Hi Rich. Well, how are you? That sounds funky. Testing. 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 state so at this time. Please stand for the pledge of allegiance.
I pledge algiance 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. >> Mrs. Wernner >> here.
>> Mr. Venudo >> here. >> Mr. Lewin. >> Mrs. Notch >> here. >> Miss Sheen >> here. >> Mr. Walsh >> here. >> Mr. Zexer >> here. >> Mr. Joerger, >> Miss Stevenson >> here. >> Thank you.
>> Okay, we need a motion to approve the resolution for New Jersey Prime Real Estate LLC, 1507 Yacht Avenue. >> I'll make the motion. >> Second. >> Okay. Was that Mr. Venuda? Motions. Miss
Sheen seconds. >> Mrs. Notch. Yes, >> Miss Sheen. >> Yes, >> Mr. Walsh. >> Abstain, >> Mr. Zexer. >> Yes, >> Miss Stevenson. >> Yes, >> Mr. Bernudo. >> Yes, >> Mrs. Werner. >> Abstain.
>> Thank you. >> Now, we need a a motion to approve the minutes of April 23rd, 2026. >> I'll make the motion. >> I'll second. >> I'll second. >> Mr. Zexer motions. Miss Stevenson seconds. Mrs. Naj, >> yes.
>> Miss Sheen, >> yes. >> Mr. Walsh >> Mr. Zexer. >> Yes. >> Sorry. Thank you, Miss Stevenson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Venudo. >> Yes. >> Mrs. Werner. >> Abstain. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Our first application tonight is the Bray Family Partnership, 720 Washington Street. Good evening, Madam Chair, board members. Uh, John Amanhauser of the DWI Law Firm here this evening on behalf of the applicant Bright Family Partnership.
Subject property for this application is 720 Washington Street here in City of Cape May, identified as block 1078, lot 2 on the city's tax map. Uh, this property is located in the RS residential seasonal zoning district. Uh through this application, the applicant
seeks both uh C2 variance relief under the substantial benefit test as well as a D1 use variance in order to operate a 120 seat uh restaurant and alcoholic beverage um service establishment inside the existing Southern Mansion building.
Uh as the board members obviously know, members of the public, the Southern Mansion is one of the most architecturally stunning and important structures that are located within the city of Cape May. The applicant has undertaken a lot of uh time, energy, and
financial resources in order to preserve this property, beautify it, and put it into the condition that it is in today. Uh in doing that, she's seeking to come to you tonight to expand its current use for the inclusion of the bar um restaurant that we just spoke of in addition to the existing use as a
tourist guest house um and the special events that are conducted on site. Um, in addition to needing the D1 use variance, there is, uh, as I mentioned, C2 variance relief related to the proposed off- streetet parking surface that is shown on the site plan that is located in the back of the room to the
rear. Um, there are 10 parking spaces that are proposed uh, in front of the expansion of the building. Um as is shown on the plan, uh we need an off- streetet parking variance related to uh the deficiency from a uh strict reading of reszoning ordinance as to required
number of parking spaces as well as a variance related to the surface and curbing in that proposed parking area. Here with me this evening uh is uh Paul Kates. Paul is going to testify tonight is a professional planner and professional engineer. Paul did design the site plan and he is a principal with
the firm of Kate Schneider Engineering. I I know Paul's been here number of times before, but we're happy to elicit credentials if needed. Madam Chair, we also he's running a few minutes behind coming from Philadelphia, but Brian Newswanger is the architect on this project with the firm of Atlantis uh architecture. He should be here within
15 minutes. Um I did intend to elicit testimony from Paul first, so I shouldn't present an issue from a from a standpoint of our presentation tonight. And lastly, to my left is uh Barbara Wild. Barbara is a member of the Brave Family Partnership, the applicant, and the owner of the building. Uh I do intend to elicit some testimony from
Barbara at the conclusion of our presentation tonight. So if I can have both of uh my witnesses sworn and then we'll have Brian sworn when he comes if that's acceptable. >> Sure. We also have our board of engineers heard this morning that each of you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth
of the truth. >> I do. >> M if you could turn on your microphone. >> Thank you. >> I do. Hey madam chair, would you like me to elicit Mr. Kate's credentials or is he accepted? >> Okay. All right. Thank you.
>> From your engineer and a planner. >> Engineer and a planner. Yes. >> Are you survey too? >> No. >> No. All right. Correct. Okay. Got it. All right. Uh so Paul, if you can, can you give the board just based on your site plan general overview of the existing conditions on site and what we're proposing through this application?
>> Yeah. So our lot is approximately 216 ft wide by 260 ft deep. Uh we are located in the RS residential seasonal district. Uh as was stated uh we do have three road frontages. Uh one on Corgi, Jefferson, and Washington streets and
then the fourth side backs up to the post office. Uh the site currently contains a tourist guest house uh with some event space. Uh in addition, there's a a mix of parking on on different surfaces. We have stone, brick, and some existing grass block
pavers. Uh and then there is also a trash enclosure uh along with sidewalks, walkways, and uh significant landscaping. Um with regard to what we're proposing tonight uh relative to the site uh is to reconfigure the area
of the grass block pavers uh into 10 parking spaces with the intent that it'll largely appear as a garden when not full of cars. Uh there will be uh landscaping surrounding uh that parking area, a brick border uh with slate
delineators to delineate the spaces and then ballard style uh low lights uh with the intent on pres preserving the historic look of the lighting um which was also uh at the request of the HPC. >> So Paul just just to veer a little bit
from from what we plan to go over. So when we initially submitted this application, we were proposing a lot more off streetet parking, right? That's correct. >> When we originally filed this, uh, we went to the HBC and they didn't like the idea, right? >> That's correct. >> So ultimately is what is proposed on the site plan now with the 10 spaces located
where they are. Uh, was that sort of a consensus between both our group and the HBC was the best design in order to appease them and retain the historic design standards that guides them and their opinions? >> Yeah. So, we met with them at one of their work workshop sessions and uh
spent quite a bit of time um going through I guess their standards with what we were trying to accomplish and uh and they felt that you know something to this. We got a little creative with the landscaping and the parking arrangement
would be in keeping with what they see it their standards and probably the the crux of that was that they don't like to see any parking in front of any historic structures. So, uh, the kind of compromise given that we have three
frontages and essentially no width between the addition and the the postal lot was that we would pull that parking back behind the front facade of the historic portion of the building. U, which is what we did. So, we're
proposing to abandon the uh the existing grass block pa area and reconfigure that parking back behind the uh existing building facade. >> And that that grass block parking area that we're talking about abandoning that
is located off Washington Street in front of the front facade of the building. Correct. >> That's correct. And our original plan called for reconfiguring that entire area in that grass block pavers to make more efficient use of that space and uh
and not well received by the HPC. >> And then just just a little bit more detail related to the 10 spaces. We know that we're we're identifying them as 10 off- streetet parking spaces, which they are, and they're legally sized to be that. But with all of the landscaping and the aesthetics that you added to it,
is that something that we intend to look more like an additional landscaped area, garden area as opposed to parking? >> Yeah. And I think when cars aren't in there, given the the grass block pavers and, you know, the grass growing through them, and then with a boxwood surround, additional landscaping, and the low
lighting, when cars aren't parked there, uh I don't know that anybody would be able to identify it as a parking lot other than the uh the signage and and directing patrons to that area. But largely from from the street, it'll appear as as a an additional garden. And
then even when cars are parked there, the uh the boxwood hedge surrounding it will kind of soften the view of the cars from the street as well. >> Okay. All right. So, Paul, based on what I'd went over in my introduction, our application file, we we're asking for a D1 use variance, right? Related to the
proposed use in the building as well as some variance relief uh under the C2 criteria related to number of off- streetet parking spaces, required paved surface area, and parking lots with with curving. Is that right? >> That's correct. >> All right. Let's start with with the D1,
the use variance. Um, is it your professional opinion based on your understanding of the site, your preparation of the plan, and your knowledge as a professional planner that this location is particularly suited for the use that we are proposing as a restaurant and alcoholic uh beverage service establishment?
>> I do. So given that I do believe the site's particularly suited um being tucked behind the post office and in an area that already has another successful bar restaurant along with um a few other commercial establishments and how the uh
the site currently operates. The proposed use will not only complement the existing use but will add to the vitality of the property and the neighborhood. >> Okay. And then Paul in in terms of some special reasons that you believe would be promoted right if the board were inclined to grant the D1 use fair variance. What what reasons do you
believe exist that would be >> So I believe the plan will promote the health, safety, and general welfare. We're providing safe access to the building and parking. We're giving the public a chance to see and experience one of Cape May's historic gems. Uh we believe we're providing sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety
of residential, commercial, and recreational uses, both public and private, in order to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens. Uh this again will open up a historic landmark to more people uh with a variety of uses to meet the public and specifically tourists
needs. Uh we believe it'll promote the desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design. Uh again the appearance of the parking lot as a garden will enhance the already appealing grounds and add to the visual environment. Uh we also believe we're maintaining appropriate
light air and open space. you know, we're not proposing any more uh any increase in the size of the structures or any any more imposing site characteristics. Um, and then we're also, I think one of the the more important purposes of zoning, we're
proving the conservation of historic sites in the state to prevent urban sprawl through improper use of land. And I think that that is the purpose that's at the heart of this application. So, one other thing to just touch on. It may be sort of explicit in what we filed, but aside from that off- streetet
parking area that we're proposing, the 10 spaces, we're not otherwise affecting the exterior of this building in any way at all through this application, are we? >> No. Uh, with one other exception, we are um upgrading the hand the existing handicap parking to current ADA requirements. But other than that
upgrade and the the proposed garden parking, the site will remain unchanged otherwise. >> Okay. So Paul, in addition to the the special reasons that you believe are are promoted for granting the D1 use fair, do you see any substantial detriment that you believe might befall the public
good, the neighborhood, the city of Kate May at the board were inclined to grant this relief? >> No, I believe there'll be no detriment to the public or the zone plan. >> All right. So Paul, that that was, you know, in keeping with the criteria related to a use variance, right? That that's correct the overarching uh
request that we're making here. there's additional that triggered the need for some parking relief, right? Some variances related to parking that we just went over. We're asking for those under the C2 substantial benefit test. So, when you consider the variance relief we're looking for related to those items, is it your professional
opinion there certain purposes of zoning advanced if the board were grant to grant that requested relief as well? >> Yes. >> And and what purposes are those? So I believe that those followed uh basically the same ones that I outlined which were A, C, E, G, I, and J. And I can run
through them again. That's promote the general health and welfare, provide adequate light, air, and open space, promote the establishment of appropriate population densities, provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses, and pro promote a desirable visual environment along with
promoting the conservation of historic sites. So Paul, when and this is our architect that's that's arriving. Paul, when you let's talk a little bit about the off- streetet parking, right? So So we're indicating that that technically under the ordinance, right? We need uh
69 parking spaces, right? And that accounts for required parking spaces for each of the dwelling rooms that exist in the property, spaces for employee proposed employees on on the busiest shift, right? And then additional uh parking required based on the number of seats that are being proposed, right? 69 total spots would be needed to meet the
ordinance requirements. We're providing 40. Is that right? >> That's correct. >> Okay. When you think about dining and restaurant establishments in the city of Kate May, is it uncommon for those establishments to require or to not have adequate off- streetet parking? >> I think it's more common than not in in
Cape May and in many short towns. >> Is it in your opinion having 40 off- streetet parking spaces? Is that more than most these establishments most likely have? Absolutely. >> So, despite the fact that we need a variance because we don't technically meet the standards for the ordinance, we're providing more off streetet parking than most establishments that
exist in the city. Would you agree? >> That's correct. >> All right. Um, and you you may have already indicated it, but but the testimony you put on related to the positive criteria, would that be the same for the other two parking variants we need surface level and and curbing? >> Yeah. And again, I think with those I
think that those same standards apply, but I think this is a a unique situation in even requesting those because it's it's being done to kind of preserve the historic nature and the look of the grounds. Um so you know it's not that we couldn't or wouldn't pave it but that we
feel that this is a much better alternative therefore supporting the pro positive criteria and and then we went over this but through our original proposal when we were at we proposed a lot of additional parking spaces offsite through the use of grass pavers that plan would have met the off street
parking requirements by ordinance. Right. >> Yeah. We actually were able to get a plan that that managed to put 70. So we actually exceeded the parking by one space. >> But that noted we would have taken away from the aesthetic look of the building and the HBC really wasn't willing to go
there to get this to >> the only way to accomplish that would have been to park in front of the front facade which uh they were uh more than a little bit against. >> Okay. Um Paul, aside from the positives again, any substantial detriment you see befalling the public good or the zone
plan of the city and the neighboring properties if the parking variances were granted that we've asked for? >> None that I can see. >> All right, Paul. Um going to take you over. We requested certain uh waiverss from the checklist requirements and they were highlighted in Mr.'s review letter.
Um as it relates to those particular variances that we asked for and and I'll just briefly go over them. We asked for a variance from required topography of existing and proposed conditions, proposed utility layouts for sanitary sewer lines, storm drains, etc. and um
environmental impact and traffic impact statement. Do you believe that those waiverss are justified through this application? And if so, why? >> Well, given the uh basically dimminimous nature of the changes that we're making uh for the overall site, we believe that those are uh warranted. Uh with regard
to the grading, we do in a in the updated grading and drainage plan that we're going to support in compliance of this, we do have additional grades. We do show topography and we are showing proposed grades, but with regard to the underground utilities. Uh they're not
proposed to change. Um I believe uh the architect may be able or Mr. newswer may be able to to speak to that, but they are sized to handle um the needs of the building as a whole, including the the updates to the restaurant.
>> Paul, there was another waiver um that was highlighted related to solid waste and recycling. And Mr. Ellis, rightfully so, asked for some more information related to how we're proposing to handle off trash and recycling. So, can you go over for the benefit of the board what we're proposing to do in that area?
Yeah. So the there's a currently a trash enclosure. It backs up to Corgi and it's towards the center of the parking lot in an island. Um it is a large it's 10 by4 um fully enclosed. Uh it currently has one uh dumpster and uh so the recycling
bins uh and that in looking at the operation and how it's currently utilized that dumpster is is underutilized at the moment. So, the intent is to continue to use that dumpster and that trash enclosure to support the restaurant as well. Um, and
given that the applicant has the ability to um increase the number of pickups during the week and given that the the trash enclosure is currently undersized, we feel like that'll more than meet the needs of the the restaurant addition to the site.
>> So, the trash pickup is privately conducted, correct? >> That's correct. >> Okay. So when you meant when you talked about the additional pickups if needed, they can be called and ordered if it depending upon business in a sense the amount of trash. >> Understand they can schedule more than one in a week, but they can also call them and ask them to to come for an
extra pickup if needed. So they have a lot of flexibility there if for some reason they they did approach the capacity of that trash enclosure, but as it stands um there's more than enough volume. >> Okay. Um Paul, in addition to the waiver
items highlighted at Mr. Hurles's review letter, there were some general review comments uh in there that that relate to your plan and the testimony you provide. Do you want to go over some of those comments and respond to them at this point? >> Yeah. Well, >> yeah, go ahead. >> I don't specifically I mean we had no
issues with uh complying with any of the requirements of the report. >> So I'll go over a few in terms of lot coverage. Can you confirm we didn't ask for a variance and that we comply with the lot coverage requirements in the RSON? >> Yeah. Yeah. So, we do comply with the lock coverage and it is our intent to comply. Um, we did uh break out a
schedule of the uh the impervious coverage and we'll uh we'll provide that with in compliance plans showing that we do comply in every area. >> Terms of number six, it calls out the need for a driveway with um to be widened to 20 feet. >> Yeah.
>> Sure. >> Um what are we considering the standards for lot coverage? Like what zoning I you're seeking a use variance. So when you have a use variance, it can be confusing about what >> what stands you're applying. So you know which ones you're applying.
>> We're we're we plan to utilize the SR standards. So we're >> RS RS standards. >> The RS standards. So we're not looking to deviate. >> For what use? >> We we have a menu. Our our zoning is and I and I believe that
>> the answer is for a tourist guest house. That's correct. And that was what we utilized in the schedule. And Mr. His is correct. That's what saving you time. >> So from looking at you >> comfortable with that, Mr. That's an appropriate standard. >> Well, I'm think the board determines
whether it's appropriate or not, but that's that's the existing lot coverage that's permitted with the existing tourist guest house. >> And we are we are currently under um what's permitted. So, with this addition
of the semi-p permeable parking, um, we aren't we aren't approaching Yeah. I think currently it permits 75 and we're at at 32 and we're moving up to 40, right? >> So, we're still well under >> well under. >> Okay. Paul, in terms of number six was
getting at the um the note calls out that we have to have a driveway width of 20 feet and it looks like what we're proposing off Washington to access those 10 newly proposed spaces is 16.9 ft. Is that right? >> That's correct. So as a condition of approval required, would you agree to a
widening of that to the 20 ft so that there is sufficient space for passing on both directions? >> Yeah. And what we showed was the the existing the but we have no issue uh working with Craig to uh we would defer to him on how he would like to see that arranged but widening that is not an issue.
>> Okay. Um number seven, can you confirm that um you're going to have uh required EV supply and service um for for make ready parking spaces available? >> That's our intent. Yes. Okay. Um and then Paul two, if you can, um lighting of the proposed parking area. Can you go
over that a little bit? The the 10 spaces. >> So again, this was uh something that we worked out with the HPC and the the plans that were provided had been updated with what they had requested
that we provide. So they are a low ballard light. Um, so I believe they're only three and a half feet tall, so they would sit low, so they wouldn't broadcast light out into the neighborhood, but they are sufficient to meet the city's lighting requirements for the parking lot itself. And then
there was also two existing lights which are proposed to remain. >> Paul, in addition to that too, these these lights and that parking area when when you talk about not having any runoff, right, or or trespass of lighting into the neighborhood, those are located in front of the expansion of
this building. Correct. Correct. >> So there is a buffer in a sense from that parking area to the neighborhood off Corgi behind it. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> And Jefferson as well. They'll behind the building on Jefferson. Um you know the parking lot will be visible from Washington but being low lights with the
um the existing hedge that surrounds the property and the proposed boxwood hedge around the parking um light disturbance should be incredibly minimal. >> Okay. Um Paul, there's some other standard conditions of approval contained in Mr. hurls his review letter. Any objection to those as conditions of approval?
>> No objection. >> Okay. Anything else you'd like to add before we uh turn it over to Mr. Newswanger? >> Uh maybe just one thing that given the the parking requirements um so I was going to say that.
Yeah. So again, uh, you know, being in a shore town and not exclusive to Cape May, we see many people show up, uh, park where they're staying and then walk, bike, Uber, they find alternative modes of transportation to get around around the city. And, uh, as such, we
also felt that, you know, promoted the uh, the use var or the parking variance and the need for parking has diminished. Um, that's not to say that parking isn't always a premium, but bars in particular are not the first place people think to drive. So, I think what we see around
the city is we see more people walking, biking, and uh and Ubering to bars and restaurants and and we don't see this as being any different. >> Okay. Anything else, Paul? >> That's it. >> Madam Chair, if I don't know if you rather me get through Mr. Newswanger's
testimony before questions? >> Yes. >> All right, Ronnie. Uh, and is Mr. Newswanger recognized? >> I have you been before the board? >> Stay with your license. Okay. >> Yeah, if you just go over some credic with Atlanta Architects. We've been in business. >> You got to use the mic. Mike mic.
>> I'm sorry. Sorry about that. It's Brian Newsmer with Atlantis Architects. We've been in business. I've been practicing architecture for 43 years. We're based in Philadelphia and are licensed in Delaware, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. Um have been actively
involved in this project, other projects in Cape May, West Cape May, and up and down the Jersey Shore. and are very familiar with the area. Um have done numerous other projects in the region. >> Okay. Can you just spell Can you spell that
for me real quick? >> Newswanger. Ne W. >> Sure. Madam Chair, I don't think Mr. Newswanger was sworn. He wasn't here to be sworn in. >> Is there any swear from the testimony about the GR stuff you got?
>> I do. >> All right, Brian. Uh, I I know that you got here a couple minutes. >> I I apologize for that. It's It's finals day, so I just left Drexel. We had our finals this afternoon, and I had to scurry down here.
>> Did you have a chance to listen to most of Mr. Kate's testimony? >> I did. >> Okay. And do you agree with the the items that he placed on the record? >> Absolutely. >> All right. Now, for for purposes of clarity, because I know it was a question that that that came up um in the review letter, can you confirm the number of guest rooms that are located
within the the Southern Mansion right now? >> Yeah, it's um it's a total of 23 with one owner's um unit and one conference room for a total of 25 uh rooms. >> So, Mr. Hollis, I think that was the in the application, I believe, we listed
25. It was to we were collectively viewing both the 23 guest rooms, the conference room and the owner's quarters. >> So the conference room is what's causing the >> that the discrepancy. >> Okay. >> Yes. >> Right. >> How big is the conference room? >> Don't know the answer.
>> It's a similar size to a bedroom, but it is utilized for conference purposes. >> It's not No, it's not on large scale. It's probably seats about six people maximum. >> And it was approved through some of the prior resolutions that were included in the application packet. It was recognized that. Um, and can you
confirm, Brian, we're not looking to add any additional guest rooms to? >> No, we're not changing any of the uh existing configuration of the building. >> Any exterior renovations aside from the parking and lighting proposed? >> No, not at all. >> All right. So, let's then focus on the inside, right? Because that's you you
created the or drafted the floor plans and layout that was submitted with this application. Is that right? >> That's correct. >> Okay. Can you go over that uh proposed layout for the board's benefit? What we did was do a um plan layout of the seating as proposed in the uh parlor and
first floor porch area and the lower level basement area uh which shows 50 seats, 32 seats on the um um veranda and 36 within the um side porch and closed porch area. Um there was a discrepancy I
believe of two seats and I think that had to do with uh the application called for 120 and graphically we were showing we had eliminated graphically two seats at our bar in the lower level. So that was the discrepancy between 118 and 120.
So can you clarify for the board the amount of spaces that we are or seats that we're seeking to have approved? Is it 120 seats? >> It's 120 seats. Correct. >> And Mr. His we will revise the any compliance plan for approved tonight to show those two extra seats at the edges of the bar. >> There's one seat on each end of the bar.
>> Correct. >> Correct. >> Got it. >> Yep. >> Okay. Um >> Brian, in terms of the proposal, right, so we know that this building presently exists as a tourist guest house, >> correct? Correct. >> We're proposing a new use, right,
through through restaurant and alcoholic service establishment. Is that right? >> That is correct. Right. Is it your professional opinion knowing the layout of this building, the space that is available and what you're showing, is this site particularly suited and is there enough space in this location to accommodate this expansion?
>> Yeah, absolutely there is. Okay. >> Yes. >> All right. >> Do you view in the event that this were approved, you see any detriment that that could befall the neighborhood in particular, but also just the public good in general? >> No, I don't see any detriment to any of that what we're proposing this evening
at all. And that's based on your testimony that there's sufficient space uses like do uses like this would you agree >> sufficient space uh the spaces are safe uh protected properly max we have egress as required and in fact we ex have
excess egress so we don't have a life safety issue so it's it's perfectly within the bounds for the use >> okay and Brian I I asked Paul the same question you went over a couple of the um general review comments and discrepies between the plan um and what
we're showing. Uh do you have any objection to any of the other uh conditions as conditions of approval of this application? >> No. >> All right. Brian, I know that you're looking at we we received a letter from the city of Kate May fire department related to the application. Right. >> Correct. >> And that letter called for I believe a
recommendation of approval with some items to be provided if necessary. Correct. >> Correct. >> Can you go over those and whether or not you believe they are required or needed? There was a comment made about a detailed plan for fire suppression, detection, etc. Um, as well as a kitchen hood. Now, sprinkler system has been in
place for over 25 years, as is the hood. It's fully inspected, licensed, and in operational order. Um, so it's it's currently uh been reviewed and certified. >> So, it's there. >> It's there and existing. And I believe they also they indicated and this was an
if necessary comment, but they asked for an egress plan if necessary. I believe one is necessary. >> Yeah, if if necessary, we'd be certainly we'd be willing to provide an egress plan that shows um the proposed life safety egress travel distances, etc. as
an overlay to our plan. >> And in terms of an egress plan, do you see any life safety issues with the amount of egress and locations of egress points is proposed? >> No. As I said before, because of the number of people, size of these hallways, and obviously the most important is that it is a fully
sprinklered facility, there are no life safety issues here that uh I'm concerned with. >> Okay. Now, Brian, you have a lot of experience with historic preservation applications. Would that be accurate to state? >> Yes, absolutely. >> Okay. In terms of one of the purposes of zoning that Mr. ates indicated earlier
was um the historic nature right of not only this property but the preservation of the property and opening it up to members of the general public. Right. >> Right. Correct. >> Can you speak to that? Do you agree with that position? >> I do. Absolutely. Yeah. I I one of the basic premises of a of historic
preservation and let me let me be clear. My former partners were the people who put Cape May on the historic register. Um so I'm very familiar with that. been dealt I've been been dealing with historic structures through my entire career from college hall, Logan Hall,
Furnace Library and Penn's campus, numerous churches in New York and Philadelphia etc. um and other s sorts of like 17th and 18th century structures and their restoration and preservation and the premise of historic preservation
is to make these buildings viable and available to the general public. So that what we're asking, the way I see it, the what we're asking here tonight is we are making this building more accessible to the general public so more people can utilize it and appreciate the building and obviously participate in its
preservation as a result. >> Okay, Brian, anything else you'd like to add at this point in time before we turn it over to Barb? >> Um, I think that covers the comments and u the issues that I s as I saw them. >> Okay. Uh, Madam Chair, just a few questions of
of Miss Wild. Um, >> before you ask K, I just have a quick question. >> That's up to you. Sure. >> I think it's for Rich before you go with her. The The license is in um >> I guess I I I just need clarification before start. The license is in Hamilton Wild.
>> It's not in Hamilton Wild. It's in an entity that she is the a member of, but that is accurate to state. >> I'm sorry. It's >> it Hamilton Wild is not the license holder. There is an entity in which she is the member of that is the license holder in the premise. >> Okay. Because I was just going by what the city gave the license and that's why
I wanted clarification. It says Hamilton Wild be the sole member in interest of the license. >> Correct. >> Barbara Wild has no ownership or interest in the entity to be licensed nor is she an officer, director, shareholder. So >> you're you all have to go slower for me.
You seem to know what you're talking about. I don't just go a little slower. And I don't understand. Is this a standing question? Are they allowed to meet to make this application? >> Well, I are we approving the license to be putting there. Okay, we are approving
the license. >> Well, no, >> you're not. The license is already there. >> You wouldn't have jurisdiction for >> who she's asking who's going to answer. >> If you're going to answer, I'll let her ask you. I don't care. But are you >> I'm happy to. I'm ready to answer this. >> Yeah. I didn't know who had the answers. That's why I wasn't sure. >> But I'll listen to your call for you
then. >> So my >> Mr. King microphone, please. >> Sure. The license is held in the name of New Jersey Farmers Cooperative Group LLC. Uh the this was placed at the property back in 2022 through approval of city council. And you're looking at
exactly what I'm looking at which lays into who the membership members of that entity are and whether exactly who is involved in that entity and who is not, who's allowed to be and who's not allowed to. >> Yeah. >> Uh you're correct. Hamilton Wild is the sole member of the license holder. that
license is situated at this property pursuant to a lease agreement that was approved by the city of Kate May before they allowed it to be cited there. Nothing is changing in that perspect from that perspective. >> Okay. >> So that entity in in my opinion has no wouldn't have any standing to bring this application because they don't own the
property. Rather they just hold the license that is situated there. What I believe we need to do in the event that we're successful before this body through having the applicant ask for this use variance would be to go to city council because we are going to at that point need to amend some of these
special restrictions placed around this license. But I don't think we get to there unless we get through here first and that's the reason that we're before you asking for the relief we are. >> Okay. That's all very complicated. Who owns the property? >> The Bray family partnership of which Miss Wild is is a member.
>> Then that's our applicant. They own their property, correct? And they're getting permission for a use in their property and then we'll decide someone will decide who's using it. I mean, >> that that but that's >> I would I agree with that. >> That's the real estate. We're making a zoning decision. So, we're not making a
licensing decision. So, to me, the person who owns the property makes the application. And by the way, people who don't own property can make the applications. I'm not sure a tenant isn't. I think a tenant's allowed to make a zoning application. I think a contract purchaser is allowed to make a zoning. >> I would agree with that. They could. So, they're an owner. They're making the
application. If if it turns out that there's an issue about who can operate there, that'll be dealt with by council. But we're making a zoning decision tonight. Okay. The land owner is the appropriate application. >> Thank you, Rich. >> Yep. Or >> both of you, >> Barbara. >> Yes. >> If I can, can you confirm um that you were a member of the applicant at the
Bray family partnership? You have an interest in that entity? >> Really, more than anything else, I'm kind of a steward of the propert. >> You're going to have to speak a little closer to the mic. >> I said yes. Actually, I I'm really more of a steward of the property, I would say. >> How long have has the Bray family
Partnership owned this property? >> Since 1994. >> Okay. And in that time, can you go over some of the renovation that's been required of you and and >> partnership? Um, the place was absolutely dilapidated when we arrived
there. Um, it was not mortgageable. It was in horrible shape and it probably could have fallen apart. Um we were I was in my 20s then. Um we had to actually jack up the entire building because it had powder post beetle damage. We had a sister every single
joist some of which were 50 feet long and 3 ft wide. Um and this was basically say 10 to 12 20 year olds and a few people that were older. We worked 20 plus hours round the clock. We did everything. We set up a mill work on the
property. We milled our own wood. We tongue and grooved our own flooring. We did everything. We did all the research. We went to we went to New Jersey Trust. We did everything to the standards and over and above. Um the slate roof, the windows are perfect. The mullions are
perfect. Everything is done historically accurately. I can say very respectfully to you all that is arguably, if not the most, one of the best historic reservations ever done in this area. And I'm very proud of that. Um, we work really hard and I've kind of been
focused elsewhere and I am really focusing back on this again and I'm about to restore it completely over again. It never ends. It's it's like when you start one side and you're done that you end up doing the other. It never stops. The costs are ungodly. The
work is unbelievable. Um, it's huge property. I'm guessing that probably most of you have never been in there. It is absolutely stunning. It has, you know, several for crown molding on 15 foot ceilings. It has everything is is state. It's gorgeous. Absolutely
gorgeous. Nobody has it. I've been in all the buildings down here. It is one of a kind. It is very special. And when we met with the New Jersey Trust, uh the executive director said to me, "Oh my god, Barbara, this this could be it is really museum quality is so over and
above." She said, "But we want it open to the public. We want the public to understand why historic preservation is so incredibly important and why their taxpayers dollars go to it. Unfortunately, now there's a few people in a few rooms who can go in there. And
then of course we have when we have weddings and events, we're allowed to do that. Now the way it's been originally set up, they said four people per room. So you could have nine, you know, 24 23 time four and then and then you have another 90ome people on top of that at
an event. But you're still the numbers we're talking about aren't different at all. But what we're doing is allowing people to come in and enjoy and appreciate. There's nothing like this in town. It's absolutely stunning. And it's
a tremendous amount of work, but as a steward, that's what I do. And you never really own a property like this. It's important. And then you want to make sure it's, you know, maintained in perpetuity. And to do that, you need an
income source. This is not cheap. You're looking at 50,000 plus in taxes. You're looking 40,000 in water bills. And that's just a start. And it goes over and over and over. And it's really, really important. And we went over everything. This is what it needs. This
is what'll make it work. And it's it's already being done in multiple other places all over Kate Bay. But we are in the very unusual position. We have all this land. We have all this buffer zone. We have the ability to do all these
things and not bother anybody else. >> All right. Operationally, >> yes. >> Um, so we I know we just went over the fact that that there's an existing license in place with some conditions on it. And if we're successful tonight, we'll need to discuss that with city council. >> But for the benefit of the board so they
can hear from you. What in terms of closing times, what's the closing time, the latest closing time that you would propose for this bar and alcoholic alcoholic beverage establishment restaurant if if approved? >> Maybe 11. There seems to be some false information spreading around that I want to do a nightclub or something late. And
we're not looking to do that at all. Not at all. I mean, in reality, what's changes since co people are eating earlier. It used to be you go out in Kate May, you'd eat at 7:30, 8:30, 9. It's earlier and earlier. People are eating at 4:30, 5:30, 6:30. They're done
by 8 o'clock, 8:30. Um, we're not looking to do anything late. We're not looking to do anything noisy. We're not looking to do anything like that at all. We want them to come there, enjoy it. If they want to get sloppy, go somewhere else. We don't want it there. >> And Barbara, in terms of deliveries,
obviously you're able to provide food and drinks to your registered guest at this point in time. We accept deliveries already now. >> And that's also events, which events over and above. Correct. So are you how do you accept deliveries right now? Can you go over for the board how how >> we have we unlike 99% of the restaurants
and alcohol serving places in Kate May have a loading area. People can pull in off the street so we do not block the traffic unlike 90% of the other places in town. Um we can unload quietly, nicely and neatly on site
and that's what we do and we will continue to do. So, we're not proposing any change to the deliveries. How? >> No, not at all. Okay. >> Where is that loading area? >> Uh, it's off of Jefferson to the right. I mean, if they come off of Washington, we ask them not to generally. Um, but they can they could come off of
Washington, they can come off of Jefferson. Jefferson has the redstone. The impact of a large vehicle on brick is heavier. So, we prefer them to go on the stone because you can replace that every year and, you know, it doesn't damage the brick. sort of you they're
utilizing the existing parking area. >> Well, it's not the parking. There's a there's a driveway. They pull in, they unload, they pull out. >> They're in the drive aisle of the existing. >> Correct. >> And those deliveries, I anticipate, you can correct me if I'm wrong, they're usually made probably either very early
in the morning. >> Um, not early that it's going to bother anybody. No. Um, it's usually, you know, during the daytime. >> Um, we have it now. We manage it very well. We will continue to manage it very well. >> Okay. Barbara, you answered a lot of my questions I'm even needing to ask you.
So, anything else you want to add right now? >> It's just I want to open it. I want it to get people in there. I want get people to enjoy it and really appreciate it. It's it's a very special special building and special in Kate May. Man, that's all we have at this time. Any questions?
>> I have a question. So, basically what you're doing is you're asking for variance to turn a tourist guest house into a hotel. Well, no. It's going to m I don't believe we're changing the definition, but we're adding a use that would typically be accessory to a hotel. Yes,
you're I I think if that's what you're getting at, you're correct and that we are doing that. >> As as an aside, if you don't mind me answering the the the building was mercantiled as a hotel license for more than six years when Frank Curado was a solicitor. >> It is now identified as a tourist guest
house. It's on the merkantile license >> because they're not allowed to have a hotel in the R2 district. Is that right? Correct. >> In the RS district. Yeah, >> that's right. >> There's never been approval for it as a hotel. >> No board approval. >> No board approval for that use. That's correct.
>> That issue was previously directly before this board was. >> And the board said that it was a guest house. They applied for a guest house and it can't be they can't backdoor um a restaurant and bar as an accessory
to a hotel because they didn't get approval as a hotel. until they got approved as a guest house. So they have respected that decision. That's not an issue before us as far as I know. They're saying they know that they need a D1 use variance to do what they want to do. So to me that's kind of a red
herring. They're they're asking to do the thing they want to do. So I don't want to get too caught up in the nomenclature that they agree they're not allowed to do what they want to do, but they're asking us to let them do it. That's right. >> Um I have a question about you had 44 existing parking spots. What happened to
the four spots that were down to 40 that we went less, but yet you're saying you're putting in a parking lot? >> So, there's currently 14 spaces in front of um the front facade of the building in that um uh existing grass block parking area
which was approved as part of a previous application. Um >> Paul, we should just highlight. So, the reason that we don't see them, why why is it that you can't see these parking spaces if you drive by a wall? So they are grass block pavers and the grass has grown up so tall they're actually not
currently visible but they were installed. They were approved but there was 14 spaces here but when we moved to the back of the behind the front building line we were only able to to provide 10. So that's where we're losing
um we're losing 14 and gaining 10. >> And Paul the reason that we did that right that was a recommendation of the HPC. Is that right? >> That's correct. We had we had originally proposed keeping all 14 of these and adding eight and and they were adamantly
opposed at us uh keeping parking in front of that building. Even though this parking is already approved, uh they did not want to see did not want to see it utilized. It's currently overflow parking and with the the existing parking on the site, it's it's rarely if
ever needed and therefore you you almost never see cars there except for maybe the occasional special increasing to a bar and a restaurant. So, there would probably be overflow parking at this point. >> Well, and that's what we do anticipate this new parking being used and that's why the HPC was adamant that we push it
back behind that front building facade. >> If I could just ask a clarification question, Paul, isn't it true that those 14 spaces, that grass, that drivable surface still is there? Yes, we're not calling them parking spaces. >> Correct. That area >> that exists.
>> So, we're just not allowed to use them. So just for clarity to the board, what we had agreed to and is contained in the conceptual approval issued by the HBC was that as a condition to getting through their review process and getting a conceptual approval, what we had
agreed to do was if they were acceptable of the 10 spaces that were pushed equal to or behind the front facade of the building, we would agree to vacate the use of the ability to use the 14 up front. Let me just explain this because we get this all the time and I just want to go over it in a way that at least for
me is easier to understand. When you're deciding about parking on a historic structure, you're weighing two things. The desire for a bunch of parking against the impact of having a bunch of cars around the historic structure, particularly in the front. That's the analysis that you're weighing. Is it
worth it to have all these spaces to have a bunch of cars parked in front of the building? This is a huge property. They could park cars all over it and in in a regular world with non-historic building, you could fill that whole front thing with parking and it would look like Acme, okay? You'd have all the parking you want. But that's not what
the HBC said. The HPC, which are the ones that are trained and designated to do our historic analysis, they've done that weighing and they've said, "We think it's worth losing four spaces to remove this parking from the very front of the building along Washington and to
tuck it in this little L-shaped area, put planters around it." So you don't see it and yes you have four less parking parking spaces but they think that's a better that's worth it from a historic preservation perspective. You don't have to agree with them but that's why they're here is to do that historic
>> I just didn't know where the force speak. >> Oh no I'm just saying I'm I'm not explaining to you that's the but that's that's not you know it's not too comp that's that's the gist of it. So, if you were to say to them, "Hey, we've done that weighing and we really want you to put compliant parking across the front
of this property." They'll do it. >> We were proposing it originally. >> Yeah, they'll do it. But, but that's the thing. So, that's the parking variance analysis in a nutshell. >> Um, and then just for clarification, how many spaces are you do you are required to have? Because I think I heard added
two more spots, seats, and then everything. So, >> how many spots are required? >> Mr. Mr. Hurles's review letter. Exactly. >> The re the calculation in my review letter is correct reflects the 120 seats which includes the two that were omissed
omitted from the the floor plan. >> Okay. That's why >> so it was the more conservative outlook. >> So the on the 69 spots >> the 69 are required where 44 exist where 40 are proposed. >> Then I also have another >> incidentally machine not just to you.
I'm good. You can say what you want to say. I'm sorry. >> No go ahead. Oh, this wasn't really discussed much, but I expected it to be. Um, maybe you want have talk about it a bit, >> Mr. Create. >> Sometimes we have these overlap things where we list each use individually and put the parking in for it. But isn't it
true that you anticipate that some of your uh guests are still going to use the bar and restaurants so that maybe there aren't going to be 24 cars for the rooms and 30 cars for the >> Paul, do you want to weigh in on that as a planner? Yeah, and I think that, you
know, we will see that overlap. Uh, and that is the intent of the application is that this will not only bring outside public in, but it'll better serve, uh, the existing clientele. >> So, one other thing to add too, Paul, um, when you look at offsite parking locations within the city of Kate May,
are you aware of any that are in fairly close proximity to this property that could presumably be used by patrons should they decide to drive? >> Yeah. the the municipal lot behind us is a is a half a block from the proposed restaurant. So, uh patrons could pull in here, use the park mobile, pay for
parking, and then walk the half a block. Um and then we're also weighing the option of valet parking uh on the Sturdy Savings Bank site. >> Um just a clarification, this lot isn't available during the week,
>> during the school year. We're not talking about this lot, the the lot at the uh the school. >> Oh, okay. I'm sorry. He said he said the lot here. >> I think I think both of them are are roughly located within the same. >> But yeah, but this this lot because of like boards, that's why park during the week there.
>> Um my other question is um Miss Miss Wilds mentioned tours. So, how often are tours given? >> Well, it depends on the time of year. More at this point, I think. Well, I don't even know if they're done daily, but usually they were done daily. >> Daily you have tours
>> and most to honestly most people do not drive. They walk. >> Well, I I was my question is does that come into parking availability if they're having tours that require parking spots? >> I don't I don't believe so. I don't
>> do you guarantee um your people that are staying at the guest house portion a parking spot? Is that part of their uh >> We we generally guarantee them one. Sometimes they don't even use it. Sometimes they show up with a Uber. Sometimes they show up in a jity. Um we
try to it's not actually written anywhere that they get one, but we usually put >> it's not delineated in it. >> They're they're all still every parking space is delineated. Yes, >> but it would and I think the reason for that is we haven't had an an additional use as of now. So, I don't think that's ever an issue.
>> Well, we don't even have problems when we have weddings or large functions or events. Um, we're we're in an interesting place. Um, when you go south from the Southern Mansion, you're dealing with the, you know, the walking mall, Kate May Mall. Then you have
parking issues. When you go to the beach, you have parking issues. When you go from the Southern Mansion and north, you really don't. You just don't um I mean you may have to drive around a little bit but there's usually parking places. >> But there's no parking issues now
because there's no bar or restaurant. >> Yeah. Here we go. >> What I'm saying is that even when we have large events, we don't have parking problems. >> But don't I would think some people would be staying there already though, right? >> Um generally yes.
>> Can I ask some questions about the general layout? on A1. The kitchen, is that where the kitchen is right now? And that kitchen serves all your guests. Now, the space where you're going to have the 50 seats. What is in there? Is that a dining room now? >> Um, yes, it has.
>> That's where people That's where And this is all in the basement, >> correct? >> The Well, I should we should clarify. There are no tables in that area right now. >> Not right now. No. >> Right. So, we're proposing tables on the floor plan. It exists as an open space right now in that area. Where do people
eat now? >> Um, right now, well, sometimes they eat downstairs, sometimes they eat in the southwing salarium, sometimes they eat in the main salarium, which surrounds the main part of the house. It's all glass and closed. And sometimes they eat in the small ballroom upstairs. >> Um,
>> and sometimes they eat outside on the decks >> on the what? >> On the porches. >> Okay. You're going to have serving food and alcohol outside. That's a whole another >> I wasn't talking about that at all. You just asked where they eat now.
>> But as proposed, >> you're saying that you eat outside. >> Um I'm I'm saying >> some people do >> some people take a picnic and sit outside. >> Um on this other picture here, >> the kitchen has to bring food upstairs. >> Yes. >> And then they would bring it through it.
What What is this space here? That makes it's just a >> that's that's an extension of the basement. It just wasn't wasn't shown. But there's basically that staircase that >> I'm not familiar with the property really. >> That staircase here is basically used for service. So >> So they would these stairs then serve
these areas here. >> So they would go through this space. So is this a separate building? >> No. >> So they have to >> So they would go through what is that area? >> Basically the front hall. >> The front hall. Okay. >> Yeah. >> And then there's the polar that you call it. And then
there's the porch. >> Correct. >> And there's an outdoor seating area, too. >> Not in what we're showing here. What what we're showing is the parlor and the enclosed porch. That's where we're having our seating. >> Anything out beyond that is really, as Barbara said, it's kind of people are
sitting outside just having meal or whatever. >> Well, the bar and restaurant used to be restricted to inside only. >> That's the intent that what you're seeing here is all within enclosed space. That certainly should be a condition of any approval that the board grant. >> Right.
>> Um on this hallway there's an elevator downstairs someplace. >> Yeah, there is there is a service elevator. >> Can I just real quick? >> No, there's not. >> Someone said condition of approval. I want I want to make sure. >> So I asked I I asked a question whether the bar restaurant use would be
restricted to only the inside and they answered yes. And I recommended that that be a condition of approval should the board grant that. >> Yeah, that was one of my questions. I was saving to make the board ask all their questions. You're certain that this you because in my experience when I go I've walk by there there's tables
outside with people doing stuff outside for weddings and events and all that outside >> and I'm just trying to figure out if this is a um a spill outside kind of bar restaurant thing. >> No, we would agree as a condition that it all remains inside as proposed on the floor plans. >> Let's just talk about what it all means.
I just don't want to get anybody in trouble. Are you still going to have events there as well? >> Yes. Okay. So, when you have a liquor license and you're going to have an event and you're going to have a wedding, you're not going to do weddings outside anymore. There's going to be no liquor served outside for weddings.
>> Well, right now, weddings do occur outside. >> Okay. So, what if I write down as a condition of approval that the bar restaurant will only occur indoors and then you have an event and someone wants to be in your beautiful yard and have their cocktail hour out there and you
set up the bar out in the front lawn, the neighbors going to come in and say you're violating the condition of approval. So, you kind of got to decide where you're using this and not using it. >> What we talked was the seating. We're not proposing seating outside, >> okay? Okay, >> because we're not showing any on the plan.
>> If we're not that what's shown on the plan is all interior seating, right? >> What about barring >> serving of a drink? >> So, if you're going to stand with a drink outside, I I think that occurs now. And I don't think that exacerbates or or otherwise. >> It occurs now. >> Violates the condition of that plan.
>> It occurs now that guests might be outside for events. I'm just I'm trying to help you. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, if I write down here that the bar restaurant will only be indoors and then your guests are going to the bar, getting a drink, and then sitting out in the lawn when the neighbors come and say, "Hey, this bar
is serving liquor that's being consumed on the front porch or in the front yard." And then you're going to be violating your condition. I I just write these things down. So >> what we were proposing is that all the seating occur inside of the building as
shown on the architectural plan submitted with the application. If there is beverage service during special events outside where there is not seating involved, but rather just the service of drinks, we're not proposing to eliminate that. We'd wish for that to continue. >> Okay. So, and I I just want to get my
resolution right. Win or lose. Okay. I I don't have a personal opinion on whether it should be inside or outside. I don't personally care. But I'm at Congress Hall. >> Yep. >> Okay. And Congress Hall on a nice day, there's more liquor outside than inside. >> I don't Okay. >> Right. >> Yep.
>> That's what I think your neighbors are back there nodding their heads about. They're trying to figure out if this is going to be the Congress Hall backyard next door to them. So, and that's a legitimate >> question that I want to resolve now. So, we're not resolving it with the police
at 10 o'clock at night and who's on the lawn and all that. So >> we don't make noise. Now I understand there's concern and respectfully I am more than happy to listen to everybody's concerned and if possible you know ameliorate them. Um right now and for
the last 30 years we have done weddings outside and there has been liquor served outside since we've had a liquor license and before we had a liquor license if they would bring liquor in they had their own liquor >> and drank it outside. >> Correct. and inside.
>> So for wedding events, there may be >> liquor consumed outside. >> I'm I'm not going to say that. >> That's okay. If the answer is I just want to write Correct. >> My job is to tell us what you want to do and my job is to write down what it is that the board decides you can do. That's all I'm doing. I'm not a decider.
But right now, if I had just written that condition, >> then I'm telling you, it would have been a problem when you're outside with liquor because that's the bar serving outside and that will get everyone upset. If that's what you're going to do, then say that. Maybe the board will agree that well, it's Kay. We do stuff outside. That's life and that's how it
goes. So, I just want to write it down. So, tell us what you're going to do. >> I think she just So, they're going to during weddings and special events, they are still going to continue to serve alcoholic beverages outside of the building. That is still the intention. >> Is that what the license your liquor license will cover you to serve
beverages outside? >> It's part of the license premise. Yes. On the property. Yes. Would the bar and restaurant close down to the public when there's a private event? >> I'm so sorry I couldn't understand you. >> The bar restaurant >> Would the bar and restaurant close down to the public when there's a private event?
>> Will you close the the proposed bar restaurant that we're asking for is going to be open to the general public? She's asking, will you close that bar restaurant if there is a private event? >> Yes. >> Okay. Is is there because you said you have tables outside now and you said there's just going to be
alcohol. There's going to be no food served out at the tables outside. >> Do we count that as any kind of seating if there's seats outside? >> Because it's just like a bar, right? If you sit at at one of the tables outside, is that considered a seat? Uh I what I
what I understood the testimony to just be >> is that you will not have the bar and restaurant operating at the same time as a special event. >> Correct. >> But there's there's currently seats outside now outside the patio. Is that
where they're going to be serving? Are people going be out out there drinking? >> We're going to get into outdoor seating. That's a whole another question. I I don't even know if they count as seats anymore. Craig will have to answer that question. >> What's that? Outdoor seats. >> Outdoor seats. Are they seats? >> If they're licensed through the outdoor
seating ordinance, they do not count as park against your parking spaces. They are credited. There is no obligation to provide parking for outdoor seating through that license. How many seats do you currently have
that I know it's not counted towards your your parking, but I guess I'm looking to see like if people were going to be coming, how many how many more are there outside? Is like a 50, 100? I I don't know.
>> Again, usually that's used when there's a special event. >> But how many how many seats are there if they if you were to >> um Oh, it would just depend on the event. I mean, how many people are at the event? >> You don't normally have seats outside. I don't >> I mean, on the front porch, there's there's chase lounges, there's tables,
just like in every other porch. Yeah. And and on the salarium, which is an enclosed porch, there's tables now and they're actually marked on the site plan. >> What? I'm sorry. >> The tables on the carium are marked on the site plan. >> So those Brian are what you show, right? So we're accounting for those already.
>> Correct. >> This is going to sound like a silly question. Where is the kitchen fan located? >> The kitchen fan >> on the back uh roof. >> It's on the roof. >> Yeah. >> Because your kitchen will now do triple what it's going to be doing, right? You're doing 20 dinners. If you're going
to do 200 a night, >> um, when we have events, we can do that and it's not a problem whatsoever. >> Do this every night during the season. This is going to change. >> Um, would it affect >> what I'm saying is I live close, >> okay, >> to a hotel restaurant >> and I can tell you what time breakfast
is served and I can tell you what time they close their dinner, their >> their dinner service by their kitchen fan, which is loud and there's no avoiding it. It's kitchen fan on a kitchen. >> I don't find our kitchen fan that loud, but >> Well, you don't live behind you. See the >> Where do you live? >> You don't live behind you. You don't
live behind your place, do you? >> No, but I certainly stood there. I I I've never found it loud. But >> my question is, how often do you have trash pickup? And where is it? Is it Is it on Corgi Street? >> Uh, no. It's actually They pull onto our
lot and they pick it up right there. >> Can you show And okay, I did see that. And how often right now? >> It depends. Every every time is different depending on what's going on. I'd like to hear from the neighbors in Jefferson and Gorgeous. That's what what kind of noise that they hear. And if
you're going to have a restaurant for 120 people, >> we're going to have the how many more pickups a week just living here in Kate May. And here I I know exactly when when our trash co collection and our recyclable comes and it's very noisy
early in the morning, 8:00 in the morning. And is it really bothering the neighbors? That's what I worry about. So, just to clarify, it is it's right here in the center of the parking lot. If it backs up the corgi and then the pickup is actually done through the parking lot,
>> but that trash truck and garbage truck has to go down Jefferson Street to get to that to turn into the lot. >> Correct. >> What time approximately would you expect the restaurant to open? >> Um, the restaurant. >> The new restaurant. I I honestly do not
think that we're probably going to seat later than 8:30 or 9 at the max. Nobody eats later than that anymore. >> Okay. So, just for dinner. >> Yeah. >> So, are you proposing anything other than dinner? Lunch >> maybe. >> Well, that's >> maybe lunch. So, then we're looking at maybe 11:30, 12 to whatever. Right now,
we eat. >> Right now, we do breakfast there, too. >> Okay. I'm just thinking in terms of parking use because I know you said you want it to be like kind of a garden open area so you don't lose open space. Can I just have clarification? Did you say there's breakfast served now? Will
that just be open for the the guest? The breakfast? >> Yes. >> Right now it's just open to the guests. >> And then and then you're thinking lunch and dinner. >> I'm thinking yes. Okay. >> All right. Um the garbage and the kitchen fan are are important issues, no
doubt. But what I'm really trying to figure out is where this use is going to take place. It's a use variance. >> Yes. Uh, the testimony initially was that the use is going to take place all in the interior. The testimony has kind of changed and
I'm not saying it's a bad thing. >> Don't read it that way. I just want to write down what it is you're seeking to do and then if it's approved there's a clear thing what we've approved and it sounds to me might not be bad but that it's going to be mostly indoors seat the
formal seating and restaurant activity is indoors. The bar is indoors for special events as there is now that may also occur outdoors. The last remaining item for me is the bar is the bar
serving drinks to be consumed outdoors. >> And this is and >> if that if the answer is yes, then that's okay. But I mean that's the reality is if you buy a drink in the brown room, you can walk outside and sit on the lounges in the back. I mean I just so I'm just trying to figure out what it is so everybody knows. It's
designed now for like restaurant guests because they'll be eating inside. They'd probably stay inside. Um, for an event, we've always had it available outside. >> So, that's >> I understand this, but you you need to be a little more forward-looking in your business plan. What I'm trying to understand is because I want to write it
down. >> I can pro. >> Is the bar providing drinks that could be consumed outside of the building? And if the answer is yes, then say yes. If the answer is no, then say no. But I'm going to write down one of those two things. So what Miss Wild just said and what we can write down for bar
restaurant use by the general public that are consuming and eating inside that will all take place with inside the building. Not to be served outside special events if they occur. >> Don't trick me. Not to be served outside. I don't care where it's served. >> Not to be taken outside. All to be consumed inside.
>> People are going to be carrying drinks and hanging out outside. If that's what you're envisioning happening, then just say it. >> Consumed inside. General public use consumed inside. Special events as they occur right now and as was testified to are intended to continue to be able to be to be served
and consumed on the exterior of the premises >> as well as sometimes they're just inside. >> But but that right that's that's fine but exterior for the special events. >> I'm curious what based on what was just said what's to prevent someone from the
public coming in to the restaurant. They're not there for dinner. Are they able to come to the bar just for a drink? What prevents them from taking the drink outside? >> We're we're not really envisioning people coming and using as a bar. We're kind of looking at as a restaurant with
alcohol service. >> I understand that. But thinking again about forward looking at how the business evolves. >> There's nothing that says someone can't do that. And if that's one of the questions that exists, I'm wondering how
does one plan for that appropriately? >> It's going to be staffed. staff's going to prevent it from happening. It's not going to be an unstaffed location. >> Somebody comes in, they sit down at the bar, they get a drink, and they say, "It's a beautiful night. It's summer. It's great. It's cool. I'm going to go
outside with my drink." >> You're going to stop them. >> Yes, we're going to need to stop them. Okay. >> Because that's a condition that we're agreeing to this evening. So, yes, we would have to do that. >> That's fine. That's all I was looking for clarity on. >> Okay. >> Okay. Thank you. Because we all live here. We watch. You go indicate May.
They serve inside of the bar. People sit outside Congress Hall. They serve liquor inside. They they drink it outside. >> Right. >> Because this is a D1 variance and it's a you know a use variance in a residential neighborhood. It's fair question for the public to know if it's going to happen spill outside and you're saying no, it's
going to be to your alcohol be consumed inside except for special events like you did previously. They will be served and consumed outside special events as you've done in the past. But this bar restaurant that's being approved is an interior use only. Is that agreed? >> Yes.
>> Okay, that's what I was going to say. >> Thank you. >> Everybody understand that? >> You don't have to agree with I'm just We got that. Okay. >> Can I ask what slate parking delineation is? So, and again that was worked out with
the HPC, but the intent is around the the perimeter of that parking we're going to have two foot wide red brick and at the instead of like a painted white line, there's going to be a gray slate brick longwise that would delineate those spaces.
>> So, that'll just be in the parking lot. >> It's just in the parking lot. So, it'll >> it's flush with the with the parking service. >> Correct. And you know, we looked at parking blocks, we looked at stripes, and they just felt that that was the most natural um you know, most consistent with the historic nature of the site.
>> And it's aesthetically pleasing, right? >> And aesthetically pleasing. Yeah. >> And you said there's an elevator on that down there. >> No, there's no elevator. >> You have no elevator? >> No. >> No elevator to get down to a restaurant. >> It's gonna The people get a workout. They get to carry it.
>> What if you're in a wheelchair? >> You're going to be done. you're going to be dining upstairs, unfortunately. >> So, we're we're providing half of our service upstairs and half of it downstairs. So, we do have equal um opportunity and availability.
>> Actually, more seats upstairs than down. >> Right. Correct. >> Where will the actual entrance be for outside patrons? Which end? Well, there's the front door and then we could depending on the season and what's going on also use the side door off the
salarium, >> which is where on this >> um facing towards the post office. >> This this entrance here, >> right? Right. >> And how do you get to that from the property? Come around the front of the building. >> Uh you just walk along the brick path. >> Yeah, there's a brick path along the
that wing of the building. >> You don't have to go behind the building. >> No. Okay, we're going to have uh Craig's report and then we can have >> Are you guys done with your testimony >> at this time? Yes. >> Yep.
>> Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Okay. I would like to summarize my memorandum dated May 7th, 2026 for this application um at 720 Washington Street. Um, as the applicant indicated, it is located within the RS residential
seasonal district. The applicant is seeking use variance approval along with other C variances as well as preliminary and final site plan for this change of use. It's an existing tourist guest house and they're
proposing to add to that use a bar and restaurant that will be open separately from the tourist guest house to the public. uh with I'll move on to my completeness review on page two of nine. I believe that item 12 has been provided the
certified list. We have gotten an updated list. Yes. Okay. Um they've requested waiverss from providing topography. Um and that was the off-site topography that's required. Uh so we supported a waiver of that request. Uh the utility layouts they requested a
waiver from. There was no change to the existing utility. So we supported that waiver. under the preliminary site plan approval checklist. Um item 3V, which requires an environmental impact statement. I didn't
think that that was necessary because the site is already developed. There's no sensitive lands there, so I supported that waiver. A traffic impact report under letter W. um that our traffic impact report requirements
deal with not parking demand but whether the roads adjacent to the site are adequate to handle the traffic from them. In this case um Washington, Jefferson and Corgi are all of adequate
width and can support traffic um that would be adequ uh similar to this use. So therefore, I supported a waiver from that. Really, I think um your decision- making is more based on their testimony
and the impacts of the deficiency of parking on the neighborhood. Um that wouldn't show in this report. So therefore, I supported a waiver. Um and then finally, solid waste and recycling. Uh they did not provide that, but you've heard testimony tonight um indicating
where it is. Um, I believe a board member raised um the possibility that because they have more patrons coming in and out of the site, the frequency of deliveries and pickups from at that solid waste recycling existing facility
um could be intensified. And based on th those recommendations, I did support deeming this application complete. Moving on to the zoning requirements. So once again, this site is located in the RS district. So the RS district as
permitted uses um uses by right allows for tourist guest houses, which this is an existing. It allows for churches and it allows for uh residential dwelling uses. And that's and it runs the whole gamut of our permitted residential uses,
attached dwellings, multif family dwellings, uh semi- detached dwelling, single family dwellings, and two family detached dwelling. So, one of um the things that you're going to weigh tonight in just in uh granting a use variance is to whether this use is compatible with those existing uses and
the surrounding uses of this site. Um, so on page four of nine, I just went through the tourist guest houses. So the access accessory uses to a tourist guest house allows for the service of meals limited to registered guests. In this
case, they are looking to expand that and allow that to be open to the general public. Um, therefore turning it into a restaurant and bar. Um, so that deals with the use variance. With regards to the parking, we've heard
testimony from the applicant. Uh on page five of nine in the zoning table, you can see the breakdown of the parking spaces that are required by the code. Uh there are 24 spaces that are required for the 24 sleeping rooms. Uh there there is one space per employee and
they've indicated there's 15 employees um for this um establishment. And the bar and restaurant requires one space for every four seat and there's 120 seats. So that totals 69 spaces.
There are existing 44 spaces and they're cannibalizing or or not cannibalizing, they are not utilizing 14 approved uh grass paver lawn spaces that are in front of the structure along the
Washington Street frontage. and they're proposing 10 new ones that will replace those. So, there's a net loss of four parking spaces and you've heard testimony from them indicating that that is the result of the uh HPC's
requirements and requests. Um there's been some testimony with regards to the overlap of those three items that we that generate the parking obligation for the site. Um
the sleeping rooms obviously guests that are utilizing the guest rooms will be some somewhat of the bar and restaurant patrons. Um I didn't hear anything with regards to your parking for your employees as they currently happen. Is
that occurring on site? Are they riding bicycles? You know, that type of thing. Um, certainly I don't know whether they're they're utilizing all of those spaces, but ultimately 69 spaces are required, 44 exist, and 40
spaces are proposed. The code also has a requirement to provide a paved and curved parking spaces. Uh those are both variances that they're requesting. Um the historical
context of this property um sort of drive that issue um as to whether that's appropriate or not. And I think the HPC has found that this grass paper is looks more like lawn can support the parking. I I would argue
that it can support the parking. We have evidence of that through numerous sites throughout town. Um, so provided that they widen the driveway access at Washington Street to meet the other code requirement, there's 10 foot that's
required for two-way traffic in each direction. So, it has to be a minimum of 20 foot wide for that driveway where it's 16.9 ft wide now. So, they have to widen that. I would support those those variances uh for the parking surfaces. So, that's
the uh details. There are four variances um I just indicated and they are located at the bottom of page five of my report and I just wanted to talk some so the applicant has indicated um always when
you when an applicant brings forth a use variance before us they highlight they really emphasize the positive criteria um and indicate you know the negative criteria is being met. Um some of the potential negative impacts that were
brought up tonight. Um noise whether it's from patrons, whether it's from deliveries, but there that's one of the considerations that the board should look at. Uh the frequency of deliveries and loading that's also it relates to
noise. Uh parking um obviously the deficiency and obligation. Does that impact the neighborhood? Um, one of the questions I had in that discussion from the applicant was valet parking was just sort of thrown in there. We've we've
seen applications not necessarily in front of the zoning board, but in front of the planning board in which applicants come to us with a valet parking plan um that sort of addresses some of the deficiencies. You kind of just threw it out there. You don't tell
us how it operates. the Washington in just kind of loads and unloads in the middle of Washington Street >> and and that's certainly an a traffic impact. >> I'm hoping that if you're going to do valet parking, there should be some type of plan and it should load and unload on
site. >> Um so that's something that you should be considering. Uh one of the other issues typically with this use is lighting. I think you've heard testimony from the applicant's engineer with regards to the low-level lighting. It's
historically. It's a historical context that's been approved by the HBC. I don't think I I didn't have a approval problem with it, but that's another consideration. Um, and I I have a question here with the hours of operation. Um, I think you've indicated that it all operations for the bar
restaurant will cease at 11:00. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Um so th those are some of the potential negative impacts um that could be considered um in your weighing of that
variance. Uh move on to page seven of m seven of nine. Uh under my general review comments, these are typically conditions of approval. Item number one, I asked them to revise the zoning table. There are some inconsistencies with their
parking calculations. I believe the ones that are contained in my report are correct and they should revise the plan accordingly. Item number two, they've provided testimony to address the inconsistencies with the uh >> number of rooms,
>> the resolutions and the number of rooms. So there are 24 rooms that's that and that includes 23 guest rooms within owner's quarters. three. Um there they address the inconsistency with the seating layout and all of my calculations are
conservative and indicate a total of 120 seats are proposed for the bar and restaurant. So that's the ask of for the use. Um they've indicated that they will provide detailed lot covered calculations. I don't think they're
anywhere close to not being conforming, but we would just like that to be that information to be provided on the plan. Item number five deals with the sight triangle issue because they are will be required to widen the driveway. We want to make sure that that driveway is safe
um and has proper sight lines uh so that you can egress Washington Street in a safe manner. >> Does that take away any parking on Washington? >> It does not. >> Okay. Okay. Um, site triangles. Uh, six, I've just talked about it, but the widening
of that driveway. Seven, they've agreed to comply with our EVSSE, which is our electric vehicle supply and service equipment ordinance. That's required of all site plans now in the state of New Jersey. Um, so they have to comply with
that. Uh they've already discussed under item number eight the loading and trash recycling. Um so we've heard where the loading is. It's in the existing drive aisle on the lot closest to Corgi
Street. Um can you tell us when typically you get deliveries? >> It it depends. Usually I would say n probably 10 11 o'clock. So it's not going to conflict with your peak time of parking on site? >> No.
>> Okay. >> Okay. Um item item number nine is our evaluation of the grading and drainage requirements. So we've um just asked them to provide some additional information. So long as they do that, we um find that the plan is acceptable.
Item 10 is our standard requirement that they have to comply with the minimum storm water management and grading requirements. and that's both during and after construction. Uh we've asked them to provide a soil erosion and sediment plan um that is required in accordance with the code. Uh 12 is the lighting of
parking area and this just summarizes one of the things that I recommend. This this review has gone through several iterations. Um that was one of the first things I saw is you had modern street light type lighting on there. You've now replaced that and the HBC has evaluated
that. So that's a good thing. Um 13 is our standard condition that that we evaluate sidewalk after construction and you're required to replace any sidewalk in port condition. 14 is our standard condition that the certificate of occupancy is tied to
acceptable inspections. 15 is the requirement to provide uh performance guarantees and inspection escros in accordance with the code. 16 is our recommendation to comply with the requirements of all of the other
departments. We've talked about the fire department review memo dated 51926. Um they indicate that the fire suppression and hood are existing but they are willing to comp comply and provide the egress plans.
>> Abs. Yes. >> Okay. Sha Tree Commission recommended approval indicating that no trees will be moved or impacted and that is dated 521-26. Public works department recommended approval with no comments dated 526
2026. And we do have a copy of the conceptual approval from the HPC. Once again, should this board grant approval, they will be required to go back to them for final approval.
And I think that's it for the reports. Did I miss any? Okay, I thought I thought I heard someone say something. Sorry. Um 17 is our standard condition. They have to comply with all other necessary state, county, and local approvals. 18 is uh me
rehashing the HPC uh approval as required. 19 is the compliance with any and all applicable affordable housing requirements. and 20. Should the board grant approval? Uh they should the applicant is required to revise the
plans consistent with their approval indicating all the conditions that we talked about. Hours of operation should be added to the plan. Is there anything else that we talked about? Hours of operation, >> location of beverage service,
>> right? Uh the loading area should be located on the plan as well. Um, and they're required to submit those uh for compliance review to the board engineer. That is a summary of my report. I'm happy to answer any questions the board has.
>> Okay. Are there any questions from the board before we open it up? >> I do have a question. It's actually for both you and Mr. Kang. It's just on how our relationship works with the planning board. It's from the 2003 resolution and
it it does say applicant may not open a restaurant to the public without first obtaining a use variance in site plan approval. But right above that it says applicant specifically agreed as a condition of approval that they would not serve food to the public but only registered guests. That was a condition of approval of the variances and site
plane weavers granted by the planning board which cannot be ignored. Neither the zoning officer nor this zoning board has any jurisdiction to repeal a condition of a planning board approval. So if we vote for this, does that go against >> you're looking at the 2000 the 2004
something? >> 2003 2003. Yeah. Uh no that's we wouldn't be violated when there a used variance is ours to grant or not grant. >> So the planning board can opine on it but ultimately we decide if we grant the variance or not.
>> So I don't believe that by granting this you would be violating anything that the planning board did. >> Okay. >> Um So I that that was their rationale I read that about an hour ago. So their well no an hour before the meeting their
rationale was that if they had wanted a hotel they should have asked for a hotel that would have required a variance and we speaking to the planning board at the time couldn't have done that anyway. So, we're not gonna, you know, circumvent that process by allowing you to call
this a hotel now. If you want a hotel, you should have asked for one. So, what they were referencing there was if you want to do that, you have to go to the zoning board and do that. So, they're kind of doing what they should be doing, which is coming here to do the hotel that they were talking about back then. So, >> okay, >> I think you're square with the plan.
>> Cool. >> Okay. There are a lot of people here that may want to speak. So, the first thing we do is open it up to anyone within 200 ft of the property. >> And madam, we just reserve our right to
respond to any comments made, please. >> You would come down in an orderly fashion, come to this podium here, turn on the microphone, state your name, address, and you'll be sworn in. And
be if according to how many people are here, we should limit it to what do you think? >> 3 to five minutes. >> Three to five minutes and you have one opportunity to come down. >> Good evening. My name is Ray Went with
the Went Law Firm. I represent John and Judy Lynch at 714 Corgi Street. >> Can you speak that a little slower? I got to write that down. >> 714 Corgi Street. I represent John and Judy Lynch. L Y N C H. >> Okay. Now, the address I was still in the name.
>> 714 Corgi. >> Is that microphone on? >> It is. Um, before I begin, we we have a little bit more of a lengthy presentation than 3 to 5 minutes. >> No, that's you give a professional. I'm a professional expert. I was hoping we could take a seat at the table.
Absolutely. And present, that's okay. >> Yes. >> Great. >> And if any member of the public has a special reason that they want to go longer than that time, like if you have an expert engineer or someone that you want to testify that the chairperson will consider those. We just set five minutes because there's 20 people.
That's 100 minutes. That's an hour and 40 minutes. So, you can see why we're a little sensitive to that. So, um you know, the chair is not trying to offend anybody. We're just going to keep it moving. >> Okay. Um, please bring the mic close to you when you're going to testify, please. Thank you.
>> Whoever is testifying, I'm going to swear you in. Do um each of you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, all truth, and nothing but the true stuff you got. >> I do. >> Uh, I do. My name is Peter Stack St. T Maplewood Avenue, Maplewood, New Jersey.
I'm a professional planner. Say your name. >> My name is John Lynch. Uh my wife and I own the house at 714 Corgi Street, situated right behind this southern mansion. I'm a uh
as stance a professional engineer. Has about 40 years of real estate development. my own business. >> Mr. Lynch, microphone, please. Turn it on, please. Thank you. >> They record it, so they need to have it. >> Thank you. >> You mentioned you're a professional engineer, but you're offering fact
testimony, not expert testimony. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> I just don't want to I don't go into his credentials. Go ahead. >> No, thank you for clarifying. >> Um before again, my name is Ray Went. I represent John and Judy Lynch at 714 Corgi Street. We are right across the street from the Southern Mansion. Uh I'm
not going to speak very much because uh I have a little dental work I'm working through. So, if I'm talking a little out of the side of my mouth, it's not because I'm an attorney, it's because I have a little dental work going on. Uh, and you don't need to hear from me tonight. You're going to hear from plenty of people that have a major major
problem with this. It is going to ma affect their neighborhood in a way that that they just can't stand. So, we're going to get right to it. Um, we're going to start first with uh Mr. and Mrs. Lynch, followed by um Mr. Stack. At that point, there are a number of
members of the public. We've tried to coordinate it so that they are close and then move further and further away um so they get the most impactful statements from the ones closest. Uh and we'll try to wrap things up uh so you can get home early tonight or earlier. Um with that
uh I'd like to reintroduce Mr. Lynch. He's already identified that he does have some expertise in terms of his profession. Um he's going to provide some factual background about how this is going to impact his property and his family's property. Um he did put some numbers together uh that I think any lay
person can do um about what he sees in terms of traffic and the like. Uh but we think it's still factual testimony. If Mr. King disagrees, I'm sure he'll let us know, but it's what he sees every day and what he's been able to put to paper.
Um so with that, Mr. Lynch, if you would um please tell the board um what you are observing, what you observe now at the property and your your concerns about what is being proposed uh and how it's going to affect your property.
>> Yeah. Thank you. And thank you for giving me the opportunity here. Um I'm not going to tell you anything you don't already know as to the importance of zoning in New Jersey. I'm sure you can read it chapter and verse to me, but Pennsylvania and Jersey are the same.
Back in the 20s, they adopted use uh as the basis for zoning to protect incompatible uses to protect residential neighbors from uses that were incompatible such as commercial uses for controlling traffic and congestion. Again, it goes on, but you know all
this, so I'm just going to move on. But this property is in the RS district. You heard that from the applicant and it's true. Um it's also true that that the use they're proposing which is a public bar and
public restaurant is incompatible with the residential zoning in which it sits. Actually, it's stronger than that. It's not allowed. That's the use component we're talking about here. I got lost along the way a little bit here tonight because I kept hearing about the testimony of the
Historic Preservation Commission and the Shade Tree Commission and all the other agencies that I'm familiar with in other jurisdictions. And that's when I realized, oh, they're combining the use variance with the application for
preliminary/final site plan. So for just for record keeping for and clarity for what I'm trying to accomplish, I'm speaking about the use variance and and all the things like for example the testimony about the historic preservation commission. While I
appreciate that we live in a historic home, it's not relevant. As the solicitor said many times tonight, you control the zoning, not the planning commission, not city council. that that power is totally within your hands. It's
totally within your jurisdiction. Having said that, and I'm going to go through it, I respect respectfully ask this board, this body to deny the requested variances and
related bulk and parking variances. Mr. Lynch, I'm going to interrupt you. Just I apologize as you get into the actual testimony regarding the impacts to your property in the neighborhood. I'm going to hand out what we've marked as exhibits uh Lynch one, two, and three. It's a packet. There's an index for your
solicitor so he doesn't have to get writer's cramp writing them all down. I have a copy for the uh applicant as well. I'll just hand them over. You can take one and pass them down. >> And I'm calling this a packet of what? Three exhibits. And I'll describe them.
We have >> I just need a name. >> Uh Lynch one is Ariel's >> two of them. Lynch two and there's an index on top of these exhibits as well. Uh our are three photographs of Corgi Street taken May 25
and 26 of this year. And Lynch 3 is the um what we call the STEK packet. And that's uh these are exhibits that Mr. Ste is going to reference uh during his testimony. And the pages are numbered as well on the bottom right hand corner. So if a particular page of an exhibit is
referenced, you can go right to that page. >> Thank you. >> If you want if you want to refer to it, there okay. Um thank you. As I as I said, I'm requesting that the this this body deny the use variances as
well as the uh related bulk parking variances. And I'm doing so not only because they're not allowed in your in your zoning ordinance. I'm doing so because they create substantial impacts on the neighborhood behind it.
And how do I know that? Well, I know it because I heard testimony to to this evening from the applicants saying they don't exist. Well, there was no basis for that because they didn't approach a single person behind that behind the southern mansion
to ask, can we look at your historic home? Can we understand how you live in that home? Can we understand how that home is related to the whether it will be the use of the southern mansion of a public bar and public restaurant? Didn't happen. So therefore, I know I
categorically suggest to you there is absolutely no basis for that statement by the applicant to say there's no impacts because they didn't do the job. As to the as to what we're talking about here,
these variance requests that the applicant has presented this evening, they're not operational changes. I mean, they alluded to that when they talked about how the tra how trash was going to be handled and how parking was going to be handled. Just operational
changes, sort of an extension of what's there. Well, I tell you why that's not true. Look at the variance application. The variance application specifically says two new uses,
brand new uses in addition to what already exists. So these are not operational these are not operational changes by any any stretch of the word. These changes are going to bring outside customers
to our neighborhood as a destination a destination use of a public bar and a public restaurant. That's what they're doing. And when they when they bring those people to to our neighborhood and there are others here who will testify,
but I will introduce the concepts, they're going to be bringing with them an expansion of the smoking that we already have outside in in the morning hours, late morning hours of the the hate to use the word drunken reverbery, but let's say the the carrying on
outside of the southern mansion on Cy Street at all hours. They're going to bring it the noise. They're going to bring the odors of the restaurants. Uh they're going to bring the arrival and departure of many, many more guests to
to the southern mansion that currently exist. So these impacts are going to be materially different than the impacts that the lodging guests present today.
Totally radically different. It's not possible to reach any other conclusion when you realize you're introducing uses that are otherwise found in your commercial zoning to be brought into to be invited into a residential district and historic
residential district. In fact, when I when my wife and I bought the home, we went through many meetings and consultations with the HBC ourselves, and they were very, what's the right word I'm looking for? It's a positive word, but they were very uh
supportive of what we were trying to do. Uh but that's not really the word I'm capturing either. Anyway, the HBC and we were involved in when we bought the home and the HBC puts a lot of emphasis on the the historic character of Corgi Street. So today I'm sitting here. I'm
listening to the applicant's testimony and they go on and on about how the importance of the historic aspects of the Southern Mansion and how they're going to bring promote tourism in in effect to bring more people into the Southern Mansion because it's important.
But what about the historic aspect of the neighborhood that's behind them that which they've ignored? And I've already explained how why I know they ignored it. They didn't approach us. That's a fact. So, we have material changes that are happening here.
They they deal with the D I guess they're called D2 D2 variances. The highest the highest standard of a variance in I believe in New Jersey concerning these uses. D1. Thank you. Um then you get into the parking.
I got to I got to if it wasn't so sad I'd laugh. But here I heard testimony about parking tonight and they need relief from parking. So on one hand they're asking for use variances to intensify the uses but
introducing two new uses that are not compatible with the zoning district. And then the turnaround saying, "But hey, by the way, we need relief from parking because we don't have enough." And and you can't take into account the recommendations of the HPC. That's not
the zoning is not the HPC. I respectfully have worked with many historic preservation commissions and many many projects. They have they have their their mission. It's a great mission and I support it. But their mission doesn't
pertain to your burden. you you carry you carry the ultimate authority here of of truly possibly eroding something that goes back to New Jersey until the 1920s, which is use zoning and how it's applied and how it's used to protect
uh existing zoning and neighbors. So that's why you get paid the big bucks. You have that burden. Um so with regard to the the relief from the parking the use variances will will a material
materially aggravate existing problems. They have problems out there uh because we know of parking problems as they impact your street today as it as it operates as a guest house. you start jinninging it up with
uh 120 seat bar and restaurant, you're in a whole different whole different league, whole different set of problems. And as we get a little bit more into the specifics of the effects on your property in Corgi Street, just so you can identify for the board, we've marked
as exhibit Lynch one. These are aerials of uh the property a little bit further away. And is that a photograph of your your property below that on page one? And then the next page is a little closer up version of the uh the aerial >> and it shows the southern mansion and be to the left the lower I mean to the
lower right you see a a red dot that would be the home of my wife and I. >> Okay. >> 714 Corgi. >> And you may or may not want to talk about these yet but might as well introduce them so that the board's familiar. You provided three photographs that we marked as Lynch 2 dated May 25
or 26 depending on the day you took each photo. Um those are photographs that you took. >> Uh yes. >> Okay. And when you're ready and is that uh they they depict various angles of Corgi Street. >> Yes.
>> Okay. When you're ready to talk about them, I just want to identify them for the board so they know what you're referring to at some point. >> There's another photograph of of a photograph of Corg Street. Do you have that? >> No. >> Unless it's those are the three deal with it.
Um, it may sound because this this is this home, this community that we bu became part of and since 2012 is is near and dear to us. So, it may sound as if I'm I'm of
somewhat stridened at times and uh that maybe I have some axe to bear with the applicant. I don't. I have a history with the applicant. Back in 2022, the applicant came before the city
council requesting the transfer of her liquor license. And if we can have I wrote a letter of objection or expressed concern, not objection, and she reached out to me and suggested we get together and we did. She invited me to her home. She was
extremely hospitable, uh, pleasant. We had a great conversation and I took what she and I discussed back to the neighbors. And just for the record, things we discussed were concerns about noise, concerns about odors, concerns about lighting, concerns about about uh
hours of operation because she went to bring her a liquor license in. And the neighbors and I hate to say held her nose, but we did. we held her nose and tried to be good neighbors because at the time she was representing that she was having hardships, financial hardships. And I
said, "All right, let's see if we can't put something together." And she helped us with maybe realigning some operational capabilities. Uh but that approval that introduced a private
liquor license for the for the residents of the inn and the ability to have a restaurant for the residents of the inn. That was an accessory. And I think the solicitor in his conversation earlier you see I I heard him rel relate to that.
We're not talking about accessories. We wouldn't be here if it was a necessary. We're here because they need a use variance from this body. That's why I'm here. So there's no no disputing. It's not a necessary. But the other part that's that's
troubling. I'm calling oldfashioned, not just because of the color of the hair. Uh, we as the neighbors met with the applicant in 2022. We met with a solicitor at the Southern Mansion 2022.
We agreed not to object to what they wanted in 2022 in exchange for the good faith cooperative effort of what we were mutually agreeing to. Well, the approval of these variances is now a reversal of the basis on which
the approval was granted in 2022. It's just throwing it out like it didn't like it didn't exist. I don't know how a person does that. I really don't. If if you came to me and said, "Hey, uh, can we reach an agreement on something?" and I I shook your hand,
that would be it. I don't know how we throw this out the window like it it pretends it doesn't exist, but that's what's being done. >> What concerns do you have as it pertains to this corgi street, its size, and its configuration based on what you've heard
tonight? >> All right, but let's let's get into that. Uh, I have concerns on multiple fronts, but let's go through the list. the cartway width of Corgi Street in the section behind the southern
mansion which is the section where most the neighbors here are going to be here to discuss uh varies between 19.5 ft 19.63 63 feet, two 235 inches and some change. That's the cartwway width. So it's it's under 20 feet.
Um but we have parking parking on one side of the street. So you can look at the the 19.5 is easy easy number. And you're either going to reduce the travel travel cart way from either 8 to 10 feet
depending upon which you want to use and measuring how people park along the street. It's more like 10 feet because the people don't kiss the curb with their wheels that they're they're off a little bit. So that brings us to the issue of uh
the international fire code and that New Jersey enforces the uniform fire code which is largely a takeoff of the international fire code and both co both codes and I can give you the this the sections if you want them but they're they're out
there. Both codes speak and let me say that the Jersey code was adopted as recent as 2018. Both codes speak to the requirement for emergency access, emergency vehicle access, a minimum of a 20 foot wide
cartway unobstructed. Un unobstructed is defined term to mean no parking. So here we are with Corgi Street somewhere between a 9 9.5 ft to 11 ft
wide cartway if you net out the parking and what the international fire code is is is requiring which New Jersey adopts is 20 ft. So we already have an existing situation where the the
partway width of Corgu street um is not consistent with current requirements and we already have situations on Corgi Street because of that. Um >> such as
>> well we have uh vehicles blocking traffic on on Gorgi Street, stopping truck deliveries for example. Um, we get into it, but there's deliveries over the for the southern mansion. We have uh >> are you test I just want to try to I think Mr. Went is trying to get you to
say actual facts of things that you know personally as opposed to opinion about engineering that can you testify. I have seen trucks on Corgi Street. They unload things there and block traffic. If you can say that, I think he wants you to say that and the board wants to hear that factual testimony from you because
you have an engineer over here who presumably your planner is going to talk about impact and negative stuff. But you I'm trying I think we're looking for facts. So can you talk about the things you've seen on your street that affect you that originate from the Southern Mansion use?
>> Well, okay. Let's start with today. The day at about 1:04 p.m. a tractor trailer, I mean a full-blown tractor trailer pulled up, blocked in a neighbor's driveway completely
and was doing delivery services through the rear door of this southern mansion. Now, you can say, well, what's the big deal? Probably 30 seconds, a minute, a minute to let the tailgate down. It was 21 minutes they sat there.
21 minutes. So if you go back to the issue of emergency services and you have an obstruction just I just testified to as one example. What happens to the residents of Corgi Street if they need ambulance service?
What happens to the residents of Corgi Street if they need fire access evacuation? Who knows what is what's the value of that person? I guess you have to weigh that. But we do know that there are the operations of of of
uh the southern mansion do required trucks to come down and they stop and they interfere and other I'm not going to other rest other >> and you believe that it'll be worse under the proposed use. I >> I don't believe it. I know it. >> I will testify to it. >> I know it. Yes. I know it because I'm
going to testify to traffic in in the next breath. >> Okay. So, >> what is the traffic like now and what do you anticipate to be like uh if this is approved? >> Well, there was no traffic testimony
offered this evening by the applicant. >> We we want to know what your testimony is about the about the traffic. Um, I used I got it maybe erroneously, but I I thought the applica applicant was for a 96 seat bar and restaurant. This
evening I learned it was for a 120 ft seat uh bar and restaurant. So, I can't testify to the impacts of the 120, but I want to testify to the numbers of the 96 so you would you would understand. What I did was
um the industry standard for for traffic analysis is the instit institute of transportation engineers is the the testimony. >> Mr. King is going to cut you off. He wants to know what do you yourself
observe in terms of traffic. He the numbers and we appreciate you put that together and Mr. King is asking for your personal experience and observation of traffic um as it exists now. And you can, you know, you can everybody's going to talk about how it's obviously going
to be a lot worse. >> Well, that's what he wanted me to address. He wanted me to address >> I I don't object to you. You're you're allowed to be an expert, but if you're going to give expert testimony, I want to qualify you as an expert. Otherwise, you're giving opinion. So, you're a factual witness now. So, you're going to give facts. >> Okay. Well, well, I wouldn't testify.
>> I'm not I'm not upset with you. I just want to make sure the record's right cuz this test >> Do you want to give your credentials and be sworn in as an expert? I don't know if that's going to happen, but yeah. Okay. Provide your credentials and then we'll see if Mr. King admits you as as an expert. >> Chair will decide that. But go ahead. Are you licensed in the state of New
Jersey? >> No. Licensed in the state of Pennsylvania. Professional civil engineer. >> As as a what? >> Professional civil engineer. I was licensed in I guess 19 probably come 85. That's why I got my
license. >> What's your experience in traffic analysis? >> I've done 40 years of real estate development and I've I've engaged traffic engineers and use traffic analysis in the IT manuals I'm going to speak about in multiple applications because every
every project deals with traffic impacts that I've ever dealt with. >> Have you ever testified before a board regarding traffic uh impact state a traffic impact statement or traffic analysis? >> Yes. Okay. in Pennsylvania. >> All right.
Madam Chair, do you accept him as an expert in the area of traffic engineering? >> Yes, but I'd like you to stick to the neighborhood a little bit more and not >> Well, if you allow me one the traffic's brief.
I'm trying to quantify not from what I believe but what what the industry standard is of the traffic uh generation model manuals are which is trip generation. This use of the bar and restaurant called fine dining is a
defined use in the trip trip generation manuals. Just open it up. It's right there. And it defines that if if you're going to to have a lunch and dinner uh actually if you have a breakfast
lunch and dinner operation, it's going to produce 36 peak hour trips per hour. And then the industry standard in trip generation manual is that that represents between 8 and 12% of the daily volume. So you take the
average of 10%. The 36 peak hour trips will relate to 360 new trips originating from the bar and the restaurant. Now tonight I heard that the gap is is probably going to be going
the full boore. Maybe not initially, but she's going to be going with a with a full operation. So those numbers are are are correct. Now those numbers do not account for uh you know people being dropped off and
picked up. It does not account for for Uber Uber activity. It just deals with new trips. So from a standpoint of use and traffic on Corgi Street, there's absolutely going to be an increase in traffic on Gorge Street based upon the daily volume
I just gave you. 360 new trips every day, every weekday. I looked at I didn't speak >> says they're going to go down Cory Street. >> I'm going to say that use is going to generate that. Whether or not they all go down Corgi Street, I'm not testifying to that. >> But but I I will say you that if I'm
looking for a parking space, Corgi Street is Corgi Street is an easy circulation for people looking for a place to park to go right down CJ Street looking for it because that's what people do now. Gorgeous Street already has problems with parking because the
post office people uh employees use Corg Street to park. And I know this because they they they park ever so tightly to my driveway that I can't get out without driving off or outside the carway with. I have to go up on the
shoulder of Ki Street to get off many times. Uh this exists. It's going to by introducing 360 new trips. It's going to get much worse. Can't can't change it. So, the applicant testified that there
there's going to be parking on site, not to worry about it. Well, there's going to be parking spillover. It's just it's going to be there. Let's talk about noise and impact. So, you're asking what do I know? Well, already
pretty much every time I'm down in the night after morning after a night after a night of that of the Southern Mansion being open, I stroll down Ces Street and pick up trash. Where does it come from? I can't tell you it's coming from the Southern Mansion, but I can tell you that I know
that there's uh loud noises and people partying at the Southern Mansion because I can see them on the balconies. And it's quite logical as they come out into Corgi Street that they're introducing trash that I'm picking up. I don't call this the city and say we have a problem here, but that's what that's what's
going on. So, we know we have noise problems. I mean, we're talking noise problems 1:00 a.m. 2 a.m. Uh, >> with >> what issues do you I >> The board with these pictures, too.
>> Well, before we get to that, where's the photograph of Del Gorge Street? You had it in front of me. >> These are the three photographs >> and then you introduced third to me. >> The three that you gave. >> Uh this is funny. All right, we move on.
Uh trash and recycling and odors. You I I beg you. The testimony was we have an enclosure where we have a dumpster. It's the dumpster is not being used. Okay. So, no
problem. We can simply add additional an additional dumpster or we can increase the the frequency of pickup. a a fullblown restaurant and a full-blown bar offers a whole different type of of waste is produced than than
simply breakfast for for in guests. Totally different. And and the grease levels and the stench that's going to accumulate there, it's it's just going to be a it's going to be a disaster. And then you're going to have from the noise standpoint, you're going to have these bars attracting ride share pickups.
There going to be outdoor conversation. there's going to be staffing act staffing closing activities. One of the issues that we dealt with in 2022 uh was listen, the southern mansion would close and then 1:00 a.m. the staff would be out there emptying the recycling containers. What do you think
that what do you think that sounds like at 1:00 a.m. in the morning when they're out there dumping these 55gallon uh containers of glass and it's it's just it's just crazy. I don't care what is said about how it's not going to make an impact. It's not
possible. I'll go further. It's not humanly possible to introduce these commercial uses that are not allowed in your zoning district and say, "Nah, we can handle this. We don't see any impacts."
It's it's it's crazy. U lastly, you talk about uh lighting. >> Well, right there, the exhaust fan. Oh, the exhaust fan currently runs pretty much 24/7. Now, I don't have the photograph. Another another neighbor is
going to speak about it and show you a photograph. But the exhaust van, as the applicant testified, is right on the back of the southern mansion. So, who do you think is the recipient of that noise? We are. And in all due respect, if if Barbara
doesn't hear it, she better go to Costco like I did for hearing aids because it's it's it's huge. uh lighting. We heard testimony as to what they agreed to with the Historic Preservation
Commission, and I applauded their efforts. If I was in their their their situation, I'd do the same thing. I would try to reach an agreement with the HBC as to what the HBC found it effective so they could get a recommendation for the preliminary final site plan approval. We're not here about
that. We're here about the use variances and the lighting that's that's out there today came about because in 2022 Barbara said we have to change our lighting because of uh insurance needs.
So what was driving the bus was her ability to get insurance at a competitive price. So whatever we you think the lighting is today, you don't know what it's going to be. because you can be almost dead certain at some point some insurance company is
going to come in and say in order to renew your policy we need these changes and they're going to be upgrading the lighting. Hopefully they they would do deal with dark sky lighting and things of that nature. But I just ask you to accept the fact we deal with the lighting today. We deal with it where it
comes through our our bedroom windows. Uh the noise comes through the bed I mean comes floods through these are old houses. the these these these homes are not wellinssulated homes. And not that the insulation would stop all noise, but they they stop any noise. They're just
transmission right through. So, I'm going to wrap up with this because I I know you folks are busy all soon when I get home. Um, one thing I I guess it's more of a question was not a statement. I I heard
the applicant speak to how what the costs were for uh water, electricity, whatnot. And and I was sort of I was sort of baffled as to why that was even relevant. Was she speaking
about those cost issues as it related to the preliminary final site plan approval? From my experience, that that's not part of the burden of of of that type of approval. And then I realized now she's trying to make the case that she wants to do
a bar and restaurant because she needs it because she's struggling under under these cost and she wants to do a great historic job really do something tremendous for the southern mansion. Revitalize the southern mansion, revitalize the area, bring people in and
therefore it's going to help her. Well, there's only one problem. I heard the same thing in 2022. So if if getting what she wanted in 2022 was did not give her enough revenue to
do what she wants, I guess she's asking again. But it's it's not revenue is not under New Jersey law a legal reason to grant a use variance. You have you have the burden of weighing
whether or not we the neighbors are being impacted. We are going to be impacted. We have emer we have emergency services. We got traffic. We got noise. We got we got odors. We got recycling. It's it's it's
over the top. Um covered it. >> What's this? >> Covered it. >> Anything else? >> Want to have your wife come up real fast and Yeah. >> move on. >> That's what I wanted, by the way. That's the picture. >> It's been sitting there the whole time. >> All right. Good. If I If I may, I'm
done. exhibit uh Lynch 2 which you have this goes way back to the cartway with in the the emergency access uh that's suitable suit suitable for Corgi Street. That's a picture of Corgi Street of what's available when you have cars parked on the left hand side and you
have the southern mansion on the right hand side per the per the per the uh international fire code and New Jerseys fire code. You need 20 ft. This is what you have. And this, by the
way, just imagine which happened today, a Mac truck. I mean, we're talking a truck that's what are they they're I don't even have the dimensions, 50 ft long with a huge huge big tractor uh parking right there. There's not a
prayer that anyone can get by that. And and forget that. It could just be ride share people coming and dropping off guests or guests being picked off from the bar at the rest at at the rear entrance. It's the same effect. It's the same effect. It's an impact on
on the emergency services and feasibility of serving Gorgy Street. It's an impact on our parking with overflow and the very things that I'll leave you with one thought. the very things which we were told in 2022
were addressed like we're not going to have smoking out there out behind the southern mansion at the rear entrance because we objected to that and that was the basis of our support. Well, it's still going on. I witnessed it. >> In fact, in fact, there's a cigarette receptacle right out there, isn't there?
>> Yes. >> Placed by the Southern Mansion to encourage people to put their cigarette butts there. >> Yes. uh you we have and this this ties into the condition I I listened to about you're going to have a bar that's
approved to be only for inside guest and certain people said well how do you enforce that and and it was testified by the by the lawyer that says well we're going to we're going to stop them come on that's it's just silliness if you're going to tell me you're going to tag them with a wrist and they can't
go through an some sort of electronic gate to get outside all right but there's no way to keep track of people that have a a drink from a bar from walking out the door. It's not going to happen. Much like if you look at the photographs which are marked the same me
u also part of Lynch exhibit >> two >> two. I want you to look at the two photographs to show the hedge behind the southern mansion. And then I want you to go back to the resolution of 22. what was into the resolution that said the southern
mansion was going to supplement which means plant more because there all kinds of voids in here and maintain the hedge row. Well, that's the condition of the hedge today. And actually, this isn't the worst of it. There's another photograph which shows this much worse condition. It
that was the condition. This is what we're living with today. The condition wasn't honored. The condition wasn't met of what was done in 2022. And any conditions you put on here today, it's silliness. Just like if you were to say, "No trucks coming down Corgi Street. You
can sign it for all you want. You can have conditions. You can send her letters." Even if with the best of intentions. There's going to be that day that comes when a new driver has a new route and they're coming down. It happens. And that's when you get into the emergency
services issue. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Lynch. I I truly one thank you for your service and I thank you for giving me the time to to express my thoughts as posly as disjointed as it was but but I I appreciate the patience and giving me the the time.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. We have test Mrs. Lynch's test. >> It's going to be very brief. Me, too. I agree. And we're moving on. Just so we have a record of how many people actually objected. >> Yes. Just for the record. I agree with
everything. >> Oh, go ahead. >> Sworn in. >> Sorry. >> Do you swear from the testimony you're about to give is the truth done by the truth of God? >> I do. Please state your name and your address. >> My name is Judy Lynch and our house is at 714
Corgi Street. >> And you were And you were going to say >> And I was going to say that I just respectfully ask you to not vote for the um variance that
they are asking for. And uh I agree with everything John said. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. Thank you. With that, I'd like to reintroduce Peter Stack. Uh he'll briefly give you his uh credentials and then I'd like to have him moved in as an expert.
Good evening. Uh again, my name is Peter Steek. Uh by way of um experience and education, I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering um from Marquette University and a master's in city and regional planning from Ruters.
Uh I was licensed as a planner in 1976 and uh I'm still licensed. It's in effect this evening. Uh in terms of experience uh I've worked in the past as an associate planner with two consulting
firms. Uh one is Malcolm Castler Associates that was in northern New Jersey. Uh and the other one was Alvin Gerson Associates uh that was out of uh Trenton. Uh for just short of 10 years I was the planning director for the
township of Montlair. And for the last uh 20 some odd years, I've been self-employed as a community planning consultant uh representing some municipalities, some developers, some neighborhood organizations.
I've appeared in uh approximately uh 220 municipalities in New Jersey and been accepted as an expert planning witness. I've also been accepted as an expert planning witness in superior
court um as well as New Jersey tax court on on land use issues. >> I think that'll cover it like to ask that uh Mr. Ste be admitted as an expert. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, what I'll do is just describe my exhibit briefly and then I'll
>> Before you begin, I just I have two questions I always ask my experts just to make sure we're covered from the lawyer's perspective. Are your observations and methodology methodologies based upon accepted principles in your fields? >> Um, they are.
>> And will your conclusions be based upon a reasonable degree of certainty in those fields? >> Yes, as a professional planner. >> I'm going to keep quiet and let you present. Okay. So, I'll just describe what Lynch 3 is briefly and then I'll refer to it uh as I go through my
testimony. Uh the first page has a portion of your zoning map on the left and as you can see this is in the residential seasonal uh zone on the right hand side. That's a 2020
uh infrared satellite photo where I've superimposed uh the outline of the property as well as the zoning districts. Uh the second page as well as the third page and the fourth page are photographs
that were taken by me. Um they were taken on May 26 of 2026. Uh so on the second page you have the view uh from up in the air uh of the the
property and uh on the right hand side that's the lawn uh that apparently has grass pavers underneath it. Uh but that's where parking is is proposed to be shifted uh to behind the front
facade. Uh the next page and that's P3 in the upper right hand corner. Um on the upper left you see the reversed photo. So this is up in the air looking uh toward Washington Street that
is in the uh distant part uh of the photo. Uh to the right hand side is the one um vent for the existing kitchen and that's on the back face uh of the
building. Uh below that um are the the formal parking areas. So on the lower right hand side, that's where you enter uh from Washington Street and then you can
go f and right now it's an entrance only and then when you go to a second area that's all gravel surfaced that's on the left hand side and then you would uh exit uh to Jefferson and you can see the the refues there. Uh the
fourth page are photographs also taken by me but these are not with a drone. These are just standing up. Um so upper left hand side you see the current architecture and there are a lot of
windows as you can see that are facing this area that's proposed for uh parking area. On the right hand side you see the uh covered areas that are used now for
breakfast for the bed and breakfast. Um the fifth page has some renditions of the plans that I'll talk about in a minute. Uh the lower right hand side is the front parlor. That's going to be one
of the new uh restaurant areas. And finally on the last page, I have also a 2020 uh satellite photo that shows the lot and blocks. And as you can see on the top, uh I've labeled Lynch on
the the house that's at 714. So uh back to the beginning. Um, I uh reviewed the application uh your zoning ordinance, your master plan, your re-examination report. Um, I uh toured
the property and the surrounding area. Um, and I was here earlier this evening to hear the uh earlier testimony of the applicant as well as my client. Uh, this is a regular shaped property. Three uh
three frontages. The last uh yard is a rear yard. Uh it's a historic building in the secondary historic district and the surrounding areas as you know are also uh in the historic district. Um it
has as testified 23 guest rooms and one owner's quarter. Um it is advertised as a bed and breakfast. Um and indeed you can have breakfast there. It is the most cooking that goes
on is eggs, French toast, some sausages, uh you know, toast, bread, um um you know, a fruit. not a lot of cooking that would normally, in my opinion, be associated
with a full-blown restaurant or or a bar. Um, also advertised on the property is uh tours. There's a sign on Washington that says there are tours available at 12 and 100 p.m. and they're, according
to the website, 40minute tours. Uh so there's really been no acknowledgment about the volume of tours especially obviously during the better weather uh whether people drive uh to take the
tours but it's it's a midday event and there there are 40 minutes each at least as it indicated on the um on the the website for the property. Um, the property today has in the uh I'll call
it the northeastern section, the one that you enter from Washington and exit on Jefferson. Um there are um 24 spaces that are in a gravel surface
and then there are seven spaces that are on the brick area. Um there is no handicap parking on the property today. If you look at the applicant's plan, uh they show uh two
handicap spaces uh by the eastern corner of the building. Uh there's no sign that they're for handicap ping and in fact there are three spaces there physically. So my observation is that the applicant
today doesn't have any handicap spaces that are signed according to law and reserved for that that purpose. Um this has already been clarified but as you know in the past and it's attached
to the application there were three applications to the planning board. Uh there was one uh documented by a resolution on April 15th of 1995.
Um there was a followup on February 7th of 1996. Uh those improvements included a swimming pool and a lot of other things uh not implemented obviously. Um there was a resolution on April 3rd
of 1996. Uh and that was the one that addressed um serving um uh so our board's seen all those. In fact, there was a question about that >> a half hour ago where she indicates she had read it and has a question about it.
So that historical part like that's the record. Maybe you could get to the part the things you don't like about the current application. There's some pointing that parking but the proposal corrects that and provides it I believe. So it was actually a positive. So >> it it was part of my research. So I just
want to emphasize that those were all before the planning board and the planning board had jurisdiction because it was classified as a tourist guest house and and not as a hotel. And that was cl clarified by the by this board on
July 9th of 2003 where the you declared that your zoning officer was correct that a use variance was needed. Um the applicant is you are aware of this application. Um
the applicant uh is in my opinion adding a new use to the property that is not an accessory use. There was already an approval granted for bed and breakfast. >> We don't disagree about that. We know that we we start off by saying we all
agree that this is a D1 use variance. >> Um there are three other variances that are cited. I would just as a technical point say the relief needed from 225-60
capital D is really a an exception under the municipal land use law because it's a design standard and not a zoning standard but the applicant still has the burden of proof to do that. Um I'm sure you have a fair um knowledge
of the surrounding area. The surrounding area is predominantly residential and is indicated uh the streets are uh fairly narrow. Um on and I'm going to
on a corgi street uh the cartway width the paved driving area is about 19 ft 5 in. There is permit parking on one. So, so the parking is allowed on one side and that's a one that's a one directional
seat street. There's parking on one side and some of that is permit parking. So, residential people can reserve a space. So, that's not available to the general public. As you know, Jefferson Street has no parking on either side. Washington Street uh parking only on on
one side. Uh, as part of my analysis, >> did you say Corgi only has permit parking? >> It No, it has some permit parking. It's signed for permits and apparently residents can reserve a space on the
street or get a permit for it. >> Yeah, they can. >> No, I don't disagree with that. But the testimony was that there was going to be a bunch of public parking on the street. But if it's all permit park not just I I >> I'm countering the testimony of the applicant that that I and I'll if you'll
let me continue I'll I'll get >> discontinue. I wanted to understand I thought you had said it was permit parking >> there. There is there's signage for permit parking and so some residents have a permit that allows them to park to reserve a space on the street. So
it's not generally available to the public those spaces. Okay. >> Um there has not been any testimony this evening about u your master plan. There was a your the planner said, "Oh, it's
doesn't impair the master plan. Didn't identify what the master plan was. Didn't talk about anything about the master plan." I looked at the master plan. your last comprehensive master plan was 2003
and it talked about uh as one of its goals on page 20 to preserve the established residential districts. So there was a theory of preservation independent of whether it's a historic district or not in commercial land use.
Also on page uh 20 of the of the master 2003 master plan, it said to encourage the continuation of a variety of types of commercial land use within the city's existing commercial districts.
So we like commercial activity, but we like it in the commercial districts. This is not a commercial district. The master plan recommends a zoning pattern that's the same as in your zoning ordinance, an RS,
residential seasonal um uh designation. Your uh master plan also had a table that recommended where uses were permitted
and eating and drinking establishments that are licensed were according to your master plan recommended to be in the C1 and the C6 districts, not permitted in the RS district.
That 2003 master plan is a little old, but you've adopted the planning board adopted a re-examination report on March 12th of 2019 that essentially reiterated
those observations. uh drinking establishments and they added a zone there was recommended to be in the C1, C2 and C6 zones, not in the RS zone. So your
zoning is consistent with your 2003 master plan and its validity was affirmed in 2019. I want to uh return to the exhibit and make certain observ So first of all as you know the burden of proof is on the
applicant. They have to prove their case. There's been no testimony about the availability of on-site parking. Sometimes developers come in and they do a survey. you know, let's say in the evening when my restaurant is going to
be booming, how many parking spaces are available in the area because I have a shortage of parking. There's no evidence on the record of any survey that was done. There is no discussion of the venting system for the kitchen.
I would suggest to you that a full-blown restaurant and a bar is going to produce more noise for different and more smells for a different period of time. It's going to be
more in to in total and it's going to be at a different time period. Right now they just serve breakfast, right? So that's when the vent system produces smells. There's no discussion about any kind of filtering system. The record is
silent about that. And the only vent is the one on the back end of the building uh on Corgi Street. No testimony about noise. You can hear the vent system, but there is no testimony about the noise. And if you
required the applicant to have an EIS statement rather than waving it, presumably the applicant should address that because that's obviously a land use impact. I also note that um the applicant has
sat down with the historic preservation commission. They've made recommendations. They are only recommendations. Since you have jurisdiction of this application, you can accept their recommendations. You can disagree with them. But they're only a recommendation. They don't bind you as
you know that very well. So this the the focus of the the reason we're before you that the applicant is before you is that this is a Medici case and the Medici case said uh you have to
advance some kind of public purpose. You have to show that the site is particularly suited to the use and you have to meet the negative criteria that it's not
doesn't substantially impair the master plan and it doesn't um uh is not substantially detrimental to the public good. It's not a balancing test. You know, we're this a hospital or a church, you balance the negatives and the
positives. The applicant has to show the positive criteria independent of the negative criteria. So, here are some observations before I go to my summary conclusions. It's great that the applicant is going to do grass
pavers and is shifting the parking back. It's just that the, you know, you don't see many cars there except maybe on a few weddings, but that area is it looks like green lawn. And it's great because it part of the historic charm of this is
not only the architecture of the building, but it's the grounds around it. They're they're wellmaintained. They're beautiful grounds. While the applicant is now going to produce 10 parking spaces that are close to the building where all the windows are,
where you have breakfast, it's great if no one parks there. But I would suggest to you that boxwoods and landscaping is not going to hide cars that are parked there. And what's
going to happen is because of this restaurant, the convenience of parking right next to the restaurant and now the the the a a lunchon trade and an evening trade that is extended because of the bar use. You're going to see cars there.
It's not going to be the green benefit that is being proposed. Clearly not an advancement of the uh historic aspects of the property. In fact, I would suggest kind of a detriment to the people that are have that are sitting
there uh in the building because th that shrubbery is not going to screen the fact that there are cars parked there. There are uh the the applicant is saying it's particularly suited. Well, the
applicant's planner said pretty much didn't say why the property, in my opinion, was particularly suited for a restaurant use, which is prohibited from the general public. The talk was mostly about how great it is that we shifted
the parking. Uh the architect said, "Well, there's space there and it's a good use." And and I would call those net opinions. Take a look at the space that's supposed to be peculiarly suited to the restaurant.
The kitchen and some of the seating is in the basement of the building. So when you're dining there, not a great place to look at the the lawn. You're you're you're subsurface. If you look at the uh page
uh five of my exhibit uh Lynch 3 and you look at the right hand corner uh and again the the numbers eight added up to 118 seats and the applicant is proposing 120. But number one is there's
a kitchen and a basement area which I would suggest to you is not a great area for a restaurant to be eating in the basement. Number two, the parlor is on a different floor and it's not
connected. So here's someone cooking food has to go up the stairs. >> Is this is this a planning testimony? >> Yes. I'm saying that the site is not particularly suited to the use. >> Okay.
>> Because of the contorted nature of number one, how you fit these 120 seats in that again the the the the restaurant and bar is has disconnected sections
that you have to leave. You have to come up the stairs and again no elevator and I guess no handicap access to the to the basement and you have to leave that space, go upstairs and serve people food that's that's in the other end of the
building and it's not even connected. So in my opinion um there is no evidence that the use the prohibited use the restaurant in bar is particularly suited to the property
because it's surrounded mostly by residential uses with a limited supply of parking. It is not particularly suited to the space because it's contorted. You're going to be eaten in the basement and then you gota some of the people are
going to have food delivered to the next story. That's not a very efficient design. How do you say that's particularly suited to a restaurant use? The applicant says that there's historic preservation purposes advanced.
The building's historic. It's already fixed up. That was the rationale used on the last round. How does this enhance it? The building is already in good shape as testified. So
I disagree with the public purposes that are advanced. This is in a site that does not permit restaurants. It is a site that's in an area that's predominantly residential. It's in an area that has substandard width streets with limited
parking and that pattern is endorsed by your master plan. So what are the negative uh aspects to this? Um, first of all, there's no testimony
on the record of how this is reconciled with the fact that your master plan says a restaurant and bar shouldn't be here. This, in my opinion, if you approve this, the land use impacts of the
restaurant and bar are going to be greater than the current operation of the bed and breakfast. It's later into the evening. More people are going to be using it. There's a greater demand for parking,
more deliveries, more employees, more smoke, more smells. I would suggest to you that rather the applicant is not proposing this as an accessory use, but in my opinion, aside from that, the land
use impacts of the bar and restaurant are going to exceed the impacts to the neighborhood uh of the current bed and breakfast use. And again, one of the issues is the 10 parking spaces look great. They happen to be in an uncomfortable
location because people in the inn are going to uh in the bed and breakfast are going to take advantage of it. And as you saw from the photographs, there are open terraces. People with units can go out on the open terrace um can party, can do what they want. One thing, as you
know about liquor licenses, there kind of a legislative acknowledgment >> that the effects extend. You know, you can't put a liquor license within 200 feet of a church. Well, who cares, right? If everybody's inside. Well, the answer is the law
recognizes that when you have a bar and a and a liquor license that the land use impacts extend further than just the dimensions of the property. So
um in my opinion there have not it has not been demonstrated that there are public purposes that are advanced. um the use is not particularly suited to the property and I would say it is
particularly particularly unsuitable because it's going to have a greater impact than than the current use of the property in this sard not addressed by the applicant is how do you you justify
a separate principal use a bar and a restaurant that is not permitted in the zone. Now, the governing body can change the zone, but as of today, your zoning ordinance says no bar and
restaurants. Your master plan said no bar and restaurants in this zone, and your 2019 re-examination report reaffirmed the recommendation of your master plan.
So in my opinion, I do not believe that the applicant has met its burden under the Medici case. Um, and in my opinion, if you approve it as proposed, it will result in substantial impairment of the 2003
master plan and result in substantial detriment uh to the public good. >> Thank you, Mr. Ste. Uh that concludes our objection and chief. Uh there are two objectors that have exhibits just some photographs. They were going to go first and then
everybody else was going to go. >> All right. Mr. Naz may have questions. >> I don't intend to >> get a microphone. John, >> I don't intend to try to conduct a lengthy cross-examination of Mr. Ste, but there is one of his exhibits. If I can ask just a few brief questions on
before we turn it over to the next witness, I'd like to. So, Mr. Stack, I'm looking at your page one, I guess it's been marked as Lynch 3. >> Yes. >> You see that? >> Yep. >> You have encircled the property in question in yellow. >> Yes. >> I'm just pointing you to this. If you
look to the northwest, immediately caddy cornered to this property on the other side of Washington. Yep. >> Can you tell me if that lot has a commercial or residential use existing on? >> That's a commercial use. >> What type of commercial use? >> Um, I think it's like a bed and breakfast. >> If I told you it was the Washington in and it's a barn restaurant. Would that surprise you? I I didn't have a drink
there, so I didn't know, but I knew it was a commercial use. >> And that's in the R3 zoning district, right? It is. >> Would that be an approved permitted use in there by right? >> No. >> To the uh north of that next lot up on Washington Street, do you know what type of use is on that lot? >> Uh I don't recall that one. I just
walked the block several times. >> If I told you it was a funeral home, which is a commercial use, would you would that would you agree with that? >> Um I wouldn't doubt that that was a funeral home. >> Okay. And if I point you to directly on the other side of Washington Street, directly across the street from the Southern Mansion.
>> Yep. That's a realtor office. >> So that's commercial use as well. Is that right? In the R3 zone. >> Yep. >> And going to the other end of Washington Street at the corner of Washington and Franklin. Still in the R3 zone. Correct. >> According to your map, >> show me where you're going. >> Right here. >> Yes. >> Is that Can you tell me what use is on
that lot if you're familiar? >> Um, that's a bank. >> It's commercial use as well. >> Yep. >> In the R3 zone. >> Yes. Okay. Directly next to our property in the RS zone here, what type of use is on that? >> That's the post office that's exempt from zoning.
>> Okay. But it's a is it a commercial use? Post office. >> Well, it's No, it's a governmental use. >> Okay. And immediately next to the post office, does the zoning change? >> Yes. >> On the other side of that street, and what zone does that turn to? >> It's a C1 zone. >> So, would you agree with me that this property, albeit that it's in the RS
zone, is a half block from the C1 zone? >> Yes. And in the C1 zone, bars and restaurants would be permitted, right? Yes or no? >> I'm going to check my notes if you let me. >> Sure. >> You testified it was >> uh yes, it was uh it is permitted and it
was recommended to be permitted, but the for some reason the governing body didn't extend the zone to cover this property. >> I understand. That's all I have, Mr. K. Thank you. Mr. W, do you have anyone else that you're calling up or is this going out? I I
>> I only represent uh Mr. Mrs. Lynch. We did try to coordinate the neighbors in a way that it would be succinct and orderly. So, I can tell you the next the the next two neighbors are are Miss Betsy Parker followed by John and Jane Howard in ter because they have exhibits
after that. There's no more exhibits and everybody's going to be more of a If we can limit them to >> your usual three minutes >> their address in just just a couple minutes >> is this
>> um >> is there a particular reason you need more? If you do the chair will consider it. It's it's okay. Sorry. >> Mer these are M Parker. Okay. I'll just >> Mr. Parker you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the
truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. I do. >> Okay. Can you uh Your name is Elizabeth Parker in the usual spelling? >> Yes. >> What's your address, Miss Parker? >> 716 Corgi Street. >> I live right behind uh directly behind
the Southern Mansion. >> Oh. Oh, I'm gonna hold this thing. I live directly behind the Southern Mansion. And I'd like to go on record that I agree with everything that has been presented by Mr. Lynch, Mr. Wint,
and the our planner. But I also have some other issues that I'd like to quickly review. And one of them is the rear entrance to the southern mansion which faces my house. Currently when there is an event
the uh and the um people congregate they're smoking drinking and I think it's unrealistic to think that if we have a bar to the public that
staff is going to come and enforce them being removed from the area. So, I would anticipate that the noise that a public bar and restaurant generate would be continuous every night. And I'm also concerned
that Corgi Street is going to turn into a loading zone. And today we had I think there's pictures here that you have of um a large truck that pulled up directly in front of my house and I believe it
was there for about 20 minutes unloading right there at the rear entrance to the southern mansion. >> Miss Parker, I'm sorry to interrupt, but just for the record, the exhibit that was passed out has been marked Parker one. It's four pages of photographs, one
one photograph on each page, uh, dated today, May 28th, >> right around one o'clock. So, musicians also routinely use Corgi Street to unload their amps and all their instruments when there's an event in addition to uh, fl flowers being
unloaded. And uh at one point we even had or there was a guest using Corgi Street to load their car with their um luggage for some reason. So I feel that this this restaurant bar will
significantly generate a great deal more in noise, traffic, recyclables, trash, parking. I could I could go on and on and being a resident it uh it would be a very
unpleasant situation for me. So I respectfully request that you deny this variance request. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> The next neighbors uh that would come up would be John and Jane Howard. And
they're, as far as I know, the last ones that have marked exhibits. I'll hand those out in advance. Again, they're photographs. They're actual physical photographs printed out. Uh we've marked as Howard one. Uh and it's a total of seven photographs. >> Mr. W. I just want to point that out the witness, Miss Parker, did not actually
testify to my recollection about this picture. >> She did not. >> Perhaps she should. M. Parker, >> I can't put this in evidence if you don't talk about it a little bit. Can you tell me what what this photograph is, when you took it, and what it depicts in the briefest possible way?
to be excluded for some reason. >> Okay. I took it because a it's a loading they're using it as a loading zone, >> right? >> Um >> do you still have the exhibit in front of you? >> Sorry. >> You still have the exhibit in front of you.
>> I I'll I'll I'll lay foundation so you have what you need. >> I just wanted to say that she took the pictures and what it is. That's all. Two seconds. >> Miss Barker. >> Yes. >> Did you take these pictures yourself? Uh, yes I did. And >> this is on Corgi Street. >> Yes, it is. >> Was it on May 28th? May 28th, 2026. I'm
sorry. I'm tired. >> Today. >> Okay. And what do you believe this depicts and why is that relevant? >> Well, it's parked right in front of my driveway. >> Okay. And it's a truck. >> Yes. >> Making deliveries at >> the Southern Mansion. >> Okay. And >> using the using the rear entrance and they were there for approximately 20
minutes. >> Perfect. Thank you. We got to get that on the record. We can't just throw a picture in there. >> Thank you. >> Perfect. Thank you. This is Jane and John Howard. What's your address? >> Yes. Uh 706 Corgi Street. >> Uh what?
>> Howorth t >> Howard. H O W A R D. >> Oh, it is D. >> Yes. Howard. That's okay. That happens. >> All right. 706 Corgi. >> Yes. Yes. >> The testimony you're about to um give, if you swear affirm, the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
>> I do. >> All right. Go ahead. >> Good evening. My name is Jane Petleski Howard. My husband and I purchased 706 Corgi Street as a second home in 2018. We became full-time residents in 2022.
Our home is directly across the street from the Southern Mansion. Please refer to photo one for our view of the Southern Mansion from our front porch. As you can see, we are in close proximity. I'd like to go on record that
I agree with what has already been presented by Mr. Lynch, but I also have additional issues that I would like to present as I appine that the current light and noise pollution issues that my husband and I experience living year round across the street from the
southern mansion would only be exacerbated by the proposed bar and restaurant and construction of same as contractor hours are not currently observed when anything is done to this property. As previously discussed by Mr.
for Lynch. Corgi Street is a narrow one-way street with parking on the right hand side. If deliveries were to occur, as they did today, and I didn't realize, of course, that a truck would be sitting there for 20 plus minutes, and I pulled
down the street expecting them to leave. The only way out would be for me to back up a one-way street and then go the wrong way down the street, which of course is illegal and dangerous and would only add to the chaos.
Photo two is a view of the delivery entrance on Corgi Street. In addition, we have Pearl Street, which is right off of Corgi Street, which can be seen on the aerial view previously presented by Mr. Lynch.
It too is an inc well narrower than Corgi Street. It is a one-way street, no parking that in season has a lot of foot traffic. I can only imagine people seeking parking for the proposed restaurant and bar not familiar with the area going down Pearl Street the wrong
way, adding to a wellocumented existing problem of wrongway drivers in this area. It's only a matter of time I someone gets injured or worse. We've already had incidents here where someone was confronted by a wrongway driver and
fell off their bicycle. I was personally frightened by a wrongway driver while walking our dog on Pearl Street. On more than one occasion, wedding guests have cut through a gap in the Southern Mansion's hedge row. And you can see the
gap in the hedger. It's picture three. They cut through a ga gap in the southern mansion's hedge with their drinks in hand to stand on the sidewalk on Corgi Street to smoke to smoke cigarettes and cannabis. Although
cannabis is now legal in the state of New Jersey, it is not legal to smoke it in public. I can only imagine how this would be exacerbated by a proposed bar and restaurant. Picture number four depicts the smoking area currently
behind the hotel that faces Corgi Street. We have also experienced several nights of interrupted sleep when at 1 to 2 a.m. intoxicated and or stoned people are ascending or descending the spiral staircase or sitting on an upper deck of
the southern mansion talking and laughing loudly with the lingering smell of cannabis in the air. Again, the current noise level would be exacerbated by a bar and restaurant. And picture five is a view of the spiral staircase and deck. There is pre-existing light
pollution from lights that outline the southern mansion's roof line and either side of the spiral staircase. They remain on 24/7, 365 days a year. The current lights shine into our home, especially our second
floor bedroom. I imagine this will only worsen as additional lights would likely be added to walkways, parking, etc. should the bar and restaurant varants be granted. Please again refer to picture number five for a view of the lights and
then picture number seven for the hedro in the current parking area that headlights easily shine through. Lastly, the roof exhaust vent, which emits sickening cooking odors, runs noisily for hours on end and at times is
forgotten and runs all night into the next day and can again be heard in our bedroom interrupting our sleep. I expect this too would worsen the addi with the addition of a public bar and restaurant. And picture six gives you the exhaust
vent. In the commercial districts, it is routine that walks are powerwashed and trash picked as patrons are not neat nor considerate after nights of drinking and partying. How can anyone see how imposing the commercial uses requested
would be good for our existing residential neighborhood? I appine that our quality of life on Corgi and the surrounding streets will be materially degraded as no conditions the applicant may provide are real as the applicant can't control guests after they leave
the southern mansion. I respectfully request that you consider the concerns pres presented by the residents and not approve this variance application. Thank you. >> Thank you. My name is John Howard.
I live at 706 Corgi Street. I just have a couple things I just want to add. My issue of concern is with the dumpster. You're going to generate more garbage and debris. I think it's going to be a situation that's going to bring in more
rodents and vermin of all different types. I think it's a true concern considering you've got a dumpster that's basically I think they said about 14 feet. The amount of garbage that's going to be
generated from a restaurant and a bar is going to surpass what that dumpster is. It's truly going to bring in verment on a grand scale. And then my other concern is if you have uh valet parking, you're going to circle around. The odds are
it's going to really create a lot of congestion on Corgi Street. And I know you've heard it, so I don't want to be too redundant, but Corgi Street is really, really tight. And the other thing that no one's really mentioned is when that truck parks there, the post office uses Corgi as its main artery to
get in and out. >> So that's going to really jam up things where it's just a constant flow. So if you've got cars circling to try and get into that restaurant or the bar or whatever it may be, it's just going to take it to a level of pure chaos. And I
agree, if you allow me, just so I go on the record, I'd like to go on record that I agree what has already been presented by Mr. Lynch and Mr. Peter Spec. And I respectfully request that you consider the concerns presented by the residents and not approve this
variance application. I appreciate your time. I know you've been here a really long time. Thank you. >> Thank you. Is there anyone within 200 feet of the property that wishes to speak very very briefly? >> Okay. Um
>> you're within two you're within 200 feet. >> I am within 200 feet. Uh 710 Corgi. >> Um so I I'm here also. I'm sorry. Jay Joyce. Joseph Joyce. >> I What is it? Choice of choice. >> Yes. J O Y C >> 710.
>> 710. >> Sir, do you swear affirm the testimony about to give is the truth, all truth, and nothing but the true stuff we got? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Um, first of all, I want to thank all the the members of the board here. I am on the same board in my am the town of primary residents, which is also in New Jersey, which is also a historic town
that has many of the same challenges that you guys face all the time. And I do and you're volunteers, so I I really appreciate that and and know up close what that means. Everything that's been test that's been presented here today by the attorney, by John, by the other neighbors. I
completely agree with the uh today was a day where we had a 20 minute block on the street. We were trapped. We could not get out. An emergency. All I could think was an emergency vehicle would not get out and the driver wasn't there to move it. He's moving things in and out of the out of the truck into the southern mansion. Um so these type of
things have have got to stop. So you've heard about noise pollution, light pollution tonight of all types. Um, I hope that the integrity of the of the master plan and that the integrity of the zoning as defined is with is upheld with the decision not to approve this application. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Hi. Hi, sir. What's your name? >> John Carter. >> Where do you live? John >> 800 Washington Street. Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, old truth, and the truth of a guy? >> I do.
So I can represent the Jefferson Street side of this issue after hearing all the Corgi Street people. So just quickly, that truck that they keep talking about today first stopped on Jefferson Street at about 12:30. So I think if you add
another half an hour to your timeline, the truck stopped there, proceeded to circle around the block a couple of times, sorry, before it ended up on Gorgi. So uh I guess my point here is that you
have to question the accuracy of the application. If the statement was that all the deliveries are made on the property, they clearly are not. Uh yesterday there was another truck parked on Jefferson Street in a no parking zone
for over 15 minutes loading into the property. This happens all the time. So this is not an isolated thing. And I think if you would spend just a few minutes and walk around to the property, you can see those driveways cannot
accommodate long trucks. It's just physically impossible. So either they're going to have to restrict the size of their trucks or something's going to give. So this is my major issue. It's the the traffic impact. Mack is running
their trolleys down the street. It's going to be a nightmare with lunch and dinner service. the trolley, the horse and carriages that stop by and lovingly describe the Washington the uh southern mansion are
going to just see chaos. So, uh I think you really need to consider this impact on the neighborhood. And just because we suffer through the Washington in the bank and other uh facilities doesn't
mean that we should allow this creeping intrusion into our neighborhood. And again, look at the Washington in the traffic and the trucks and we sort of laughingly talked about how they unload people on the street.
You know, they're not supposed to. It happens. and what's going to happen with the Southern Mansion having lunch and dinner with an equal or bigger size operation. And you know, I agree with everything that's been said before by the lunch
parties. I think so many things have not been addressed here. The number of employees and where they're going to park. Right now, the Washington in as far as I know has about 40 employees and they're parking all over town to get
here. How many employees are going to be parked need parking for this operation? It hasn't even been addressed. You folks are just saying the streets are fine, so there won't be any traffic impact. I just don't understand it. I don't think you're really doing a good job
protecting the citizens. I'm a year-round resident for the last six years and I put up with the Washington end. But again, I don't think it's right that we should have this intrusion and creep and change of use for this property.
Please deny. That's all. >> Thank you. Um >> hi. Some of you don't know me. My name's Crystal Harden. >> Okay. >> Um, you spell that for me. >> H A R D I N.
>> My family bought their first property in 1979. >> Slow. Slow down. You watch everybody else do. >> I'm tired. >> I'm going to get us all out of here. >> Chris is c >> Crystal. C R Y S T A L. Okay. >> Your address?
924 and a half Corgi Street, 718 Madison. Okay. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> Okay. Go ahead and give your testimony. >> My family bought their first property in 1979. So, I've been a physical part of
the growth, the tourism of Cape May. I've seen it all. I've been stuck on Carpenters Lanes with all the trucks. Their trash behind the mall is disgusting. The recycling, but no one ever says anything about that. The
Southern Mansion, I used to party in there when I was in high school. It was for boho and just all the kids partied back there. What Barbara Bray Wild has done to all of her properties has brought more revenue into Cape May. If
you haven't had the honor or pleasure of going in the Southern Mansion, you really should. It's magnificent. The restorations. I know this because as a officient, a wedding minister, I've performed dozens and dozens of weddings
there. Never heard one complaint. Actually, I'm surprised that some of my neighbors never complained about my five children walking to Star of the Sea School on Ky Street. They're in grade school. Three
boys, two girls. They fight a lot. They're much louder than the weddings at at Willow I mean at the Southern Mansion. And being here so long, I'm in shape. I walk a lot. We walk to the restaurants. We walk to the
Washington in. We walk to the mall. The Sha Fun doesn't have parking. We go to the Ramble. No parking. Tons. One of my other prop one of my other parents' property is the historic I call them money pits. Historic money pit, historic
hotel makeover. It's never ending. We did eventually buy parking, but nobody else around there has enough parking. They took away spots on the beachfront in front of convention hall. It's like, are you kidding? So, parking should not
be an issue. This is a historical tourist town. We make our money, everyone makes their money by the tourists. and the more great restaurants because Barbara only does top-notch fourstar immaculate. If you walked
around her properties, all of her properties are magnificent. They put ours to shame. We work really hard. I still run them. I'm still working. I don't have time to nitpick about little things. I don't sit in my window. I'm
cleaning rooms and doing weeds. This town needs more revenue to take care of the increasing taxes and utilities that are put upon us. So, I I could go on and on and on. I mean, I've lived here. I've been a taxpayer since
1992 myself. So, and and I love what's happening to our town. It's growing. And the more great restaurants we have, I mean, she's it's not going to be packed. It's not going to be a bar like Caries. They go to Harry's and Carney to have
that fun. Southern Mansion is classy people and a lot of people can't afford to go there, which means great. The trashy people are going to stay on Beach Avenue. The classy people are going to go to Willow Creek. I love that cuz I live right down the street and I like to
walk to classy places to eat and drink. So, I I I I'm just trying to tell you the facts. I have no violin here. It's good for us and you should approve it. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Oh, and I sat on the HPC for three
years. I didn't like that. >> My name is Ellie Odonghue. I live at 811 Corgi Street. Uh, I wanted to go back and readress a few. It's amazing. >> Does it reverberate? >> I just go very slow. Ellie
>> E L L I E. >> Okay. >> O Donahghue. >> You're gonna put your name in the resolution. You want Absolutely. The last name for me to mess it up. Odanu. O apostrophe D O N A >> O G H U E >> O Apostrophe D O N. Okay. Got it.
>> Got it. Ellie Ellie Odanu. And the address >> 811 Corg. >> Okay. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So hope you got >> I do. >> All right. Now, now you say whatever you want to say. >> Okay. I want to go back to the master
plan and the uh revisiting of Washington Street where there is a um >> okay, an effort to tie in because there are commercial properties situated on the other side of this property. So, I
want to go back and revisit that. If we look at the bank, the bank closes at five o'clock. If we look at the post office, the post office closes at five o'clock. If we look at the funeral home, that's not open at night. Um, and they
have very ample parking for whatever um they need in order to bring people off the street for a very short period of time. If we look at the real estate office, that closes at 5:00. So when you try to tie in the sea aspect of it, the
commercial aspect to our residential neighborhood, it doesn't match up for what they're looking for use to what those are. If you look at the Washington Inn, that was established in 1978. The master plan came into play in 2003
and that master plan did speak very specifically to the preservation and protection of residential neighborhood areas because they knew the town was growing. So I think it is the burden of the board to honor that intention to
honor what was already written to protect neighborhoods particularly since the town is growing so much. There is revenue everywhere. There's plenty of revenue in other properties. It should stay in the commercial zone. So to now
infringe that and take that concept violate the master plan that was done the Washington was there before that master plan came in play. So I don't think you can really tie that in to balance that argument. So, I think it's
very um important that um the integrity of the position and the burden that you've been placed with here tonight really looks at honoring um the intention of
that and protecting our neighborhood so that the whole town doesn't just become another Jackson Street. And I think it's not really fair to ask all the neighbors and all the deed owners and all the taxpayers in an area to support
one person's one famil family's need to benefit themselves with income. There are tours people can come in and see the house. They don't need the restaurant to um expose the beauty of and I I've been in front of the board with Barbara
multiple times and I honor and I think she does a great job and I think what she did there was beautiful. So this is not personal. I think she's a hard worker and I think that they've earned and deserved what they have, but they're asking neighbors to help them make more
money so that we can all be inconvenienced um by their benefit. And I just don't think that it lines up with the master plan. And so I'm going to circle back to that um because I think that master plan um was there for a reason. and you're
the board here honoring um sitting with the city and I think that master plan should be sitting on everybody's conscience tonight when you vote. So I thank you for your time and um that's it. >> Thank you. >> Please say your name and spell it.
>> Dana Severance. It's Dana D- A. Last name Severance. S E V R A N C E. I'm at 722. Corgi. >> 722 Corgi. >> Mhm. >> Sorry, it autocorrected severance.
So I have >> All right. 722 Corgi. Do do you swear from the testimony about the deal will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing with true self. >> I do. So I will be very brief. Thank you all for your time. I just want to go on the record as uh saying I agree with um
all of my neighbors on Corgi and on Jackson Street um that have uh Jefferson that have testified. Um I wanted to just bring up one or two points that I didn't hear mentioned. Um I heard the applicant mention that um the property is like it
already has a built-in buffer zone. I would beg to differ being on the back end of that. Um I have uh two kids. They're ages 12 and 14. We haven't heard much talk about children, but if anyone's gone down uh Corgi Street, you you know that one block down there's a
basketball net, you frequently see kids riding bikes. Um my children love to play basketball. They like to have a catch in the street. And the reason why they like that is because it's a quiet street. In fact, that's why we picked that house to live on versus the busier
Washington Street. Um, so I think with all the testimony that we've heard regarding um potential increased traffic, people circling the block looking for a spot, um there's going to be a potential safety issue with kids outside playing, enjoying their front
yards, enjoying walking down the street, um grabbing a ball, going out of our driveway, and uh riding their bike, and the potential for for um you know, accidents to happen. Um I also just because of where we're situated, I want
to reiterate the point about the dumpster. Um I heard testimony about that the current dumpster is underutilized that they can increase the frequency. I have concerns that if they utilize the dumpster more and given the different
type of refues that will be put in the dumpster that there is the potential for more more vermin um smells and also just the noise and more frequency of having to empty the dumpster. So, um those are my only points, but I'm I'm conscious of
the time. So, um thank you for your time and I just respectfully request that you deny the application. Thank you. >> Thank you. I'm paying attention. Go ahead. >> Uh, please state your name and spell it for me, please. >> It's uh Ted Weer. W I E D E R S E I M as
in Mike. >> W E I D E R S. >> Negative. W I E D E R S E I M. >> It's not an easy one. I'm sorry. >> No, this isn't you. This is my computer being dead. Sorry, it's worn out. I
broke it. >> One second. H R S I S E I M >> S E I M. >> Okay. >> All right. And your address, sir? >> 509 Franklin Street. I'm at the corner
of Franklin Street, Page Street, and Pearl Street, which backs on to Corgi Street. >> You swear affirm the testimony about to give us the truth. Told you nothing but the truth. Sup God. >> I do. And since it's uh very late, I'm just going to say I agree with the Lynch
party. I agree with Mr. Wint and Mr. Stack and all our neighbors that this application for a variance should be denied. >> I thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> The name took longer than the testimony. I apologize.
>> If this had been an hour ago, I would have been much longer. I'll just get um my name is Victoria Clayton. I live at 808 Washington Street and I also own property at 42 Jackson. Um I guess first of all I want to clarify that the
Washington in and the funeral home are grandfathered and they are considered non-conforming use. Just so you know that. Okay. I live across the street from the Washington end. Um I guess the one thing I just want to make sure um I
have great respect for you Barbara and I have been to the Southern Mansion many times and it's beautiful. I just want to clarify that there is a lot of rumors around town that you were going to open a speak easy in the basement and I just want to clarify is that something that's
down the road or Okay. Okay. I just wanted everybody to >> Okay. I just want All right. I I am concerned about noise and I'm I live now next to a boarding house because um
unfortunately the house next to me, George Andy's bought and has turned into a J1 house and Dennis and I are not happy about that. But that's for another topic. Um, so I am concerned that late at night people leaving will be going
down Washington Street at a at a very big speed, but otherwise um I I like progress, but I don't think that this is something that um our town
needs at this section of town. And I'm sorry to say that, but that's just how I feel. I think I think we have a neighborhood and Corgi Street is very residential. There are kids playing their basketball at night. They're playing kickball. I watch them. I hear
them. And I think this is going to impact them very much. And also the trash will have to be picked up every single day. When you have a restaurant that's 247 open every day, and I know that from being at the Washington in, they're going to have recyclables every
day. It's going to be picked up. You can't leave there. So, that's something that you should know that the trash will definitely have to be picked up every day if you're operating lunch and dinner um seven days a week. So, I just wanted to state that and you know, you have a
big job ahead of you to make a decision. So, good luck. I'm afraid this is going to fall down. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else within 200 feet? >> Yeah. Okay. >> Jerry Carter, 800 Washington Street.
>> How are you spelling Jerry? I got it. G E R R I >> and that address >> 800 Washington. We live directly across from the southern mansion. And >> affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> It is.
>> Okay. Go ahead. >> We live directly across the street, my patio. I have a beautiful view of the southern mansion from my patio, which I enjoy greatly. I think it's a beautiful property, and I think the current use is the proper one. That corner is just
crazy there. I don't know if anyone knows how the valet works at Washington in, but they make a broken Uturn on Washington Street into the Southern Mansion's driveway to go back to the funeral
parlor and park in the back. So, that corner there is just chaotic. And um I've seen a lot of close calls with cars coming racing down in all the different directions. And on Jefferson Street, we always have trucks idling outside the
Southern Mansion making deliveries. They can't fit in. I guess they're sitting just out there by my patio. So I hear them a lot. And I just think that why on earth would we change what they are doing right now? They do it beautifully. They have weddings. They're very
respectful. I don't have any problems with that. Only once do I remember they had a very loud DJ, but most of the time it's it's been fine. But the trash that concerns me greatly that they'd be picking that up every day. That's right
across from from us and the vermin and the whole bit. It's just why why would you do this? Would you want to live there right across from that and the poor people on Corgi Street? Would you want if that was your house, would you want this to go on? Ask yourself that
question. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else within 200 ft? Anyone beyond 200 feet that wishes to speak? Okay, we're going to close it to the public.
>> Yeah. Sazer, is there anything you feel need to be needs to be said? >> Sure. >> Well, I don't know that the chairperson asked if there were more people within 200 feet, outside 200 feet, and then closed to the public. >> Maybe there's someone I don't know.
That's the chairman's decision. She can reopen if she's >> You would like to speak. >> You can go. >> Look, >> are you within 200 or beyond? >> Beyond. >> Okay. >> You can keep it brief. Thank you.
>> I promise I will. My name is Glattis McKenna. >> Can you spell your name for me? >> Sure. M C K I N E Y. >> Can you speak into the mic? I can't hear you. >> And everything was Glattus. >> Correct. >> G L E Y S.
>> G L A D Ys. >> Can you repeat the last name for me, please? >> Sure. It's MC K I N E Y. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. McKenna. What's your address? >> I actually live in Lower. I work for Miss Wild and I just want to give some
testimony. >> I I don't think you can testify. I'm sorry. >> Okay. >> You have to be a resident. >> Okay. be able to give us an address in Kate May. >> Okay. >> There's some extraordinary um exceptions to that, like if we were doing a nuclear power plant, you could go outside the
area, but for a local restaurant, we have >> No, I I was just going to speak operationally how she does things operationally. So, it's >> that's a different thing if if if you were to be called as a witness by the applicant.
>> But I I think the >> No, >> what do you want to do? M >> no problem. >> Thank you for trying. >> No, no problem. >> That's okay. Right. >> Okay. Hold on one second. I just want to make a note about Miss McKini. >> Okay. >> Are you within 200 feet or
>> um farther? >> But in Kate May. >> Yes. Miss Kate May. >> Okay. Um can you say your name and please spell it for him? >> Certainly. It's Carolyn Poacher Woody. That's C A R O L I N
Poacher. P O C H E R Woody W O D Y. >> Okay. What's your What's your address? >> 11 South Lafayette. >> You uh swear the testimony you're about to give is the truth, truth, and the truth of God. >> I do.
>> My family's own property in Kate May since the 19th century. Um, both of my parents actually met in Kate May uh in Henry's which is now Taco Caboito. Both of my grandparents, both sets of grandparents were uh full-time residents. And I've been a full-time
resident for the past 20 years. And I've been visiting Kate May since I was a baby. So, I don't know who remembers what the Southern Mansion looked like when it was the Krilly House, but I do. It was a dilapidated wreck and when Ms.
Wild uh purchased it in 1994, uh revived and restored and made a transformation of the property and every single property that she's touched has been exceptional. the uh just the uh
property that she's renovated on Lafayette Street, Willow Creek Winery, Legates, all top-notch, 100%. And I think that she will do the same thing with a restaurant, an alcohol serving restaurant, not a bar. That's
not what she wants. So, I urge you to approve this uh resolution. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Yep, you're allowed to do that. >> Thank you, Madam Chair and board members. Um, without
going for tat on everything that was said tonight, just just in closing, um, some things I'd like to add. the exhibits that you were provided by many of the objectors talked about, you know, noise, talked about rowdy behavior, talked about deliveries off street. The only information or only exhibits you
got were exhibits dated today. I mean, we don't have anything suggesting as was indicated that this is a pattern of usage. But all of that being said, one >> you had the micro >> Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. That's not what we're doing. >> We had two and a half hours of public
comment. he gets to close and then we're going to do the board's going to vote. Okay. >> In in addition to that, Mr. Solicitor and board, a lot of the issues that were brought up were policing issues, right? Or or noise complaints issues where you would think typically if these things were patterns that existed and happened
all the time that Miss Wild would have citations issued against her against the property. She's indicated to me she has never had a noise citation issued by the city of Cape May against her. So, for all of these patterns to be as alarming and disruptive as they claim to be, there's just there's nothing to back it
up as far as I can tell, aside from some photographs that we received related to today's date only. Um, that said, as I as I mentioned earlier, uh, after the objector's professional planner uh, went through his analysis and testimony, we understand that the RS district doesn't
allow this by right, as you've said and we've gone over multiple times. That's why we're here, right? That's why we're asking you as a zoning board of adjustment to bend the rules a little bit to allow us to do what we're looking to do outside of what is otherwise permitted by rule by ordinance if the ma
the master plan is always a guidance but that's that's a planning board metric right a zoning board of adjustment is exists in order to grant deviiances from what's allowable and required under ordinances and under the master plan that's what we're asking you for and that's why we're here um as I mentioned
this property is commercial in nature now we're just seeing seeking to expand that commercial use which already exists. There's commercial uses across the street directly on Washington, the next block down to the guess it would be the north and to the south, right? We are half a block from the C1 zoning
district that we're not in the middle of a neighborhood, right? We know we back up to Corgi. This is otherwise a semicommercial zone. We're asking if you allow us to continue to operate commercially with this additional use that we believe as has been testified to by the professionals is a use that is
particularly suited for this site and the site given its size and availability of parking as we've already laid out and just the general layout of the site allows it to be suitable for the proposed use. So, we thank you for your time. We appreciate your consideration. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Is there a discussion? I'll frame a motion. I I'll do a little talking first. >> All right. So, this is a C1 variance. >> C2. >> Is it a C2? >> We didn't ask for it under the hardship. It's a D1 and a C2.
>> Oh, I said C1. I'm D1. D1. I had the C stuff. You got to get through the D. And a D variance >> um is a special variance. It requires five out of the seven to say yes. It also has a higher standard. I'm not going to try to repeat it perfectly. The
um both of the uh professionals um did explain the D1 variance. I'm not sure the D1 variance is set forth in the engineers report um focused on the D1 variance. It's more of a generic one, but this is a sightspecific D1 variance, meaning you have you have to find the
site as particularly well suited. Um, I will say that I do think there is evidence to support that it's particularly well suited. There's evidence to find that it's not. Okay? I'm not suggesting that you say yes or no. I'm saying that there is some evidence that it's particularly well suited. I think you are within your
discretion either way that you vote on this yes or no. Uh, this site is not far from the C2. It has several C um, what do I mean C2? It I don't want to confuse you. This has a zone C2 and a variant C2. It is near a commercial district. It
is surrounded by commercial uses, one of which is nearly identical to the proposed request. So, um the property is a humongous lot. Um it is a unique historic building with a lot of space in it and around it. Um so, it does have
sight specific qualities that could support a devian from the zone. On the other hand, on the other hand, there is certainly also testimony to indicate that the site is not well suited because it's right against a commercial road
with all the concerns outlined by your community members. So, there's certainly things you can consider and I I know you're not, this isn't a classic weighing C2 variance, but you're always weighing. You're deciding. We're looking at the benefits of preserving a historic site by having a use that might help
preserve it. On a site that seems suited for perhaps a commercial use that already has a commercial use, so it's not like they're going from a house to a to a bar. They're going from a guest house to a bar, but it's right against a historic street, a small street. You
have testimony about impacts on that street. You have a busy um intersection. It's true the Washington in is there, but it also makes the intersection big uh more busy. So, can it handle another another non-conforming use? So, you're
going to you're going to weigh all that and think about that and decide and apply the standard the D1 standard whether the site is particularly well suited and whether or not there's a a negative impact on the zone plan and zoning ordinance. You always have to consider the negative criteria like you
do all the time. Okay. So, you're going to also consider the master plan. It's true. It's not permitted by the master plan, but if it were permitted, they wouldn't need to come talk to you. So, that alone isn't a reason not to grant the variance. It's just that one of the things you're going to weigh in your analysis. Okay? Um, when you vote,
please give your reasons for voting. There's plenty of reasons that are on the record that can support your decision either way. So, please try to draw some of those reasons into your statement while you vote yes or no. Um, does anybody have any questions in the We're going to vote all at once. The application is presented as a whole. You
have the parking issue. Um, it's very interesting to me the parking issue because the HBC had them reduce the parking in a sense, move it closer to the building so that you're parking right up against the historic structure where everyone's looking out the window. The HBC has weighed that in their
opinion and thinks that's better than having it out in a parking lot that was approved previously with compliant parking along Washington. That's the HPC's ballow, but quite honestly, that that is just a recommendation. You guys can do what you want with that. you are
in charge of the site and the parking. So, um you can discuss that or do something different. But at the moment, the applicant has justified their variance by pointing out the HBC who are the experts in the field have instructed them that it's better to do the parking the way they're doing it than the way
they proposed it with compliant. So, you should factor that into your analysis. But they prevented the application as a whole, presented it as a whole. So, we're going to vote as a whole unless there's an objection by the applicant or the objector. Okay? We're going to do it all as a whole. Five votes are required for it to
say yes. If it doesn't achieve five votes, then none of the variances are granted and the project is rejected. Although they have all the other prior approvals and can continue doing what it is they're doing. Okay. So, the motion I recommend being made, but how you vote is up to you. We always make the the
motion in the affirmative. Doesn't mean it's suggesting how you should vote. It's just that way if you say yes, it's yes. If you say no, it's no. So, we always do it in the affirmative. So the motion I recommend being made, but how you vote is up to you is a motion to grant
preliminary and site preliminary and final site plan approval with the variances as outlined by the board engineer on page four. Whoop strike that five of the engineers report one through four subject uh to the conditions
outlined by the board engineer 1 through 20. uh with the waiverss as recommended by the board engineer in his report. That's the motion I recommend being made, but how you vote is up to you.
>> Can we have that motion? >> I make the motion. >> Miss motions. Mrs. Notch seconds. Mrs. Notch. >> No. and mainly because of the neighbors objections with the smoking the extra
parking and you know problems and I just think you know with the the odor coming from the this from the way they you know kitchen I just feel that this is not the good use for this property >> my answer is no um Kate May is small so
everything is close by but that's one more reason why we have to keep the residential areas residential. I think there is substantial detriment to the good to the public good. There is a reason zoning doesn't allow
the resident the restaurant and bar uses in a residential zone. I believe there's too much impact on the neighbors with noise, trash, traffic. This variance will push parking into the neighborhoods a couple streets back.
There is limited parking on Washington and Corgi. So this means that parking will be spread deeper into the neighborhoods that are close by. >> Mr. Walsh, >> I'm sorry. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. >> Um
I believe it's important to preserve the residential neighborhoods for residential enjoyment. Mr. Walsh, >> I'm going to vote no. Also, um the zoning laws are pretty clear. No bars or restaurant in the RS zone. There's no
testimony that I heard that would change any of that. Um there's testimony that it would add vitality to the neighborhood. I don't see that happening at all. I think people leaving a bar late at night, anytime, walking down the street is not going to add to the vitality of any neighborhood.
Mr. Zexer, >> I also vote no. I am concerned about the noise elements. I'm concerned about the waste and recycling pickup. The idea of a full restaurant and bar is going to expand that use significantly. I do understand the neighbors um comments and
I respect those. But just the idea of expanding the use of the property to this extent I think does does go against what I would think would be in concert with the zoning ordinance. >> Miss Stevenson.
No, I don't think there was enough evidence provided or information about business operations that allows me to determine if granting these variances would impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance.
>> Thank you, Mr. Venudo. >> I think the uh ordinance got it right to prohibit the use of a restaurant and bar in the RS district. So, I'm voting no. I don't believe the site is well suited for a bar and restaurant as the building
backs up too close to the the residential area right behind it. >> Mrs. Werner, >> I'm also voting no. Um, I think that you've done a beautiful job there, but its current use is more in keeping with
the neighborhood and this expansion is um a detriment to the neighbors and to the zoning plan. >> Thank Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, Council. I need a
I need a motion to uh approve the bill. >> I'll make the motion to pay the bills. >> Do we have a second? >> I'll second. >> Okay. Mr. Venuda motions. Miss Stevenson seconds. All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you everyone. Do we have a motion to adjurnn?
>> Bills. >> Bills. >> We just did the bills. That's what I Are you in favor? >> Yes. >> Any nays? No ns on the bills. Okay. Do we have a motion to adjurnn? >> Motion. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Thank you everyone. Have a good night.
>> We didn't pay the bills. >> Oh the bills next. How are you? Number three.