subject to you meeting the conditions of section 525-65. And I ask the applicant on page 507, the
applicant should provide testimony confirming that the proposed improvements and changes comply with the boat club requirements stated in that section. Um, if you note under on page 407 at the bottom under a boat clubs,
section three has parking and that says parking shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of section 52549. That is our standard parking requirements that has the menu of all of our for all of our uses. And in addition to that, it says two off- streetet
parking spaces shall be provided for each trailerable boat. Use of a boat club facilities shall be strictly limited to the number of boats for which two off-street parking spaces are provided and available. So that analysis has never been applied to whatever was
going on with the club, >> right? Um, so you know, the board may grant you a parking variance, but I don't know that that analysis has ever been done at any of your site plan applications. And that's why there's just fear of, you know, any owner can
just allow as many um families to participate in your club and create a parking problem. Obviously, as a good, you know, owner, you're not going to do that, but the board still has to do an accounting of what's on the
site and and if there's an appropriate waiver or variance that's necessary, they have to make that analysis. What I'm telling the board is that analysis has never been done with regards to the club. >> My is is the membership of the boat club. Do you have to own a boat?
>> No. So essentially it's a social club. >> Well, it's a social club like any yach club. I mean this was largely written around Corinthian that that language there Corinthian yach club. I mean like there's a lot of people in yach clubs that >> really really it's a it's a it's a a
unique use within a larger marina complex. It's a social club. >> There's a social aspect. Sure. Yeah. >> And so people join >> probably as much if they own a boat or they just like to go to the pool. like they have a prime >> or a paddle paddle board or
>> from a zoning standard the the membership is not really dictated in in the zoning code. >> So you know but the requirements are >> right >> so that's >> and the membership and the activities aren't dictated but the impact of the
club and its members and its activities on parking >> right the number the number is kind of controlled by the parking requirements. >> Exactly. That's that's >> I'm looking at it >> point and ultimately it's controlled by common sense. >> You know, you're you're just not going to have a business model if you
>> and and we don't our our zoning doesn't leave it to the business model of the owner. So I I I agree with you, by the way. I'm an advocate of I don't I believe parking is mostly ridiculous. Okay. I don't know. Somehow Tishes operates without any parking. I mean, people walk to places, they make do. I I
I think parking is overrated in in the town. But leaving that that's not that's not my job. I don't make policy. Okay. >> So the difficulty is this. I have a slightly different recollection than Craig does in terms of testimony about parking. I kind of recall Mr. Schulo
saying when this motel thing came up and I was kind of baffled by the parking in this whole complex and Mr. Schulo testified uh that it was built it was it was in there. It was it it was in the Rangu that when they approved this whole
site plan, there was a boat club. Okay. >> It's true. >> Because there's boat slips >> and there's residences that you that satisfies the parking idea for the boat club. It was all done together. >> Okay. >> And at the time we were just dealing
with this this thing and nothing else was changing. >> And the argument at the time was >> this is great because it's making the clubhouse smaller. we could have 210 people up in this space. We're making it a house. So, we're actually reducing the intensity of this use. This thing is great. And that's how that was approved.
But I will tell you that in my mind, the argument there was this all makes sense because the residents are using it, the boat slip people are using it, and that's what this is for. Now, that it's a social club serving alcohol with membership that's not
limited to the residences or the boat slips. That to me is a term a situation where we got to say well wait a minute what's the parking situation now it may be that your persuasive business mind and your excellent council and your great engineer we look at the parking
and they say hey this parking is fine okay this is this is perfectly fine >> we already did that in 20144 everything you just described you make it sound as if I'm coming in with this new plan I'm going to have more seats and we're opening a restaurant and all none of that's true >> let me ask you let me ask it this at
all. We just opened some space. >> Let me just ask you to >> for the same people to go into >> these couple questions because >> I'd like to review the 2014 testimony. It's it's this is this is important. Up until this point between 2014 and now
let let's between 2014 and 2024, prior to the issuance of the club license, the the membership of the paddle club utilized the pool deck area for food service and their own alcoholic beverages. Correct. >> Yes.
And since 2024 when the club license was issued, um the only change in what was going on in the exterior was now the club members were purchasing alcoholic beverages um through the club license
and weren't bringing their own onto the premises. Is that correct? >> That's correct. >> All right. With the proposed member dining area, what's going to be occurring that is no that hasn't already been occurring since 2014? Nothing.
>> Mr. Shulo, um, with regard to the site plan, >> how will the membership dining uh area impact the site plan, the approved site plan as it w as you have it on the board as it was submitted, as it was approved
by this board in 2014. It won't. No change in space, no change in area, no change in use. >> Will the member dining area impact the existing building arrangements? >> No. >> Will it impact the driveways? >> Nope.
>> Will impact the number of parking spaces available? >> It will not. >> Will impact ingress and egress to and from the site? >> No. >> Will impact drainage facilities? >> Nope. will require any changes in grading or other existing grading uh drainage patterns?
>> No. >> Will there be any change to utility services? >> No. >> Will there be any change to the landscaping? >> Nope. >> Will there be any change to buffering? >> No. >> How about sight lighting? >> No change. >> Any other considerations of site plan in light of the definition of site plan as
set forth in the municipal land use law? >> No. Will adding the porch over the existing contract uh concrete port porch inexraably uh inexurably ex alter the existing building in any way so as to render the building non-conforming? >> No.
>> Will the uh addition of the porch roof uh alter the building height? >> No. >> Will alter the building or lot coverage? >> No. >> You reviewed Mr. Hurles's report? >> Yes. Do you have any uh issue with
anything that he has set forth in his report? >> Uh only one comment at the end that we're in the historic district and we're not. >> Okay. >> I think it was a typo. Craig >> and in his report, Mr. Harless indicated that PA and I think he needs I'm not I
think he meant Palestina Associates in that and needs to check his uh his report but I think he said PA supports the site plan waiver application or the application for uh that we've put in place of sight. >> Is that correct? >> Yeah, that's what I read too.
>> And would you agree with his uh conclusion in that regard? Yes, >> that is the issue that's before this board is whether or not the site plan will change, not the operation of the
boat. That's that's been dealt with in the context of the prior approvals. This is not a relication of the boat. The parking has been uh approved on the
2014 site plan. There are 123 parking spaces. Mr. Hurles sets forth that there's no change in the membership being proposed. There's no change to anything that is happening with regard to the club and the club membership.
This application as it is before you does not alter any aspect of the existing approved site plan and that's what we have in front of us a site plan issue not the use um if we were looking
to have a Airbnb on the third floor. Mr. King is absolutely 100% correct. We would need to uh present an application to the zoning board for a use variance. We're not here doing that. >> Excuse me. You do have a Airbnb above
that hotel. >> Well, >> yeah, there is an existing Airbnb currently. You can bring it up online right now. >> Well, it's not just online. That is the testimony at present. >> Right. >> Well, to be clear, Airbnb is not a use.
It's just the platform to rent. But it is as stand corrected. >> Well, you knew that anyway. I'm just >> a leased an illegal leased unit. >> It's a lease unit. It's a It's a short-term rental. That's what it is. And that was what was approved. >> Um, as just mentioned by Bill, nothing's changed. In the 2013 approval, it
mentions specifically Kate May Paddle Club. It doesn't just say clubhouse. It says this use. It's exactly what Sean is doing. >> In the 2013 2014 resolution, the 2013 approval, it names Kate May Paddle Club. It talks about exactly what he's doing. It doesn't just say clubhouse generically. Says Kate May Paddle Club.
This isn't It doesn't I'm I'm trying to figure out and I I can't get it from the testimony if at the time that was that that use of the clubhouse was associated with residents and people renting boats as opposed to the general public. It may
be that at the time who I wasn't here in 2014, okay, but in 2014 if the testimony at that time was that this restaurant clubhouse facility is to be used by
people who have residential units, people who have boat slips, and anybody else who wants to be a member. That's persuasive. And if that number was in or around 160, then I agree
introducing serving alcohol may not be a parking issue. But if at that time it was for residents and boat slips and there was 82 members and it was BYOB
and now it's 160 members from anywhere in Kate May who can go there and buy alcohol because they happen to know the guy that is a member or actually can be a member, not even just whatever their membership requirements are. After tonight, I guess
I'll never be a member. What? What are there's no site plan considerations there. If they had six if his testimony tonight was we had 600 members now, we had 83 in 2014, we have 600 members now. You would your testimony under would be there'd be no site plan considerations.
>> My testimony would be the zoning doesn't differentiate the way it sits now and it can't be a consideration. It's already been approved. I'm not sure the posture of your question is interesting in that you're asking. Do we feel like it could be an impact? >> I'm sorry. >> It's >> surely, you know, I I respect and like
you very much. The fact that it was approved in one site plan doesn't mean we don't have any parking considerations. Mr. Herurus will tell us that there are parking considerations. >> I mean, but it's not that's the thing. It's It's not changing. That's >> right. Yeah.
>> This is This is >> I need a couple minutes with my people at this point. This is a This is You completely just took this and turned it on its head. It absolutely was approved with anybody in the community could use the facility
>> categorically in 2014. You said you weren't there. I was there. I gave the testimony. And let me tell you why. Because there were no homes. There were four There were there were six units. Five were abandoned. One was sold. We
reversed a condominium association and make it a single family home event there. We got 287 variances that night, bulk variances to do that site plan. Craig was there. There was no people there for this club
idea. It had to be opened to the marina and others in the community. And it's been a a total sar. >> That would be very persuasive testimony. If the testimony is that the park >> I already gave it 10 years ago. I'm giving it again now. >> Well, maybe
>> the board the board never set a restriction on how many club members you have. You've made that up. And that is the issue that the board is faced with. Like you >> make it up. I haven't even made it up yet. Right. >> But but I mean there was never there was never a discussion on how many members
you could limit this. never a discussion on and that's why the parking analysis was never done. >> You've made a material change in the last year which has caused this discussion. >> You went and got a club liquor license that becomes a a completely different
animal than somebody sitting around a pool with a couple of kids and and and some Australianly temples. Now you have a private club on the water which you are proposing to expand into an indoor dining facility. That's a That's a material in my mind. That's a material
change to the original. >> Here's here's what I'm going to suggest you do. Mr. Coffin, let me help. Here's what I'm going to suggest you do. It's going sideways. Okay. This is a good facility, very good professionals, person who invested a lot of money in your town.
I I suggest you just regroup. You're under the impression that because we're focused on the parking, you're going to lose. That's not the case. Our board just wants to have an analysis to understand how many people are using this, what parking is available, how has
it changed over time. The testimony is mushy. Your engineer testified is the same number since 2014. Now you're not so sure. Maybe it is. Why not just regroup and come in and say, "Here's how many people there." Let me finish. Here's how many people there. Let our
engineer have a minute. This may not be that big a deal. 18 seats. I mean, it's not that much. It's not that big a deal. >> It doesn't The seats don't My point is you're making my point. >> Okay. >> It's 180 seats. It's 2,000 seats. But if
I say I am not going to make one more member available to the community, what's the difference? That's the wrong way to do the math. It's it all hinges back on, well, how many people are here every day? Because that's what generates the traffic and the >> You want to make the case that you're
going to limit it to what it is now. and you want to come in and show that what you have now is adequate for its purposes, then fine, make that case. >> We have made >> flip this to a bad owner and they could just say we're going to have 300 members. >> I couldn't agree with you more. I
couldn't. So we have to we have to somehow quantify and limit based on the number >> and that is all we're asking for you to go on the record with how you have operated this what your charter says with regard to membership all of those
things that I'm sure your lawyer can summarize and and and so that we can find a way to ensure that the testimony tonight will be operationalized from you to the next owner. And I think that if I can add on to that, you know, board is
also slightly struggling with the the fact of the boat tell and how that relates to the alcohol and how everything is coming into play. >> Boat tell does not relate to the alcohol whatsoever. >> Well, you testified.
>> Look, right now, as the testimony stands right now on the testimony under oath on what it's being used for, I believe requires a use variance. So the you know if it's and if it's being used different than a motel then you need to have
parking for a three-unit residence and you need a use variance. So we got to straighten that out. You can say it's an enforcement issue but it impacts parking. You don't need parking spaces when it's a boat use. When it is a boat use you now need Craig will tell me I don't know the RSIS calculations need
some number of parking spaces and it's a use variance. So, that is not a non-issue, but why not just get your facts together and make a case? There's no objectors. If there's a terrible parking problem and it's a big disaster for the community, there'll be somebody
sitting out there. So, let's just >> Fair fair enough. Fair enough. I don't I don't feel attacked here. And and frankly, I I like that there aren't even there's just not even anybody else here. I think we've done a very good job in
the community and put on a wonderful product down there. I know that we do not have a parking problem as it relates to all these uses. I also know that the homes that I've sold where somebody takes the four cars that they can park in their unit and they invite eight
people down, they start pushing into our parking lot in one day. We finally have to say we tag all our parking so we can control it. push people out. You know, that's there's pressure always. I'm happy to come back and lay it all out
with you. I've worked with Craig for many years. Great engineer. It's a great team. We'll do that. We But I just I have to tell you that I feel that we do a very good job down there. We are This
is a marina and a facility that Kate May should be proud of. We're proud of it and we plan to keep it in the form that it is in. And I I'm very sympathetic to that. >> I don't think the board Go ahead. I'm sorry. >> That that Craig said like, but what if
we get, lack of a better word, a jerk next. >> I don't want to see that happen. >> I'm Let's Let's tighten it up. Let's Let's down. >> That's exactly what I think we're trying to do here. I don't think there's any question, right, that the the way the propertyy's run, it's a it's a it's a
nice it's a good property. But the board has to justify what it has to justify. And we can't we can't go we can't go past that. We can't just let it slide >> because if you came back for another application, another change in the future, someone is going to reflect on
that and question what our decision was if we didn't have something. >> A couple other board members want to speak. Bob has a question. Sorry. >> Yeah. Um first of all, I I know someone who is a member of the paddle club who does not have a boat. He does not have a house there, but he was one of the first
ones to join there and he got grandfathered in is what he tells me. >> And he also told me if you want to join, if I wanted to join now, I couldn't because I don't live there, that you've closed it. Is that correct >> that you've closed the membership and you grandfathered some of the people in
there? >> Yeah, it's not it's not correct because you don't live there or don't have a boat there. It's that we're sold out. we can't take any more members and operate the property correctly. And to be sure, if you have a boat slip, we're we're we're we want you to be a member before
somebody out on the street. >> So percentage that that group that's out on the street went down went from this to this because when we started there were no boats there. We had 210 slips and there were 30 40 boats in the Marine. Well, there were more than that when I when I was a member there and it
was before we got there. It it went really well. But so the point is is now we really don't have that that gets pushed out over time, you know, because everybody who's on the property really wants to be >> Yeah. Rick, you want to say something? >> And and the while we
>> hold on, Bob, I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Just one other in the comments that I have gotten from my friend um about uh the use of the the the the boat club. He he they really enjoy it. They like the B Bob BYOB uh concept and all that. Um I
mean I I kind of like what you you've done here, but I do think that maybe tightening it up a little bit. >> Um I know like I also belong to Kay National. Okay. and I'm a member there and they have closed the membership there because they've had so many people that have applied to it and they've
limited it, you know, and and you know, doing something like that and making it part of the record I think would go a long way. >> Fair enough. >> Well, I think everybody on the board at the time you came for the um the third floor, it was made very clear the people
that use that will come and go by boat. >> Yes. But I don't think that's that's a zoning issue to enforce and not to be discussed here. >> That's a separate issue. Are is your paddle club limited numbers by the ABC? >> No. >> And does it have an occupancy load?
>> The facility does like the spaces always have an occupancy. >> So that'll regulate how many >> room does everything. >> So that'll regulate how many people you can have there? >> No. I if if it said 400, I wouldn't have more than I have now. No, I I understand that. But you have outdoor like the
indoor the occupancy load of the indoor space is very limited to what you can and and I don't think they're they're not connected how you rent like I said is your is a zoning issue not a planning like we've already agreed on that and if it's not being followed then that's a zoning board issue. This is something
totally separate to me. I I agree with what you're saying, Rick, >> with what about the hotel >> about the boat being >> the motel being a separate issue from >> I I will tell you that you're entitled to your opinion about that and that's
fine. But if it's not being used as it is alleged to be you as it was required to be used that directly impacts parking. So I'm just telling you that >> and I and I'll agree with that. >> Yeah. That's a a zoning enforcement issue, >> but but the applicant is back in front of the this board now. >> The fact that it's actual use is
impacting parking. Now, I'm not saying you got to condemn them for it. I'm just saying if there's an appeal. My opinion is that if it's actually being used different than as represented and the actual use impacts parking and now you're reviewing a parking impact, you can absolutely consider that. Not
punishing for not doing what they're supposed to do, but it's just like, well, I'm not going to try to do a comparison. So that's my opinion on that. But I am sure after tonight they will reflect upon their use and they will either come in and amend their prior approval or use it properly
because the way you're using it is not consistent with the >> will there be fines attached to that? What are the ramifications of that? >> That's not our bow. >> So whose job is it to enforce that? >> The zoning zoning officer >> then that's where it should go. Not >> but you're you're misunderstanding me Rick and I want to just be clear about
this. We are not enforcing this. What we're saying is in the parking analysis, you take the testimony as it's given to you and you analyze it as to whether the parking is is is going to be a problem. And if they're saying, "Hey, I know we said we'd use this for residents, but
it's really a disco club and we have 400 people in there at night." You can't say, "Oh yeah, well that's a enforcement issue. We don't care what that how that affects parking." I'm telling you that if what they're doing is not a motel but rather an Airbnb, then that that the parking isn't
forgiven. There's there it impacts parking. >> I understand that. But the enforcement is use it the way you should and you eliminate that problem. >> Well, that's that's a corollary issue. Well, that that that is absolutely >> or you can go back and take a look at your operational um usage of it and come
back and testify that you're going to adhere to the original >> and eliminates the parking issue from that. >> It would, but that needs to come back. >> The underlying thing is it's a use issue and this board would not have jurisdiction if it's a non-conforming use.
>> I think we >> let's let's have the the the applicant and his uh professionals >> Yeah. Guys, did you want to regroup and talk about this for a minute or what? Or what do you want? What do you want to do? >> Just one minute. Sure. >> Sure. Go ahead. >> We don't want We don't want to go too. >> Go ahead. >> Yep. >> Thank you.
>> Yeah. While we're while we're there talking, guys, um skip down on the agenda, >> this payment of the bills. >> Anybody have a motion? >> I'll make the motion. >> Second. >> All right. Just give me a second. I got to find my sheets.
>> Say I. You you have two of them here. >> There were two. >> Yes, there are two. >> Approve them both. Right. >> Legal and engineering. >> All right. First one is for uh legal, please. There a motion. >> I'll make the motion on the legal payment of the bills.
>> Second. >> Okay. Deputy Mayor McDade motions. Mr. Lhome seconds. And that's for all the bills. >> I >> Yeah. >> Um Mr. Gorgon. >> Hi. >> Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Reed. >> Yes. >> Mr. Crowley.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Lhome. >> Yes. >> Mr. Riggs. >> Yes. >> Mr. Produces. >> Yes. >> Mr. Jones. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> All right. We have another set of bills for Hurlesish Planning and Engineering LLC. Is there a motion? >> Motion.
>> That Mrs. Reed. >> I'll second it. >> That was Rick and then me. >> Oh, thank you. Mr. Longhome motions. Mrs. Reid seconds. Mr. Gorgone. Yes, >> Deputy Mayor McDade. >> Yes, >> Mrs. Reed. >> Yes,
>> Mr. Crowley. >> Yes, >> Mr. Longhome. >> Yes, >> Mr. Riggs. >> Yes, >> Mr. Produces. >> Yes, >> Mr. Jones. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> I have a comment >> to this board. >> Well, I think we should wait for the applicant to >> Well, it's not it has nothing to do with
them directly. >> Oh, okay. >> This is the second time in three months that this city has had the wool pulled over its eyes by Airbnbs. Can we not talk about >> Well, it's the truth. >> I understand, but we're on the we're
still that obligation is still kind of hanging out there. So, I'd rather have that conversation separate from the >> All right, I'll wait. >> Mr. That's fine, Mr. King. >> Everything that's we're talking everything we're talking about now >> is in front of the public and everybody's watching us,
>> right? >> Let's just wait. >> Let's just wait. >> Well, this should be for the public. >> Should we have a a >> We have a 10-minute recess. I second that motion. >> Fine. >> All in favor? >> I >> Thank you. Off, please. >> Have a nice break. >> 7:30.
>> I don't think more of you I don't think you should talk about it off the record either because you're all assembled. Okay. So, go home and talk to your families about it if you'd like. >> Yeah. Outrageously low. I I must have missed the zero. So I can make this comment when they're
present. Okay. >> There. >> Yeah. Our main office is in Northfield. >> We have about 15 or 16. >> Yeah. Yeah. or duel.
>> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. My my partner my partner Merry Christmas. This is where it's Christmas. Uh we we just interrupt we interrupted our
meeting so we're back in session now guys. Okay. >> Okay. >> Go ahead. >> So we understand the board's concern with regard to the membership. Um because as it currently stands um there
are approximately 100 Mr. uh Mr. Scarbor testified there 160 families. I think it it it may be plus or minus a few um and we understand the board's concern as articulated by Mr. King because if he's
right if you suddenly have a surge in membership I mean although from a operational and sort of business standpoint we as it's been indicated the membership is closed but that's sort of informally and
Mr. Scarbor on his own does not have the authority here to limit the membership because you have to recall we are dealing with a nonprofit corporation that has a board of trustees and it has officers and it also has governing doc
documents which uh I I didn't bring with me tonight because I didn't I didn't think I I would need to. uh but the bylaws I can indicate to you uh do not have a provision in there limiting the membership. So in order to limit the
membership we would have to have a meeting of the trustees and the bylaws would need to be changed and we are willing to undertake that process and I think that if we undertake that process and come back to you and show you that
that process has uh been undertaken and that there is a limitation on membership. Um, I think that will go a long way towards assuaging your concerns relative to parking because as I um
listen to you, I think the parking is the is the primary concern here. >> Can I ask you thing is of interest too, but that's separate. Um, what would be helpful is some kind of historical analysis to show that you've had 160 or
something close to that for a period of time and then you can testify operationally. We've dealt with that by making sure that residents don't park in the available spaces for the club or whatever and that it's been worked fine and and then establish that and then that number has meaning as a something
that can operate well and then maybe the board will you know agree that as long as it's limited to that that it makes sense and then it'll be fine. >> Fair. >> We can we can pull those records because uh what happens you know operationally what happens is memberships renew on an
annual basis. So they're and I've said I made this analogy before they're they're kind of like my Sunday plan Phillies tickets. Um you know I I get the opportunity every year to renew it and if I don't then Mr. Hurles who's on the list gets to you know uh buy my uh
Sunday plan tickets. Um and that's sort of how this the the the membership works. So we can pull those records and and we'll be able to to see what the uh and it and it does operate on a family basis. So uh I I'm a member, you know, I
have it's it's me and my wife. So 10 years ago it might have been a little bit different. It might have been me, my wife, and my daughter, but now she lives in Philadelphia and she's not a member anymore. But that's essentially how it works. >> Association with the development there.
>> Yeah, there is. Just for the That might be a way of doing it. I've been president of a homeowners association. >> Bob, >> your mic is not on. >> Sorry. Um I was I was a president of a
homeowners association number of years ago and um that's a way that we dealt with the clubhouse and the pool there was through the governing documents and um of the homeowners association. Just a a thought there. Mhm. And Rich, uh, if I
remember correctly, didn't you say you would also revisit the 2014, uh, site plan approval process? >> Um, yes, I have the I have the resolution. Mr. Herurles is going to dig up his old um document. I mean, it's it's my
recollection that the parking was tied the parking acceptable because it was tied to residences and boat slips >> and not from 2014. as my recollection of the discussion in 2022. Mr. Herurles believes that may have been the discussion in 2014. He's been here
longer than all of us. So, we will revisit that. >> And and Craig was also going to revisit the apparent lack of parking analysis in that process. This may result in the board
being asked to grant a parking variance. Um, just be I don't think that that club analysis has ever been done. >> That's my point. >> I think in 2014 the board approved a clubhouse. Now that clubhouse has that
word club in it, but I don't think they ever approved the club use per se. And there was no I cannot remember any discussion about limiting or number of members. Um so that's why I I advised the board that I don't think the parking
analysis has ever been done for the club and that's why you guys raised the concern of hey how are we controlling how many family memberships are being allowed here? >> Understandable. >> Yeah. And also in that analysis, that
particular intersection there that your driveway enters into is probably one of the most complicated and and annoying intersections in towns. And so would an analysis of parking also be an analysis of egress and ingress?
>> That was that was done in all of the all of the previous site plan approvals. We talked about Roseman's Lane being one way, being two-way. We've we've gone round and round with that >> whenever we turn the u the alley back in. >> Yeah, I remember that. That wasn't even
on the >> So, that has been that has been dealt with over and over again. So, I'm hoping not to revisit that. But >> you may have to Mr. Shulo can provide a or this this team can provide a parking analysis that we can review and
determine whether a variance is necessary or not and whether the parking is adequate >> and some reasonable caps on on growth. Yeah. But >> all right. Okay. >> And I think and the importance of this is not to say that they have a parking issue, but to put something in the
resolution that controls what goes on at the site moving forward? >> Yeah. >> Mr. Kane, will we s will the uh BOEL be um addressed through >> I mean I I think for first of all, it
won't be addressed by me in terms of enforcement, >> right? But understood that I do think I mean we write these resolutions for a reason. So somebody should be doing something about it. >> But if the testimony next time is that we recognize that we have to use a consistent resol the resolution and we
will that's one thing. If the testimony is no, we want to use it as a Airbnb without any or that an illegal lease leased unit, >> right? >> Uh not tied to a boat slip. and then they say, "But we also want a parking
variance." Then you can factor that into your analysis of the parking and the impact it has uh that different use has. And you know, >> I just want to be clear. >> There's no question that the motel clarification is going to come up the next meeting. >> And so we would encourage you to have a
conversation with your >> Yeah. And what would be helpful if you could produce the uh the merkante license for that property as a as an Airbnb or a hotel, whatever it is. It's got to have a merkante license, and I'm I'm assuming you have one for that.
>> Mhm. >> All right. Any other any other questions, guys? >> So, we we're going to table effectively, right? >> We're going to we're just going to we're going to adjourn it and continue. We don't need to renotice. Can I make my comment now or? >> Let's close out this application and then I'll go to the board and you can
say what you want to say. >> Okay. >> Can I just ask one little question here on the pictures that you provided? Do we have a roundabout date on when these were taken? Just >> that >> month year. >> Yeah, that that's accurate for this year. That's off the web page.
>> So, >> okay. So, both and how about the inside? >> That's accurate. So, summer of 2025 B. Okay. Got it. Okay. >> Okay. Any other questions from the board?
>> So, this is it'll be heard again at our next meeting which when do you want to >> That's right. They may have some work to do. >> Let's just talk about dates so I can announce so we don't get jammed up. >> January. >> If if there's a variance required then they would be required to notice. >> Then we would be be required to notice.
>> Yeah. So, that could change the calendar. So, let's put it in January. >> I I would put it at January and if that changes, then I will contact uh the board secretary and Mr. King and Mr. >> I just want to announce a date and time so you're covered. >> So, for now, the January
>> second meeting in January is what? January. >> Oh, yeah. >> When's our when's our second meeting in January? >> Okie dokie. >> All right. >> All right.
I know that's a phone among us. >> Second Tuesday. >> First Tuesday, it' be the >> second meeting. >> Would January 27th make sense? >> I used to realize it wasn't >> Would January 27th make sense? >> Yes.
>> 27th. All right. So, this application will be continued January 27th. It'll be heard at 6:00 p.m. at this location. If for any reason uh that date needs to be adjourned, uh we will try to put it in the agenda ahead of time. So check the agenda and there'll be announcement of the new date at that time unless we can
get it all together by then. >> Okay. >> Very well. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thank you gentlemen. >> Okay. >> You wanted to say something? >> Yes. I I do have a comment. >> And >> this is for the good of the order. I suppose
>> this application's closed. The comment now is for the good of the order. Our board's just discussing, but you're welcome to participate as public. Go ahead. Well, I would like every business owner to be here because I'm a business owner in the area and I succeed when other businesses succeed. But they have to
abide by our resolutions and we have to enforce our resolutions. This is the second time in three months that an individual has come before us and has not followed our resolutions about how they are to operate their boat
or their rental units or whatever. This happened three months ago with the people who own I don't know the names of people that own the Queen May where they had this building that they purchased and it was for the specific use of their employees
and there was never any intention never any intention for these people that own that building to use it for their employees. They opened it up immediately as an Airbnb and then three months ago we passed
again that they could operate uh what what was that shoe store called? Uh I can't remember in the mall that sho uh cast what was it called? >> Yeah. Where they they're opening that up now. Now, we have some before us tonight
where we p I remember specifically I was new on the board that this was supposed to be used for transient voters and it wasn't. It's an Airbnb. I pick it up on my phone. I can go rent it out now
if I want. When are we going to actually start enforcing what we pass? And maybe that's a charge to the city council or the city as a whole because we're not enforcing >> it's not our job to enforce it >> as a zoning board. It's the the zoning
officer and the um the town attorney are the ones who deal with that code enforcement. And if I could comment on that specifically, the city has invested in software to pick up on Airbnbs that have not registered with
mercantile licenses that have not um follow through on what they need. Particularly, I mean, some things have to come from people issuing a a complaint. So, in this instance, this is
the the first I'm hearing of this situation. So obviously at a certain point the zoning officer would be notified, hey that's that's an issue and it and it needs to be addressed. So I encourage people if you if you think
there's something out of compliance that that this board passed, you can always reach out to the zoning officer. But then we turn into an issue of we have neighbors calling on neighbors and you have a full out zoning war. So I think the city's trying to do a delicate
balance of of uh competing interests but I think for particularly Airbnbs the city has undertaken a huge effort and expense and the city manager did announce at a meeting and we have pretty much almost 100%
>> percent compliance on that. Right. So at least on the I can I I can speak to this only because it's it's been an agenda for MTRA um with uh pushing we updated they got the software it just went into place this last year in this situation I
would say that it was would be considered so unique in my view and I've been involved in the entire merkantile license short-term rentals and the compliance on filing and getting your applications. I don't know that anybody would have picked up on this because
it's such a narrow definition of use in in a one condition place. Meaning, how many other boats do we have? None that I'm aware of. So, we had one that was passed through an ordinance in 2014. You know, that's not the kind of thing
that the code enforcers driving around going, "Let me go knock on the door at the hotel today and find out if they have a boat." Um, so I I really think this would have been an outlier without having been informed by someone. Um, we
are we do have almost 100% 100% compliance on people who are out there renting through an Airbnb. Verbbo filed for their applications this year. We understand we actually you can go back to history on these houses to see how
long they've been renting and when they how many times they did >> I think it's worth the effort to go back and try to deconstruct this situation. >> I I don't disagree with you Rich because it is a little >> part is was a mercantile license issued >> right
>> for it to be an Airbnb. I will be on that tomorrow morning. >> Right. Because if it was without looking at the >> right >> resolution then I mean not that's not like someone shouldn't go to you know get yelled at or anything but that would explain why the software didn't pick it up or did the software not pick it up >> exactly and why they didn't pick it up.
And that's one of the things I want to look at with Aaron the city clerk. >> That came out of nowhere for me. I didn't know that was an issue. >> Again it was just a comment. Yeah, just a comment >> and and I appreciate that, you know, as well. And obviously, as these
resolutions um are approved, Karen does send that over to our zoning official who gets a copy of it. And you know, obviously, if he were to be if the zoning official were to be out there for another reason,
of course, he would take note of, hey, wait a second, this is not in compliance of what was approved. So, I mean, sometimes, like the deputy mayor said, this was such a unique thing that it did raise the issue and now it has to be
sorted out. >> I'm just glad I can't be blamed. That resolution was pretty clear. >> Very clear. >> Look, I actually listened to you guys. >> Enforcement is always a problem. Has always been a problem. >> So, >> so the um construction about that you're
talking about tonight was caught by Bruce. They didn't have permits. So the what they're trying to legalize now they never got a permit. >> I was going to that's how it all started >> was they already started working on the inside. >> Well let's not talk about a particular
application we already quasi. >> Yeah she's bringing up that they had >> I agree. I'm just saying. >> Okay. Yeah. >> So the generalities are better. >> Okay. Um >> motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to adjurnn. All in favor. >> Thank you everyone. Have a good night.
Merry Christmas. Happy to He's driving. >> Mike.