##VIDEO ID:deVkvk2tATo## e e e there's not testing one two three p e e e e e e e testing e Act of 197 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 have the pledge of allegiance to of the United States of America and to the for stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all please make sure your microphones are on okay oh you know what component I'm talking too much up there Mrs Werner here Mr venudo here Mr leadwin here Mrs Notch here miss shean here Mr Walsh here Mr Zer here Mr Bodner here miss Stevenson here thank you okay we have the minutes of the October 24th 2024 meeting would somebody like to make that motion I'll make the motion second motion by Mr venudo seconded by Mr ledwin Mr Lewin yes Mrs Notch Mrs not um do you want to um vote on the minutes uh voting adopting voting on adopting the minutes would you like to vote Yes okay thank you Miss Shan abstain Mr Walsh yes Mr Zer yes Mr venudo yes Mrs wner yes thank you okay our first resolution is for Edward and Linda farington 1012 Pittsburgh Avenue can we have that motion I'll second okay motion by Mrs Notch seconded by Miss Stevenson I mean Miss [Laughter] Shen I'll do this way no you need to change it from 's Mr Lewin abstain Mrs Notch yes Miss Shan yes Mr Walsh yes Mr zexer yes Mr venudo yes Mrs wner abstain thank you our next resolution is Jack and eileene Oaks 11:45 Washington Street I'll make the motion second motion by Mr zeter and seconded by Miss Stevenson okay thank you Mr Lewin Mrs Notch yes Miss Shen yes Mr Walsh yes Mr zexer yes Mr venudo yes Mrs Werner abstained thank you our next one is Michael Kennedy 722 Columbia Avenue make a motion I'll second oh I'll make a motion sorry second okay motion by Miss Sheen and seconded by Mr zeter Mr Lewin Mrs Notch yes Miss Sheen yes Mr Walsh yes Mr Zer yes Mr venudo yes Mrs wner abstain thank you okay our first application tonight is for Christopher roner 1514 vento Avenue evening Mr chairman members of the board John amh Houser the DWI law firm uh here this evening on behalf of the applicant Christopher roner uh subject property for this application is 1514 vento Avenue it's identified on the city's tax map is block 1176 .02 lot 1.08 and it is located in the R1 zoning District uh prior to arriving tonight we did receive recommendations for approval from City of Cape May Fire Public Works and shade tree commission um uh respectively on December 3rd and December 5th through the application that we presented before you what we're seeking uh is variance relief related to maximum permitted fence sight and a front yard as you know 4 feet is permitted we're proposing six feet through this application um here with me this evening to provide some testimony in uh in respect to the application and why it is that we're seeking this is Mr Joseph monac Joe is a professional engineer with the firm of the blaso and Associates uh who drafted the variance plan that was provided with our application I think this is Joe's first time here so I'm happy to elicit some credentials from him uh before we start then I also have to my left the applicant Mr Christopher roner uh I don't intend to elicit testimony from Mr roner but he's here should the board have questions or need to fill in uh any gaps should anything come up this evening um if I can have them both sworn though I think that makes most sense if each of you please raise your right hand we're also going to SAR on our board engineer Craig hles to each of you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth or nothing but the truth sh you got I do thank you both if a gentleman could turn on your microphones good so Joe if you can can you uh provide some credentials to the board your educational professional background uh sure yeah I have a Bachelor of Science in civil engine engineering uh from the University of Delaware um uh on behalf of the bason associates I perform land use board reviews for Wildwood Crest and buoro as well as sitting as the board engineer for unur um in addition to that I've been before several boards in K May County and a few in Atlanta County how long youve been licensed Jeff uh over two years okay and as you indicated you've provided testimony and supportive applications at many boards throughout this County right yes okay is that sufficient Mr all right thank you guys are you a planner or no if you are I want to put it down no no okay that's fine all right so Joe if you can to start can you give the board uh some general information a brief overview of this property and some specific uh features related to it sure so the uh the proposed activities for this application is a single family dwelling uh the lot the subject lot is a corner lot with actually three frontages that being on vento Avenue Brooklyn and New York Avenue um structure is a single family dwelling and also a proposed pole and on-site parking so Joe you just mentioned that this lot being on the corner actually face as Frontage is on three streets so it's got three front yards right from technical sense that's correct given that is it your professional opinion that that unique feature of this lot provides practical difficulties with being able to to develop and meet all the requirements related to um the zoning ordinances and front yard setbacks Etc yes all right that said we meet all the bulk requirements of the R1 District through this application correct yes so despite that we need variance relief related it solely to maximum permitted fence sight in the front yard right that's correct okay so I mentioned earlier 4T is typically allowable we're proposing six um the way that we are proposing to situate the building on this lot where are we looking to front the building on which street so it's going to front on Brooklyn so fronting on Brooklyn that would essentially although technically a front yard the frontages along vento and New York are more akin to side yards traditionally correct that's correct all right now if if viewed in the context of those being side yards would you be permitted to have 6-ft fences along those lot lines yes so given that Joe and the the difficulties that go along with needing the three um meeting the requirements for front yard fence site when you have three front yards is that your professional opinion that certain purposes of zoning would be Advance if the board were inclined to Grant the relief request that to have a 6ot fence along the vento and New York frontages yeah I I do believe there are purposes of zoning that are in advanced um to promote a desirable visual environment and to provide light air in open space the the application includes um you know compliance with all uh setback requirements and building Heights so for that reason I believe it does you know Pro promote open air so a little I I guess a little further too we should talk so where we're proposing uh the enclosed space inside of the proposed six- foot fences it's a it's a rear yard behind this proposed Welling correct yes and and what are we some of the features that are proposed in that rear yard we we're proposing an inground swimming pool correct yes so given that is it also your professional opinion that having a six- foot privacy fence is is suitable given the intended use of a permitted accessory use swimming pool in that rear yard yes makes more sense than having a 4-ft fence than anybody can see into and over I believe so yes okay all right so Joe you gave some uh testimony related to the positive criteria that you believe would be Advanced if the board would have Grant this and that's under the C2 uh substantial benefit balancing act test is it also your professional opinion under the C1 hardship criteria that the unique feature of this lot particularly the three frontages would allow the board to Grant the relief under that scenario as well yeah I I believe that does apply as the property essentially doesn't have a rear yard right now back to the C2 criteria in addition to the to the positives you placed on the record is it also your professional opinion that if the board were inclined to Grant this relief there would be no substantial detriment either the a the public good or be the Zone plan ordinance of the city yeah I I don't believe there would be um visiting the site prior to this evening um I did observe the uh Landscaping easement that exists on New York Avenue and it seems that the intent there is to have trees with significant height creating some type of screening um where a a fence that is 6 foot as opposed to foref foot um essentially um makes that objective uh you know it fulfills that objective of the landscape easement so you mentioned you you drove around that neighborhood or viewed some of those properties in advance at tonight did you also notice that there's any other properties along this block that have six foot fences in the front yard yeah um yeah every application Rises and falls on its own yeah there there is a property on the opposite corner um there that that does have a six- foot fence in uh really on the corner um where as this is uh proposed tucked um back behind the building okay less invasive that said though um there are other six-foot fences and front yards in the neighborhood so would this if this were to be approved would it not it wouldn't be out of character with existing conditions in that neighborhood would it I would agree with that yes okay Joe do you have a chance prior to um providing testimony tonight to review Mr hur's uh review memorandum from October 29th I did yes okay um obviously we went to discuss some of the comments that are included in his General review uh section do you have any objection to any of the comments raised if as conditions of approval none at all we agree to comply with all comments set forth in the report and uh are willing to work with the board engineer on um all items outlined okay Joe anything else that that you'd like to add before we uh turn it over to the board with any questions they might have all I have it's everything all right mam chair I don't have anything else on Mr mon anyone from can I ask a question I just don't have the spelling of your last name please oh that was my first and my two questions m o h n a CK thank you okay Mark would you agree that the fence is a safety feature for the pool yes would you agree that six-foot fence is safer than a 4-ot fence yes you think that advances the per of Z rela to safety safety and Welfare yes right thank you I'm going to add that to your appreciate thank you if I may what kind of fence are we talking about uh wood vinyl chain link what is it there's no there's no description anywhere no it's just it's just a solid fence I'm not sure what it's going to be at um could be vinyl um 6 foot solid privacy 6 foot solid privacy I mean that's going to hold up the best in the in the you know the weather conditions here okay as opposed to Wood so I also have a question um so the fence goes all the way to the sidewalk on vuda is that right it goes all the way to the sidewalk um I think it stirs um pull this which Frontage we talking about vento vento those are the side next to driveway first of all there's no there's no sidewalk so it goes all the way to the street then oh yeah I mean I I think it's sets back off the street a little bit um well that's my question I guess go how far back off Jo we don't have a dimension to the center line of the street but in Rel while you guys are figuring that out I'm just going to when this major subdivision was develop developed and approved the residential site Improvement standards for vento Avenue only required sidewalk on one side and that's on the opposite side of the street okay so delvento will have sidewalk on the opposite side but not on this side okay I guess my reasoning is if there's a driveway or becomes a blind spot for people backing out when the when you have a six- foot fence all the way to I don't know what what it is to the street the RightWay line line right okay so is that like 3 feet in is it's about 5T in Oh 5et okay that's what I and also the um to address their concern about not being able to see it's a oneway is a oneway street and it's I'm I'm open on the side where traffic com traffic is coming from that's you but not your neighbor I didn't know what your neighbor would be able to see out that's what I don't I don't know what the house is next to you that was my thing okay that fence does not affect the site triangle for the driveway on the adjoin L okay it's sufficiently far enough away that it's not impacted okay and then the six foot fence on New York Avenue is that correct yes and that just goes level with the house that's correct yes it it's just running to you up to the front of the house yes to the house now that sets back further because you have a landscape buffer correct there's a 10 wide landscape easement we're actually 25 ft to the we've got yeah if you could bring them closer to you that would be helpful closer to to your yeah that sets back further because of the landscape buffer I don't think they can still hear you got to bring closer got to speak into the mic it sets back further because of the landscape buffer thank you okay so it stops at the beginning or the back of the house and it goes around and comes up the driveway on the other side correct that's that's correct okay I mean it's Rich it's in our ordinance that 4 foot is all that is required for safety reasons correct I don't know yes yeah okay so they're going be beyond that so but 4 foot is still within our ordinance for safety I don't know I I and I'm not sure it's a zoning issue there's a fence height requirement from a particular side of fence for a pool and I'm not even sure it's a zoning thing I think it's a construction um limitation as well what you what you were trying to make the point for them that 6 foot would be safer I'm just saying 4 foot is only the requirement I wasn't trying to make a point that I I would just saying that six foot is by definition safer than 4 foot if the object is to keep people from clim from getting over the fence an 8 foot would be safer than a 6 foot I suppose but I was that I wasn't arguing in their favor I was just pointing out that it is a safety feature so it is a purpose of zoning but it's certainly not I don't think anyone testified that they're required to have a six- foot pool so I think they acknowledge that they I mean I don't know if that's true how high does a a I thought a fence had to be 40 was 48 inches 484 feet but for a pool 4 it's 48 on a pool I got in litigation over one side of the fence was lower than the other because of a retaining wall so the question was which side of the fence had to have the 48 inches um so that's how I spend my life uh but um actually I thought it should be the outside but they thought it was the inside but nevertheless um so yeah I think a 4 foot's the minimum required by the construction ordinance I don't know that we have by a construction code I don't know that our ordinance requires a certain height fence around a pool I don't I don't believe it does the code it's not a zoning issue it is a construction code I try to be very particular for machine because she's very particular so I when I said I don't know with a 4f foot I meant in our zoning ordinance it's a construction it's a construction uh code requirement to have a fence around a pool and the height of it is regulated by the construction code for our zoning I don't think there is a requirement for a pool for a fence around a pool I don't think there's a minimum height or maximum height is there is a requirement for a fence the way that it's phrased is a safety fence is required and it just says safety fence and it doesn't have a height associated with it and the and the construction official determines what the current construction codes are that that are sufficient to meet that okay so I have my question is the front yard will be Brooklyn Avenue the front of the house right that that's where we're facing the house so we're right next to the driveway that's the six foot fence that we're that we're giv the variance for is that correct right by the drive cuz that would be the front yard facing that way right because you're allowed to have it across vetto what vento vento you're allowed to have that six foot because that's not that's we're not that that's why we're here is I I just want to know which side we're talking about vento Avenue side is what where the but also the and New York yor Brooklyn when you're facing it that is also going to be six foot by the driveway so we're we're talking about that side on the right side right there by the driveway also say say that again please you're looking at the house from Brooklyn right by the driveway on the other side of the driveway there's a six foot fence yes we're talking about that's six foot fence yes and we're talking about also the six foot fence vent on vento on vent yes the vento Avenue is the one that does not conform the most it's most prominent it sticks out closest to the right away the closest right but it's for those two and then also the one on New York Avenue so it's there's three fences that that should only be at four feet they're supposed to be they're now be at six feet I don't think I think it's just the two that's what I'm trying to figure out no it's okay hold on Craig Craig again will correct me if I'm wrong or clarify for me but I think it's an issue of a fence in a front yard and a is the definition of a front yard I believe is the area beyond the principal structure correct so that if that fence stopped uh you'll use the vento side for a second if that fence stopped where the house stops then arguably that would be not need a variance because it would be a six foot fence that's not in a front yard for that reason along New York Avenue because the fence appears to me to stop at the structure the principal structure uh that fence is probably not in a front yard so it's allowed to be 6 foot so the only area that I would say they need the variant for and again Craig will correct me if I'm wrong is this uh three pronged area well near vento the house it looks like that's a a porch there so it stops before it gets to the house uh I I see I see are they parking is that an overhang what is that these are parking spaces no are they parking spaces under something the proposed okay so then looks like a deck there a 25t set back there they meet that if you look at the 25t front yard that's the that's the closest face of the structure to the street MH well then then Craig can you answer something for me then it stops at the back of where's the front yard in this house start then at the 25 foot setback from from valento so that u-shaped portion that you were just pointing at is what I believe is what they're seeking the variant for yes so everything forward between the face of the structure and vento Avenue any fence that's in that area is non-conforming and that's what they're seeking the variant for for okay I I I'll I'll go with that I just I thought that I I didn't think our front yard was defined by the setback but rather by the the face of the structure but their their face of the structure and the setback are one and the same okay but that's what machine is asking and I I I assumed that too but I where does that structure where does the structure start on this property at the 25 foot Mark or after those parking spaces I thought it started at 25 foot right that's okay so so where those parking spaces are that's not open air there's that's underneath the structure no it's open that's open air it's air we have that box in there just to show that that's parking area but it's not aure back to the point place of unit then where's the face of the structure it's not 25t it's like at 50 ft no it's 25 ft 2 we have it marked at 25t the second set of of parking spaces are in a garage that's what I just asked no you so there's there's four parking spaces the first first two sit on brick ribbons right I understand I'm the on with the that's that's open air that is not covered by any structure okay so then you pull into the garage and park the other two so the face of the structure is right on the 25t set back no but no I I someone misheard me I I said that the parts with the cross cross marks through them is that open air I was asking about the things with the X's through them the cone shaped parking indicators these things right here this the dash lines represent parking SP they're parking spaces but they're within a structure yes there's two located the first two are the only answer that is yes so M to clarify your question the structure goes all the way to 25 foot Mark so what I said was right that u-shaped area that's within the 25 ft also happens to be the area that is beyond the structure right so when when you it doesn't go all the way back what you're looking at me good so no I'm Wai for you to finish your sentence that's all well maybe maybe it was a long sentence then I'm sorry so why I don't know I thought I was clear I can point out the exact area the area beyond the structure is is the part where it can't be six feet longto it's that simple want you do that John I want you take that up with you okay do you have a further question after that this right here is a deck right no that's a that's a ground level Pool Patio area right okay but it's not a structure it's not a structure so this is where I thought he said it had to be the structure show her where the house joh house is right yeah I know right so the area that we're asking relief for relates to that view right there and I was as okay that's that's I knew it was that area I was saying what constitute that it has to be a variance that was my question because it's past the driveway and it's the side yard that's where it's not past the driveway it's past the structure the front face of the structure it is past it it is yeah yeah yes that's that's what makes it non-conforming because the definition says any anything in the front yard is defined as between the face of the structure and the street line so any any structures out there are non-conforming we allow four foot fences there if it was a 4ot fence fine but as soon as it hits six variant yep are there houses on the other side of vento facing that there are not across the street is there going to be any houses facing that there there will be there are lots across the street none of which are developed yet I thought a New York Avenue was supposed to be the back of the houses in to the so this is a little facing and I was going to talk about this when I went through my review but the applicant mentioned another similar lot at the other end of the block that this board considered some of you guys remember and there's some new members here but I'm just I'll I'll just highlight that so that application they came in for a Pool Patio that were in the setbacks along New York Avenue as well as and I think that's Baltimore Avenue so it was for variances on both of those streets um as well as fence height in the front yard and that front yard was Baltimore and New York so this one this this applicant has designed a house where they could fit the pool in that is totally conforming they don't need a variance from us that pool conforms the so their architecture and the layout of the site is more conforming than that other lot the only thing that they're asking for here is just a six-foot fence that they think provides more privacy for that pool and hopefully for their side the neighbor on that side um and that's that's the difference between those two applications and I also think that there is a little bit of difference in the development pattern because across the street from that lot is Baltimore Avenue which is all wet lands that would never be developed so they oriented the pool and the fence closest to that so it would be now here they've turned the house towards Brooklyn Avenue where there are other houses that have that pattern along Brooklyn Avenue um across the street as well as to the north of that um have that front yard pattern oriented towards Brooklyn Avenue so it's that's not out of character of the street so I I think this is you know going towards the Creative Design of trying to make that work and and coming up with a compliant pool and they think that this is a better alternative than what what they uh what they would be required to do correct I think that my personal feeling when you mentioning character of the street there's no other fences on vento that go from the house out to the street if you're on the corner of Brooklyn and delvento and look down the street it's a straight shot there's no fence that runs out on any of the other houses you're going to have solid fence to the concrete apron for the driveway whereas the other fences end at the end of where the house is end this will be the only fence that extends that far 4 foot six foot anyway I realize you can have a fence but it's really going to stick out there when you're looking down that street if necessary there's no other fence on set back 5T and the fence on the other Corner had the 10ft set back and that's where we Pro lose my you do you do yeah I mean it's a short section offense it is to go yes their next door neighbor actually has a white vinyl fence that extends all the way out to the RightWay line so they would be matching up against an existing no stops at the house what I thought I just drove by it stops at the house I think he yeah I didn't see I'm I could be 100% but I've stood there and I looked down the street I didn't see a fence out that's correct Greg I thought I I swore that there was a white vinyl fence that runs all your next door neighbor right out to the RightWay line that's correct on that second lot in that's not my recom what I saw but I don't yeah that's okay so doesn't Karen show me Karen show me a photo in the in the um in the file it doesn't it so it matches up with the face of the structure and not all the way out to the RightWay line so I misspoke thanks Karen I'm not say how many Joe yes how many feet of fence is it what's the setback off the back lot line 15 it's 20 25 down yeah why why don't you point that out from right line can it's just not character and that's not you do it if you see them or they're lower two or three high but it's legal somebody's got to tell them what put 25t 25 ft of fence Joe can provide the test okay Joe do you want to just add Mr roner into asking he talked about how long of a fence along vento we're talking about here yeah roughly SC ing it appears to be 30 ft Frontage on vento and then it dips back toward the structure correct sets back 5 ft correct okay question is there any Landscaping facing the street Joe if you want to uh touch on yeah our office um as a condition of approval will prepare a landscaping plan and we'll work with the board engineer to finalize that plan so that it is to the satisfaction of the city that was included as a condition Mr H's review letter I believe I'm getting the sense the board wants you to step this back so I am getting the same sense okay um is 10- foot acceptable would the board be okay with a 10 foot step back with Landscaping in front of it 10t 10t from where it is located on the plan so it's going to be back 10 foot opion we're we're we're not done our presentation yet though you'll be able to speak later that back sir 10 you're going to you'll have your opportunity be doing get it no keep it 5T we can put the plenty of landscaping in front of the 5 foot we can put plenty of landscaping in front in front of the fence at the 5 foot RightWay area and you can't that's the public RightWay you can't plant anything there no okay so we had to as a condition would you be agreeable to it yeah that's fine so what we can indicate I know that there's got to go to the public but Mr H just point in speaking with my client we can back that fence 10 ft back and put Landscaping in front of it so essentially you'd have a an additional 10 foot off of vento that we'd be proposing still with a 6ot fence that comes across but backed up 10 ft we could do that if the board was in 15 total correct because you have the five now add the 10 right in a lot of places a set that correct right and then we can landscape in front that we can yeah yep need another variant from a streetscape standpoint if I'm standing on Brooklyn and I'm looking down towards Baltimore I'm not going to see the fence coming out to vento you're going to see less than fo well I'll see 10 foot less right but it'll it'll appear to come to the structure to the end of the structure the same as the other house next to it which also has a pool it'll it'll stick out it'll structure not okay right because right now it's 25 it'll go back to 15 15 ft okay right and then and we're proposing parking in that area so you'd have cars that block yeah not to make their case for them but I I just want to help you think about a little bit part of what's driving this Dynamic right because zoning is a all all the bulk things impact the design remember the proposed pool has to be 10 foot from every structure from the principal structure so pushes the pool out okay so the pool's kind of out in the middle there true right then they also need to um fence in the pool so they're trying to create a backyard in a property that has three 25 foot setbacks on yeah okay so those front setbacks are kind of condensing the developable area and then they're having to put the pool 10t away from all the structures um right and a pool has a larger Craig correct me or wrong because it's a pool I think that has to a foot from the back from that back line else might not have to be back from all yards for pool so now they're trying to create a back so that's why they're resisting moving the fence in because it's making their essentially their backyard ised is squeezing more got a 25 ft on New York they got to come back 25 ft on the other one and 25 ft here so I'm not trying to sway you I I get it their rear yard their backyard the backyard that they have for their pool is not not a piggish backyard it's not that big of a backyard so that's why the 10 ft is kind of a big give over there because it's a you know it's 10 by 20 it's a couple hundred square feet the backyard that's not a big one to begin with I'm just just getting you to think about the all the but it's not so much the SE it's the height of the fence is six foot that's I think you know for me it's one of my biggest issues is the height of the fence that is 6 foot so now you're you're almost creating like a a wall I'll just remind you that if it's four feet if it's four feet they can go right out to the road right I know but six foot is almost like a wall that you're putting up that you're you're not allowing I think I'm I'm just pointing out to you right I think at this point that's my analysis is is a 6ot fence set back 10 ft from that line a better alternative than a 4 foot high fence that can go all the way out to the RightWay line and that's true that might be the analysis that's true that's it yeah that's what I'm trying to well then Craig do you need a variance because you're shortening the distance from the structure out to the no the anything anything in front of the face of the structure that's six foot high needs the variant so they still need the variant no I understand it it just it shortens up um you're now looking at a 15ot extension in front of that for the fence instead of 25 what they're proposing but they're showing on that plane that you have in front of does that need a variance though to shorten that yes okay yep it's the same relief it's the same relief yeah they're just lessening the extent of it well they're asking then for two they're asking for 6 foot plus a change in the setback no no no just the fence height a fence the fence can be anywhere in the front yard at 4 foot height once you go to six it becomes non-conforming and they need the variant that's right I agree okay let's do your your report here so okay I would like to summarize my October 29th 2024 review me memorandum this is a project located in the R1 a low density residential district um you've heard um testimony from the applicant indicating the only variants they're seeking here is for the 6ot fence height in the front yard area so I'm going to roll right into the completeness review um they asked for a couple of waivers uh under item number five they asked for a waiver from providing the AR Ural plans um they've indicated that everything's going to conform they're going to so when they get reviewed for a building permit they're going to be required to conform with all the other Bulan area variances I mean bul area requirements and there's no variances requested for that so therefore I did feel that that waiver was uh should be granted under night item number 27 they asked for uh a waiver from providing the locations of the utility layouts I recommended that that be provided on the plan as a condition of approval we do not want to see the fence conflict with any of these services that go into the lot um item number 28 the design calculation showing the drainage facilities that was a condition of approval for the original planning board approval so therefore we would like to see that as a condition of approval and finally and they've already talked about providing some Landscaping we've asked that a landscaping plan be provided as a condition of approval based on those recommendations we did uh support uh the completeness of this application on page three of five of my report I have the Bulan area charts um if you look at the R1 PW District uh for all other uses which is for single family dwellings you'll note that they are conforming with all of the Bulan area requirements um it does have three front yards as they indicated um and there's three fronts and one rear yard um so there's a 30 there's a 3 25t setbacks and one 30 foot setback so um so it is unique to that lot with three uh front yards with regards to the swimming pool if you look all of the swimming pool uh Bulan area requirements are met except for the fence and railing and that's because the height of that is in the the six foot height is within the front yard setback and therefore that's the variance that's required from section 525 section 57 E3 and we've talked quite a bit about that if there's any questions with regards to the variance but um like I said I believe the test is whether a six foot high foot set foot fence set back 10 feet from the RightWay line is a better zoning alternative than a 4 foot one that could be brought all the way out to the RightWay line okay under General review comments these should be conditions of approval should the board Grant approval um item number one we've asked for offense detail I believe the record has indicated that they're providing a 6ot solid vinyl fence um so that detail should reflect that item number two we've asked for construction details for perious uh Paving surfaces just to verify that they are conforming with lot coverage um item number three we've asked for a couple of set setback inventions to be provided on the plan just to verify that there's um 10-ft setback um does look like that but we would like the setback on there um item number four the they're required to comply with the minimum storm water management and Grading requirements of chapter 525 there's a stormw system design has been provided but they have not given us the calcs so we would like to review those and just make sure that it complies item six uh item number five uh we asked for them to revise the parking calculations for five bedrooms and indicate that there's a total of three parking spaces are required they have met that they exceed it there's no issues with that item number number six this is of particular um attention for the applicants because a lot of times when they construct they get this wrong the pool equipment locations have to comply with the required pool setbacks so that pool those those equipment locations need to be provided on the plan and with the setbacks to mention to them to make sure that they comply item seven uh is our standard condition ethic comply with the uh city sewer and water department for the proposed uh connections item number eight is a requirement that if to provide a landscaping and vegetation plan which is should be a condition of approval already talked about that um and there are new Landscaping requirements for pools under item number nine so the Landscaping plan should reflect that there's buffering that's required AC along all the side and and front yards so that needs to be shown on the Landscaping plan 10 is our standard condition prior to we evalu uh give granting a CO we evaluate the sidewalk condition now you do have sidewalk on two sides I know there's none in the front but a lot of times the contractors break those sidewalks up um we evaluate that and make you replace anything and make sure it's suitable prior to your co under item number 11 you're required to post the inspection escrow account and your Co is tied to that um acceptable inspection item number 12 you're required to comply with the requ requirements to the shade tree commission fire department and Public Works we did get a fire department recommendation for approval dated 12324 Public Works recommended approval 12324 shade tree commission recommended approval with a condition dated 12524 and they said there are no significant trees on the property care should be taken not the damage to Street trees on Brooklyn and New York Avenues so you're required to comply with that um 13 you're required to comply with any and all other state County local approvals 14 is informational this is not in the historic district 15 you're required to comply with the affordable housing requirements and finally should the board Grant approval you're required to submit uh perfected plans that address all the conditions of approval and submit the requisite number of sets to the board engineer for review and approval that's the summary of my report I'm happy to answer any questions the board has any questions from the board that 4 foot buffer zone that this the city requires for that was the Landscaping com land is that does it matter if it's in front of the fence or behind the fence they don't require I don't it I don't think that it specifies I think it could be either or okay yeah so I think it just has to be on the perimeter of the pool on that on that lot line okay okay so at this time will open it up to the public within 200 ft of the property they she asked if you can move the plan over speak micophone my apologies for not speaking into the microphone thank you everyone got her back okay no one within 200 ft Beyond 200 ft and i' ask everyone to keep an open mind as you hear from the public they're part of the evidence sir will you please raise your right hand you swear or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth St be God I do if you could please state your name and address Hunter Cochran 1429 New Jersey Avenue that's at the corner of New Jersey and Baltimore Avenue could you just spell that last name for me c o c h r a n e and okay 1429 New Jersey is your microphone on sir it is okay all right thank you I'm not as technically challenged I I figured that part out sorry so I have a question for Mr hurles please you're saying there's no no front yard setback on a fence a fence can go all the way to the lot line at the street that's correct if it's four feet high it's four feet thank you I think this concession of moving the fence 10t away from the street is an improvement I don't like the fact that it's 6 feet high I think that's going to be visually awkward and difficult especially for the whoever the neighbor is who buys the lot across the street looking toward the ocean through this fence or trying to look through this fence those are my comments thank you very much anyone else Beyond 200 feet closed to the public any other questions or comments from the board uh my only comment is that I think it's um it's damaging to the street scape putting up a six foot fence in the front well it would be the front side but also okay that's just um can you say that again St right I feel that the six foot fence would almost be too much for the streetcape to handle that it will look like a wall looking at it from V valento Avenue that because you're going to have it coming all the way down at six foot it's going going to go across six foot and then come back in six foot I think it's damaging to the streetcape the reason earlier I asked about what kind of fence is I know on New York Avenue the backs of some of these houses have I don't know if it's aluminum or steel RW iron and it's much less obtrusive if you're driving down that street you can see through it they have plantings there I would much rather see something like that if we're going have to have to have a fence come out something that you could see through you're looking down that street it's going to be this white wall whether it's 4 foot or six foot high ether I would take with the Privacy required to have plantings there if the plantings are sufficient to block the sight line it would be the same have the same effect have to talk about it well we we need to make before they vote at the so we should think about that what the lower fence not the lower but a different as oppos to fully block off like a a solid vinyl fence a one foot top open I think the whole reason they want the six foot is for privacy and for to be like a wall yeah that's what I think yeah so so it's privacy and you can't see as they in the pool yeah but you know a lot of people have 4 foot fences and they still have privacy well if if she I just want to and I'm not I I don't vote I really have no feeling how I should go or anything I'm just reminding you that if if if if you suppose you say no suppose that the varen is deny it's my legal opinion they could go tomorrow and get a building permit and put a 4- foot fence all the way out to lento you'll never hear about it again except when you're having dinner next week and someone says why did you allow that solid 4-foot fence all the way up to the curb and you're going to have to say I didn't they didn't have to come here we went to so I'm just I'm just pointing out that really what should be going on the analysis you're doing in your head I thinker that should be true do we want if I were the applicant and I lost I would just give myself a big backyard with a four foot fence all the way out to the curb and plant some trees to make it go up six feet and I think that's the end of that so I I I think you're analyzing whether it's better to have a six- foot fence 10 feet back or a 4 foot fence wherever they want it that that's that's the reality I think I think that's zoning but right now what's on the table is it for it to go all the way to the street we did not change it's not we have not said anything they said that they set they're pred to have you vote on it being 10 foot back from vento at 6 feet and reality is you I think you're either taking that which is I'm not saying you have to or you think well we don't want a six foot fence sticking out if they want to put a 4 foot fence then they can put it wherever they want that's better but that's the analysis that you're you're doing what's the better zoning alternative thing that's that's permitted or the thing that is being sought in the variants that's always the that's always the balancing in the end it's what is the better zoning alternative and just to add to bringing it back the 10 feet as we've agreed to is going to add additional Landscaping on the exterior of the fence along the streetscape too that would otherwise wouldn't be there if we did put a 4-foot fence all the way out for me it's the Landscaping because you can have that fence hidden by some attractive Landscaping yeah you pretty much you know want to yours it's it's concealed you don't see it from the outside I have a question Craig sure you spoke to the landscape either uh inside the fence or outside the fence for a pool correct yes well what if we said you're going to have a 10- foot setback for the fence but you're going to be required to landscape along that fence you set that you can set that on the exterior of the fence so it it it looks halfway decent it doesn't look like a as Stacy said a wall going down the down the street you'd have some landscape and it would be probably more appropriate for the people that buy the Lots across the street I would I would recommend that that condition goes along with the setback 10 foot of the set the 10- foot setback with the fence and and an appropriate Landscaping if you go down that those houses that been developed uh yeah they they've put Landscaping in in the 25t setback but i' I'd never approve that landscaping that's been put in there but there is a requirement with the pools that it be so the plannings have to be more mature correct there are there are dimensional sizes for the landscaping that's required as part of the pool ordinance so they're going to have to meet that um there's a planting schedule um doesn't have the species but it has like the number the types of shrubs trees you know bushes at some point I'd like to see that schedule if you can provide that I don't I don't need it right now provide it to me because there it's in it's it's stward in yeah there's no uh uniformity going down that New York Avenue well remember none of those other houses have gotten variances for the front yards on V on vento so they just have a normal Landscaping requirement but they have a landscaping require M on New York in a set back there there's a buffer requirement on New York that's that was set forth by the planning board that's right so i' I'd be interested at some point you know to do it now but I'd be interested in seeing the language that speaks to that uh Landscaping along New York Avenue I will send that to you thank you but Mr L to your point we would the the Landscaping that we are talking about we would propose on the exterior of that fence mat short Landscaping in order to mask that I I understand I'm just kind of doing a a little retro sure understood did you understand I did okay I have a curiosity question just to better understand the development because you have the restrictions of Highland speaches in here and it talks about with fences how they're subject to the restrictions of the architectural design guidelines I'm just curious if you know if the fence fits those restrictions for the development believe the answer to that is in terms of the fencing I believe it does because I don't I I can't definitively answer that I don't think there's any issue with that uh at at this point but but I guess better to not give you any sort of misleading information I can't definitively say that okay just curious but if there's an issue I think we're we're gonna have to deal with that because we can't violate the covenants we we can't violate the Covenant so I mean even if we were to get approval here something that's not allowed there we're out of luck okay it's it's a it's a good question it's just not one that we have any authority over but I guarantee that you've asked that immediately after this meeting we're going to be reading those Covenant very carefully see no that's okay no pressure okay so we need a motion did this go through Architectural Review Committee yet I'm sorry did this go through the the um I thought they had architecture Review Committee for this development no no I maybe it's just one member what's that there may just be one member at this point well well number number one says fences are had to be reviewed by the committee yeah does it's okay sorry the one yelling at everybody I make a lot of noise up here so I don't have my mic on all the time planting and removal of trees and shub required review and approval of plans by the committee listed on page II and it says page 18 in the application materials for that development page 17 says no building fence or other Improvement shall be commen the to maintain without doing it now I didn't read the whole thing I'm just right so we're going to have to go through that process which we will do yeah we're going to have to do it we're not getting around it or attempting to but it's not a relevant consideration it's not right it's not here yeah well I don't want say it's not relevant it's not a defining I mean I guess if we trying to look for a neighborhood scheme sometimes I guess it could be relevant but it's not determinative it's between them and the HOA it's not a zoning issue yeah okay is there anything else all right so normally I uh frame the motion for you but I when I'm when the motion is other than just approving what's requested I kind of back off and let you guys give me some idea what motion you want to be made my impression is that the most useful motion to be made is a motion to approve it 10 feet back from the road but um you know I don't want to decide that for you so if someone's give me some indication and then if you'd say that I'll do the usual thing where I 10 ft back from the road with proper landscape okay so you like to hear that you have to give that motion a I'm sorry what did you say 10 ft back from the road with proper landscape exterior land exterior exterior yeah I'm I'm going to go is I heard what she said but I'm going to do it my way when I do it is that where the the line is right now that we go 25 ft out to my question is when we go 10 ft up is it from that line that's right there we're going back 10 ft yeah we're we're taking from the end line on vento back 10 ft Clos okay just where was already going ACR 10 ft from the lot which will be effectively 15t from the curve well but where were they they were already coming in how many feet it'll they were coming in zero feet it'll be 10 feet I thought they were coming in hold on wait stop okay there's the right five foot right away so I I I believe it's 10t in from the property line which will appear to be 15 feet because there's a a curb has is 5T beyond the property line because there's a 5 foot right away way is that correct Craig yes 10t from the curve okay the correct measurement is from the RightWay line but you can't physically see that so Everyone likes to measure from the curve face um in that case it's F it's approximately five feet to the RightWay line from the curve face and you're you're you're setting it back in additional 10 from that you're going You're Going 15 fet from the curve from the curve yeah you'll be I I work I work from lot lines and the fence is gonna be 10 feet from their front lot line they're I was I was helping them out Envision it because there's no physical marker on the on the RightWay line so the motion Mr King it we were my client was misunderstood where we were at he thought we were moving it 10t back from the right of way essentially another 5T from where it is I I did clarify that when it was first said so okay 10 ft from the curb I don't think that's I was expecting to be 10t from the curve I I thought you might be that's why I did clarify that the first time it was said but that's okay I understand you misunderstood but I I I wanted to make sure that's what you remember I said so then it's going to be 10 feet from the property line it's going to look like 15 feet overall that's I tried to that's okay all right so I think the the the applicant's um proposal is to be 5 feet move it back 5T from the property line which will give a visual appearance of being 10t from the Curve and that would allow 5T in front of the fence for planning okay and it'll it'll go it'll stick out from the structure 20 feet not the 15 I said before right yes I'd just like to add that a Park's vehicle sticks out 18 feet so when looking from Baltimore Avenue down the block a parked car would stick out 18 ft from Brooklyn you mean from the front right when you're looking down yeah looking down velento yes be a yard all right so now your analysis is slightly different but similar D you you're the the Alternatives you're considering is to run the risk of a 4-ft fence going all the way out to the curve line or having a six-foot fence strike that a 4ot fence going all the way out to looking at the hold on guys messing up my record I don't mind you talking but right a having a 4ot fence that goes all the way out to the lot line or a six- foot fence that comes back from the lot line five feet that will give the appearance of being 10 ft to the curb and having um substantial Landscaping on the outer side of the fence so you need to that's what you're weighing and that's why you get the big bucks and Sor I I do I Mr public raised his hand and I think it's appropriate normally I would not give people second bite the Apple but he specifically spoke on the assumption that it was 10 feet and I want to give him a chance to talk about that I think that's appropriate because we we changed the playing field on them a bit thanks if you don't mind Madam chair I do 15 Mr cochr you remain under oath thank you materially different 5 feet back versus 10 feet back and I would be opposed to a six foot fence 5 feet back okay if we have a 4 foot fence where does the Landscaping go there isn't there isn't no they they have to have it it would be inside we could have it inside it would be inside right it have to be inside the fence line visually I my opinion is it would look better on the outside I agree I think the Landscaping should be outside of fence whatever it takes Madam Madam chair when when can we offer an amendment to the well you're you're going to vote on the application as presented so the application presented would be at so they're presenting a five foot setback from what's shown on their your the plan is in front Okay so a change from what they originally proposed yeah we we were discussing a 10- foot set back and he he does not want to follow through with that so we're voting on a five foot7 okay and I'm just going to say I think it's going to be like a wall regardless of where you put the plannings you're going to have a foot wall down over and back it's it's going to be I think it's going to ruin the streetcape coming down coming down the road and and even across the street when they eventually build my understanding was that it was going to be 10 foot set back now and if we're going to do if we're going to do where the where the uh current fence is drawn on the plans setback is a very specific term setback is measured from a lot line not from the curb line I I gave you a visual when I talked about the curb line that was a visual so you can get a sense of how far back it was setback is from the RightWay line which is five foot from the curb line okay so they're offering another five so it'll essentially be 10 foot from the curve line is where they're proposing the that that wasn't my understanding my understanding was the fence from the current fence line is on the on the uh drawings was going to be 10- foot back 10 foot back from what from where from current dra from the current drawings that's what we so I I asked if they would if they would concede that they initially said yes but the applicants saying they misunderstood that and thought we were talking about from the curb line so now now he has revised his decision and says he's going to set it back five fet so it's where it's shown on the plan move it back 5T that's where what's being proposed that's not my understanding but that's okay am I that's correct correct I just want to make sure that we're so we've we've we've come full circle on from from zero foot setb back to 10ft setb back to 5 foot setb back so I just want so it would be 10 ft from the curb line and it would allow 5T of planning space in front of the fence towards vento facing vento which is plenty to conceal the fence where you're going to see a 4 foot fence just a wall of white well they're still going to put plannings around it not on the outside but then that's there you know at least there'll be it won't be a wall well that would be Ian most people have a the person next to has a 4ot fence so you know I'm not I'm not sure but those plannings would have to be on the inside you still see the white fence that's right I'm not sure the person next to them has a 4- foot fence just to be clear I well it's a pool no I'm just I just don't want to get my record all flumix with things that AR the the the the fence next door to them stops at the property line so it's allowed it stop I'm sorry it stops at the structure so it's allowed to be six feet my guess is that's 6 foot I don't know if it's six or four my guess is that it's six because it's in the side yard and not in the front yard so I mean I have children and there's no place to play if I pull back another 5et I'm really I'm shrink in my yard I've got no no backyard so that's that's my dilemma no you can have it at four feet you just want it at 6 feet with but 4 feet I would put it out at the set at the setback and plant inside the fence yeah that's fine I mean that would be you would still see the white wall he's from the public he can talk to him unless he's from like out of town I just I mean we're going to we're we're going to make sure that where we're planting complies with the ordinance we have to right so I think we if you want if you're from the public we reopened to let Mr Cochran speak I guess if you have something to say I I don't know who one's interested in shutting your that I mean Martin Van walsom 32 I I get stuck hold on Van WTH vanan space w suum 329 Congress street9 Congress the ordinance requires that the plantings be on the property line so it doesn't really matter where the fence is the plantings have to be a 4 foot barrier on the property line were you going to read something I can if you want it it actually only required it on the side and rear lot lines correct it's on the rear and the side but in this case you have three frontages so we're talking about right right so even if it were a 4 foot fence it would still have to have Landscaping on the property line everyone the fundamental problem here and it's news to me is that you can have a solid 4 foot fence in the front yard in Kate may I did not know that until you know 20 minutes ago I never believed you could have a solid 4ot fence and a front yard in Kate May that's the fundamental problem so so now you're finding the best alternative to that fundamental problem and while we talked today about uh the year review and potential zoning changes I think we should discuss solid fences in front yards in Kate may all swimming pools shall provide a 4 foot wide planted Green Space along the rear and side property lines within the rear yard to increase infiltration add additional buffering improve Aesthetics and provide space for grading and the conveyance of storm water can you tell us where your um what the code number is I think it's in Mr ear's review letter yeah it's it's directly in there thank you it's the Landscaping requirement that I cited this comment number 195-209 nopee we're in the zoning code so it's section 525 624a I mean A4 62 A4 that's the Landscaping provisions of the for the pools so as I understand the ordinance you would not be able to put a fence that is surrounding a pool on the property line it would need to be set back at least four feet from the property line to allow for the landscape buffer in a rear yard and a side yard in a rear yard and a side yard I agree this is a front yard I understood that technically yeah that's hope it helps thank you I don't just got to decide close the public M close public motion to close to the public okay close to the public someone make a motion I'll make a motion we vote on this as it sits vote as it sits as it is as it is we're going to close to the public first so okay we're good it it is it's closed to the okay there you go okay we won't do a motion the chair's discussion Clos motion that we vote on it as it is right now all right can I hear the motion because I don't know what it is well we're I think we're in a disc you're still discussing okay you're voting on what was presented originally or what we've discussed what we presented originally and I'll say right now that I would be against it so that then it would be a 4-ot wall I'd rather see a low wall all the way out than a six- foot that stops intermittantly okay else have an opinion so there's a we're going to do by the book there is a motion to consider the to to approve the application as proposed in the OR original application which is a six- foot fence to the property line that's the motion that's been made okay subject to the conditions outlined by the board engineer and that motion is looking for a second I'll second okay we have a motion by Mr Walsh seconded by Miss Shen Mr Lewin no Mrs Notch no Miss Shen no Mr Walsh no Mr zexer no Mr venudo no Mrs Werner no In fairness to the applicant they very clearly made a a request that you consider the six- foot fence 5 ft back from the front property line so I'm going to ask you to vote on that how you votes up to I'm not saying you have to Grant it I just think it'd be unfair that they specifically Revis their you did right Mr you specially revised your application inate that it's five feet from the front lot line I'd ask someone to make that motion uh please second it and then vote on that if you vote no I it's okay that's your decision but I I don't want to I want to R into a problem where we didn't vote on the thing they asked for now is this going to be like we can always just change it after we vote if it doesn't pass to what made the applicant once is that what we gonna do from now did it beforehand I'll answer joh actually I I I perhaps shouldn't have let you make the first motion um because I gen my general policy on changes to application is that if they reduce the impact of the variance that's appropriate uh in zoning application so I don't let people change their whole plan because that's not fair to the public but if they make an effort to alter their proposal to decrease the varant and that should be voted on by the board because that's the point of coming to the board you get feedback you listen to the public you try to meet their demands and you can alter your application and revise it to try to minimize the impact of the variants you're seeking so it's perfectly appropriate for them to do that and we do it routinely so and if the answer is no then the answer is no but it might be yes but that's the whole purpose of having an open hearing and hearing from the public is to improve the application so if they improve it we vote on it I have a question and anybody have a scale I have scale on me what dimension are you looking well the question is if you move 10 feet from the property line which is what the drawing shows if if you move it from the current drawing 10 foot back five foot back I'm asking 10 foot back that's what we originally talked about well that's and I know they they changed their mind they conceded to five foot and that's all they've offered I recommended 10 right they did not they don't like 10 they want to go with five Mr King just indicated that that was their concession and that was what you should be voting on so I don't want to be talking about 10 if we're talking about five correct the only thing they've offered is five from the property line from the RightWay line correct proper line that's the application they revised their application to that I'd ask you to vote on it if you want to vote no that's up to you but just vote on their revised application that way if there's an appeal they they they they can't say we didn't let them um revise their application which they are permitted to do in my opinion as long as it's an improvement can you do the verbiage on it I'll make that sure it's a motion it's a motion to Grant the r IED application to have the front set back the front fence moved back 5T in from the property line at a height of 6 feet subject to the variant subject to the condition that there be substantial Landscaping uh on the 5 foot area outside of the fence but on the property okay okay can we have that I'll make that motion again okay Mr wol I'll second it Mr Z for a second okay thank you Mr lwin yes Mrs not no Miss Shan no Mr Walsh no Mr Zer yes Mr venudo no Mrs wner yes so we have I got four three no I've got four four no four four3 no yeah um rejected 43 okay thank you thank you so [Music] yeah from here 10 would have passed it they would have passed it I it was obvious was the sense of the board I was like I was trying to save them 10t I was just trying to understand like they didn't want to be SE right right right there's certain HOA requirements the problem is they can do the foot fence all the way to the property no they can't buffer zone is from Curb back in they and they could so what what they're saying see they could they can go from there back that's the 5 foot right there so they can go right to the proper here's their property line the pin and from the PIN to the curb which is a set B so they can go right to here with four foot tricky one scw to me is less two there was no good Al it's really going to really going to show when that's constructed the solution would be not to orient the house on the Orient the house just like the rest of yeah it's the only house on the street that's going be you got a glass of wine I'm getting one tonight the house yeah need a glass of wine in the other house that we approved a couple years back that was on a corner if that worked he could have done the same thing one of the members is a think to get greedy over get greedy Over Feet he should have given but oh my God yeah every single one I'm like something different pools I mean everybody name built yet yeah he know I had more comption I was to tell you architect sharpen his pencil you know can make this fit you can make it fit on Prop our next application and I apologize I'm not going to say your names is for 502 West Perry Street block 1032 Lots 2 good evening Madame chair board members my name is Ron gunis appearing on behalf of Anna Diaz and Jose granados owners of unit three of the West Parry condominium this property is 502 West Perry Street it consists of a three-unit condominium uh in the R2 Zone The Proposal this evening is to demolish the existing detached garage and to reconstruct a new the storage structure in the same place this will trigger variances for expansion of a non-conforming use because once that's torn down we reconstruct it that's the expansion and sidey yard setback for aness accessory structure all other conditions on the site are pre-existing and will not be affected by this project to my right of course is Mr John how Bruner from the Highland GR group he's our engineer he'll be providing the expert testimony of course to my left is Miss Anna Diaz if we could have them sworn in please will please raise your right hand and Mr herles remains under do each of you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth is nothing but the truth St you got I do I do thank you um John briefly credentials for the record sure um licensed in New Jersey is both an engineer and an architect been practicing both fields in Kate County for Going on 30 years I've been board on numerous occasions I provide before put boards thank you madam chair yes knowledge as an expert thank you okay John why don't you take us through existing conditions on the site and this evening's proposal yeah as you mentioned Green's on is that better yes okay here we go good um property is developed with two principal buildings um one that's closest to Perry Street is a two family home and towards the rear of the property is a single family home and in between the two is a detached garage that is the principal topic of this application this evening uh we're on a 50 foot wide by 150 foot deep lot in the R2 zoning district there are multiple non-conformities to the existing property um none of which are going to be exasperated by the proposed development this this evening um we have non-conforming front yard I'm sorry noning front width of the lot where 60 ft is required 50 feet exist and remain unchanged we have um non-conforming lot coverage where 40% maximum is permitted 51% exist and that again will remain unchanged the garage that is the real subject of application has several non-conformities namely its side yard setback where four feet would be required for that accessory structure we have 0.28 ft setback we also have um an then is substandard separation between accessory structures on the property we have a shed that's 2 feet away from the garage that is remain and I'm not sure how the board interprets this but we have an adjacent property with adjacent garage that's about one foot away from us um but in any event I think the variance for the non-compliance setback between accessory structures would apply between the garage we have on site in the existing shed none of those existing non-conforming conditions will change as a result what we're proposing to do is take down a truly dilapidated dangerous and collapse historic garage and reconstruct it in the exact same footprint to the exact same dimensions and height uh and an exact same location um the application's been before the HPC we have received the demolition approval for the original garage and we' received conceptual approval for the replacement of the garage in the same location same footprint and similar materials in its reconstruction now the board may be asking themselves if you're going to tear down the garage and build a new one can't you make it in a conforming location and the answer is yeah we really could HPC actually requested that we maintain it in its current location because it's more historically accurate in the context of how garages reconstructed for these types of homes in the hisor district they actually requested it and it's written in the resolution that they would prefer to keep it in this location hence we're here before you this evening seeking the variance to um for the side yard setback we would need the be here anyway for the Reconstruction by virtue of us demolishing and then reconstructing the garage um so it s as though we wouldn't be here this evening but the side yard setback relief that we are seeking which looks like it's unusually small because it is um might have the potential to be ulated but we're seeking to keep at the same location to maintain the stor fabric of the HBC of the stor district and the hbc's request now at a very technical level we require use variants for the demolition hence reconstruction of this garage it's actually it's a D2 variance so it's an extension or expansion of a non-conforming use the proofs for a D2 variance are a little different than the use variances that are a D1 variance where you're looking to introduce a new use to a property that doesn't already exist our burden of proof we must demonstrate to you isn't that the site is particularly suited uh or there are special reasons for this use it's more that the site is able to accommodate the expansion of the use in this case the site can absolutely accommodated because it's been part of the site and has been for 100 years um so so far as that's concerned we're not introducing the new use newly um we're simply looking to preserve what has been there for some hundred years U so I think for that reason alone the uh positive criteria under for use variance would be satisfied furthermore we do actually have a one of the U purposes of Municipal Landis law that are being Advanced by the preservation of in this location and that is again to promote the general welfare of the public by maintaining the fabric of the historic district and maintaining the typical development pattern of detached garages in these historic homes so for those reasons I believe the positive criteria for the use variance are clearly satisfying now with any variance we must also demonstrate the negative there can be substantial impairment to the Zone plan the intent or to the um public good again this is not a newly created condition not a newly created building it exists has existed and we're simply looking to maintain it we actually could piece by piece replace it in place but that doesn't make any sense um much makes makes more sense to De demolish it reconstruct but when it's done same footprint same height but not in in any delated condition so I spoke through the use variant we need we also need um some bulk variances again that setback I keep referring to to maintain that same setback requires a sidee sitb back relief along with the non-conforming separation between this building and the adjacent properties garage and are shed on the existing property um the positive criteria for granting that relief and I would think that gets Advanced under the C2 criteria is that we're again preserving the character of not only the neighborhood but this property and preservation of the um fabric of the historic district the negative um criteria for that is again we're not creating a new condition this condition exist the side yard setback to the neighbor is to a garage who's one foot away from us we're certainly not adversely impacting the neighbor and by as rebuilding the garage in the same footprint so for those reasons I believe the setback variances could be granted under the C2 criteria which leaves us with the non-conforming lot width and lot coverage conditions um which would be Advanced under the C1 criteria they existing conditions they're legally existing we're doing nothing to exasperate increase them and I believe that we had no opportunity practically to make them conforming to force conformance would in fact create an undo hardship upon the applicant and for those reasons I think the positive criteria for the C1 criteria is thus established and for the reasons I've already presented the same negative criteria I think is also overwhelming satisfied so with that I'll be happy to answer any questions okay John thank you you um you don't leave me much to elicit further testimony and you make my job a lot easier but I do have a couple questions um you referenced the HPC resolution that is the concept approval that was not provided to the board they were given the uh the resolution for the demolition uh certificate just the the resolution number and the paragraph that you showed me earlier that uh talks about reconstructing the garage if you could read that into the record pleas I'd be happy to um help me find where the resolution number is on this though page two at the bottom page two at the bottom bottom paragraph I think I have it I'm sorry HP resolution number 2024 d18 well we have the concept that granted the approval for demolition of the exis garage okay thank you so we gave the board the notice of conceptual approval that the HBC provided to the board secretary everybody has yes yeah have it yes that's my approval okay it's not a resolution looks it's a it was the conceptual the frame it wasn't in the resolution but it's in the conceptual approval thing so we just want to get that in there because it wasn't in the resolution there were conditions attached to the Demolition and that wasn't one of them so the title of the document is notice of conceptual approval under the applicant's name and with a property address noted the day of the HPC hearing was May 20th 2024 and I will note that one of the paragraphs they have in describing it is the HPC voted unanimously in favor of conceptual approval for the proposed garage the hbc's conceptual approval incorporates the recommendation that the replacement structure be permitted to remain in its current configuration on the lot HBC acknowledges that maintaining that placement may give rise to variance relief for zoning purposes but the restoration of the garage in its current location would offer a benefit to the historic district by preserving aspects of the historic site I move to admit that notice into the record I think the Karen has a copy of that yes the HPC sends it to me so then I distribute it to the board if you didn't have it in your so we did make sure everybody saw it and I emailed it to you too and and then the other point joh I you know it these are all existing um so we're asking for variances they're only for a a a duration of time um for when this because this building has the right to stay where it is it's protected by law as non-conforming structure in the setback we tear it down that's what actually gives rise to the the the need for the variance correct correct correct which is to reput it back into the sidey yard and to expand uh the non-conformity on on the lot but it's only for a short period of time while it's demolished and then until it's reconstructed yeah but certainly makes me question the use of the term expanding the non-conforming use I realize from a Le perspective that's probably accurate but we're not really expanding it we're temporarily removing put it right back it's like instantaneous switch um and as you indicated there all the reasons for that you you've already discussed and as uh illustrated by the HPC notice correct is to really gets the heart of the historic district and that's to preserve the character and feel um and and that includes being able to see this from the street when you look down the driveway as you're coming down the street you see this historic configuration of the driveway and at the end of that driveway is the carriage house or the barn or or the shed correct us with the two doors that open up right up against the property line usually right next door to the neighbors's one they' be side by side and that's exactly what this this configuration is and and you have the backing of the HPC on that and you also have the knowledge of the board members of of the community and the nature and character of of the district do all those factors outweigh um the detriment involved and deviating from the zoning ordinance yes I think yeah as I mentioned before what are the true negatives that are occurring here I really see none let alone do they would they rise to a level of being a substantial detriment and and this is the best approach uh to to preserving with this particular older structure is to just simply recreate it in place as it as it appeared correct when it was newly constructed it's um most buildings you might say why don't you just rebuild it piece by piece um I I'm not exaggerating when if you touch this one it would fall down and we'd be back here describing why we need to rebuild something that fell down while we're trying to reconstruct it we've had that happen Okay so I think that's all we have if anyone has any questions from the applicant or Mr Hower I just have one quick question is this just going to be used for storage correct correct no heat or air conditioning put in correct okay okay can have report Craig sure I would like to summarize my report dated October 7th 2024 this project is located in the R2 low medium density residential district you've heard testimony from the applicants indicating what they're proposing to do demolish and reconstruct uh the existing uh storage garage on the property um I'll roll right into the completeness review under the checklist for C and D variances um they asked for uh several waivers um I supported the waivers from item number 26 27 31 and 33 um the two that I recommended being provided as condition of approval item number 19 and 28 and they deal with topography um and Grading and drainage and design calculations now this application normally wouldn't trigger storm water review however this neighborhood has very prevalent storm waterer issues and because they're over on lot coverage so 40% is permitted they're I think they're at 51% um we asked any applicant that comes in a variance in this neighborhood to provide a stormw system to try and hope hope the overall uh stormw drainage in the neighborhood so um that should be a condition of approval um with the uh with that recommendation I did support deeming this application complete um the applicant indicated there's a bunch of noncon existing non-conformity so the there are two principal uses on the site there's a two family detached uh structure at the front uh oriented closest to West Perry Street and then there's a single family dwelling that's located at the rear um so the single F only single family dwellings are permitted in the R2 District uh the fact that there's two principal uses on the site creates the non-conformity as well as the fact that there's a two family detached structure on the site so all of those are non-conforming situations um they're existing they're not touching that this an accessory structure that relates to those um the lot is also uh not sufficient in width and Frontage 60 foot is a requirement 50 foot exists and I just talked about the lot coverage uh 40% is the maximum permitted they're at 51% this doesn't result in any additional impervious coverage but it is an existing it becomes a non it is a existing and proposed non-conforming situation at 51% with regards to the Demolition and reconstruction your de demolishing a structure um that has a side yard setback requirement of 4 foot where 0.28 foot is existing and proposed and the distance from the adjoining building um there's a minimum requirement of 10 feet where there's less than one foot that's proposed between that and the uh the structure to on the joining lot so those are the existing conditions that are going to be um re reconfirmed by the Reconstruction of this this new the the garage so that's the summary of the variances I'll move on to page five of six my general review comments should be conditions of approval uh we ask that the zoning table be revised to reflect the comments in the review memorandum um and indicate all variances that were indicated in my review um item number two we asked for a couple more setback Dimensions to be provided on the plan um and that and I they asked for the variance but it just needs to be conformed uh dimensioned on the plan um item three I just talked about in the completeness items but that's the for ask asking them to provide a storm water system um connected to the the shed uh item number four we've asked them to provide revised parking calculations that are done in accordance with the residential site Improvement standards I believe they conform but they need to be provided on the plan um item number five they've asked for a waiver from providing a landscaping and vegetation plan we would just like confirmation that they're not um that they're preserving all the existing vegetation and there's no changes so that note could be added to the plan um six is our standard condition that they have to uh reevaluate the sidewalk and replace any sidewalk that's found deficient after construction item number seven is our standard condition that they have to post an inspection escrow and that their cert certificate of occupancy is tied to um an accept acceptance of improvements with that and then item number eight they have to comply with the requirements of the shade tree Commission fire department and public works department we did receive those review memos fire department recommended approval with no conditions 1018 [Applause] 24 is that the only one we got I have here shade I got I'm sorry the HPC is in between sorry um the public works department dated 10124 no comments and Shay Tre commission also recommended approval um says per attached email message which is on the back of this and it said there are three trees on the property um that being said they all have cond dominant Trunks and although visually pleasing they're not significant enough to Warrant preservation so it doesn't sound like there's any conditions related to the trees um but do those trees need to be removed we're not anticipating for them removed now you're not going you're not going to remove them the trees I don't foresee the need to now the only thing that would cause us the need to remove is if they interfere with the recharge system that were to be introducing but we'll make efforts to avoid that okay you have a problem with that because this is a tree City and if you're going to take the trees down and even though they said it Vis they didn't have an arborist review it I mean I went through the shade tree but my son who is an arborist who's on West Cap May one if we move he reviewed he looked at the he looked at them today okay they really they need to be protected and not taken down yeah there's no trees I mean I'm just talked to Miss there's no trees around immediately around the one close I have a picture of it as of today so if we if we it's close to it if we moved the garage if we moved it then it could affect the tree if we rebuild the garage where it is it will not affect the tree that's there but they have to take care of the roots it's not they can't just because we've had this before with construction in town and they put heavy equipment and they damage the roots and then the trees die because they didn't take care we don't want the tree to die no Mr Hower can you agree to put some tree protection on your plan and make sure that the contractor we can yes okay thank you are they going to access from Perry Street or from Congress Street going through there I would expect them to come from Congress Street that would be the easiest path but I don't I don't know that I'm prepared to say we're going to restrict them to that because you have a tree that's leaning across that entryway this is very light con involved with this this is not a big building this is not a big house it's a very small light frame wor about the heavy equipment going through okay so once again a project is located within the historic district um just provide evidence of final approval um comply with any and all applicable affordable housing requirements and finally um should the board Grant approval you're required to revise the plans to address the conditions that the board sets and submit the requisite number number of copies to the board engineer for review and approval any questions from the board Craig uh store management you're talking about gutters on the on the garage um it can be done either with gutters or there there are you can put a stone trap at the at the strip line and capture it that way but Okay the reason I asked is this I mean this this garage is so close to the property line I was wondering could could gutters even be installed on this garage without crossing over the property line yeah we might have to do something creative with this one but I'll work with Mr huner to just address the storm order and I believe historically HBC would much prefer to see us not have the G on there so we can work on something it's it's going to be a limited system I typically ask the applicants to comply with whatever overage that they have so the difference between the 40% and and the 51% is so it'll it'll result a small system okay now I understand it's just that it's particularly if flooding is an issue in this particular area definitely needs to be addressed so the potential exist even for us rather than to trying to capture the runoff from this particular garage take the P area from one of the extic buildings yeah the idea is to offset that so we'll capture it off an impervia surface and and recharge it okay especially with being as close to the neighbor's property as well don't want it to contribute anything further than um yeah I've been pretty consistent at recommending storm water systems in this neighborhood and very familiar with the problems I I just want to be a lawyer about it and go on record for some future application I'm not 100% sure D2 variant is required in this application it may be it may not be but if it comes up again I want to reserve the right to revisit that just as was the H Bruner mentioned because for reasons he mentioned I I I Craig and I had this conversation earlier and it may require D2 variance um but if I really really thought about it I'm not sure it does I'm not sure what's expanding um but I in this context I guess it makes sense but I it's being torn down but I I still have some doubts in my own I try to be intellectually honest and I don't want to be captured later in some big hotel project and there's some question about whether replac an accessory replacing an accessory structure triggers a D2 expansion of a non-confirming use I'm not 100% sure about that it may um and it's perfectly reasonable to vote on it tonight that way and I'm not saying it's legally wrong I'm just saying I have the same doubts that Mr how Bruner expressed well we applied out of an abundance of of caution I appreciate that and you might have been able to really fight on that so I appreciate get here and find out that no no I appreciate you doing it and it's appropriate I just just have some some doubts okay i' like to open up to anyone within 200 feet of the property you wish to speak anyone Beyond 200 ft of the property and we'll close it to the public we need if there's no more discussion the motion I'd recommend being made is a motion to uh Grant the application as proposed subject to the conditions outlined by the board engineer um including a condition that the trees existing will be protected and a plan to that effect to be provided to Mr hurles and that's the motion I recommend being made but how you vote is up to you I make the motion second motion by Miss Sheen seconded by Mr Leed Mr lwin yes Mrs not yes Miss Shen yes Mr Walsh yes Mr Zer yes Mr venudo yes Mrs Werner yes thank you thank you madam chairman board members just got you heard the lawyer say that right he said I think we do it for i'ms are Happ [Music] something yeah get through I go over and check Merry Christmas yeah that the conditions are met when we have that we have approved what do you mean conditions are being Norm give me well I'll give you a good example we' we've talked about this before the O'Hara Beach Club right that I've requested that they fix that and provide the doors I have not gotten a affirmative response from that but um if they if they fail to do that then we'll send code enforcement out I've never seen Clos there isn't any there aren't any so what are we talking about talking Cod they're speaking of the Ohana Beach Club they were required to put doors like Carriage doors on the front and they never they never provided those um I reached out to them and they f is that the one where you went under the building yes right it looks better without them but yeah well I at one point I was told that the door was on order so I never heard that it came in they told me it was on order theying from that was going to be the power gate that when you pulled up it opened or something yes right yeah remember we had a we had we were right about that we were right about that that worked out really well you don't even see the cars under there that that but that's not the that's not the point I guess my con my thought is that if they aren't going to do it then they got to come back here and ask us to relieve them of that requirement I have followed up with that so I will I will reach out to them one more time if they fail to address it then we'll we I'm I'm just I guess one of the things that I'm interested in is who where where do the responsibilities lie with so me okay um after you after you approve things they perfect the plan they submit it to me I verify that the plan matches the conditions of approval I look at the resolution I look at my notes for each application I make sure the plan then I sign the plan I bring it to the the city the board the board um secretary signs the plan as well as the chairperson um once that happens they post an inspection escrow I follow up on behalf of the board and the city and verify that every every uh construction project complies with your approval so I'm the police officer for the board okay okay so I'm just I'm just curious about where your role versus the zoning we have talked about that and I and that was a special circumstance I'm not aware that there's widespread non-compliance going on I just want to yeah that was I'm just curious think um my experience Craig captures more than any other board engineer I yeah I've encountered I mean he really does do he makes them crazy and makes them comply with the plans but sometimes if there's something that's that that it's holding up it's unreasonably holding up a project like a door is on back order and the rest of the thing is built and they have a bunch of tenants coming in you can grant a temporary coo based on the condition that that get fulfilled within a certain period of time and if it does doesn't it doesn't if it's not our the disconnect is that it's not Craig can't issue violations the Construction office has to issue that something that's something that's occurred I used to have a hammer it used it used to it used to be called a performance guarantee the state has has lessened the responsibility of developers providing performance guarantees the the improvements that we can make them uh provide at performance guarant is significantly less than it was 10 years ago um and that holding on to their money used to be the impetus for them following through and completing everything um that hammer is gone now so then it gets into an Enforcement issue at the end as opposed to giving them their money back right and that money giving them their money back was the big carrot I think the my my interest is where does your responsibility stop and does zoning pick it up or does construction pick it up with we answered your question though yeah any board projects I'm ultimately responsible so if there's any issues please let me know okay he's resp just think of it this way he's responsible for compliance with the plans okay okay but once the once he says to them hey there's supposed to be a door and it's not there okay Craig has no ability to make them do anything they have to issue and I don't I'm not involved in that that's the construction official and the City attorney so all that stuff that goes on with local and all that all those violations that is that's the City attorney and the construction department so so to make it make sure I understand once if you find that they have not complied with the conditions of this board uh then you you turn it over to so they asked me before the project is accepted they asked me to do a final inspection right and I issue a recommend letter that gets sent down to the construction okay that's so they're the enforcement right so they ultimately become the enforcement they issue cosos or don't issue cosos okay so you're clear Craig didn't miss that there was no gate yeah they told me that it was on order when I right we've talked about it several times here but but other than that I mean when you said it you you gave the impression that there's rampant violations of so besides that one what there the other thing was like with Pittsburgh too with them not complying I know they went with them and they said they gave read stickered them right but that was the code enforcement that wasn't part of that that was construction related right okay you know I was inspecting that and I you know I was on you know it's when they red stickered it you know my first call was to figure out what what happened and then it was an inter it was interior stuff and typically my site inspections are for the site work outside I don't do I'm not looking at Plumbing and Heating and where doors are and stuff like that I do go through and make sure the proper amount of bedrooms are in there or you know parking proper amount of parking spaces are in the garage those types of things but I don't I'm typically not in the building I'm more doing the SES right so if they're putting like if a garage is all sudden putting in heat and air conditioning and plumbing right that's not you that's typically gets flagged by the construction official or theing officer right okay he more inside I'm more outside yeah okay and then we get and then typically during that process process we get an ASB built survey of the improvements then and we look at that to verify that the setbacks are what they told us they're going to be and does Construction office then get as builts M so they're required to produce as builds so there is a process and it it's typically followed that you know you're you're speaking about the one that the one that happened and we've we've talked about that one and I'll follow up again but but um I I to be honest with you I think generally the process has ensured that your whatever you guys set as conditions is followed through since we're asking questions Craig tonight this application on vento every other house on that street was oriented till vento this one now is oriented till Brooklyn what made that they can just change that orientation so they have they have front yards the only the only condition that was set when the planning board approved that was they couldn't front on New York they didn't say anything about Brooklyn so someone else could have turned their house around they could have easily turned their house um on on on both ends only on the ends were the was at the condition every other one had to be oriented towards vento and then when you get to the other side of the street when they start developing the other side of the street you're going to see the same condition I remember Craig when we were on the planning board those that motel that was taken down back down there by I think it was uh First Avenue or Second Avenue down there on the no that by the beach drive that Motel was taken two there's two vac three yeah there's three vacant lots and we I think we put it in that subdivision that it had to be oriented a certain way we've done that we've done that on several several different ones that have come in for variances we've told them there was one on Pittsburgh Avenue where we said it the the house had to be designed so that it you know even though that they were going to access it from the side street the dead end side street we told them that it had to look like a front oriented towards Pittsburgh so we've made those conditions before and and to be honest with that's that's a very specific one that initially when they submitted the compliance plans I rejected it I was like this doesn't look like a front the front of a house and I rejected it and they had to redesign it so like that's an example of what happens during this compliance review right question part for Rich and um part for Craig Beach Avenue um is the time time to file pass for uh the grand to do anything after we had we denied we denied the um you know their their variance request for for the grand you know they still have the the fire pits the pool thing and stuff like that patio with a fire pit days whenever we publish the resolution are we at our 40 when we publish it so I guess my first qu okay I was just wonder if we had hit our 45 days yet with that it's measured from when we published the resolution and I don't know when we published The Resolution the resolution the week after the meeting J so it's probably just about 45 days Bruce is on it I know that Bruce Brittain is on that I I definitely uh was my job to make sure he knew what happened okay and he knows and I I'll make a note to remind him okay because and that's the other thing and it touches on the issues we we talked about compliance people doing things and it's one thing if there's there's a process in in place and construction is following after the work that we do and because that's the way the the process is set up but we've had situations where that doesn't happen The Cove with um around around the pool area which I know Bruce did check on it was taken care of but I guess there's obviously you have a process in place to make sure that that gets done but that's out of the ordinary because they're not pulling construction permits there's no one going out to follow up at that point it's something that's coming from us I mean we're all going to know about Beach Avenue because we all pass it all the time so we're all paying attention to that we're all paying attention to that but um the cove and Beach and the grand aren't going to be the only circumstances probably you there's going to be another one that comes in place I mean just what's your what's the procedure other than you keep a Tickler file in your head to say I'm going make sure I I keep track of those of those projects and and make sure that they so any approval that the board grants they go on a list that I have and I I I share that with Karen um we track so they're required to provide an inspection Escrow in some cases I I talked about a performance guarantee being the hammer in some cases for subdivisions and site plans we get that so we do have we do track that um and when we like for inance inance if we have a a site plan that has a performance guarantee just because we accept the project doesn't mean they get all their money back we're allowed to still hold 15% of what their performance guarantee is and make sure for instance that all their plantings don't die and we're allowed to hold that for two years um and then I make a recommendation to the governing body to release that after the two-year maintenance period or just before the two-year maintenance period is up so they're they're and that's all provided by the municipal land use law it's not specific to Kate may this happens throughout every New Jersey Community um but there there is a process um we do track them now the ones that get denied if they go out there and don't do something that becomes a city issue because I don't have I don't have an inspection escrow and it's I don't track those you know theoretically they're supposed to fix it yeah I'm just looking for what the process is to make sure it doesn't fall through the cracks I mean um these two I I don't think they they're not going to I know they're not going to but but I just don't know I was just wondering what the what the process is City staff but it sounds like Karen's on top of it she says Bruce it's on your list and Zing your zoning and compliance officers um exactly okay I think even the city solicitor contacted me and said make sure if this doesn't go through that you let Bruce know so there's a lot of eyes on things thanks just just curious what the process is what happened with the Grand Hotel was really hard for me to remember if they came to the zoning board or not because I was also working for the HPC at the time and they came a couple times to HPC but I don't know how they got their permits without coming to the planning board but I was still new then didn't really understand so the reason they didn't um that they were able to do that because they had permits to do a lot of other things and it just they just snuck that in and like they just did that with permits open for other big projects mhm it's like they took that Atrium out that used to be there Y and so they many times met with the HPC or at least more than one time about that project so there were a lot of changes from HBC what they wanted and uh I didn't really understand the process but it probably should have gone to the planning board before they got permits but that's what happened ask you a question I don't know can you turn your mic on mik please your microphone thank you very much it's in an open me now where where do we stand on the litigation for the local I know the city as I understand won the case can we speak could not ask a more complicated legal question than that [Laughter] one we we we have we have one we have one nearly all of the case um there is an appeal of Judge B's last decision that gave them until December 30th to comply I may be wrong about December 30th maybe December 1st I could be wrong about one of those two things yeah we're we're in that in that zone it's right in that zone And the loal tried to file an emergency stay in the in the Appel division which was denied and I think as of now the city is probably um recommencing their effort to start fining and doing bad things that's what I that's that's what they should be doing in my opinion again I'm not in control of that uh my major issue in that case is shells on the sidewalk which are still there amazingly um that was an issue that was never appealed so I never understood why that wasn't done and judge bed didn't understand it either and told them they had to do it um so they just keep spending money and appealing and doing their thing and trying to get stays and they keep losing so uh and the city is going to start finding them and instituting the fines uh and at some point I think the city's within its rights to pull their coo and they're out of business till they comply and I don't think they're going to get a lot of sympathy from Judge ble who gave them four six months to do things and they didn't do any of them I don't think they've done any of them so that Mo that basically from a from a process point of view that moves now to the city solicitor in the city uh let me explain a legal concept that'll make this make more sense I kind of assumed it and didn't do it properly and it relates to something somebody asked over there about the 45 days um things don't stop just because you appeal so if you're ordered to remove a roof and you don't like judge B's decision and you file an appeal you have to remove the roof and you can still be fine for it you can still be shut down that's the decision um unless the court issues a stay meaning that the court says okay I decided this but I'm going to let you I'm going to hold off the compliance it's going to like being suspended without pay right but I'm going to hold off compliance uh until the Appel division decides this well they ask judge B that after they lost L they ask judge B for a stay and to get a stay you have to show a reasonable degree of probability success on the merits and irreparable harm bunch of things you got to show and judge ple didn't believe that they they showed that so they they denied that they lost the stay so as of that point the city is able to enforce the last decision of the last judge that decided it now you can appeal the denial of the state you can go to the Appel division say hey wait a minute we have to tear apart our hotel don't make us us do that and the Appel division hasn't issued that stay so right now the city can be doing any of the enforcement mechanisms that are at their disposal whatever they are not my ball but they can okay yeah you mentioned that and I didn't realize you that a person can put a Solid 4 foot fence in the front yard and that maybe we should take this back to um maybe Council to make an ordinance where you can have a solid 4ot fence in the front yard yeah I mean I think the place that send it to might be the planning board but um C how's that work I thought we're supposed to report to the planning board as recommended changes yeah you can it can go either way but um I mean the planning board is making a lot of recommendations right now so it's probably a good time to do that if this board wants to forward a recommendation to them will certainly bring it to them yeah there was a there was a point there a couple years ago that we provided the planning board with a an array of things that we thought needed to be looked at right the the current pool regulations came from the originally came from the zoning board um there's been other recommendations I think with our grandfathering of you know the the 20 year and also the the undersized Lots reconstructing undersized lots that comply withl requirements we were hearing a whole bunch of things that which Dre the ey of all the local zoning attorneys they all yell at me because they come in and get these variances that were yeah you know kind of kind of gimmies to reconstruct on an undersized lot now they don't do them so they're all mad at me the one thing about this these paperwork is we're going to we're going to hear it again somebody from town is going to call and say you guys approve everything and you know I have to do the explanation no no a lot what's approved isn't what they asked for a lot of things people ask for Craig tells them go away you're never going to get it yeah you guys never see half the stuff that I I think I think Craig understands us better than we understand ourselves well CU something I'm like oh yeah it's should be an easy one no I knew wasn't going really your P your decision making establishes a bar and a lot of the attorneys turn away work and they don't even bring it to they don't even bounce it off of me they're just like no that's that's not even going to fly I'm not taking that work um you know so you don't a lot of this is filtered out just because of they know how you rule on certain things so if it's a similar case to something that you guys typically turn down a lot of the attorneys won't even touch it you'll never see it so therefore most people are bringing applications here that have a at least percentage chance of of getting approved so yeah and you can see like you know yeah like tonight that guy lost that guy probably lost by 5T right um and if if he had stuck with original proposal there's a possibility he would have succeeded and to be on that list as approved but did you really approve what was asked for right so so a lot of these approvals are things that get massaged and scaled back a lot and then they get approved and this doesn't necessarily reflect that right yeah but there there are I get applications and I I open them up and I was like whoa I'll do that and I'll call the attorney I'm like you really you really think that you have a chance on this like what what's your thinking here am I looking at the plans right you know that those yeah like like you'll notice we've granted more flare ratios lately that's because people don't ask for them willy-nilly and when they come in for them they usually are of a type that we might actually approve you know they're filling a hole in an old in an old house you know or something else but you're not getting new construction at 10% over building or something like they just don't bring him anymore mhm you know it's like it's like an outfielder who throws people out all the time and then all of a sudden he doesn't throw anybody out this cuz no one's running anymore so they keep getting thrown out so it's you know it's a yeah I've had people come to me and say well what if I wanted to do this or that or the other thing you think it'll get through and my answer to them is don't have your architect do anything that requires a [Laughter] variance so we're all kind of agreeing that we don't like this solid vinyl fence so what what do we do with that to is there anything in that I have to go back and look at my manual but is there anything in the uh in the HBC you know the standards that were just published I was I was talking to Rich about that so he's like I don't see this happening throughout town because not the majority of the town it's not occurring in the historic district because if that's not historical context it will never get through the historic review so it never even gets to us um but you know in the periphery of the Town what not in the HPC you'll you see some of this stuff that's that's all new construction over there so that's why you're you see it over there um so it's not prevalent but it can happen and tonight was a perfect case where it can happen so how does our suggestion that we don't like that get to I think you just take a a simple vote that says we recommend that this be looked at by the planning board you see this as a problem yeah no solid white vinyl fences in front of a house any way shap just solid fence I mean even if itet like in the back they a lot of people have that vinyl or broad iron fence it doesn't look too bad something like that would be acceptable to me but yeah I think solid fence I mean there's I think you're right solid fence because even wood if you have a stockade type fence does not look good either so so please have the the planing board look at solid fences in front yards the appropriateness of solid fences and and what the design standards are is that what you do Karen well you know what if everybody raises their hand if everybody raises their hand and say that's what they want just show a hands do anyone say no okay then when I send this report after you adopt the report I will also say and the zoning board request that you consider changing the Zoning for solid fences in front yards okay will do that yeah just for you guys though and I your friends that's and I usually give this speech because I I A lot of times to do the master plan but these things don't go unused um when we do Master plans or when we're taking a look at zoning changes and you know any zoning ordinance change we look at the pattern um is and you know we're disapproving things or things that are repetitive like why are we constantly having to deal with for instance a front yard setback in the R3 District let's take a look at that you know do we need to adjust the the the setback distance like what's going on why is it so repetitive why you know is it not consistent with the neighborhood and what the building pattern is so we look at those things when we do reexaminations and make and make recommendations for changes based on this stuff so great one thing that I have a question about is the um we seem to have gotten locked in somehow based on some historical analysis that the and I've gotten locked in in the Appel division on this is that this 10- foot requirement for the pool from a structure is because of ladders for firefighters and I believe you when you say that like that that's the reason they did it but there's a million other reasons why you would not want a house to be surrounding yeah it's a it's safety issue you can jump off the house into the pool so we've kind of got locked in on that and it'd be nice if we had our planning board in our like review or something make a statement that that the purpose of that is not just for fire safety but also for Access around the pool in case there's a child drowning in the corner and you got to be able to walk over there and get it so right I just our records up until now make it seem like that's the only reason and we're having a problem Court that could be a simple change just to the zoning ordinance without even touching the master plan is just say for safety purposes and and that for safety purposes comma and then that's all that had to be added you recommend to change them on that I don't like for safety purpos that's fire too but say something like in order to provide access around the pool it's required that or something like that okay yeah we can add you know whatever phrasing in I know and I know the board senses that you know they want to kind of they want to tighten the range on pools and that 10- foot thing does make them a little smaller and it fits in less yards and allows some more landscaping and all the other factors that go into it so it's it's good to have okay but you know as much as we say there's trying to B constraints on the pools it seems like everybody wants a pool everybody wants a pool so well the other issue too is is the pool is the pool setb only applicable to the main structure or is it applicable to an ancillary building jum off the garage into the yeah so it says from the principal structure is how it's written yeah so so if you have an out if you have another structure it doesn't uh because there is an issue or there is a situation in town where garage door opens over the pool I know the house you're talking about yeah exactly you buil a garage and you can open the door and step right into the pool yeah new construction yeah dive you dive off the Garage in the the current pool regulations you know it has a landscaping section it actually allows the accessory structures to to function as buffering wow oh really yes it's stated in there so I also noticed that um the fire inspection sheet that we get there's never any comments it's always just signed off and I really question if anyone is actually going out and looking at that do we know Ken do you have a dialogue with them well it's funny you say that because I actually went to the talk to the chief or whatever one time said you guys do you look at this do you not have any concerns with this CU I was I had a concern I wanted to know if they had the same concern if they felt or just tell me no because of this reason and I'd be you know fine I just never see any comment and there's been questions on these so I think there have the overall impression that I get from Chief culture is that they think everybody really has a high regard for safety and that they're not really trying to do anything unsafe but I can tell you that uh just Tuesday night there was he wrote a comment that he wanted something done on a planing board application so there are comments but they aren't there aren't many okay yeah so they when they see something dangerous they do comment and we just had one at the board and it resulted in tabling an application having the applicant come back and res redesign it yeah well I mean I mean one of my concerns with is what down there at Kate May Marina how narrow the streets are to even get the fire truck you know through there and everything and even back on um Cal horn horn clag horn you can't get anything back there yeah you know what I'm saying like did anybody ever look at these plans that they could get a fire truck back in there because they they can't you know and that development has a long stored history yes the Kate May Marina yeah there a lot next thing yeah so anything else or do you need us to vote on this yes I think you make a motion to send the uh accept the report and send it to the planning board anyone want to make that motion I'll make that motion motion by Mr vudo a second seconded by Mrs Notch okay Mr lwin yes Mrs Notch yes Miss Sheen yes Mr Walsh yes Mr Zer yes Mr venudo yes Mrs Werner yes thank you now this one is from 2023 is by the time we get to like a whole year has passed is there any way we can do it like sooner so we remember what happened so I did introduce it I think in April but it could have been August it began with an A and you guys didn't want to do it then so I I did hold it till we had just two okay so we I'll try to have it ready earlier next year and then we'll manage it so there's just two applications and and the report yeah cuz I I'm like I thought we denied and that one like then I realized it was 23 and not 24 do we do this is this our a lot quicker than a lot of my other boards so yeah that's okay you know what so so when I did the first one it hadn't been done in five years so yes to your point though Craig should we look at modifying this somehow to say that it was not the original that there was a negotiated settlement no don't say that but yes no I mean because you're right settlement but there's people that have said to me well you guys approve everything no matter what comes to you you I would put approved revised well that's that's that's a that's an appropriate you want to start listing that certainly yeah because otherwise people think this is true this is slam dunk to come here there's no problem well should we revise then or maybe for next year put in re you know well that's who who had that I think that's a good good option approved as revised yeah can you do I will yes I I shall do that for 2024 that'll be fun well even the one on page two at the top we approved part of it but we denied part of it too but it says approved I don't think that was I don't know where where that this this comes to light someplace in the community and they they take it it just it happens right that's what that yeah that was a tricky one application has to stand on its own Merit you can't just say hey9 stre this I get that right right so even if it was modified they still got the variants but I can put that there so uh people will be wary of uh just coming in they'll know that there could be a a negotiation although they should all be watching the meetings if they're coming yes me I would I would afraid to come here so we also need an approval of the um bills the bills of the bills here I guess it's just second there you go okay Mr Lewin yes Mrs not miss Shan Mr Walsh yes Mr zexer yes Mr vudo yes Mrs wner yes thank you and then Merry Christmas everyone Merry Christmas Merry Christmas adjournment motion to adjourn motion toj all right all in favor I I okay good luck to Mr Bodner it's his last owning board meeting oh yeah that's right moving on up remember the little guys