to the board of park. The meeting was called Yeah. Right. The meeting was called to order in accordance with the open public meetings act noting this meeting was provided to
the home use tribunal the star ledger and the high park planet on March 246 and was posted on the borrower website at wwin park.com and on the bulletin board of the bor on
2021 South Avenue Park and has remained continuously posted as required by law. The fire exits are to the left and to the right of the council chambers. And please everybody speak into the microphone as the meeting will be is
recorded. So start with the allegiance to the flag. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under
God indivisible with liberty and justice for all >> Mr. Dickerson >> here Mr. >> present >> Mr. Peasant >> present >> Mr. Her >> present. >> Mr. Hol
>> present. >> Miss Corbett >> here. >> Miss Leslie. >> Mr. Rothber. >> Mr. Viny >> here. >> Miss Walsh. >> Mr. Winfrey >> here. >> Mr. Gibbons.
>> Uh, yes. >> Mr. Cosanza >> here. >> Mr. Robinson >> here. >> Councilman H >> here. >> Thank you. So um are there any comments public comments not related to the
pretend the current matter of tonight? So we will be starting with hearing of a new case that is the application number Z2602 which is a request for interpretation
and please allow me to say something about that because in the 20 years that I have been a member of that zoning board I've never heard of that never ever and usually we hear applications for buildings construction something going
on this is about a notice this for request for interpretation and so I think for us as the board members important to know it's not relevant if we think that this application was is fulfilling zoning or
requires a request for an for an or for a for an exception of the existing zoning because it is approved by our zoning officer already. The question is, is the interpretation of
the term accessory accessory building so I apologize I'm not like I'm a second language my second language >> um to so so that's the topic at I wanted to start for us as a board members to understand that it took me a
while to get it because it's so unusual for us so um on that note I will ask the applicants to >> Mr. Chairman, before we begin, um, do I need to take >> Oh, yes, you do. Yes.
>> Sorry for that. >> Oh, sorry. >> Uh, would you be so kind to uh raise your right hand and repeat after me? I, Nicholas Dick, I, Nicholas Dickerson, >> I, Nicholas Dickerson, >> do solemnly swear >> do solemnly swear
>> that I will faithfully and partially and justfully perform >> that I will faithfully, justfully say faithfully, >> faithfully, and partially, >> partially, and justly perform >> all the duties of the office of Highland Park Zoning Board of Adjustment. >> all the duties of the Office of Highland
Park Zone Board of Adjustment. >> according to the best of my ability. >> according to the best of my ability. I do further solemnly swear >> I do further solemnly swear >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey
>> and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey >> and that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same >> and that I will bear uh true faith and allegiance to the same >> and to the governments established in the United States >> and to the governments established in the United States >> and in this state >> and in this state
>> under the authority of the people >> under the authority of the people. So help me God. >> So help me God. >> Congratulations. >> Thank you. >> One more announcement. So the meetings will be livereamed via Zoom. Public comments will be allowed for general
board matters excluding applications for the development. >> Mr. Jacobson. Um this is I'll have to ask you to sign your oath and I'll notoriize it sometime tonight. Okay. >> We'll do. >> Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Chair.
>> So members of the public who wish to ask questions, present testimony or present witnesses invocation for development must be present and in person at the location indicated above. To view or listen to the meeting, you can leave this via Zoom. So the discussion about
the case is not via Zoom but just for us in person. I think I want to make that clear to government. your appearance please council. >> Sure. Good evening. My name is Peter Oliver um of Pogland Longo Miranda Dunen
Dugas. I represent um Alex and Goldie uh Rabbi with regards to the application tonight. Um good evening Mr. Chair, members of the board. As I mentioned, I represent Alex and Gold Reb who are here with me
tonight. Uh they are owners of the home under construction at 324 North 5th Avenue and the applicant's looking for an interpretation of article 230-3 of the Highland Park land use ordinance for accessory building or use. Uh just
to give a little bit of a background, my clients obtained a zoning permit uh as issued by Michael Mullen, Highland Park zoning official, as well as written confirmation that the planned pool room at their residence is not considered an
accessory structure under the municipality zoning ordinance from Scott Brer, uh Highland Parks construction official. My clients relied upon those representations and encumbered themselves with a million-dollar construction loan and began building the
pool room portion of their house before their neighbors, the Hollers, filed an order to show cause seeking to prevent that construction. We're here tonight uh seeking an interpretation because as part of that order to show cause uh the court in Middle Sex County issued a
temporary restraining order and interpreted the pool room as an accessory structure in contravention of the earlier representations of the municipality's zoning official and their construction official. What we're asking
the board to do tonight is to support the decisions of these officials uh which my clients relied upon uh to make the call whether the pool room was an accessory structure and um bearing in mind that the court's determination is
not final and the board's decision may be of great weight in assisting the court in rendering final decision. Uh in assisting the board I brought with me uh Mr. Robert Longo. uh he is a principal of Cornerstone
Architectural Group and we'd like to have him brought in as an expert and to provide testimony to the board with respect to why it is we believe that the structure, the pool room that's being built is not an
accessory structure. So with that said, I'd like to offer Mr. Longo's testimony and to qualify him as an expert witness. >> Mr. I would just note that the board has jurisdiction to entertain the application that is presently before pursuant to NJSA 40 55D-70B
under the municipalities law. Uh just so there's no question in anybody's mind. Sir, would you please raise your right hand? You solemnly swear the testimony you're about to give in this matter would be the truth. So I hope you got it. >> I do. >> Please state your name and spell your last name for the record. >> Robert Longo. L O N G O.
>> Very good. Councelor, your your witness, please. >> Mr. Longo, can you please provide the board with the benefit of your education? >> Sure. Again, my name is Robert Longo. I'm principal of Corners Architectural Group. For the record, uh the address is 202 Hamilton Boulevard in South Planefield, New Jersey. I'm a licensed
architect and a licensed professional planner in New Jersey. >> Could you please use the mic? >> I'm sorry. >> Yes, absolutely. Use the mic. Everything's being taken down. >> Just reboot or just keep going? >> Keep going. Okay. I'm a licensed architect and a professional planner in the state of New Jersey. Uh I received
my license to practice architecture 37 years ago and my license for planning 27 years ago. I both licenses are and have been in good standing since I received them. I appear in front of zoning boards and boards of adjustment as a regular part of my practice and have done so
well over hundred times during the course of my career. And I've been in front of this board at least once before. Um the most recent project was probably a dozen years ago. We got approval for the Park Avenue Dental Group on Routton Avenue when they relocated their office.
We needed a variance because ground floor office was not permitted or is not or at least wasn't. It probably still is not in that zone. So that's my most recent appearance I believe in of this board. >> So we will welcome you as a as a witness in public. >> Thank you. >> I was just about to ask the board to
accept Mr. Longo as an expert in the field of architecture and planning and specifically with regards to the planning issue as to an accessory structure. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So the primary issue here is is definitions and that that's kind of where we are. So I I kind of live in
building codes and zoning ordinances. I always look at the definitions and and what they're trying to say. And the core issue here is that as the board's probably aware is the bulk requirements for accessory structures is different than that for principal structures.
So if if that were not the case, we wouldn't be here. Okay. So accessory structures have a have smaller setbacks but they have smaller heights and smaller areas. Okay. So our argument is and we've been maintaining all along
that we have one structure that incorporates a pool and enclosed pool within it. So I have printed a couple of large copies of what I believe is exhibit C in your packet um that council submitted and the only thing that I've
done is added some color um this this sort of orange color to to the drawing just just for clarity. Can >> you identify >> we mark those? Yeah, >> because they are colorized. >> Happy to. >> Yeah, >> just write it on and say >> y
point of order for a moment. Mr. Chairman, I there is an objector here this evening is represented by council. Would it be more appropriate to present any testimony through question and answer so that the objector has the opportunity to cross-examine as well? Um
so we will have the opportunity for members of the public which is the objector in this case to represent uh and bring up their arguments and then actually uh address questions to the witness or to to the to the statements that are given like in our sequence how
we do in the board. we will first hear the applicant and then open up her to the public and you would then >> I I I I understand but my point is is that I'm asking whether it would be more appropriate instead of allowing the the witness to give a speech that allow him
to provide his testimony through question and answer so that there could be clarity. I believe it's very appropriate for our board to follow our uh rules how we move on and we're very happy to do that and we will give you plent opportunity as a member of the public or as a member who represents a
member of the public to put you up to statement and then to have questions to things that are presented here. Thank you. >> You'll have an opportunity for crossexamination. So I have five separate drawings here. Am I marking these as five different
exhibits or like they'll be as one? What's the board's preference? >> Just mark them individually >> individually. >> Individually so we are clear. Okay. Which image you were referring to when you're speaking. >> Okay. So if you you have exhibits in front of you. I believe there's ABC D.
I'm starting with E. The drawings in that collectively were C and I think there was on exhibit D as well. >> I want to know where to where I should start here. I believe it would be Was there an exhibit? >> This is the last page of exhibit >> C.
There's a D but that's all. >> So why don't you call it C C1 of the board and then you can go from there. Perfect. >> Please date mark it and date it please. Okay. Thank you. back to the microphone. Okay, so this is
exhibit C1 and I should note that I don't have enlargements of all of exhibit C that that are in there. So I just just selected exhibits five to be exact. So this is C1 which is a floor plan and the color indicates the area in in question.
So this is the first floor plan. It shows it shows the entire footprint of the house. And this colored area is this is the pool structure here and this is the the connecting link to the pool structure which shows a connection to the family room and it shows a bathroom
and a mechanical equipment room that serves the pool house just you know for context. So um one of the main um one of the arguments that supports the fact that this is one integrated structure is that this
building has one continuous envelope. It shares a continuous foundation. It has a direct connection to the family room structure part of the home. The mechanical systems, electrical
systems are integrated with the building. There's like one service coming electrical service coming to the building that's served from the basement in the main part of the house. It lacks some independent means of egress, meaning we're going from to this structure, this this pool portion of the
structure from within the main portion of the structure. And you will see in the following drawings that architecturally both massing and stylistic viewpoint, it's integrated into the main context of the house. So, I think it's important that we
understand that typically an accessory structure is something that's detached. So, think of a garage or or a shed, right? We have a home and we detach something and we call that accessory because it's something that's on the same lot, but it's not connected to part of of the principal use. So, it could be
again could be a could be a cabana, could be a garage, could be a shed, it could be um a number of things, right? A play structure, things like that. This clearly is very different than that. Um, this house also has a garage. The garage is integrated
with the home. It's underneath on the second floor. Very typical. Um, so that is the layout that we have just sort of for context. Next drawing is C2. So the next four drawings are the four elevations, front, sides, and rear.
You'll notice that this is the front elevation. Um, you'll notice that there's nothing colored here because the area in question, meaning the pool enclosure, is not visible from the street. So, that is what the side of the house looks like. And I wanted to show you this and just for context so we can
understand how this how the pool enclosure looks in context with this architectural style. This is exhibit C3. This is the right side of the house or what would be the west side of the house?
>> I want to find the drawing. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yeah. Thank you. So what's colored again what's shaded here is the area in question that is the pool enclosure and the the connecting link. So again you can see that it's got
a similar architectural style. It's got a similar massing. It's clearly integrated into the rest of the house architecturally and from a massing standpoint. This is the opposite side, the left side. >> C4. Yes. C4.
The left side. It's the west elevation. So again, this is the the pool enclosure. These two large openings are by fold doors that open up would open up the pool to the yard. Again, you can see that the mass is similar. The roof line is similar. It is part of one integrated
structure. This exhibit is C5. This is the rear elevation. Again, the shaded portion is the the pool enclosure. And again, point being that the massing the scale the architectural style is consistent with that of the main building. So those are
the primary characteristics that that we believe support the fact that this is part of the main structure and not an accessory structure. So some of the definitions so your zoning ordinance um
that defines accessory structure with five criteria. So it's it's 230-3 in our definitions. It says an accessory building or use is subordinate to and serves an ancillary purpose to the principal building. Now these are five criteria A through E
all which must be met. It says it's in subordinate it is subordinate in area extent or purpose to the principal building. It contributes to the comfort, convenience or necess necessity of the occupants of the principal building or principal you served and is located on
the same zoning lot as the principal building or principal building served. And then E says may have a sink, electric service, heat and or air conditioning but does not contain a bathroom, toilet, kitchen or cooking device.
So these are exclusionary types of language here, right? So the the the ordinance is trying to um prevent from somebody building a garage and putting in like a bathroom and a kitchen. Um it's trying to um
suggest that these are connect these are independent structures like disconnected from the existing building. Right? So, cuz it says it must be on the same lot, which means that you couldn't have a house and build a detached garage on your
neighbor's property or you couldn't have two adjacent lots that were say contiguous but not one parcel and you couldn't have a house on one and a cabana on another. It must be on the same lot. So, that infers that it's a
separate structure. And the fact that this addition going back to C1, you look at that link, there's a there's a bathroom like in this link. This is all part of the area in in question.
And definition E, it says does not contain a bathroom, toilet, kitchen or cooking device. So, so the presence of that bathroom alone by this definition prohibits this from being an accessory structure just by that sentence alone.
>> I think that's probably we have direct unless you have other >> No, unless the board has any specific questions for Mr. Longo. We have any questions at this point. Can you describe the doors between the pool room and the family room? Is those
simple interior doors or these doors are dead bolts and to a separate section? >> It's a standard three-foot swinging door. I can't speak to the locking of it, but it's a it's a three-foot swinging door that might connect any other two spaces and similar to the other interior doors in the house.
>> Correct. Thank you. >> I don't know if I'll ask this right. Is there any interpretation under which the little blue or the little orange part could be interpreted as the part of the structure on the right rather than on the left?
>> I suppose that's more what the board's here to determine tonight. You're suggesting >> I'm not suggesting I'm just saying is there interpretation that it could be that way? >> I suppose. >> Okay. >> Yes, please. Actually, building on the board member's question, um, is there an
exterior door to enter the room that's labeled? >> Um, there are biffold doors, like large biffold doors that that would lead to the outside. Other than that, no. >> No more question.
>> Is the bathroom accessible from inside of the room or from the kind of hallway? So both there there's two doors. So there's this connecting link here. So there's a door here and a door here and a hallway. >> So both the mechanical room and the and
the bathroom are off of the hallway that connects the two. So in guess in the judge's opinion all of this everything I've shaded here the judge considered to be accessory. >> Yes. >> In its entirety. Yeah.
>> So Mr. longer. In your experience with when dealing with accessory structures, I know you mentioned something that's detached like a garage or a shed. Have you ever seen something like this where it has a similar foundation and it's contiguous with the building where it's
been deemed a uh an accessory structure? >> No. My experience whenever there's attachment um it's going to be part of the principal structure. >> Are there other Any other questions from members of the board? >> Is access to the uh covered terrace
strictly from the hallway. >> It's from the exterior or from the family room. Actually, it's from the family room. There's doors here. >> Okay. >> Or from the patio, from the outside, >> but it doesn't connect to the pool room or the hallway. >> Oh, it does connect. It connects to the pool room with sliding doors. So, not to the hallway. Pull room, family room, and
outside. So, all three sides, but but not the not this link. Good. Do you have any other >> Yes. Um I would also like to have my client Goldie Rabbi testify about her reliance upon the um zoning and
construction officials decisions uh in building uh the home and to basically build the house of her dreams. I'll ask her to come up and testify. Thank you very much, Miss Longo. Good evening, ma'am. Could you raise
your right hand, please? Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth? So, help you God. >> I affirm. >> Would you please Would you please state your name and spell your last name for the record? >> Sure. It's Goldie Rabbi. R A B A V.
>> Thank you very much. Counselor, your qu your your witness. >> Is it okay if I take this out? It's a little bit >> absolutely >> okay. >> Is it Can you still hear me? >> Okay. So, >> I wrote what? Oh,
>> Rabb, I know you have >> Can you please also use the microphone? Sure. Because we cause we make sure the recording is correct. >> M Rab, I know you have um uh some comments that you prepared with regards to >> Thank you.
um what it's meant to you with regards to building the home of your dreams, getting the approvals from the zoning code officials to start that addition, the pool room and the construction, and then to have that stop. So, I'd like uh
the board to hear from you regard to that. >> Okay. Hi. Uh thank you for hearing us today. Um, I had to write my thoughts down so that it would be more concise.
Um, I I do want to say that it's really good to see a lot of friendly faces tonight. Um, this has been an incredibly lonely and uh traumatic process for us. Um, many people here know that we are
unfortunately way too familiar with trauma and so I don't use that word lightly. Um, in all honesty, being here tonight is just a little bit surreal. Uh, when I first heard about this meeting, I didn't really realize that we would that we would have to be present.
I I I've never done this before. Um, let alone that I would have to speak, let alone that I would need community support. Um, I I kind of thought this would just be a formality. Um at the end of the day, we obtained all the required zoning and building
permits from the township. Um that was not an easy process. Um but that's to be expected when undertaking a major construction, you know, uh project. Um we were rejected twice um before our plans were ultimately approved. And
ironically, it seems that once that we satisfied the townships, our neighbors became dissatisfied. um or perhaps not ironically at all. Uh considering the fact that um the neighbors challenging our project and their attorney who's also a member of
our community have sued multiple neighbors before and perhaps this outcome was inevitable. Throughout this process, we worked very closely uh with the township officials, Mr. Mullen, Mr. Scott Brusher um as well as our engineering and design team
um to identify, address, and eliminate any inconsistencies related to building and zoning requirements. Um this was not a situations where corners were cut or questions were ignored. We invested significant time, effort, our resources
to ensure that our plans complied with all the applicable township regulations before the construction began. This meeting, I guess in my mind, was supposed to be very straightforward. Our plans were reviewed and supported by the zoning and building departments. The
question of whether this structure was an accessory has never like it was never brought up, not once. It seemed like it seems like a separate a simple matter of the zoning board to to stand behind its own professionals to
reaffirm that the zoning officers understood the township's own regulations and properly issued our permits. Instead, I found myself living in this version of the Twilight Zone where a court ruling can impose
financial and emotional burdens uh over circumstances that we had no control over. We despite the fact that we followed all the rules and we did everything that we were told to do, we're still in this situation.
So now I would like to explain why this house matters to us. to my family. Many people in this room know that in March of 2021, my husband and two of my younger children were involved in a devastating accident. We were skiing and a ski lift disconnected and fell 30 ft.
My husband in those seconds uh pulled my kids onto himself um preventing them from injury, thank God, but sustaining very serious at that point in time life-threatening injuries of his own. When we when he answered his first
surgery, the doctors estimated that his that he faced 37% chance of death and more than 95% chance of paralysis. Today, he's walking and he is truly a miracle and we thank God for it every single day. What most people can't see,
however, is the chronic pain that he lives with, the the deterioration of his hip joints because they're joined together by a huge nail, and the early onset of arthritis. Now, uh my husband's only 48 years old.
uh he has an entire lifetime ahead of him and the best way for him to preserve his mobility and the quality of his life is through constant physical exercise that he has to maintain every single day, multiple times a day. So this is why I'm sharing my story. For years, we
searched for the right property. We worked with architects and explored numerous possibilities. This house is our dream home, not because it's extravagant, but because it is designed around our family's needs. We specifically chose this neighborhood
because our home would fit in naturally among the other large homes that are right next to us and in front of us. We the including the home of my neighbors that are suing us right now.
Those neighbors had described our home as a monstrosity. The word that the judge adopted into his characterization. Yet our home is no larger than theirs. What truly seems to bother people, these people, is that we're building a pool.
But the pool is not a luxury for us. It's a part of a long-term plan to ensure that my husband has reliable access to nonweightbearing exercise that his doctors have insisted on. It is also a part of a design that would allow us, and god forbid, I hope this never
happens, but to adapt our home so that our primary living space as well as our master bedroom and everything that we need is on the first floor. It feels surreal and and frankly it feels violating that I have to publicly
explain deeply personal details about my husband's health and our situation. But here we are. What makes this situation even more difficult is that we were not stopped at the beginning of the process. We were prevented from continuing
construction only after the structure was already erected and approximately 7 months into active construction. By that point, the structure was erected. Substantial work had been done, completed in reliance on the permits
that have been reviewed and issued by the township. Had these issues been raised before per permits were granted or before construction had progressed, maybe we would be able to do something different. Meanwhile, the consequences of this litigation have been really severe. The
existing structure has re has remained exposed to the elements for virtually the entire period which is like nine months now. Up until this week, the house has sat rain, snow, freezing temperatures, seasonal weather without
the protection that would normally accompany a project at this stage of construction. Significant damage has already occurred as a result of this exposure. Our construction loan is now in default because we were unable to meet construction requirements.
Our insurance coverage is sad to lapse in July. The financial and emotional strain on our family has been immense. As I said earlier, I I expected tonight to be a little bit more than a formality. But this past chabas, this
past Saturday, numerous people approached me in our synagogue and told me that Liam Hower had actively encouraged people to attend this meeting and support his this campaign against us. Because of that, we were advised to ask our own friends and neighbors to
come here tonight in support of us. I'm asking the zoning board to uphold the determination that the zoning that the zoning officer has made. My understanding is that this issue remains critically important because the court's
decision is not final as our attorney stated and ultimately the zoning board is the authority responsible for interpreting and applying the township's own regulations. the property owners cannot rely If the
property owners cannot rely on the permits that have been given properly reviewed and issued by the township implications will extend far beyond my family. They would affect every single resident who seeks to build or renovate or to
improve their property in reliance on the township approval process. We followed the rules. We worked with the township officials. We addressed every concern that was raised to us. We obtained the required approvals. We invested substantial resources in reliance on those approvals. We acted
really in good faith every step of the way. I respectfully ask the board to stand behind its own zoning officer, behind its own regulation, behind its own professionals, and say that the permits were issued
properly and in accordance with your zoning laws. Thank you so much. >> Thank you. Does the board have a question? So is the Thank you so much. Thank you board members. Um this is
brought to my attention. I also want to note that there has been a number of reports by um members uh or of sorry of your own uh zoning commission who've issued reports uh that are in line with
the zoning officials uh that this is not an accessory structure and we would simply ask that the board issue an interpretation consistent with that. Thank you very much. So there are no added questions from the
board then this will be open to the public and you're welcome uh to ask questions to uh the witnesses of the applicant. >> Good evening counselor. Could you enter your could you enter your appearance please?
>> Yes absolutely. Good evening. My name is Elliot Ostro from the law firm of Epstein Ostro and I represent Leon and Susan Howard, the next door neighbors to the property in question. Uh earlier this afternoon, uh my office
submitted to the board um our written objection to the relief that is being sought by the applicant this evening. I did bring hard copies for each of you if you'd like me to to hand those out now or I can give it to you afterwards. Whichever the >> So, you probably you hand them Can we
receive them now? >> We can receive them now. I were they electronically were they >> they were electronically submitted this afternoon and and and I and I I'll I'll apologize to to the board for uh for you know a relatively late submission.
>> I'm sorry but we would object. We didn't have an opportunity to fairly respond. Mr. um >> when the capacity is the board attorney. Yes. I I mean I I'm of the opinion that it was certainly whatever was filed was
certainly filed at the 11th hour. Uh and the fact that this has been on the agenda for some time is somewhat of a problem. Um, I mean though the law would allow your uh would allow your your uh
brief or submission to be part of the record. Um, I mean it should be noted that you know it is filed very late and uh it's highly unusual to do that in such a proceeding as this. >> Well, I I'll I'll I'll respond in uh in
a few ways. First of all, I again I I apologize. Um I did not receive um notice of this hearing uh and this this proceeding until uh on Friday and um I was out of the office last week. My son
was getting married last week and so I I I I was out of the office and I did not receive notice. And to the extent that the applicants council here is is objecting, I'm a little disappointed, frankly, because
they didn't bother to send me a copy of the application when they sent it. >> And you made an appear an appearance of this matter. >> I I I didn't know the matter existed. >> Well, then in that case, uh then then why is the >> Well, well, why are you objecting to
that? Well, well, and to be clear, then what what you saw in the applicants papers is that this is the question that's been presented to this board has already been presented to the superior court of New Jersey, Middle Sex County, the Chancery Division,
>> which has not entered a final order, >> which has uh considered the issue both on a temporary restraining order application >> has not entered a final order. Could I ask the gentlemen because time is limited a little bit that what my suggestion is that you I personally say
that as a chair of the board that I would welcome you hand them out and while you're presenting we can look at it. >> Sure. >> And then we can shut this uh um and I think this is nothing objectable like nothing illegal that I'm doing right now. It's unusual but it's not it's
highly unusual but you can do it. >> Yeah. So I think in in full making sure that everybody is fully heard in front of the board for the piece of the community. I would suggest that you hand it out and we can then follow your
presentation as it will be coming to the into the records afterwards. Members of the board, I I would also note that hallows received notice and that this matter has been on the agenda for some time.
>> That was my understanding from uh Mr. Thomas as well. This is hardly a new case, >> right? But I think it's not more diff more easier for us to follow. And then
>> Mr. Chairman, your word is final. I I'm just making sure that you understand what the law is and I'm advising you because uh it's appropriate that you're aware of it. >> Yep. What what I shown you here is uh
attached as exhibit two to my submission as well. This is the current view or it was the view from the the howler's back deck. Um and what is what is >> uh I appreciate this.
Uh but the truth is the truth is that is that what what's been presented to the board this evening is a question of interpretation. Right? And then so the question of interpretation doesn't necessarily mean that we need to consider the
specific situation of the rabios the applicant. It doesn't necessarily mean we need to consider the specific situation of of the howlers notwithstanding the current view of of from their deck. But most important before the board here is a question of
the interpretation of your zoning ordinance. All right. And >> as pertains to the structure. >> Yep. >> I didn't interrupt you. >> He didn't interrupt you either. your zoning ordinance though. Highland
Park zoning ordinance section 230-3 the definitions start I question >> we should have lesson finish the presentation with the picture >> oh yeah
>> the photo this is a photo from the howler's deck uh the wooden structure that you see is the pool house that the revives have started to build a pool house and then there's also a what are they It's like a deck or something. Are
we looking at the pool house itself or are we looking at the side that's >> We're looking at the side of the pool house. So So you're looking at if I look at C1 that was part of that application, you're looking at this area, right? >> Thanks, Chris. >> Right. Because the Howler's house is over here.
>> Okay. Now I understand. >> As one of the two board professionals, can we look at it too? Just want to authenticate that you took that picture or someone in your someone in your >> Mr. Hower is here. He took the picture. We can ask him to authenticate it for you if you
>> All right, that's fine. But no, you have a question for Mr. Cusanza. >> Yes, I just want to see the photo. Can you describe again where it's taken from and when did you take the picture? >> This picture was taken actually in uh September of last year. And uh I again
I'll orient you the for on C1 the howler's house is is next door here. >> Well, can you please make sure that you use the mic whenever you explain something >> everything is being taken down. So
you're >> based on the orientation of the design of the diagram here. where the Howard's house is above the this their back deck is over here. What you're looking at in that picture is is the side of the building.
>> Thank you. >> Excuse me, sir. >> Yes. >> On page 24, is that the house? Yes. Yes. >> Yes, sir. >> Approximately how far apart you know I guess that's the deck is the white fence
there. >> The white fence is around the deck. Correct. >> Yes. From the white fence to the structure, how >> less than 10 ft. >> Okay. The question that that's been presented to you has been presented to to the court
uh it was presented originally to the court back in September of last year on October 1st. The court entered a temporary restraining order based on its opinion that the houses had demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of
their claim that the con the uh structure that was being built is inconsistent with Highland Park zoning ordinances. Uh the revives uh through their council at that time um sought to made an application to vacate that
temporary restraining order. the court considered their arguments and and denied that application. Uh to to the point where the the it was noted this evening that the structure has been and it remains open to the
elements. Uh back in December of last year, the court uh modified its temporary restraining orders so as to allow the revives to winterize the structure. um they didn't and for whatever reason they they didn't but it
wasn't done and it wasn't because they weren't allowed to. The court allowed them to do that. In January of of this year in January 22nd the court held a full day hearing
accepted witness testimony. Uh the testimony of of Leon Hower was was presented. the testimony of certain professionals working on behalf of their buyers was was presented and the expert testimony of Mr. Longo on the one hand and our
expert uh Mr. Delveio on the other was presented to the to the court with respect to questions regarding interpretation of the zoning ordinance. a court issued an opinion. Um that opinion is is attached uh to to
the uh applicants uh papers actually and and that opinion concluded that uh the structure is being constructed inconsistent with the Highland Park
zoning ordinances. Now why is that? Why is that? So, I do have a couple of questions for Mr. Longo and I I will ask those in a few minutes, but I want to go through what what the analysis really should be
because Mr. Longo respectfully skipped several steps. First, we start with the definitions. Definition section 230-3, the definition of a swimming pool. It's important to notice note the
definition of a swimming pool because the definition of a swimming pool according to the Highland Park zoning ordinance is any body of water used or intended to be used for swimming and I'm skipping some words because it's you know u is swimming by the owner and his family and his guests constructed
installed established or maintained inside or outside any building. That's the definition of a swimming pool. Swimming pool can be either inside or outside. >> Sure. By definition, section 230-132 of the zoning ordinance, section B is
titled permitted accessory uses. a permitted accessory use section 230-132B. Number three, private recreational facilities such as but not limit to swimming pools.
By definition of the Highland Park zoning ordinance, a swimming pool inside a structure is a permitted accessory use. Mr. along seems to have
skipped that part, but >> you have to address it now if you'd like. >> I I I'll have questions for you when when it's time. All right. Section 230-126 of the of the Highland Park zoning ordinance, conformity with regulations.
Section A of the of of the of that uh code section says, "No building, structure, or land shall hereafter be used or occupied, and no building or structure or part thereof shall hereafter be erected, constructed,
reconstructed, move, or structurally altered unless and in conformity with all of the regulations here and specified." So both structure and a part thereof have to be inconsistent with with the
with the regulations. And then we finally get to the definition of an accessory building or use. Accessory building or use is defined as subordinate to and serves as an ancillary purpose of the principal
building. What we have here is the principal building. I'm pointing to you to C1. We got the unshaded area. The principal building and the smaller pool house subordinate
to an ancillary to the use. The purpose of the principal building is not to go swimming. The purpose of it principal building is to live in it happen to want to swim also which I I I understand but that structure is ancillary to the
principal use of the building. It subordinate an area extent or purpose of principal building. Again it's smaller than the rest of the house. The purpose is to house a pool which is subordinate to and ancillary to the purpose of
living in a house. It contributes to the comfort, convenience or necessity of occupants of the principal building. Mr. Vive explained to you how that how this pool contributes to to the comfort, convenience and necessity of the occupants. It fits that definition as
well. Is located in on the same zoning lot as the principal building. That that's true. It's it's on its lot and it may have a sink and so forth, but cannot contain a bathroom. And it was it was curious and it's it's a little interesting because when you look at C1,
Mr. Longo chose to highlight for you as part of the pool house. This hallway that has a bathroom have a main house according to the architect who designed the building.
>> A question. >> Yes, sir. >> You could have an accessory use in a principal building. Of course you can. Of course you can. Right. But the question the question the question presented the interpretation of
of when we want to interpret this is what is if this is a principle an accessory use connected to the principal building. What are the what are the height and size limitations on that? Right. Because because your the Highland
Park zoning ordinance Section 230149.5 provides that the gross area floor no accessory structure. Now here here's it's interesting. It's right because we're talking about statutory interpretation and and so we got to look at the words
of the Highland Park zoning ordinance to figure out what what they mean. It says no accessory structure in conjunction with a single or two family dwelling. Right. What's interesting is that we when we've read read each and every one of these
sections, the word attached doesn't exist. >> Are you testifying as an expert, sir? >> I No, I'm reading the words to you, right? The words the words detached don't are aren't in the in that >> Sorry, you're kind of blurring the
distinction. >> Okay, Mr. Longo. >> Yeah. I got some questions for you. Why don't you come up and grab a microphone? We could do it that way instead, >> right? >> Okay. >> Oh, if you want to testify elsewhere, you win. >> No, I I don't need you to testify. >> Attorney's witness here would not be appropriate. >> Yeah, totally fair. Totally fair. So,
Mr. Longo can can testify for us because he he's been presented as the applicant's expert. Mr. Longo, uh you've had an opportunity to review the Highland Park zoning ordinance. >> I have. >> Right. And you've reviewed uh each of the sections that uh that I've presented
to the board so far? >> I have. >> Okay. And within the within your review of those sections, did you note anywhere the requirement of an accessory building to be quote unquote detached? Is that word detached in the zoning
ordinance? >> I believe it's inferred. It's not read that way. >> It's inferred, but it's not it's not in there. You're inferring. Correct. I'm referring it as as the zoning officer in the board's plan. Yes. >> Yeah. Right. All right. So, and and and the word attached,
right? The creating an exception for an accessory structure that is otherwise attached to a a uh a primary residence or a principal structure. Is the word attached found anywhere in the Highland Park zoning ordinance >> as it relates to what? as it relates to
the accessory structure where or the swimming pool accessory use. >> No. Right. Right. Mr. long. You you you testified earlier that that you've you've done this in many other many other townships and and it's it's been your experience
that in in many other townships that there's uh that when an accessory structure is attached to a primary primary residence is considered a part of the primary residence. Is that right? >> Correct. >> Right. and and in in in connection with
that experience, did you have the opportunity to um review the zoning ordinances in those other towns? >> Um I I did you did >> do this for a long time. >> Okay. Have you have you ever uh done an application in the borrow of Matachin?
>> I'm not sure what the borrow of Matachin is relevant for us. >> Well, I I if you allow me to with two questions, I'll explain. >> I I'll get here real really quick. I can find zoning ordinances that have the word attached and I can find zoning ordinances don't have the word attached if that's where you're going. I well it
it is where I'm going because because what you're doing >> the touching may or may may or may not do is not does not gerine to this proceeding. >> Well that's true and similarly sim similarly Mr. Longo's testimony that he's done this in lots of other places
and in lots of other places they thought about it in one way is not gerine to this proceeding either. Right? Because what's what's before this board is not based upon how many years you've indicated.
>> Can we move on from this point? >> Yes. >> Yes. Yes, we can. Mr. you testified you testified about some of the uh characteristics that you took into consideration when coming to the conclusion that that the Highland Park
zoning ordinance necessarily means that if the structure is attached to the primary residence, it must be a part of the primary residence. >> I I it's inferred and it's certainly part of the discussion. >> Well, it's part of the discussion because you put it there, right? >> Yeah. >> Right. Because the words aren't actually
there. I'm not suggesting that this is in sex structure only because it's attached. I'm saying the attachment is a factor in that consideration. I But that does that does that factor into the board's consideration of the definition of an
accessory structure under we its interpretation of its zoning ordinance. >> I think we could ask the board's professionals that question. >> Okay. So, well, I'm asking you because you you testified. So, one of the factors that you testified to is that
you you explained to the board here this evening that um that one of that you noted that there's one continuous envelope. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Right. And within the definition uh section 230-3 of accessory building or
use, do you find the words continuous envelope? >> No. Do you find that the that the ordinance itself considers whether there's one continuous envelope a part of the definition of accessory building or use? >> That that's my opinion as an architect and a planner.
>> Right. But it's not actually in the words of the zoning ordinance. Correct. >> No. Right. You also testify to this board that there is a continuous foundation. >> Correct. >> Right. And and within the definition that you're asking that you the applicant is asking this board to
interpret this definition is the does the definition itself take into consideration whether or not there's a continuous foundation? >> No, it wouldn't in this ordinance or any other that's foundations are not >> mechanical systems and electrical
systems you say are connected. Is there is there an exception to the definition of accessory building or use within the Highland Park zoning ordinance? >> All of those items you're mentioning go to the term subordinate. >> No, all of those words terms I'm mentioning are the ones that you use to explain to the board why why the
definition of accessory building doesn't apply to here. And what I'm asking you, sir, okay, is follow my question here. What I'm asking you is where in the definition according to Highland Park zoning ordinance
is does does it say that you should take into consideration whether the mechanical systems and electrical systems are fully integrated? The definition says accessory building is subordinate to an area and extent. Subordination means it's separated
somehow. So if it shares a foundation, if it shares mechanical systems, if it shares electrical systems, if it has a continuous envelope, then I argue that alone means it cannot be subordinate. So therefore, it cannot be accessory by their definition.
you you uh you testified to the point that that the existence of the bathroom here necessarily negates the possibility of of the section being a a an accessory structure. Correct. >> 230-3E.
>> Right. >> Correct. >> Right. 230-3E. So hypothetically, hypothetically, if I moved this to over here so that it was not connected
to to the house and I kept the bathroom in it over there, would that necessarily negate it being an accessory structure? >> Hypothetical is not before the board. I'm going to object to that. >> Okay. >> I just told you. I said a hypothetical
is not before the board. Therefore, I'm objecting to your I'm objecting to your query. >> I'd like to add that the the reason that I colored in what I colored um is because that is the area of the building that the judge said was accessory. So,
that's the reason I included the bathroom in the colored area because that is what the court said was accessory and that's what we disagree with. >> So, Mr. So long, you are are you explaining to the board that what you're doing here tonight is asking them to overrule the judge. >> I'm just explaining why I doing that.
>> This is not as far as I understand. You may correct me on that. It's up it's in front of the zoning board to identify if this element of the building is an accessory access building or not. Um and we just as a
board we have to be clear that this is fully within the current zoning and rules and regulations of bulk variance of bulk volumes and of uh distances to the to the property line. This is within this is what's allowed within the just
for us to when we listen to make this clear. So the question is if this is identified as an accessory building different rules apply >> access accessory building different rules apply then if it is a um uh than
if it is part of the main building and that is that is the question for us as a board to understand this is what we're listening to and >> correct >> appreciate to comment about >> yes sir I It's not clear that you could separate
the bathroom from the pool bathroom. >> The architect that designed the building separated it from the pool, right? >> I'd like to address that. >> Well, of course, it is the same plumbing. It's in the same structure,
but that doesn't negate what what what the job here is today, right? So this connecting piece includes the bathroom in which it's gusting and it also includes the mechanical space which is exclusively pool. Therefore it's you can't separate
those two as it's designed. I mean certainly you could create a hypothetical do that but that's not what we're talking about today. >> Um and to address Mr. Odd's just notice about you know these areas I mean these areas are broken down. This building has
different foundation types. Okay. The the pool pool enclosure has a conventional foundation and the main house has a basement with a pre-fabricated foundation system um that has insulation integrated in it. It's a superior wall
system which some of you may be familiar with. So since the pool has no basement, that system is not appropriate for a pool. Also the collateral load from a pool is different than structure with a basement. So it necessitated having two different types of foundation systems.
So this diagram simply says, hey, this is a garage that's different than the main house. Yeah. Because the garage is a slab on grade like my house, probably like yours. Oh, and this part has a basement. That's the main part of the house. Oh, and this pool house, the pool room is different because it's got a
different type of foundation. Doesn't mean anything in terms of this discussion. Simply means that the architect here chose three different foundation systems that made sense for this structure. Sir, >> we're not being asked to overrule the judge. The judge has simply asked us to
appine on the zoning ordinance because he sees us as the appropriate body to correct. Thank you, >> Mr. I actually need to correct you. The judge hasn't asked for this at all. >> The judge has asked us. >> No, no, no, no. >> He has deferred us. >> No, he has not. The judge the judge has
not asked for this for what the excuse me please. The authority for what the board is doing is set forth exactly in the MLU. So this board does have the authority to do what it's doing. Are you going to refer to it as anything else is incorrect.
>> I sense I apologize. I I wasn't suggesting that the board doesn't have the authority to hear this application. What I'm explaining is that the court >> it an esoteric exercise which >> the court certainly certainly that's that's a kind of an inflammatory statement.
>> The court has not asked for this hearing. The court has not asked for this interpretation. The court has already made the interpretation. >> But that is positive on this board. >> I'm not suggesting that it is. >> Well then why are you saying it is? >> Because I want to I want to correct the
mis misunderstanding. Um >> I think the misunderstanding may be yours sir. Yes, sir. What? >> Sorry about the reading. The applicants now request that the board interpret the relevant provisions of the ordinance. It's not the court I'm reading. >> That's right. The board is the board is
making the interpretation which is as a matter of law. It's right. >> Yeah. But it was the applicants who requested this. >> Yeah. So the >> it was not the courts. The applicant has asked has asked the board to give an interpretation which which the board has
the express authority to do. >> Yes, I agree. >> The court does not ask for this. >> I'm sorry sir. >> The court has not made a final judgment. >> No, I I I said that earlier and I I think it needs to be emphasized that uh whatever the court has said to this
point is not binding on this board. This board is acting of its own authority. counselor, >> I let me sum up for you because advisable. >> I appreciate that. Thank you, Mr. Long. I have no further questions.
being dissatisfied with the court's ruling, the applicant has now come to you to ask for a second opinion. Now, it is correct that it's consistent with the municipal land use law for the applicant to be able to do so and it is within your authority to do
it. There's nothing wrong necessarily with it, but we do need to put this into context. Then how can you say being dissatisfied the the applicant has now come to the board? I mean that's
is exercising its express right an expression of dissatisfaction that's not correct because the applicant was dissatisfied with what the court ruled. They're asking you to second guess the court. Make a different decision. maybe agree
with them so that they can present something to the court prior to a final resolution. That's >> right. And which is consistent with with the municipal land use law. But the question before you and I I'll I'll say it quickly but once again because the question before you is relatively
simple. It's one of statutory interpretation. It's your job that you do all every time you get together, right? Your job is to look at the zoning ordinance and interpret the zoning ordinance, right? And and when you when
you do that, you have to read the zoning ordinance all together. They have a pool that is by definition under Highland Park zoning ordinance an accessory use.
They have a building that h Yes, sir. >> Is it a pool? is an accessory use or it can be accessory. >> It is by definition accessory use. I >> not a potential. >> No, no, not a potential.
>> Not a potential. Section 230-132B3 single family residential zone. The following regulations shall apply in the RA residential zone. B permitted accessory use. be free. >> It's not a potential. >> Not it's not a potential. It is by
definition. >> It's it's it's your definition. >> The question isn't if there's an accessory use. It's if this is an accessory accessory building. >> Oh, so go back go back to the definition of of accessory building or use. You're your >> Mr. Chair, can I address that?
>> No. >> If you finish your sentence and then No, it's not for you to say whether he can or not, sir. Oh, I'm in the middle of something here. >> But for you to just say no is inappropriate. You're out of order. >> So if you didn't finish your thought and
then the >> section 230-3 definitions accessory building or use, >> right? Your definitions don't distinguish between a building or a use. And a pool by definition under your
definitions is an accessory use. And >> what's another accessory use? >> I'm sorry. >> What's another accessory use potential or permitted >> private recreational facilities such as but not limit
I I I will sum up this way without repeating myself again. the plain words of your zoning ordinance necessarily make that pool house an accessory structure that's limited in size and area by your de by by the
zoning ordinance right that the plain words right now you you asked me before and and I'll I'll tell you um I'll touch on it briefly um what the when I was referring to other townships right the
reason Why it's relevant to consider and for you to consider when you're trying to interpret your own zoning ordinance, what other townships ordinances say is because again we are looking at the words that were chosen by the drafters
of the ordinance, right? And then when the drafters of the oras had the opportunity to draft the definition of accessory structure, they had the opportunity to do what other townships have done. They had the opportunity to say an accessory structure is ABC.
However, provided, however, when an accessory structure is attached to a primary residence, it it may use the height requirements of the primary residence. Right? They had the opportunity when they chose to define an
accessory structure in your zoning ordinance, they had the opportunity to say that an accessory structure is one that is detached from the primary residence. They had the opportunity to say that a primary structure, excuse me, an accessory structure by
definition is not attached to the primary residence. They had the opportunity to do that. the drafters of your zoning ordinance chose not to. It's important to know that because it's irrelevant under Highland
Park zoning ordinance whether the building here, this box that contains the pool, whether it's attached to this or it's over here completely separate and apart. the words of your zoning ordinance don't
make a distinction. And so you're being asked to interpret your zoning ordinance, not the fantasy that Mr. Longo was presented, right? Not not somebody else's, not not the experience that he's had in other townships. Your zoning
ordinance, your zoning ordinance does not make a distinction that under the definition is an accessory structure. No. >> Yes, sir. >> It's hard to see how that section is subordinate in structure.
>> Sure, it's going to be subordinate use, but I don't see how it's subordinate in structure. >> Well, it's subordinate in two ways, right? I mean, first of all, in totally integrated >> in square footage, it's smaller than this,
right? And also subordinate. It's subordinate as well in in height because the the main house is about 36 feet plus high. This is 29 ft high. >> So I think that's for us to discuss
later. You don't we we do not need to convince you. You need to you presented your case and and I believe you did this really well and we can probably u and you finished with that. >> Yes. Good. Thank you. Can I can I ask a clarifying question?
>> Sure. Sorry about the point. So the if I understand your argument, your argument is that a pool is always accessory even if we're in the middle of the house. >> Is that what you're arguing? I'm just trying to understand >> if I I I guess if you're what you're if
you're trying to picture a pool say in the basement under under everything in the middle of the house, then we wouldn't be having this conversation, right? because the height wouldn't affect any would wouldn't be seen from outside. It's the basement up to
wherever the first floor is right in the middle of the house. The the pool or if the pool was here, right? The pool was here, then it wouldn't be this separate structure tacked onto the back of the house.
And so the building there would it wouldn't there wouldn't be a separate building surrounding just the pool >> like you have here relate to that. That's actually a good question. gym equipment is removed. It's just a
room. Would there be an issue of that? >> No. >> So, the issue is use, not structure. The >> the issue is the structure housing the use. Thank you. Thank you. I think we're short on here. Let's try to make ordinances perfect and of course
none of them are right. Um so there's always some words to do here. But Mr. Osma is trying to argue that because your ordinance says pools are accessory that every pool must be accessory. That simply isn't true. Otherwise, this car, this house has a twocar garage like many
homes do. Probably most of your homes have a garage integrated. No one's arguing this garage is accessory structure. So, why are we arguing that the pool is accessory structure? Mr. Obro said, "Hey, look at this diagram. There's a separate line around here than
this. So, this thing must be a different thing." Well, there's a separate line around this garage, too. Like I told you before, the reason that is because the garage is a slab on grade. There's a reason that looks different. No one's suggesting that that garage is accessory. So why is it boiling different? The reason in my opinion is
it's not. Um I want to read definition of swimming pool for you because Mr. Obs you know conveniently didn't read your whole definition. Okay. Swimming pool private any body of water tank or receptacle for water whether artificially or semi artificially
constructed or portable having a depth at any point greater than 18 in. or a diameter of or an area over 120 or a diameter of 12 ft used or intended to be used for swimming
or bathing solely by the owner, his family and guests, blah blah blah. That would make my bathroom and probably your bathroom an accessory use. It would make four bathrooms in this house an accessory use. So, if we use Mr. Ogo's
definition, we have an accessory garage. We have four accessory bathrooms because they contain swimming pools by definition. Now, I'm not suggesting that your ordinance would consider a bathtub to be a swimming pool, but clearly these ordinance are meant to be interpreted. I
don't think the board is going to suggest that a bathtub is a swimming pool. But that's what your ordinance says if you read it strictly. So, that's why we're here to get your opinion as to exactly what this ordinance means. I I I was >> You need to speak in I'm going to I I
just uh gather my final thought for you here wi-i which is that you know I started off by by noting for you that unfortunately I I received late notice of of this hearing. Whether that makes a difference to you or not it is is irrelevant. It's a fact. um a as part of
>> your objection is a record just so you know. I mean we didn't we didn't uh strike it. >> Well, of course you didn't. So, right that >> Well, yes, of course we did. But the fact is is that it came when it came. >> All of that is true. Yes. Uh the point
that I was making in in uh in in uh noting that for you is is that at the time that this uh question the same question that you're being asked to interpret today was presented to the court um we had the the benefit of of
our expert architect as well. Um, and I would ask you if you think it makes a difference to you and if it doesn't make a difference to you, then it it doesn't make a difference. But it if you think it would benefit you to help this to help you in coming to your decision to
hear from our expert architects, I would ask that ultimately that at the end of this proceeding that you continue the proceeding to another date so that I have the opportunity to present it. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Is there any other member of this public who wants to have a question? >> Yes. >> I think you should probably want to come up here. >> Yes, you should come up and speak to the microphone. Please identify yourself and get your address, please.
>> Yes, please. It's relevant. >> Okay. Hi. Um, my name is Rick Cabella Lewit. Um, I am the rabbi's oldest daughter. Um, and do you want me to spell my last name? Sorry. >> Would you please?
>> Sure. Um, L E F K O W I TZ. >> Thank you. >> Um, I just wanted to talk as a member of the public um, as somebody who's like watched this process. >> Did you give your So, sorry. Did you
give your address? You live in the same house. >> Yes. >> Okay, good. >> That's what I thought she said. Um, yeah. So, I wanted to just talk to you a little bit just from my perspective as somebody who's a member
of the community, as somebody who has seen this process from the beginning. Um firstly firstly I I've seen from the beginning um the countless hours of work that went into making this structure a
reality in terms of you know in front of the zoning board. Um there were many meetings um which resulted like my mom said in the alteration of the plans multiple times um many times to make sure that the plans didn't just fall
within the you know the legal aspects of the law but the spirit of the law. This this was a a phrase used by one of the zoning officers. And this is important because Highland Park's a beautiful town and and part of the reason for zoning laws is to make sure that we, you know,
respect the integrity of this town and and we keep it as beautiful as it is. Um, this is a this was a very consuming process, a very rigorous process. Um and once the approvals were granted and and
the loans were sought out and and the loans were taken, um the fact that this process is capable of being paused for such a long period of time um
because How do you know lawyer is trying to pull out by the way? >> Lawyer comes over and says, "Well, of course, it's an accessory structure. You live in a house. You don't live in the pool." But as people picked up garage
has the same properties which is you don't I mean most of us I assume don't live in a garage. Um so basically I think the comparison to the garage which people believe that if it's built part of the house I haven't seen people taking them down if they have a second
floor or another excessive structure and about right behind him right after he had his his accident. Um, and I've sat behind him during his whole recovery. And to this very day, I don't know if any of
you are familiar that in the a shaw and it's painful to watch him try to put on that shaw. Holmes County for North Avenue. You're represented by council, sir.
Well, why not? >> Uh, well, since you have an attorney who's entered an appearance in your behalf, it would be preferable if the attorney spoke. >> Mr. Holl, do you have anything you'd like to tell the board?
>> How's that? >> Still not sufficient, but go ahead if you want. very represented would be represented by council throughout this. So I just I don't understand why it would be it would be
I object to it. On that note I've been living here for 30 plus years. I would suggest that you you know I think you can do this on behalf of your client. I I I I'd rather do it through the question and answer of my client
because I my client would like to express his own. >> If you'd like to your client, that would be fine. >> Sure. Go ahead. >> So, Mr. How >> is there anything that you'd like to tell the board? >> What is it that you'd like to tell the
police? I'd like to tell the board that uh I'm probably living here as long as everybody on the board or longer, 33 plus years, loving my life and children. We raised an entire family here and the issue is really uh
how shall I say this? Urusive monstrosity. That's the correct words to start. Okay. We've had a beautiful view up until now. Our sun would come, the sun would come out in the morning. We'd be able to look from our from our terrace, from our
deck, and from our uh kitchen and see the sun and it was beautiful. And now at 11 12:00, we finally get some rays. It's just incredible. picture that
this picture doesn't even show up because you can see a sun here. This is this roof is completely different. It's got roofing on it and which confirm you took that photograph. Uh my main camera took that photo.
>> That's fine. You operated the camera. That's fine. Please speak into the microphone. Fine, too. So the roof line on this particular part of this uh monstrosity is 29 and 1/2 ft high from
what I understand. 29 1/2 ft and the roof on the building is 33 to 35 ft. Don't know exactly. The roof line is incredibly high. We tried to negotiate with them to bring it down and every time it was another issue
that they didn't want to bring it down. Medical reason, this reason, that reason, everything under the sun. They just want to be in our face. It's just it's a horrible situation. We have uh we have laws to prevent this
from happening and and people on the board evidently have the authority to make this happen. We want the roof brought down. We want the building to a normal size and accessory structure. It is an accessory structure. There's a couple of reasons why
uh that my attorney might have not said. When this building was built or is being built right now, a uh an architect designed this building. And from what I understand from from everything that I've heard
from court is that an engineer designed this building and an architect has owned this building. An engineer is not supposed to design the building other than for an accessory structure. I don't know why my attorney would mention it. Probably get to it. Was probably shut down a few times at least by the board
attorney here. But this is the fact. Okay. This is an accessory building. The judge ruled it's an accessory building. It's too big. is supposed to be accessory is 600 feet 15 feet high maximum. This building is bigger than a
lot of the homes in Highland Park. It's a,50 ft and 29 ft high. It's absolutely insane to build something that size. You wanted a pool. It should have been smaller. It should have been conforming with other people's needs and other
people that live in the area as well. Again, I'm going to bring up the winterizing thing because they let the building rot the entire winter. I don't know why. You don't know why. They probably don't know why. I I don't know. But they started
doing it a couple of weeks ago. And again, they defied the judge's order. The judge said, "Winterize the building. Don't add any structure to it." They've built out the whole front of it and we're going to court again on July 2nd to try to take that piece of destructure
down because they're doing everything in pushing the envelope on us. They're trying to destroy us monetarily and they're trying to destroy us our real estate value. I mean, I I don't know if it matters to anybody else here, but real estate value in how Park is fair,
not great, fair. And they're trying to destroy my investment, my real estate by building their investment and their real estate. Totally uncalled for and not necessary. Have a few more minutes.
I think the biggest problem here is that I approached Batman, okay? And I asked him for a plot point. He says in quotes, "I'm not giving you my plans. Go to the zoning board and get the plans." that
that was the beginning of the end because he didn't allow us he didn't want us to talk to he didn't want us to think about anything to discuss anything with him to make any arrangements that both sides are happy didn't want it he just wiped me off wipe me dry
so I went to the zoning board uh the construction office and I asked for the plans and they said well you have to fill out a uh opra I forgot ology. Okay. I filled it out public record open public record.
Fine. I'm not familiar with and um I filled it out, sent it in. It was denied. Okay. I filled it out. I sent it in again. I was denied again. I had two friends fill it out. Denied.
Why? Secret plans. What's the secret plans? I don't understand. Secret plans. My attorney tried to get the plans, too. He was denied. How do you like that? He was denied as well. The only way we got the plans, he had a subpoena of the
plans. So, there's something going on that this man didn't want us to see the plans before the building. So, they can say all they want about, yeah, the hallows aren't fair or we're not right and all of this stuff, but the bottom line really is they were deceptive. They
were deceptive to us. They're deceptive to the court. They deceptive to the judge. They try to push the envelope as much as they can by building things they're not supposed to. The judge put it put it in his order. If you build it and it's not supposed to be there, I'm
going to order it down. You didn't get to that point yet. That's July 2nd. We didn't get to that point. On our way, the board should this board, this governing board should know deception is what their model is.
Thank you. I'd like to respond first. Correct. Yes. Identify yourself from there. What is >> Yes. Peter Oliver council for um first I'd like to address a deception that was made for this evening. One
involved the location of the fence. It was represented that the fence was within 10 ft. As I'm sure your professionals can attest, there's a 10- foot setback with regards to that fence. So, it's at least more than 10 ft back.
With regards to the comments that would be uh by Mr. Pard, um my client, Mr. Ray, would like to address those. And as Mr. got to speak, I'm going to request the
board of view, Mr. Ro out to address Mr. >> That would be fine. I think I would I would have to know. I think that the comments should be You want to keep them brief? >> Yes. >> Let me let me let me swear you in.
>> Uh thank you. As long as these words testimony you're about to give this will be the truth. So be God. Please state your name and spell your last name for the writer. Can you say revive evolves from pallet last name is R a T A E D would you like your attorney
with you uh kind of I don't have much that >> all right >> my wife already mentioned it's just I just want to some mismizations that were implied in some statements uh back
first foremost uh we went to all our And we informed them before we started building that look we by the way my wife didn't mention this we live in Hel for almost two decades we've also raised our family here we love the town and definitely we wanted to stay I think
it's a side point but you know it's not only here at before we started building we went to all the neighbors including the towers and we told them look we're about to start building if you have any questions comments or anything that let's just
discuss it and we have to address it. um to the point where there was a question there was a tree on college fabric to me if he wanted me to take down and I think we're taking it down he also wanted it down and we've communicated about that and there was no issues with
communication so to say that we're not approachable or we didn't when he when he asked me can I see your house plans I thought it was intrusive and what I said to him I I do think it preaches some
modesty for me to show you my entire display for everyone to see. Of course, we pass that point. But I didn't want like why do you care where my master was? Why do you care where my windows are? Like I want you to prove it. That's why I said that that's really was the
purpose and is still the purpose and I'm very uncomfortable with this display public private life and what the house looks like and whatnot. Um the other thing in terms of just not being amicable to uh
make changes, we've sent them plans to actually show how we can lower the roof and exactly in that structure was bothering them with sidelight significantly to the most minimal level that it would just pop out like a foot
or two to from the bare medium. So it's not flat, it's like really hard to flat. And I was reading to work with them. Um, so the response back was and I'm just quoting from memory. They asked me to plant 35 foot trees going on a
peripheral of their household, which I don't know if you're in landscape, but to plant 35t tree, you need about 20 foot radius. Besides the economic expense, it's just not feasible on any side. They ask me to pay for all the returning fees. They asked me to make the render of all the plants everywhere.
And this was like a list of 10 or 12 different demands that they have in the point is is that in this realization that I was in a I didn't work with my neighbors. I did things in secrecy. As a matter of fact, I speak to my other neighbors all the time. But what's
happening heads up and it's just I didn't want to share my plans which I still fall to that decision. I wouldn't share my plans if I didn't have to with people that I don't live with. So that's really what it was. Um and I think the board really have nothing else to say. Thank you so much.
>> Thank you. >> So is there any other member of the population and please could you please be surprised to make it free? >> Oh yes absolutely. >> Your name is Abraham Blander. I live at 134 North
10 Avenue Park. Um I happen to have been the next door neighbor of the Rabiovas for the past uh almost 20 years now. Um I don't I don't claim to be an expert on understanding uh pictures and if if a pool is
considered an accessory use. I don't know if that means that the building that it's in is also an accessory use. It looks like it's part of the rest of the house. But that's not why I'm here. you made that decision and you have the right because that's what you do for a living and I we appreciate everything you do. But what I I have to just speak
to the character of my neighbors here. I've been enjoying being their neighbors for many many years. Um their house is slightly bigger than mine. Doesn't really bother me. Uh we live in a very in very close to each other and um not
having uh sunlight or whatever that really hasn't affected. We we have a very good relationship and um I find them to be very good and trustworthy and uh generous and and and good members of me community and to paint them as anything otherwise is personally
offensive. I just wanted the court to hear that and thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Just for the record it's a volunteers. >> Okay, great. Thank you for your volunte. >> Yes, please come to the microphone and speak your name. It's
>> important because the meeting is Susan Hannah's wife and uh we live at 3304th Avenue and here we are. Okay. I'm sorry that you had a terrible
accident and I wish you all the best in recovery and all of your whatever rehab that you have to do. I think appreciate it. Okay. But
I don't think that has any on the fact that this I get it that he needs to have rehabilitation. He needs to have access to the pool, but you know what? bar gyms around available for rehabilitation and
for swimming and for fun. There have been many people in our neighborhood that have built pools, okay, for whatever reason, because they needed to run or whatever. The pools have been constructed in a way that wasn't
obtrusive to the next. Okay, there were several people here that have rules, okay, that did it in compliance with just being hacks. Okay, I wouldn't I don't think this picture
these pictures do justice to what this house looks like. As my husband said, we've been living in the neighborhood for many years. It might not mean anything. We were here. We were low neighbors for a long time. Okay. We
welcome our neighbors. I really couldn't care less if the revives decided and thought permission to build another floor onto their house. It's fine. Okay. But this whole house, this accessory use
disturbs our living. Okay? And it makes it extremely uncomfortable. Now, I invite you all to come to my home or coffee or just to take a look at this rupture and tell me or be honest and
say, "Would you like to be looking at this every time we knocked out on your deck?" Okay. Highland Park is a beautiful area. Okay. And I don't know, we bought this property uh from this woman who currently owned 3/4 of
and she and we lived in unison with all of our neighbors. We don't have a problem. We might have had some issues here and there, but we've worked it out. No one has ever built a structure like this close to this on our property. So if
anybody would like to come and see it, visually see it, I ask you to do it and then you would see really what we're talking about. Now the plans were not available to us. Okay. Yes, Mr. Rabay had called once and he
said, "Okay, you want to come and talk about it?" My husband finally got back to him. Did not want to release the point. Okay. I did meet I drove by one day uh drove by I mean I was coming out my house and I saw there were bikes
going into the house and they were closing the gates and I think they had the company they were showing the some of the structure to the company and um thinking to myself should I go out of the car or whatever said okay you know
I'm just gonna address Mrs. with adults, okay? Because maybe we will be neighbors one day and I don't want this to continue to affect our relationship. And I said to her, "In what world do you think?" Because the wall of the pool
house had just gone up. Okay. And I was just like I couldn't believe it. As I said to her, in what world do you think this is right to do to a neighbor, seeing that we all live together and all of our neighbors are close to build this
huge structure and block out totally block out your neighbors to the right and it's just like we're moving in. I don't care what I do. Doesn't matter. That whole thing is going, you know, she said to me, "We come from Brooklyn." She said, "We come
from Brooklyn." in Brooklyn. That's the way they do things. Okay. And not too long afterwards, the pool the roof of that house went up and I don't know what is it about 15 ft. No, the the pool the roof >> the pool roof is 29 ft they gave to that
to that to that to the height of the the wall. Now, that was no consideration. Not at all. Okay. And it just when it continues to go up and obstruct everything, it obstructs the calm of of
the neighborhood. I don't think I think that my neighbors could see it from a mile away. It's it's a little ridiculous. Okay. So, I'm here just to say that I know your honor, your um
your objections and maybe you've all had objects with some of these things, but really I would like you to come and see if that's within the bounds of uh to come and see what this structure looks like. And again, I wish the revives all
the health and and and and the ability to heal. Okay. But it's not really a part of what we're talking about. This should not be a pool structure that obstructs everything
because he needs to do rehab. Again, if they've constructed it in their house, they could have constructed they could have put a bubble on it like so many other people have. Okay? And it could have been an all year thing. Why is this? because and then they put garage doors
on the other side of it so that it should literally be indoor and outdoor, winter and summer. Okay. And honestly, it wouldn't make much of a difference to me. Okay. Whether they had a pool or not, they could have a pool. It's nice. Like my husband said, actually in court,
we were hopeful that they would be we would be good neighbors that they'd invite us over to swim. Okay. But that's not going to happen. Anyway, >> that's what I have to say and I hope that you all run the board will look kindly on both sides and you can
understand why we are objectives and it's not because we're bad people, not because we don't want them to have nice things. Not because our house is bigger or your house is bigger, but just we wanted to be friendly neighbors and they made it in class. So, thank you.
>> Thank you so much. >> Put this back here. So I >> could be super brief if you want to make a statement that was the microphone. Yes. house.
>> Sorry, I can't hear. Could you speak up just a little bit, sir? >> Yeah, absolutely. >> My name is John Shabay and my wife recently purchased a house island uh at 149 North Face Island and uh we
are it's it's very sad to see that house is not construction. It's a beautiful artist that's always made a decision
to see how to proceed instruction. Thank you. Thank you so much. Don't see any question. Okay. Yes. So
um it's safe to assume because of the board that the house is built in performance and all the step back sideyard improvements coverage all that.
>> Chris, can you answer that? >> Uh I think the answer is presumably yes. It doesn't receive a zoning construction permit. All the board has asked is to make interpretation of the zone. >> Sorry is not correct. I think 43%
>> the public so the public portion of the meeting is closed. >> As I said but even causes the board to make another question. Um I just want to be clear as to the process. Right. So we render our opinion tonight and then it
is that it's done or our opinion goes to the judge and then the judge revisits. >> No, this would not this would not necessarily go to the judge. This this is particular to this did this use this
application? These are separate these are on separate tracks >> there but there are two track >> I would say. So yes, I mean I think there's been some confusion introduced uh into the proceeding by saying that
you know whatever whatever decision the board makes contrary to what the what the court has already decided. This board has inherent authority under section 70B of the municipal land use law to make a
determination and interpretation and it is doing that now. what it is doing is perfectly legal. So if the if if the board determines that it believes that the pool full house or pool you know covered pool
is not an accessory use that's certainly within it that's certainly within its authority if it decides it's going to determine elsewhere other otherwise that is also within it authority is it hospital interpretation account.
>> Uh I think we should at least in front of the board is the request by the applicant to make application. >> Mr. Gibbons would be happy to say board asking make an interpretation on the provision of the ordinance and the board has taken action by resolution.
Definitely that's the end of the board's interaction with >> correct. Correct. the board elected not to act. If the board elected not to act, I I don't believe that would be really called for the board making decision under section
70B that this board either has been turned that that it you know that it makes the interpretations to whether it is or it isn't, if you will. Uh and that's really that's really what the board must do. >> Okay.
>> And question. No, no, that was just an honest question. So, we do have two choices to make an interpretation saying that the >> Yes, the board the board has the board has the right to make the
interpretation. As I said, doesn't have the authority to pun say no, we're not going to. >> So, are you waiting? Do we need a motion to to vote on? >> Yes. First thing. Yes. Yes, we need to
make a motion in terms of the resolution that actually discussion. >> I have another question that should bear in mind. I thought you were going to say something about >> I think you discussed it before going through the hypothetical questions.
So I can summarize totally if I'm correct but the uh rules for an accessory use they basically put in place to keep people from putting small apartments like above their garages back of their property. Uh so I didn't write that ordinance what
my colleague at LRK did. The legislative intent of that ordinance which I believe in 2020 excuse me was to add more flexibility for people to use def but all workspaces uh including occupations
those strictly relate to what issue >> right I have a question for Mr. G. Yes. Uh related to when the board enters in or renders an opinion or interpretation about this particular topic. This interpretation will impact not just
this property but how accessory structures and control structures are regulated rather than >> no in my opinion it would not each application system on its own merits. Okay. So just claim that there would be some kind of question. It's not that's
not the way. Thank you. I believe our discussions about and you need to give us that building element of believe. I mean is there any submission
from uh there any submission from the applicant's attorney? The interpretation was whether or not it's an accessory structure or not. >> I'm gonna whether it's whether or not it's an accessory structure as as anything or
>> you have to vote. Yes or no? Yes. So >> do we have to vote tonight? You don't have to, but in terms of it be very at least >> well my my potential my rationale is
that um some of these zoning regulation or whatever haven't been completely presented to us like for example the the situation with the swimming pool and accessory use that it wasn't you know it didn't just say swimming pool it had a whole list of
other things for example. So there's parts of the statute that that haven't been reviewed by all of us which may be important for the interpretation of this instruction. >> I don't I'm making sense or not.
>> I'm not sure I understand what you're >> we've been presented with sniffs of of the zoning regulations. We have been presented with the entire regulation and I think that maybe that you know having the whole thing in context would allow
us to understand what a main main purpose or a main >> the building principle versus the accessory building or use >> municipal plan. I think that's that's very important.
you just indicated that you may not uh that you that you perhaps there are questions that need to be answered. So I defer to him. >> Yes sir. >> I I actually going to request that I believe we just put together his his
thoughts on this and that's been distributed to the board. Perhaps it might be helpful for him to read back to his work of um what profession what professionals um think about this matter said. Well, what what he has prepared is
a matter of record just as it is with the other materials that received both sides. But if you want to give a comprehensive summary on the records yourself, I see yes probably briefly. I mean I think that would be appropriate.
I suppose before I do that some nation speak up a little bit. Sure. >> Before I do that some nation Mr. Gibbons could you would it be appropriate for me to describe the legislative intent of an ordinance even not notwithstanding the literal reading of ordinance?
>> Yes. I believe I believe that especially since you were involved if I recall your your firm was involved in pardon me preparation of that ordinance. >> Yes. >> The answer is yes. you can do that. >> Yes. So, we're referring to the what we
characterize as the residential form based code uh starting at section 230-149.1 through6 as well as graphic representations as to what we appropriate uh regulations and adopted regulations for the design of suits.
Um in that ordinance we did address access structures uh and there was a comment regarding the limitation of the accessory structure being limited to 600 square f feet in conjunction with a single and two family dwelling. That legislative intent was that if there is an accessory structure on a property for
a single two dwelling it is limited to 600 ft to avoid or access structure may have been larger than a house in the case of 6. There was no such restriction for commercial block. That is why it was written down. That was a legislative
decision. Uh with regard to the definition of access building and use, I will admit it is not clear. I did not write that ordinance. That's probably been in place for the last 30 or 40 years. Uh I can attest though when I did do the um adopt uh separation of the
ordinance and assisted with the adoption of the residential form base code which includes section 14 230-14925 regarding session structures. Um we did not intend to basically do housekeeping for the rest of the ordinance. That would be a very expensive project that
would need to be authorized uh because the ordinance does need copy. Uh and the other reason for that is because it was inferred and commonly used throughout the many years I've been here uh in Han Park also been touchable as well but in common park it's commonly known and inferred throughout the
ordinance that if a structure is detached from the principal structure it is an accessory it does not preclude accessory uses from being inside the principal field as a boardroom. Um so with that being said uh describing both working with the Burough
Holland park and updating its ordinances there's much work to be done um but I rendered a report dated June 22nd 2026 given my opinion this does not substitute as your interpretation as the power is in your hands uh but my opinion is that the pool structure is uh sorry
the pool enclosure is connected to the main portion of the dwelling by the interior hallway that opens to the family room. There's interior doors but no exterior doors or egress other than garage doors or folding doors in this case. Um the structure the full enclosure has the same um building
foundation system although it's different subsections some are slabs some are structured differently but more importantly it shares the same roof structure. Uh so it gives the p uh the appearance of data attached structure uh from the outside but in terms of for
plan it certainly is part of the new structure by virtue of the um connecting hallway uh connecting structures um and as depicted on the plans the pool enclosure is not a separate structure in the lot there's no separation even if if there's one inch of separation I would
classify that in my opinion I would classify as a detach structure however since design is part of struct main structure is the whole structure including pool pool enclosure in my opinion constitutes the principal building. Um I already discussed that the fact that the structure encloses a
swimming pool does not alter my interpretation. Again ordinance anticipates that there will be accessory uses inside buildings separating uses from buildings. Um and that does not confine them. Furthermore, that does not the ordinance does not confine us inside
buildings as reflected in the treatment of home occupations, private garages, private swimming pools, home gyms and so on and so forth. Uh the question therefore is really the question that's being asked is about the structure itself and based on the plans that are
submitted for our ability to determine whether structure whether the session structure it was my opinion that the pool enclosure as the plans constitutes far the principal building and is therefore subject to the bulkly setback regulations principal companies in the
230-149 ordinance if the again if the whole structure was detached from the rest of the the main building, then it will be subject to an accessory structure setback subject to the regulations 230-13.
>> Thank you. Is this a time to make a motion? >> Is it time now to make the motion? >> Yes. >> I'd like to offer a motion. I appreciate Cal's comment. It was well formulated. Um, I would move that the board interpret the relevant provisions of the
borrow ordinance to determine that the indoor pool enclosure, bathroom, and connecting hallway by virtue of their shared continuous foundation, unified roof framing, and interior circulation constitute an integrated wing of the principal building rather than a separate rot accessory building.
>> I think that's I think that's well crafted. Yes, I think it certainly can be considered as a motion. >> I'll second that motion. Do we have a discussion on them? Any comments that any board member may have or questions or any questions,
>> thoughts that you want to share? >> I found Chris's testimony compelling as well as the go question we have to look at. Um, so yes. So we uh just for the board it's not for us to decide if this is a big building
or not. question because that is within the uh within the zoning that we have and actually I look back into the zoning I thought these are enormous buildings that are possible at that place right that's that's not our question and when
you go through the neighborhood this really big buildings um but so our question is is this an accessory access is an independent building by itself or is it part of the main section right and
that's the question that you'reing is on the record with that with a yes vote or find that yes agree would be a yes vote that you will that you will interpret it as as
you would put an integrated an integrated structure and not an accessory structure. Uh so a vote in favor would be that a vote against it would be would would be that you don't agree with that by implication. I
presume that would be an accent. >> Okay. Are we ready to make a vote if the >> Mr. Fer? >> Yes. >> Mr. Fez. >> Yes. >> Mr. Buffer. >> Yes.
>> Miss Corbin. >> Yes. >> Mr. Winfrey. >> Yes. >> Mr. Malard. >> Yes. >> Mr. Dickerson. >> Yes. >> Mr. Manny. >> Yes.
>> Thank you. That notion will say, >> thank you so much. Um, we have more business. >> Yes, please. >> At the next meeting, we preparing a resolution. >> I would believe that I will prepare a resolution. Yes. Either myself or Mr. on
as well, but I expect that when is the next meeting? >> July 27th. >> 27th. I believe that it'll be ready for that. >> I think question really not a jurisdiction report
hearing July 7. Yes, >> there there is there's a court here as I mentioned before any decisions board aid the court it's not removeing of the court just decision
>> so I don't believe you can simply escalate the resolution because the board would have need to do that >> right well the decision is record the board and content of the resolution has to be approved by the board So I mean the way one would address that
to the court if that was an issue is simply to say uh I know this is what I would do is and I've done many of these case and the board has made this decision the resolution is pending >> uh exactly majority of experience
uh I would think members of the judiciary would understand that I see no no reason or uh bills Six county has always had a fine uh fine judiciary in terms of land use matters and fragment matters. So I presume they will
understand that. Well, >> thank you. That was education I needed. >> I apologize. >> That was the education I needed. I want to understand that process. >> Oh, okay. Thank you. The board has more business to do. member of the public want to leave the moment.
still have Yes. >> So we as a board we still have to prove the minutes from the previous meetings. putting them together. We all had a chance to review them. So I make does
anybody make a notion who minutes? >> Yeah. >> Or any questions about the minutes? >> Does anybody make a motion? >> I will make a motion. So approve the minute. >> We thank you.
Who was in >> Mr. Mr. >> I was not president that evening >> Mr. Bonnie? >> Yes. Thank you. So my last business and if you're aware
is to say uh we uh our uh attorney provided us with the with an update of the of the rules and regulations of this little work that you all have as the last print out of the file. And basically what we're saying is what we
said at the beginning that anybody of Zoom now always on and so that basically I want to say that in a virtual format you have something contribute to the application you need to be here you can listen to it
from home you can say whatever you want from but anything that is relevant for the application has to be and and that is what this edition is saying. So we had a chance to look at it and I will if anybody has a question for it
you uh we have the the changes are marked till red do you need to think about it for we make >> okay so we can push it to the next okay you can do that >> all right
>> people make public comment have to be residents parks >> not necessarily because because of the public portion the Republican general. So I I I I tend to be pretty open-minded at it. I mean, if it's a different
situation, whatever, for example, um you know, if it's an application, if it's an application for an actual I mean, I tend to be fairly uh I tend to be fairly open.
>> Okay. Well, what would be a problem? >> Yes. So what we actually need to do is Scott told what we need to do we need to push the vote fund the um rules regulation to the next meeting. We have to say I in order to push it
on both. >> Yeah. >> All in favor? >> I >> All right. So then >> motion to motion. >> I think >> I can't just do it. I think I can just
do that. Okay. The meeting's adjourned. All