Come to order 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. It's our third. >> Michael Richmond
>> here. >> Rich Patterson >> here. John Pittz >> here. >> Dan Adams >> here. >> Craig Pomisano >> here. >> Rich Toulson >> here. >> Johanna Perski >> here. >> Her Pagno >> here. >> Steve Joki >> here. >> Drew Campbell >> here. >> Sam Freriedman. Patty Rosenberg
>> here. >> Okay. This meeting is being held in accordance with New Jersey statute requirements of the open public meetings act sunshine law. Notice of this meeting has been advertised in the press and posted on the bulletin board in the municipal procedures for obtaining
building permits and merkantail licenses. At the conclusion of your case tonight, please approach the board administrator PAMA design provided information sheet. Okay. And then we're going to do
approval of minutes meeting of October 30th, 2025. I'll make that motion. I'll second. All >> in favor? I abstain. Mr. Chairman, I'm with you. I as well. I was not here. >> Okay.
And then approval of decisions and resolutions. 33 2025 Michael and Monica Kick. 34 2025 Richard and Joan Rosenlat.
35 2025 Tammy Rosen. and 36 2025 Betty's Barbecue LLC. I hear a motion. >> I'll make I'll second. I'll second. >> All in favor?
>> I Okay. >> All righty. All right. Our one and only case tonight is Triumph Development Group LLC, 323 North Huntington Avenue, block 509.04, 04 lot 2720
located in the S40 zoning district seeking a C variance relief for a pole in the front yard and potentially others as part of its proposal to develop a triangular lot at the corner of Comar Circle and Huntington Avenue current on
taxes and sewer payments proof of advertising and notifications provided representative by Christopher Malson Get Roger get very handy test this evening will be the truth.
>> Yes I do. >> Okay. Thanks Jo. board. My name is Chris B. I represent a tri building group respective application tonight. The property 3.3 North Huntington block 509.042 block
27.02 located zoning district and it's a 5,500T lot in a zone that requires 4,000. The application site is for a variance
to allow a pool in a front yard on both Huntington and Bulmar Circle. That would include the fence in front of the pool as well. The unique situation about this property and why we're going to ask for a
primarily for a hardship variance is that no that no matter where you put the pool on this property or the house on this property, you're going to need a variance for a front yard setback. Period. I mean, you may say
Okay, you may say, well, why don't you slide the house, looking at the site plan, slide the house closer to the corner and put the pool here. Still a front yard and a front yard. Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter where the house goes on this property. There's going to be a variance for a pool in the front yard
and a fence in the front yard. Period. You can't do it. Can't be done any other way. So, why does that constitute a hardship in New Jersey land use? trying to think there's a way to do it without fighting. There's no way to do it without fighting variance. Um
we talk about hardship all the time and it tradition traditionally their varian before are not their varian before are not hardship varian the flexible c variances see C2 variances where the benefits outweigh the desip variance has to do with the unique shape
of the lot which presents a peculiar practical difficulty in developing that lot because of its irregular shape or size in terms The way Margan is laid out that is an irregular shaped lot with with which presents peculiar
factors in developing like I just said in trying to put a pool in this lot you can't do it without the variances we are seeking tonight can't be done now you may say so fine you build you bought that lot you didn't know it was that way
go without a pool forget the pool so then you're telling me that if I don't have a pool, then I can't put a fence here either. So, what what do you mean? So, I want to use this as my as my yard for my kids. My yard for my kids. I
think dad's busy. Homer's busy. There's a circle right here. But no matter what I do here with this fence, it's going to be in the front yard. Period. End of story. Can't be done any other way.
On Palmar, certainly on Huntington, you could bring the fence all the way behind the house, but on this lot, you know what the front yard setback is for the house? 25 ft. The average on the block on Huntington is 25 ft. You lose 25 ft of this lot
because the averaging on that 100th Avenue. This house we This house is set back 28 ft. It's dramat substantial 28 ft but in order then to put a fence on it
work pool but you didn't just a fence that fence would be 28 ft back behind the house and you need a fence on coldart too so you have something so you have something closed if you put a fence behind the house that's standard in the front the fence can go at the face of the house
well the face of the house in a triangular shaped lot would mean that the fence has to touch the house >> okay at each So you'd have this little enclave in here. This little enclave in here. >> Just curious. >> And a tiny little space in here as your
yard with all this being which is nice to be a throwaway for anybody. But that's that that's why I I never come here and ask for hardship variance because it's a diff it's a difficult thing to demonstrate. That that that is what hardship variance is
in real life. The variances, the variances we're asking for are for the fence on Kmar and the pool in the front yard. The fence on Huntington and a pole in the front yard and the equipment cabinet. And I'll get to the equipment in a second.
The fence the fence in the front yard on on Huntington. Like I said, it's it's supposed to be back at the house here. That's 28 ft back and leaves you 30 feet this way.
But what we've done with this plan is put the fence off of Huntington off the property line off of Huntington. The fence is 13 ft back and the pool is 20 ft back. It's one situation where put on sidewall. So with the fence being 13 ft back, the
front yard 13th of the fence, there is still substantial rightway before you get to the sidewalk. There's a grass strip. There's the sidewalk. There's the grass along the curb. And then the street back here on Kmar.
The fence is six 6 ft 6 in off the property line, but again, you've got substantial right away. That's the same on Huntington. So, it's not just it's not just the front yard setback, it's also the additional right ofway where there's grass and sidewalk that separates gives you that
much more separation off the street. Why why is this why does it work in this situation? What one of the reasons it works here is because Huntington Avenue is almost like is is could be almost a better Hunt Avenue is 55 ft wide. So, it's not as if this pool is on top
of the sidewalk or on top of the street. It's a big wide open area. Same with Homeark. Homework curves back as you go south and east. So the pool really is not in a situation where it's going to impose upon anybody across the street. It it's w it widens out here. So you got
a pool really in a situation and a fence in the situation where there's a lot of light, there's a lot of air. It's not it's not only the situations where you're walking down the street and all of a sudden there's a fence on top of you. You've got you've got a substantial amount of space to set set back on both sides
which I would say is you say well I'll make the house smaller and push the pool over the house. The house is only 22% building coverage 22%. We're 35 that's low mean the house isn't even 3,000 square on a 5500 foot lot. The
house isn't even 3,000 ft. Can I ask a question? >> Absolutely. >> You just said the building coverage is 25 >> 22 where 35 is committed. >> Is it 35 or 30? >> Uh signing scale as you go to a lot that
big. Maybe maybe 32 or 33. >> The 30%. >> 30 when you get over 5,000. >> Yes. 22 is still a little low. I just want to clarify accurately >> 30 and 35. >> If it's 30%, it's still 22%. It's still relatively low. And landscaping landscaping in the front yard where it's
where it's supposed to be >> 60 is 82 substantial landscaping on both sides and a lot of grass like I said modest house. So with that introduction and kind of understanding why
we're asking for that hardship variance but I think this variance can also be justified under the flexible the benefits detriment because like I said the low coverage the substantial landscaping that this whole corner area is left open on landing act that being promoting
light and open space and the corner open >> so the landscaping around the fence won't interfere with drivers seeing around the corner. There's enough room after the landscape after the fence. >> Yeah, the f the fence stops, Rich. I I
didn't scale it with probably 25 or 30 ft to the point. >> The fact that they're both stop >> and they're both stop signs. >> Right. Right. >> Stop sides. >> Right. >> Right. And the triangle would clear that.
>> So, Mr. a balancing question cuz I'm looking at this >> and I see, you know, 13 ft from the fence to the sidewalk. Is that correct >> on Huntington? Yes. >> Okay. So, we're about from the fence to
>> 15t from the from the fence to the property line. >> From the fence to the property line >> to edge sidewalk about 18 ft. >> From the fence to the sidewalks about 18 ft. >> Yes. So, you see the additional rightway in there. There's grass on the on the
house side of the sidewalk. 610 610 looks like almost another six. >> Right. >> So at least 12. >> No, I'm looking. >> Yeah, >> I was just trying to get that. I see 6' 10 and a quarter and I see the 13 ft.
So, I was just trying to I guess the difference between those I guess the difference between those two is the difference. >> That's not defensive. Defenses back where the spring locks are. >> I I understand that, but you're saying it's 13, right? >> Okay. 13. >> Okay.
>> So, then Dan, if you see the the dark hatch line. >> Wow. >> And the line under that, that's the edge of sidewalk. >> Probably another couple feet. >> Yeah. probably got 15t >> probably 15t
would be helpful if there was a you know an actual landscape would you know showing how deep the I see that yeah how deep the bed also are designed it's I meant Patty thank you it's it's not a board on board fence it's going to be a
black powder coated space to pick it >> behind the landscaping. So you won't be able it will blend in. You won't be able to see it when they call it invisible fence. What they call invisible fence kind of thing that black
>> you get >> and just kind of disappear in it. So we are >> this one. >> Can you speak up, Patty? I'm sorry I can't hear you. >> Patty, can you speak up
>> and into the microphone, please? >> Thank you. one the the unless you corrected it since we got these plans and scale says 332. It's actually 316. >> Yeah. Um
bed's going to be on the planting bed's going to be on the outside of the house. There's a better sufficient growt. >> Yeah. >> Patty, there's a landscape plan being circulated.
>> It's coming down the landscaping. >> There's one copy. >> Oh, okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Bon. Just looking at the landscaping and it's going down the row here. >> If I take that line that the the dash mark line that goes around in a circle around that corner.
>> Yeah. >> It pretty much looks like the landscaping comes to that line. >> Is that correct? >> Um that would be the grass. >> Not the >> But I'm looking at looking at this picture. It kind of matches pretty close to that
>> from what I'm seeing. >> I think you're right, Mr. Ash. I think you're right, Mr. Ash. Chief, I think you're right. >> Okay. >> And how big is that shrubbery? >> It's going to cover the fence. We higher the fence. >> So, it's going to be over 5 ft. >> Yeah. But that's the idea. I mean,
>> I I I understand that, but I'm just looking at more of a visibility >> for the corner >> and and kids and stuff like that. You got to worry about kids on bikes. I'd be happy to pull it back >> as a condition to the fence in there. >> Okay. I'm sorry, Rod.
>> As a condition of approval, Andy, can you make sure at the sight triangle there's no shrub higher than 18 in in a sight triangle there? >> Certainly. >> Thank you. >> Let me introduce Andy Schaer, our professional. >> Well, there's certain guidelines we
follow. >> Mr. Schaer, just give us your name in the business package, please. >> Yeah. Andrew Schaer uh for 1425 Cantell and Boba Fart Cantell and Boba Fart base landing. >> Okay. Please raise your right hand. You swear affirm the testimony you get this evening. You'll be truth.
>> I do. >> You're an engineering planner. You won't accept his credentials obviously. >> Yes. >> As Mr. Balison indicated there in the as a aerial photograph there are two stop signs here. So they are stopped streets.
Not that everybody does, but given the design of the lot, triangular, no rear yard, two fronts and a side, basically putting the house back in this area, the larger part of the triangle in the pool in the front, which reverses the front
and the backyard. Yes, it does, but there's no other way to get everything in there. And it's not overdone given that the building envelope is 22% where 30 is permitted. We haven't overd designed that. That's the test I always use. Did we overdo it? And lock coverage
is a really good indicator of that especially when we use because it's at the point of a triangle. So we we can do sight triangles and add that to the plan. That's fine. But given there are stop signals. So it changes
the shape and size of those side triangles with the anticipation that people would actually stop the stop sign. And one one of the ideas for the control of not having a fence in the front yard
is for the the imposition of it where people are walking down the sidewalk. You have that enclosed feeling depends on your shoulder. >> Correct. And that would be the case. >> Have we addressed that? We have again by moving the fence pretty far away from the property line, especially the
sidewalk line and giving that air light air and open space feeling where in other lots in the rectangular area where lots are you would be able to push that fence much much closer to the sidewalk. The Queen encroaches into the sideyard
setback triangular lock. Two fronts and a side. In this case, two fronts and two sides. Requirement for a side yard for pool equipment is 10 ft. Requirement for pool equipment in a rear
yard is 5T. We don't have a rear yard under any circumstances. And the idea is because rear yards usually face each other. your yards are back to back. So 5t in one, you've got at least 10 feet in the other guy's backyard. That that's
that's why that control is 5 feet. Where in a sidey yard, the houses are much closer together. So it requires 10 ft. In this situation with the full equipment right here, the house next to you with a 10ft sideyard setback
acts as if it's a rear yard. It gives you the same kind of space. This thing is closer to Kar Avenue. If anything, it's it's next to their front front yard grass back here on. And I I would suggest it's probably the best place in the entire property to put in terms of
being non-intrusive on any neighbors. But that's a variance because portion of it, as you can see on the plan, portion of it encroaches into that 10 ft. Most of a lot it hits 10 ft and then a couple feet of it. The enclosure approaches into that 10 foot
requirement. But like I said, that was it. If you call that a rear yard, and you might because it's the back of the house, it'd be 5T, it will be well within this requirement. >> We go back to the corner again. And I see there's a colorized photo at the top
left corner there. That looks to be the corner that discussed. >> That's correct. >> This is from from Swimmore. It's kind of a mockup of ideally what it would look like. >> All right. I was going to say if we had something that continued to that whole corner to look at it would probably clear up a lot
of questions. >> I just have a question. The visibility concern >> Mr. Bal I'm going to reflect back to Mr. McLaren. >> Your micro >> sorry I'm going to I just have a question. Mr. McLaren, can we clarify? You said something about that whole
intersection making sure. I just want clarification on that so I understand like what that distance would be and the height not exceeding 18 in. Can you give me an idea where that would be on the plan? >> How far away from the top of the triangle for instance?
>> Yeah. Like where would that 18in mark start in that picture? >> It would start at the fence line here and about 28 ft to the curb line of the intersection of the two streets. So where um my question is the 18 in that you said, can you make sure it's the
shrubberies below 18 in in that line of sight? >> Yes. >> Where would that possibly be based on that drawing? >> This area from here to here. So we can add that to the plan where that that the landscaping height is limited to 18 in in this area. That's a little bigger
than the sight triangle would ever be. >> Well, I'm just saying the sight triangle. I just want to make sure that what he said with the sight triangle in that distance that >> I was just looking for where that possibly would be >> it's going to be very small. >> It's going to be a very small area. >> And what what Mr. Schaefer is saying is
we're factor of safety if which is not even required. Nothing that sight triangle is going to be larger. It's actually smaller than the area that we're going to be using. >> The area will be larger than the triangle. The only area will be larger than the sight triangle. >> Yeah. I'm just saying I was just curious
to how far back that say triangle would be that maybe the 18inch rubbery would start >> with stop signs they're not very far but it doesn't make sense even given that to not limit this area to 18 18 in >> it it just makes sense because people run stop signs
>> can you give a chief any kind of idea in terms of how far back in terms of feet from the >> Yeah that's what I'm looking at how far back would that be looking at how far back from feet would that be 30 ft line from the curve I'm just concerned just grass.
>> Well, I think the idea is to try and hide the fence. >> I think you can you can accomplish that but not the point. >> Yeah. Not to the point and not go beyond it. >> My biggest concern is that I I I don't have a problem with the concept. I like it. I I see that. >> But I'm worried about kids coming around
the corner on a bike and someone blowing the stop sign and not having enough time to see them. That's my main concern. >> Safety. >> You know, Mr. Balancing, you know me. I'm always about safety aspect and and I and that's where I'm going to be on this. >> I mean you land be here
>> and here. Okay. >> I mean, you know, as a corner >> that gives me a better perspective of it. Yeah. >> Yeah. That gives me a better perspective, a cleaner idea of the look of it. And I'm not trying to take away from it, but I'm just trying to make sure it's the safest possible. It's a little bit. It's a little belts and
suspenders, but given this the angle of the given this the angle of the triangle intersection, it's worth it. >> Okay. >> And that's about 30 ft, Andy. Right. >> Yes. >> That's That's a big distance.
I'm going to agree. >> Yeah. If you lay a sight triangle on there, I think it's probably behind it. >> Yeah. And I think what we're talking about doing there is imposing our own version of a sight triangle that's bigger than what the asto refer to. >> Yeah. I I'm just saying I'm just looking at it.
>> But it's really a special. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I understand in terms of variance justification in the hardship standard, what do you tell us? >> Oh, the irregular shape lock. That's everything in and of itself. But I think also coupled with that in the positive
side kind of a C2 flavor we've taken the design a lot the house away from the intersection making it less than it could be in terms of size and putting the rear yard in the front which there's art in the front which there's only
space left to do that with provisions for creating enough sight distance for the operation of the intersection. So you think from positive criteria it's justifi can be justified under both the C1 and C2 criteria. >> Yes.
>> In terms of negative criteria and it said a little bit about this already in terms of can the invariance be granted without substantial detriment to the public good. >> I do I absolutely believe that especially since the design has flipped everything from the putting the house in
what could be a backyard to the pool being in the front yard which is lower elevation. And you think the variance can can then be granted without substantial impact on the zone plan and zoning ordinance? >> Yes, I do. >> Why is that? >> Again, we have designed it such that
we're lessening the impact as much as possible on the intersection by moving the house away. moving the pool to this area, but still holding it back from to this area, but still holding it back from the intersection, creating 30 roughly 30 feet along both travelways to
a stop sign that has clear sight distance. >> That's also a function of pushing the fence back away from >> rather than have the fence come to a point, just pull back. Yes. and also pulling the fence back as you said away from the sidewalk composed in front of
us again to create a tunnel that is wide enough to there's another house on Avenue down further with the same situation and I think this is going to have a much bigger sight angle than that house >> that's at 602 North Huntington
>> 2016 >> it's the same situation the same exact same exact >> except it's there closer to the sidewalk. What you're talking about here, >> right? >> You can't even see the pool there. You can't see the pool now. >> Mr. Cher, with respect >> with respect to when you when we have
neighborhoods designed like this, traditionally we have mostly a a straight through straight through >> linear knock, right? When when we introduce and it's good for variety when we introduce these types of neighborhood this type of neighborhood design whether it's baker court seaside court or
bayside court invariably some of these corner lots are going to end up shaped like >> a pair like this. >> Yes. >> Is that is that something that that's again that's a trade-off between trying to increase variety and and there will be will be houses that will suffer from
those peculiar angles. >> Right. And it's it's it's difficult as a planner to say this isn't beautiful. It really is the layout, but it does have some negatives in terms of lots that have a triangular or in some cases a pair shape.
You just have to deal with the issues associated with those particular lots. >> Therefore, the pump function is the plane. Yes, but it's still and we could have a reply linear situation like we have over here, but it's a little more I'm sorry boring compared to what this
is. It's beautiful. >> Thank you. That's all we have, Mr. Chair. >> Okay. Uh, anyone from the board? >> Just one for clarification, Mr. Chairman, and I'll turn this on. >> Thank you. in the amendment to the
application in the one two three fourth paragraph last on this every time >> sentence I'm sorry >> you get on this every time >> the narrow rectangular shape of a lot is a classic hardship in a city where rectangular lots are the norm >> I said narrow rectangular and then
rectangular again it's a triangular >> either way I would question it um is it true that they are the norm and I guess that might be for Roger >> a standard rectangular I withdraw my question. >> If it would have said triangular, I
would have question. >> You're right. >> Easy enough. >> Anybody else from the board? the public. >> Just give us your name and address after swear you Henry 15.
>> Miss Henry, please raise your right hand. You swear in front and tell the truth. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Uh I'm here as a mom and a teacher. I'd be remiss to not say something. I teach my seventh graders to say something. I
sat back and it's happened. Um, I love a pool. I have no problems with the pool going in. It's the visibility. Uh, the intersection was deemed problematic when the safe passageway happened and the circles. And
I didn't I didn't mind the circle. Circles kind of have that flow, but that circle that stop sign off on Huntington, I would say it's not People don't stop at it probably 80% of the time if I had to make a guess. It is a dangerous
intersection. It leads to the fields. Clomar is a cut through for bikes, the electric bikes, now the scooters. It's it's really a safety thing for me. I'm worried about I know all the math works out for visibility, but before the
construction, there was it was wide open grass and it was still a problem then. And I'm just nervous for safety. Sorry teacher. I hate speaking public. Um
>> think of this as seventh grades. Um so uh I I do wish you consider I know we're talking about the height, but it's it's becoming a a very familyfriendly neighborhood now. The circles are coming back. small children. A lot of people
are selling houses on this end to move to that side. And I I I'm I'm just concerned because I see the cars just blow right by that stop sign. That one in particular. Um
want you to consider. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anybody else from the public? Okay. Public portion is closed. Um
yeah, if there's nothing else in motion. Um the main condition if this is approved, we're going to there's discussion on that site triangle. It'll be bigger than the the say ashes. Is that the word?
>> Ashto. >> Ashtto standard. And uh your professional work with Roger as you kind of drew on there. Nothing in that above 18 in in terms of uh shrubs. Um
>> do we hold them to that black fence as a condition? >> That's fine. >> Sure. That's fine. >> And they did circulate a landscaping plan, right? And Roger were satisfied with that as terms of domain escaping in it. How do we
describe that? Black uh >> 4 in thin metals. >> Um 4 in space between >> pool compliant. >> Say just call it pool compliant. >> You wanted that black fence.
>> Well, he agreed to just wide open. >> If he agreed to it without >> Yes, that should definitely be a condition. >> Yeah. And we should also the landscaping is um going to be on the inside
of the fence on both. >> He showed a plan shaping. >> I mean my understanding is we always want the landscaping to for fences in this situation. We we can lighten it up. I mean I don't >> we can make it less dense. I I don't
want to I don't want to say I I want you know I want everybody to be satisfied. You're it's the right leg. >> The landscaping will hide the fence. That's that's all we're >> right. But it's also going to hide kids on scooters like she was saying coming up the block. >> Well, it won't because the the the sight
triangle is bigger than what's required, >> right? If if that's just the right the right one to apply to this that that's fine. I just make sure that's that's the right one. Whatever one is the proper one for this situation. >> Sure. D. That's That's fine. >> Yeah. You'll show the sight triangle.
Roger. All approval. Roger. All approval. >> Um you'll do that black fence. You showed us the landscaping plan subject to any outside approvals that may be required. Any representations made by the applicant during the during the course of the hearing. I gone through
the conditions. I haven't summarized the appearances yet, but since we started with the conditions and anything else in Mr. McLaren's report, unless otherwise addressed. Th those would be the conditions. It's a C variance application. Board heard the testimony
on the hardship C1 and C2 standard and it was a couple of variances. The location of the swimming pools were not they're not allowed in the front yard and they have their swimming pool should be located in Kar and Huntington's front yard.
The fence location, same thing. fences aren't allowed in the front yard and um we'll have a fence along Huntington in Huntington and the Colemar front yard and then that pool equipment uh has to be 10 ft in a side uh has to
be 10 ft in a sideyard which this technically is and they're not complying with that condition. Um I went through the conditions that will be attached if this is approved and we'll need a motion, a second, and a roll call vote.
I'll make that motion back. >> I think we have a second. Second. Yeah. Craig second. >> Michael Richmond. One thing I got from Chris's presentation
was the idea that um even if we didn't even if we didn't even if we cuz I kind of thought the same thing. Well, yeah, you don't need a pool, but and you would Yeah, you would have to
get a variance for a fence. But, um, you know, if people buy the house, if young families buy the house, they're going to want to have a fence around the property for their kids. Um, so
and the fence in Margate can be 5T tall and can be a solid fence. Now, yeah, they would have to go for a variance and maybe we put the same conditions on, but either way, someone that buys that property is going to want to have some type of
fence there. Um it's a I think in Longport they deal with a lot of um the triangle thing going back almost 30 ft for the site triangle. There's two stop signs there. I
know. Um yeah, I think it is a hardship either way. Even if you didn't have a pool there, you're still going to want to put some type of fence there. Um
there is is it's a 30foot sight triangle over >> Rich Patterson. >> My first concern and my first question was about that sight triangle and it's uh the answer was satisfactory. I mean I
I think it's a huge sight triangle. Uh again, we can compare it to the one at 602 North, uh which works out fine and and doesn't have near the the triangle that this one has. I agree it's a hardship. I know we
approved it's a hardship. I know we approved the fence at Lancaster and Amherst with Stan Bergman. Same thing. He only had a front yard and he had little kids and he set back probably 20 ft from the property. And I think the same situation exists here.
So, as much as we're against front yard fences and front yard pools, I think this is a perfect example of where hardship uh comes into play. Uh, for that reason, I approve the application. >> Dan Adams. >> Okay. Um, I agree with a lot of the
concepts of what Mr. Richmond and Mr. Patterson said. I just want to be assured that the landscaping will not be impeding upon or making it any less visible in that area. Um I I I'm very
concerned about children. I have a granddaughter that's going to grow up in that area. Um she's right around the corner. I mean, she's only 5 months old now, but she's eventually going to be on the bike and and be roaming the streets in the neighborhood just like roaming the streets in the neighborhood just like everybody else. I agree with the
fact that if I bought that property and I had young children, I'd want a fence as well. Um, I think we have to look at each case independently upon itself. I know I, you know, I was sidebaring back here with with PMO because my main
concern is what will this do to the next one? But we have to look at each case independently upon itself. We can't compare apples and apples when it's it's something different. And this lot is unique. Um, granted it was a single
rancher that sat on this property before and there was plenty of visibility around it, but it was subdivided and that the building of the two homes in in this area was allowed. And with the fact as long as I'm assured that the site triangle will meet the standards and
there won't be any impeding upon the uh shrubbery or the landscaping that will will cause any additional additional problem. I will uh I will approve it as well. But I think we need to address the bigger problem is the
stop sign issue which has nothing to do with the planning board but it's something we need to look at and address. >> I said I approve. >> Okay. >> Craig said that in the sentence before said I will approve. >> Craig Palomas.
>> Yes. Uh I I agree with everything that Chief said. Um there's a fence for the kids and that's very important. Um there's also a lot of grass from the sidewalk to the fence. There's 11 feet on on the one side on the corner side
and there's 15 ft on the other side on the Honey Avenue side. That's an awful lot which I'm happy to have. And the fence, the black fence that they've agreed to makes the pool disappear. makes it just the fence disappears and
the shrubbery in front of it front of it. It just looks like a shrub glass landscaping area. Um, and for the kids, I think they it's a necessary thing for the fence for them to have a fence there. And it is quite a hardship to have a triangle big block. And I
agree with the other board as I approve this. >> Rich Tollson, >> thank you. Yes, I think that the chief's um explanation was very comprehensive and doesn't believe. I think the
hardship conditions have been met. Um I'm only saying this is a a point of concern for me with so many of the applications that we get. Um again I'm going to reference uh the add amendment to the application building coverage as
low as 22% where 30% is permitted which would allow substantially larger your house by including the pool to footprint in the house is reduced. I get caught up on these things because I don't think you'd build it I don't think anyone this is a general comment
would build a bigger house and not have a pool. Um, it's a shallow reasoning for me. >> It's a shallow >> a shallow fool, too. Um, so I I just wanted to get that to get off my chest. But what I just said, the chief's
comments were comprehensive. We do, some of us, um, have an opportunity to have our voices heard, to address stop sign concerns in the neighborhood. Um, and we can do and will do that. Um, so with all that being said, I approve the
application. >> Johanna, >> um, so I live on Gladstone Avenue um, at the opposite end of the circle. My neighbor across the street >> Oh, your microphone, Johanna, I'm sorry.
>> My neighbor across the street um, has a similar size lot with three small children and does not have a fence. They make a make ample use of their yard. Um, and I think part of the reason why we live in this neighborhood is
because it has like a nice open feel and this is a lot of fencing. Um, so I vote no. >> Heragnum. >> Um, I'll agree with what Chief Adam said. As long as the uh setback for the
stop signs uh are u going to be what they say, I'll I'll agree with the project. Steve Joki. Um, I don't necessarily agree that this is a hardship. Uh, corner lots are corner
lots and there's plenty of room on this on this lot to build a house. Um, the fencing I I believe is a problem. I see. Um, I know this area well. I ride my bike around town a lot and I have to
agree with Miss Henry that it is kind of hairy going around there. Um I think the fence well just last last meeting that we had
um we had we um declined defense. So I don't think I don't think this is a good plan. So I don't approve. >> John Pittz. >> Uh as the resident pointed out, this is
uh this whole area is part of the safe roots to school corridor. We spent a fair amount of money making significant modifications. There are lots of kids that travel uh along those routes to get to the two schools we have in town.
It's a oneway um there a oneway street pretty much have to come down Huntington there. Uh I vote no. >> Motion carries. Six in favor and three. >> Very much playing around.
>> Yeah, we got to give you seven choices. You want to journ up a meeting? >> Oh, yeah. >> Okay. Um, do we not have any other business for the board? So, uh, I get a motion to
reject.