Heat. Heat. Good evening everybody. Born uh zoning board of adjustment for tonight. Uh please like we have the opening statement. >> Sure. >> Pile Township zoning board April 13, 2026. I hereby declare this meeting of the How Town Township zoning board to be
open, adequate notice having been given pursuant to the New Jersey Open Public Meeting Act in the following manner. First, on December 16th, 2025, a copy of said notice was emailed to the Asbury Park Press on the Star Ledger. Second, on December 16th, 2025, a copy of said
notice was handd delivered to the clerk of the township of Howell. Third, on December 16th, 2025, said notice was posted in the office of the zoning board and on the bulletin board in the Howell Township Municipal Building, 4567 Route 9, Howell Township, New Jersey. In
accordance with the fire prevention code and for your safety, please be advised that this facility is designed with two emergency exits at the front and rear of the meeting room. Furthermore, smoking is not permitted in the municipal building. Please take note that this meeting is being videotaped for possible
future broadcast on How Township TV77. Thank you. >> Thank you, Lisa. Could we have a roll call, please? >> Mr. Barillo, >> present. >> Mr. Caner, >> here. >> Mr. Hughes >> here. >> One by one. >> Mr. O'Donnell >> here. >> Mr. Rosco >> here.
>> Mr. Ryan >> present. >> Miss >> I guess I'm present too. >> Mr. Kavarakis >> here. >> Chairman Mertens. I am here too. So, so we're so I think we're all seven
tonight. Okay. Anyway, could I ask everybody to please rise for the pledge of allegiance and with a quick moment of silence for our troops overseas. >> I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. >> Okay, Howard, could you swear in our professionals? >> Of course. Good evening. Just raise your right hands. Do you swear that the testimony you're going to give tonight
is the whole truth and nothing but the truth? So, help you God. >> I do. I do. >> All right. Thank you. >> They are sworn. >> Okay. Sounds good. Okay. So, any minutes tonight? >> No minutes. >> Okay. No correspondence.
>> There are uh there's an email from Ken Pape, attorney for case BA2505, Jacob Eli, which is on tonight's agenda. Mr. Pap asked if the board would remove the application from the agenda and reschedu after the revised plans have been submitted, and he will renotic for a new date.
>> Okay. So that will probably mean the expiration may have to be moved up and further notice sent. Okay. >> Actually, Mr. Chair, I was wondering if I could ask uh professionals to what the story I I just was noticing that there's a lot of delays on this.
>> Yeah, Charlie. >> Yeah. So, I I did speak informally with the applicant's attorney. Um there's some internal things going on on there and this isn't a code enforcement case or anything like this. This is their own application. they made some um decisions that's delaying them coming to the board, but they will be resubmitting
plans soon uh for us to to hear the application. So, it's not a code enforcement thing or anything like that where they're skating by. So, >> okay. Thank you. >> Was it Did you mention that they're going to have a new engineer? >> Okay, that's Yes. Okay.
>> So, I don't I don't have an issue with it then. I was same thing. I was thinking this it was getting getting a little ridiculous but anyway so anybody here for that case tonight it will be rescheduled at a later date and we will have it announced at that time. Okay
Lisa >> there's also an email from Bob McAuen McGawan attorney for case BA217 Whiteoff Mills Road LLC asking that we reschedule his application after a full submission with site plan can be made and he will renotice for the new date. Um, the board
secretary has asked for an extension of time for the board to act on the application. >> Okay. Uh, Jen or Charlie, anything you want to add to that? >> No, I I think the first hearing that we had, there was a number of questions that led to like what kind of site plan changes we're going to need to happen.
So, they're going to go and actually put together a site plan to come back with everything at one time. So, there's eliminate any questions that the board may have as much as possible. >> And is that including knowing who the tenants are going to be? That was one. >> Probably not. >> Okay. I think they're going to they at least know the one that they discussed
and they're going to try to refine a little bit more closely what the >> path when we get to it. No worries. >> It's going to need a new expiration date. >> So, she doesn't have one yet, but she asked for one. >> She just has it April 30th. So, um
>> make it >> I think I think that's going to have to be extended probably. >> Yeah, she asked for one, but she didn't I don't I don't think she got one yet. >> Okay. Okay. So, when do you think we'll be hearing this? >> That's up to them. >> Okay. We'll have to hold off on that.
>> There's no reason notice. So, we notice. >> Okay. So, we don't have to worry about that. >> Okay. And that's it with correspondence. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And I'm so happy to see there's no resolutions tonight. I think last
meeting we had like seven >> or the minutes clearing them up. >> Okay. So, we have our one and only case tonight. Um, my secretary is going to read this into record uh because I am
not sure on pronouncing the uh the hall. So, Glenn is going to be case number BA2516. Simpra LL Simra Hall LLC type is minor site plan for a change of use.
application of Simka Hall LLC as applicant and AA Martell Howell LLC, Howell Partners 1 LLC, AA Cardiff 1 LLC,
ZS Investor NJ1 LLC, and ZS Mill1 LLC as owners seeking approval for a change of use for one of the units within the previously approved retail building F, Green Leaf Shopping center from retail to a banquet hall to be used for hosting
social and business events, including corporate gatherings, parties, and other large social events with no proposed site improvements or on premises known as block 25, lot 54.08,
5321, US Highway 9, and the expiration June 2nd, 2026. and I could not have said it any better than >> Thank you, >> Mr. Chair. I see that there's another member of the public. I just want to be
very clear that this is the only application that's being heard tonight. If you're here for this, that's great. If you're not, that's great, too. I just wanted to let you know. >> Okay. Thanks, Jen, for bringing that to our attention. So, good evening. >> Good evening, chairman, members of the
board. Dante Alfuri on behalf of the applicant. As Mr. Caner stated here, we're seeking the board's approval um for a minor site plan for a change in use. This is an existing site. We're not proposing any site improvements. This is just simply changing to a actual permitted use within the zone. I have
one individual to provide testimony tonight. She's going to go into some testimony about the use um and then hopefully get the the board's approval. >> Okay. What she's testifying as a as a licensed planner. >> Okay. So, um what get you sworn in and then we'll get your qualifications on
record. Do you swear that the testimony you're going to give tonight is the whole truth and nothing but the truth. So I help you God. >> I do. >> Okay. Could you just state your full name and spell your last name for the record, please? >> Yes. It's Kristen Shepard. C R I S T N S H E P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P A A R D.
>> Thank you. >> Uh Miss Shepard, can you please provide your qualifications for the board? >> Yes, I am a licensed professional planner. Uh my license is active and in good standing and I have testified on behalf of a number of boards across the state. I've also prepared a number of uh comprehensive plans, master plans, and
zone ordinance recommendations. >> Okay. Thank you. We accept your qualifications. >> Um you heard Mr. Caner uh identify the site and talk about the change in use. If you could just go into it a little bit further with regards to what we're proposing tonight. >> Sure. So, good evening everybody. Um so,
as mentioned, there is no uh change in use to a non-permitted use. This is a permitted use in the zone. There's also no uh are no variances associated with this. So, we're looking at just one design waiver in this case, and that's an against ordinance 188-107C,
which is requiring 194 parking spaces. And the application tonight is proposing 187. And because that's under a 20%, we're looking at a waiver instead of a variance. And this really equates to seven space difference or 4% uh in in that change. So from a planning
perspective regarding waivers, we look at the reasonleness of the waiver in consideration to the relation of the intent of the ordinance. So in in this case, I believe the reasonleness of the waiver can be contemplated giving given that this existing shopping center is operating with a number of uses already.
So there's retail, there's medical, there's restaurant, and all of those uses really have their own type of peak and off- peak parking demands. And this proposed banquet use uh with this application is primarily operating dur during the evening hours. It's going to be operating from Sunday to Thursday and
there are going to be limited events and the average approximate uh guest number is going to be 40 which is really modest in relation to the overall site and as a result this site really is functioning as a shared parking environment with the other number of uses on this site. So I believe that the there is adequate
parking supply here and it can accommodate the proposed use. So the intent of the ordinance is to ensure that there is sufficient parking without adverse impacts. And it's my professional opinion that this will be satisfied. There will be no adverse impacts and there will be parking for
customers and for clients for all of the uses. So accordingly, it's my professional opinion that the waiver can be granted without impairment to the zone plans intent. >> Thank you, Miss Shepard. Uh, first Jennifer,
>> I mean, I agree the use that they're proposing is permitted, so there's no objection to the use that they're putting in there. I also feel like the center in general is significantly overparked. Um, I don't take any exception to the
waiver. I don't think that, um, there's going to be a parking issue in this area. You know, there's million parking spaces behind this building as you get back towards like the rear of the site. >> Okay, that's good. I wanted
>> I really don't feel you know this this what they're proposing is 16,600 ft. Right, Dante? in in that building that's along Route 9 that's attached to the Texas Roadhouse. Like that building that you see from the road
that has the vacancy, but the site is pretty significant and has a lot of parking spaces. So, I am not concerned at all >> whatsoever. Wasn't I reading something, too? I mean, you're you're maxing this out of 40
people in the hall. Is that correct? that that's what we're anticipating being the the average. >> Okay. Yeah. So So >> So Dante, I would say that they're going to ask you for a max. >> A max. >> Um >> my point is if there's 180
>> Yeah. What did she What? I'm sorry. What did >> 187? >> Yeah. I mean I don't think we're Unless Unless they're driving two cars at a time. >> No, I agree. >> Yeah, that's that's >> I would say it like can you can we put a max at 100? Like I'm not I'm not suggesting 45. Can we put a max at 100
people? I certainly agreeable to that. We were actually going to suggest 80, but we're more than happy with 100. >> I'm giving you 100. >> 100. >> Yeah. >> I I think there's more than enough parking spaces to accommodate that. Yes. >> Twothirds of the people drive. >> Correct. >> Yeah. But so the but the space can
accommodate comfortably 100 people. Okay. That's that was why I wanted to >> I think I think and Charlie and I talked about this earlier, so I'm going to steal his thunder a little, but it I think that's just how it laid out with like tables and chairs, but if people were in the space without the tables and
chairs, it can accommodate more. But I think when you get beyond 100 people, it's going to become problematic for you from a from an operational standpoint. So I think a 100 people is is a
>> I think is a reasonable from our end of it in terms of trying to manage it and if they're okay with that I think that that's a very reasonable request. >> The the one caveat that I would say to that is it should just be a maximum of 100 or the maximum building building occupancy per fire code. So that way if
it's 80 then that's what the require that's what the maximum occy. >> Okay. We'll get that. Um >> yeah. And then >> go ahead >> just to add clarity. So um the overall whole shopping center when they first got approved many many years ago had
gotten a parking reduction. Uh current ordinance requires five and a half parking spaces per thousand square feet for a shopping center. They got an um like a waiver for 4 and a half per thousand square feet. So if you carry that standard through to the current application, they would be compliant with that requirement. Um, and they
would require with all the uses that's existing there, the Texas Roadhouse, the different retail in there, uh, with F4 and a half per, uh, 1,000 ft, they would only require 187 parking spaces or 186, which is what they have there. So, I think it's adequate. And then you can see the pad site immediately to the to
the back of this behind the woods. There's ample parking there. And there is sidewalk connectivity. So, if there is such an event that requires a little bit more, you know, there is overflow parking. So they're not taking all of Texas Roadhouse or the other, you know, um restaurant spaces or retail spaces
that are in that that front building F. >> So >> yeah, because because my thinking is when you have Texas Roadhouse with a full busy night and they're having and having I'm I was concerned about people parking in the back and getting there,
but if there's sidewalks, then that's makes a big difference. Which unit are we talking about in relation to like Texas Roadhouse or >> three or four down? >> The hair cut. >> It's multiple. It's multiple tenant spaces. It's like >> they're replacing the existing hair
salon. >> Oh, the hair salon. >> The hair. Okay. So, they're replacing the hair salon. >> Okay. So, where hair cut? >> Yep. >> So, and Mr. Alfair, there's no intent for this to be like rented out to some third party for like a nightclub or any of those type of >> No.
>> Okay. And that would you be okay with the condition to that effect? >> Correct. >> And then is there any type of like valet or like um transport like limos or that kind of anticipated with >> my client's not anticipating any limos
um or party buses um and they're not proposing valet. She my client believes there's going to be more than enough parking available for her patrons to come. So, in the event that let's say you're more popular than you thought,
>> you know, would you be amendable to in the event that there's an issue employing valet? >> Yeah, we have no objection to that as well. If it's necessary, my client obviously would want everything >> obviously. Yes. >> Okay. Mr. Alono, you had a question.
>> Yeah. trying to get a an understanding of uh you know what's going to be there and there's an existing facility that's operating now that's going to be uh leaving and you're going to renovate the place to your liking. Is that what you're doing? >> Yes, it's going to be interior
renovations only. There's not propo there's nothing proposed outside. No exterior changes whatsoever. >> Well, I was getting you're going to just be doing private parties, right? Correct. >> And what about a liquor license? Do you have one? >> I don't believe there's a liquor license. So, is it bring your own liquor? >> I I'm not sure about that.
>> Is it going to be bring your own liquor? >> Yes. >> Yes. Okay. And then, of course, you'll have somebody there checking for proof, you know, that they could drink. >> And um did did the fire Well, you didn't build it yet, but based on the square
>> there. >> Yeah, I I realized that. That's what I wanted to know. the fire department uh based on the square footage, could they give you a capacity >> or will they give you a capacity? So, you're saying, you know, 100 people standing up, they may allow more, they may allow less.
>> We're maxing at 100. >> Yeah, we're more than comfortable of maxing it at 100, but if if code requires it to be less, we are we are comfortable that as well. >> But you're not looking if code allows more, you're not looking for more. >> No, 100 is the cap. >> Okay. And who's doing the cooking? Are you are being catered? >> It's being catered to the premises.
catering spot right next door which is going to cater directly to the establishment. >> Okay. >> There's not gonna be any cooking in the actual banquet hall. >> One thing I'm always fussy about it and I know a lot of people don't get along
with it. It's the restrooms. You have to put restrooms in there. And the county is very lenient. They'll say, you know, for a ladies room, one stall or maybe two if you're lucky. I would appreciate if you would make it adequate bathrooms
in there because when you have a hundred people and they're drinking beer and they're drinking soda, one stall or two stalls isn't enough. You're going to run into problems. Texas Roadhouse has in the men's room one stall and one urinal. Don't go there on a Friday or Saturday
night because you got to go to the bathroom. You're not getting in. >> And I know it sounds funny, but >> No, you're right. >> It's the truth. Okay, this is open Sunday to Thursday, right? >> Sunday to Thursday. >> No Friday, no Saturday, >> right? Well, if you have 100 people,
you're still going to need those restrooms. >> And you know, I I would suggest you don't go by what the county uh suggests or allows, you increase it and you'll be happy in the long run that you did. >> I'll certainly make that recommendation. >> Thank you. That's >> the plan. But the plan's as is there's
one bathroom, >> one shared bathroom, >> guys. We have no jurisdiction over the number of bathrooms inside the building. Exactly. Zero jurisdiction. >> That's why I brought it up. >> Just as a warning. >> We have no jurisdiction. >> If you want to run a good business, don't go by their >> standard. Go by ours. Even though we
don't have one, I'm suggesting I can't force it, but in the long run, you'll suffer if you don't do it. So, and Dante, if um say there's any change in plans to not use the restaurant that's next door and they want to use some other vendor from another site, can would the EP applicant
be amendable to any of those delivery of those food materials coming into the back from the loading area at the back of the building? Nothing's like coming in from the front or anything like that? >> No objection to that. >> All right. >> And my client's not anticipating um significant deliveries as it currently
stands. Yeah, Mr. Ryan >> Charlie, if I might, when the parking variance was put in for the shopping center, was that based on retail being in there or >> Yes. >> retail? Yeah. >> So, >> for the whole center, not just this.
>> Understood. >> Yes. >> So, if the T-Mobile building was to empty out and the mattress building was to empty out and catering holes were to go in each of those, same standard apply for parking or does it have to be changed? standard.
>> So, we just utilized uh restaurant and entertainment have the same one per three seats to calculate what the parking requirement was for this. Um we I don't know that we have a standalone banquet uh in our land use code. So, we try to apply what was the closest, but it would be the same standard as being
considered. Now, uh I don't know what that is in terms of retail, you know what I mean? Retail might have higher, might have lower. If those change of uses come in, it would probably trigger them to come back to the board for a minor site plan as well and we review the parking again.
>> Maybe maybe if the entire center was approved with a parking demand of X and whatever is looking to go in there requires a parking demand of less than X, that parking demand stands. We don't get to reinvent the wheel,
>> okay, >> later. Um, but we do check and see where we are with their certain things, but they the the center as a whole has a right to rely upon the parking standards that they were approved under. >> Okay. Just want to understand that.
>> Um, so I guess I have a question for you, Miss Shepard, that if hair cuttery was in there, they had a maximum of say 10 10 employees, >> would you guess for haircut? >> I I I don't have a number, but sure. 10
sounds good. >> Not 100 though, right? >> Not 100. >> Okay. Will there be staff in this building? >> I believe two to four staff per event. >> Okay. And when it's being catered, is the restaurant going to amp up their staff to help cater? >> I wouldn't be able to attest to that.
>> Uh the client's only proposing two to four employees at the event. >> Two to four working there and then whatever is going to >> facilitate over they'll bring. >> Correct. >> Right. So, I'm just trying to think that if the
parking lot was meant for retail with a lower number and we're going to guest up to up to a 100 plus people working this um I see a a potential parking problem in that parking lot. >> Well, again, we're proposing 100
employees working. >> I didn't say 100 employees. I said 100 guests, which is what we're capping it at. Plus, there's going to be staff in that building, possibly in the other building to help facilitate. >> We cannot look at the other building. We cannot. They can do whatever they want.
They're there. They can cater whoever they want, whenever they want, however their staffing is, >> whatever. We cannot impose them in theory upping their staffing to address this issue on this applicant. You can't
do it. That use is allowed there. There's no restriction on their staffing. We cannot I understand that where you're going with this with goes to the parking and that's a different situation but we cannot impose
additional issues on on that because let's say they say okay we're going to get it catered by someone else and the truck is going to come in pull in the back unload go away they're allowed to do that. So how this food is prepared
and where it's prepared is not we are not allowed to impose additional parking relief or standards on them because in theory another use in that shopping center may require it. We can't do it. >> I'm just going on what was in the
application that that >> I understand but what was in the application was 40 people. We upped it to 100. So if you go with a parking of 40 people, it's one space per three seats. So divide 40 by three and that's how many parking spaces. So they're
we are envisioning success and allowing for additional up to 100 people. They didn't ask for that. We offered it. But I think that what they're proposing here at a 40
person with two to four employees, that's how we need to evaluate the parking. We're upping it to 100. That's fine. We can up it to 100. They agreed to it or whatever the fire code requires. But they're like six parking
spaces short from what they're required. If you look at this independently as a banko facility, not even as part of a shopping center. If you look at it as part of a shopping center, they're compliant. If they're not, they're six short in a massive shopping center.
>> I'm sorry, what was that formula? One per three people. Was that what you said, Jen? >> Yeah. Three seats. One per Okay. >> So, and just >> So, that would be like n uh 34 spots if it's maxed out at 100. >> My math is correct. in terms of patrons. Yes. And then additional for the
employees, >> right? >> Okay. So, and just to clarify, so they would meet with the prior parking uh reduction that was granted for the whole green tree of 4 and a half per thousand square feet for retail within the shopping center. They would comply with that requirement. Our code was changed a
couple years ago. It's it's now five and a half per thousand square feet. They would be required to have in this building F area 194 parking spa spaces. So they're they're short by eight spaces with the current standard, but they do have
sidewalk connectivity throughout the balance of the site. There is an abundance of parking. There's at least one pad site building that hasn't been constructed yet. There's another pad site building that hasn't been striped yet, but um you know, there's space over there and and this is going to operate off peak from like your BJs and some of
the other uses in there. So there is ability for shared parking throughout the the shopping plaza. If there is an issue where it's over parked in the front here, >> they're going to have to park in the the balance and there's to your knowledge there's no restriction from the because you're this is just going to be a tenant to occupy that space. There's no
restriction on being able to use the balance of the site for parking. >> Any restrictions? >> Okay. >> And I and I was going to just state exactly that that this is an off- peak operation. It's not operating as at most of the other uh businesses in in the shopping center are.
Okay. >> Any anybody else? Nick, >> I mean, is part of that overflow like they can park in LA Fitness parking space? >> It's not LA Fitness parking space. It's a shopping cent's parking space. >> Yes. >> So 187 that we're talking about is like
that L-shaped. So what's in front and then along down the side? That's the 187. >> Yep. >> Correct. Just in this front building where the Texas Roadhouse and it's building F with the different retail spaces, there's 187 existing parking spaces there.
>> Jennifer, I don't see any problem with the parking spaces because >> the fact of the matter is they're not going to be open on Friday and Saturday and they're not going to conflict with the Texas Roadhouse and they may have a party that uh you know the hours are different where there won't be hardly any cars here except for
>> Yeah, I would venture to guess that Texas Roadhouse is busiest Friday, Saturday, right? have a party on a Monday or Tuesday. Texas Roadhouse in the afternoon is dead. >> Correct. >> You know, even in the evening, there's going on. >> I don't I'm not I don't have a problem with the waiver. >> But I just want to get that out there.
And it's a self-contained union. If they want to change something, they have to come back for variance because wherever we grant now is what they get. >> Correct. There's no sense in arguing about it. >> Yeah. If you put it into perspective, I mean, if Hamesada had, you know, was at capacity for their restaurant for the
for lunch and and so on, um it would take up, you know, a fair number of parking spaces during peak hours. So, they're going to be cooking during off- peak hours. So, even if they had to bring a couple extra staff in to help with the cooking, say midafternoon, it's
still not going to negatively impact any of the parking. It's it's a very large lot, so it's it's going to fit. Everything's going to fit just fine, I think. I I don't see an issue with it at all, honestly. >> And also, uh the parking is first come, first serve. >> Exactly. >> So, you know, it's not like it's reserve
parking. >> Will there be a new sign in the front of the building? >> There will be a new sign. Um and my client will comply with whatever the ordinance requires. >> Okay. Thank you. So, just to recap, there's we're maxing out at 40 seated
and 100 total if it was like standing room only. No seats, no chairs and tables. >> I would just say 100 total because if they change the type of table, >> the high top table that you're standing around,
>> it could be a different >> They came in here proposing 40. Does it have enough for for 100 seating? >> They can't seat people. >> Yeah, it's not a problem. >> 16 It's 1,600 >> 1600
>> 1,600 square feet. So the idea of 100 seat seated individuals would be difficult. >> You're 1600 feet or 1300 1300 >> 1600, >> right? >> Well, that's that's including the storage area. >> They have building only >> the building app. Yeah, building app itself is >> Yeah. 1300 square feet, I believe. Yes.
Actually, our space is smaller. It's 1300. >> Yeah. >> The actual building in total is 16,000 square feet. >> Anything else before we go to public? Okay. At this time, we'd like a motion to go to public.
>> We'll make a motion open to public. >> Mr. Caner, >> I'll second it. >> Second by Emory. All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. May >> the chairman has opened the hearing for members of the public to ask questions or comment on this application. If you would like to speak, please come up to the podium. You will need to provide
your name and address and you will be sworn in. >> You're in Are you >> Oh, okay. You said you were in He's hanging out with us tonight. There you go.
>> Okay. Motion to close the public. >> Motion to close. >> All in favor? >> Yes. >> Okay. Anything else from the professionals? >> Okay. >> Chairman. >> Okay.
This time, what is the pleasure of the board? >> U Mr. Chairman, >> I'll make a motion that we grant the minor site plan for change of use. I think it was called a waiver uh given all the uh restrictions and constraints provided in the testimony.
>> I'll second that motion and I wish you good luck in your business ventures. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we have a first by Mr. Caner, Mr. Donna with the second. Roll call. >> Mr. Burillo. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Caner. >> Yes. >> Mr. Hughes? >> Yes. >> Mr. O'Donnell? Yes, >> Mr. Rosco. >> Yes, >> Mr. Ryan. >> Yes, >> Chairman Mertens. >> With all the findings on record and what
we discuss, uh, I say yes as well. Good luck. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you, Chairman, members of the board, we appreciate your time tonight. >> Have a good evening. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you. >> Okay. At this time, is there any um the financial disclosures? Uh, everybody
realizes the 30th is the deadline. >> Did it today. >> Okay. Done. >> Yeah. >> Okay. If there's no further business, our next meeting would be in two weeks, I believe. Lisa, that would be on the 27th.
>> Um, I can tell you >> meeting dates. >> April 27th. Yes. >> 27th. Okay. >> We have an agenda. So, do we have cases for that night? Good question. You
>> April 27th >> 27th right now it's Steuart Street and Gabrieli How >> Steuart Street LLC. >> Okay. So we >> Okay. So at this time I'll entertain a
motion to close. >> Amarie with the second by Mr. Rosco. All in favor I I