test test e e e e e e good evening everyone it's 602 and this is the historic preservation commission um meeting of Kate May it's uh March 18th 2024 in compliance with the open public meeting Act of 1975 adequate notice of this meeting has been provided if any member has reason to believe this meeting is being held in violation of that act they should state so at this time Pledge of Allegiance please States stand na indivisible andice for all roll call please Mr copelan here Mr Carol here Mr Becker here Mr Stevenson here Mr Tesa here m pagno is absent Miss Wilson strick here Mr Johnson here Mr hamron here thank you um minutes um January 8th and February 15 2024 uh you've had a chance to review those do I have a motion to accept those minut Mr chair Mr chairman I'll move to accept them but I've offered a correction to the minutes of February um 15th the special meeting with respect to the text of the um Special Report excuse me the advisory report being written to the city on the police station and it was several words that simply were um relating to the conditions that were in that advisory report so I would uh Judy do you have the the text for it uh yes since we had only one the motion read motion B my my Mr Tessa to issue a favorable advisory report covering the tower height and it was amended to say issue a favorable advisory Report with conditions regarding the tower height and and that's the way the report was prepared from the draft that we saw so I would offer acceptance of the minutes with that correction I'll second that motion do we have to vote on that motion by Mr Tessa seconded by Mr Becker Mr copelan yes Mr Carol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson yes Mr Tesa yes Miss Wilson strick abstain thank you resolutions there are none applications approved or denied in review you've had a chance to look at those um do I have a motion to accept those I will make a motion that we accept the um things approved and review by the Review Committee I have a second second motion motion by Mr Carol second by Mr Testa Mr copelan yes Mr Carol yes Mr Becker Yes except there are six projects for which I need to abstain goul at 1125 Washington Street all three Iana Yan con projects at 10:45 Washington Street Mella at 11:26 Washington Street and sidel at 112 Washington Street because I live within 200 feet of all of those properties thank you Mr Stevenson yes Mr Tesa yes Miss Wilson stck uh yes with abstaining from uh Delan 10 Congress Street and de Mario 26 Congress Street thank you thank you before we start um this evening uh we have a long agenda and um um by ordinance we uh do not continue the meeting after 10 o' and we do not accept um um the beginning of an application after 9:30 it's hard to tell when we're going to end this meeting tonight so it's a chance that we'll finish on time in the event though um that there's someone in the one of the applicants or two that feel as though it's not a rush and they can wait till next month then I would offer to them that we will put them on the top of the agenda for next month and they won't have to sit um through a couple of hours of other people's testimony so give us some thought if you want to take advantage of that opportunity just let me know um if if um you're not sure and you want to wait to see how this goes then um at some point just raise your hand and um we'll acknowledge you and put you on the agenda for next month okay I'm having said that first order of business is Waters 1218 New York Avenue 1131 and 11 and 12 this is a contributing property this is a deck windows and Roofing good evening everyone my name is Dave Schultz I'm a partner with dis Architects I'm a registered architect in New Jersey amongst other states and I live in West Cape May so we were here uh last year for a conceptual review so I think in order in order to save some time I will try to just provide an overview of the application and you probably noticed we want to add a few things to the application that I think will be helpful um excuse me sir could youing could you bring your mic a little closer I'm sorry thank you the house is a craftsman style home as you know it's one of triplet and it's the center piece to uh the three almost identical houses you should have received our package application January 17 2024 as well as the application itself the waters have owned this property since 2004 and they've cared for it along the years and they've done as much as they can and they want to do more now to make it even more compliant and more original so if I can just kind of overview the documents I'm looking at the first sheet is HPC 001 those are the photos we showed you the last time that show the house in its current condition you can see from the bottom left photo it's in the middle of two identical houses with blanket almost identical and all of them are actually pretty good condition page two um shows the uh the neighboring house the upper left is the neighboring house to the right or to the west and then below that is a house across the street just to give you a flavor for the context of the neighborhood I guess you'd call that kind of a cottage Ranch and then bottom right is U our house to the right but to the left of that in gray shingles is a 1220 and it's it's the other third of the triplets the third sheet HP c003 shows the rear of the properties again you saw these before uh the upper left is the waters residence and of course that's where we're planning the the new deck at the rear um which we we received approval exactly a year ago and we received zoning approval last fall uh below that is the the neymaring house to the east just for context and to the far bottom right is the neighboring house to the West um next page HPC d010 is our site plan again for kind of for reference in dark blue is the the footprint of the main house and the shared garage at the rear of the property and light blue is the porch and in Amber is the proposed deck addition which you you approved as a concept approval last year uh the next two sheets are really interior alterations um so I don't know that you care a lot about those so we can go buy those um then we get to the elevation so more importantly um the way the sheets are organized at the top of the sheet in line drawing that's the existing elevation and then below that in rendered version is the proposed updates or Renovations and of course the B the right side of the sheet is our spec sheets you'll see our product information is there and that's keyed into these plans so the differences you can see is the roofing is rendered as Cedar shake or cedar shingle rather and we are proposing an Eastern red uh cedar shingle 18in shingle on all the roads that are currently asphalt um the windows any window that's tagged with a four in a box is an existing vinyl window that we propose to remove and replace with an Allwood window and we're proposing Sierra Pacific Windows that's Allwood and they will be they will be in white they'll be Factory painted but the factory Prime but they'll be painted in white so anything with an E accented is existing to remain those are wood windows U but you can see there's a fair number of Vy windows that were there when the waters purchased the property in 2004 t ni's house it has brick foundations Brook pier and really a beautiful front porch and on the left side you can see the deck Edition next sheet uh HPC 601 is the front and rear elevations again so bottom left is the front so the only thing that's different than it is today is the new roofing shingles and Cedar and windows that are being replaced because they're currently in vinyl and then to the right of that is the rear elevations again you can see the the deck Edition we proposed to match the details on the house brick Piers wood lattice wood trim wood railings and and epe decking and wood lattice work as well the next page is the U that's the the right side of the house so there again it's the same you can see what we're doing it's uh new windows and Cedar Shake Roofing and at the bottom right where it's tag 17 that's the uh outdoor shower that is also proposed in wood and the last sheet are details so top left is our outdoor shower am I is everybody with me am I going too fast no we're okay so uh top left is the outdoor shower that's a detail section cut through the shower it's all wood proposed in Cedar that would be stained with a solid white stain there's a you know sort of vertical plank tongue and groove siding in a frame is how that would be constructed the door would match that and then above that is a cedar pergola with pearlins on top of that so that's the small outdoor shower with a drainage bed across from that to the right is a detail section through the rear deck and that's taken in the Middle where there's access to the basement so there's a three-step step down so you're looking at the side of that section Uh Wood lattice again excuse me painted white um you're looking at the decking if you can see the structure of the decking the wood rail is Beyond in this section um made to look like the the rail that existed with a wood nle post directly below that there's a detail of the nle post and elevation it's a 6x6 post um with a cap trim and of course base trim to to match the details on the house and then to the left of that is the actual rail detail with a wood cap rail wood bottom rail and an inch and 3/4 by inch 3/4 um wood ballister uh throughout below that is the window schedule which was tied into those elevation numbers which we kind of talked about before those just they're matching the sizes that exist and below that are elevations of the actual windows and dimensions and to the left of that is the one new door that's on the rear of the house off the deck from the kitchen and that's a 26x 700 door made by the man uh window manufacturer so it's all going to match um there there were some cut sheets in the application I don't know if you need me to go through those for the product detail I'm happy to do that and if that's if there's questions I can take them now we normally uh go around the room this is uh your presentation is comprehensive thank you I will open it up to questions in a moment um the lce um it's it's pictured on 603 it I'm assuming that that's privacy lattice it it's not solid well I'm sorry it's you're saying do it have a backer board is that what you're asking no it's 25% um um see through 75% material yes that's what that's what that's what it is it's see- through lattice is it privacy lattice not sure what you mean by that that's our definition for a lce is 75% solid and oh 2% see through if they're spaced right um if that's a requirement we'll make sure that's the that's what happens this looks more like 5050 75% solid yeah okay and we it'll be we'll make it part of the motion also your presentation talks about um the windows being painted which is what we look for wood window Prime from the fact right well the spec sheet though talks about um is a long-term durability is in Ed by core guard plus a leading wood treatment against rotten and insects um that gives me a bit of pause it seems like that's more of a vinyl type product rather than than a than a painted wood it doesn't say painted the the product that we specified is is Factory primed it's all wood it's all wood wood this product here I think I think the cor guard is a is a treated wood so we have a paint paint over a treated wood if I'm understanding correctly I'm looking for that cut sheet well here's here's the the issue the cut sheet actually says clad however your window schedule on 603 clearly states that it's exterior white painted oh here it is um so there's a conflict between the cut sheet and your window schedule not that sheet the next one one with the arched window on it there might be an application on the wood that safegard for for the future I'm not even sure why that yeah that should just be deleted I think the one that's clouded is the one that we're proposing and your window schedule is clear it's clearly well wait a minute it's this does not say painted this this talks about some kind of material um a Timeless with the exceptional thermal performance as with all our wood productss long-term durability is ensured card plus a leading wood treatment against rot and insects it's just a treated lumber yeah it's not a clad window it's a wood Window Factory well see because it says like all our wood products yeah well that means that door clad is a wood product by or Door Guard rather I think I mean you can we can certainly specify that they be all wood windows and they be not clad and paint yeah I can assure you that's what that's what we're proposing all wood we can make that really clear painted is acceptable yeah some other uh material is is not and we are going to need I totally understand we're going to need clarification totally understand that that would be our if you look at some of the other manufacturers they clearly talk about prime I think this manufacturer is new to us if I'm if I'm recalling I don't remember seeing this manufacturer before so okay but Mr Schultz you're proposing as a condition of any approval that these are going to be all wood factory painted non-cloud windows correct that's correct and that's our understanding and that's the client's understanding so you may recall we had the manufacturer bring in a sample of Sierra Pacific last year sat in the back of the room for a couple of weeks that's what this window is and I would also in your defense like to point out that your window schedule clearly says that these are painted exterior windows yeah I I I thought this was an approved window manufacturer the problem is you just submitted one document in your cut sheets that indicated clad you want to get that out of the second page we should delete well just so there's no confusion in the future because we have a compliance officer that visits the properties and if you wind up with a whole house full of wood windows that are other than painted they're going to have to come back out so it's the clarification is for your benefit yeah underst I'll make sure that we correct that um with that I'll open up to the U commission members does anyone have any questions or observations about this application I would like to speak a little bit about page 603 where you're showing a railing system on the back porch and it looks to me like this is a little lighter weight railing system than is common with the three bungalow houses that you have on the front uh we generally suggest that you use a spacing of three inches between ballustrades and have the ballustrades you know at about the same width so it looks like for the amount of wood is the amount of the opening and that matches that matches the historic way those railings were done I agree that's the way that's the way it should be okay so the ballister thickness is okay but the spacing is too wide that what you yes it it looks to me like you're saying that the bals themselves are supposed to be an inch and 3/4 um oh I'm I'm looking at the height there um they should at least be 2 in 2 in no less than a 3 in opening between that's what we've approved in other instances so no more than a 3 in so what's interesting is in that in your typical railing section two it clearly states ballister space 3.7 3 and 3/4 in so you're spot on yeah yeah I'm sorry you you but you're requesting 3in spacing 3in spacing Max but as John pointed out you're tighter would be the maximum spacing so the drawing doesn't necessarily match the wording so we're looking at the wording right John yeah that's 3 in spacing detail this says 3.75 in so you're saying make it in well but that's the question is when I the spacing is it Center Line or is it the space between them that's the question I would say it's a space between them yeah so just make that three inches and you're fine um and the ballister you'd prefer two inches full two inches in that's what we done before John I think I think I knew that sorry any other questions or observations I just think this is an extremely well put together presentation comprehensive very little to question um even the details of of on your finish schedule the exterior door being painted thank you aside aside from Mr Schultz's presentation I think it should be mentioned that that in in every way as as the issues have been addressed here this is a significant Improvement to the house the the use of the materials such as the cedar the use of painted wood windows all of those are things that are credit to bringing the house up to a better standard thank you thank you do I have a motion I'll make a motion that the application be approved with the additions of did we get got got privacy lattice for privacy lattice for one of the conditions I can go over them really quick uh I heard that the lattice work should be 75% solid as a condition that's one um the noted conflict between the cut sheet and the window schedule the applicants proposing all wood factory painted non-lad windows throughout uh on uh 603 the railing system uh in response to uh comments there is going to be a a ballister thickness uh be a full 2 in with no more than a 3-in opening between each ballister correct I'll second that motion motion by Mr Carol seconded by Mr Becker Mr copelan yes Mr Carrol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson yes Mr Tesa yes Miss Wilson stck yes thank you is this our record thank you very much thank you seen okay next order of business is Adis Inc doing business as lamir beach front Resort 1317 Beach Avenue block 1146 Lots through through 24 6 through 24 this is non-contributing um uh building and a demolition and at the same time time there'll be um the same organization presented for the same location non-contributing this will be to reconstruct the hotel wing and constrict the the rear event Wing so there's two issues same applicants good evening chairman and commission members for the record my name is Keith Davis I'm an attorney at neat Davis and Goldstein um as you may recall we were before the commission on January 9 uh where we started to present this application um we started with the Demolition permit request two aspects to it one related excuse me Mr could you introduce everyone before you thank you so much certainly so seated to my left is uh George Andy who's the here on behalf of Addis the applicant I have Bill MCC who's our project architect and I also have with us Margaret Westfield who we have retained as our historic preservation architect and I plan on asking all of them questions well could we bring a chair then and your your expert could it and if we could turn the monitor on for uh so that we can do the exhibits we are going to present the the demolition testimony first um but we did think it was important to at least show the members of the commission what structure is going to be replacing the 2B demolish structures because it gets to point 6 of your design standards which is the impact on the historic preserv I know but we have two applications one is a demolition we deal with that separate and distinct uh well I'm going to present just that aspect of it so that the board has an understanding we know you all have the plans they've been submitted as part of the application it's separate and distinct we deal with can vote on them separ separate applications there's nine points you have to make on a demol understood and um we will have a separate um motion um and vote and so I'd like to council do I understand you to be saying that in order to present the demolition application you need to make reference to and support that demolition application with material from your your subsequent application is that what you're saying that that's right Mr Testa yeah I think it's material to the application it's up to the chairman to rule but I understand what you're what you're saying I think it's very difficult to make a determination as to particularly point six the impact of the removal on the historic district unless the commission knows well what's going to go when it's place no I I disagree what what what that part means um number seven or whatever it is six um is that um we want to know by removing it what is the impact we're indifferent as to what's going to be replaced at this point point and so um well you have to bear with me but we've been doing this um for 15 years and U we have never had an exception and I don't suggest we start one now so the issue is if you want to demolish something you have to satisfy will this Commission of those nine points so chairman with all due respect this is our application I have a court reporter here who was taking down these proceedings to in order to establish a record uh before this commission um respect what each and every one of you do know that you are volunteers and you're giving of yourselves and your time to make sure that these historic preservation commission District standards are adhered to um but I need to create a record and what I believe is also relevant to the application we're presenting to you I promise you it will take no more than 60 seconds of our presentation as part of the demolition to merely ask Mr MCAS if what is before you is what is ultimately going to be constructed vote on the Demolition and then I'll come back and I will have him provide additional testimony in more detail as to what the conceptual revie the president and I'm not comfortable with we can I make a comment here Mr chairman I I I think that uh what the chairman is pointing to the way that the HPC bifurcates these applications and historically I think the Focus has been on what's there and the impact of that removal in the district and then you can follow up on the next part of that with look at this wonderful building we're proposing or whatever the application is um the bifurcation makes sense but I I don't think it's entirely irrelevant to bring that up but the the weight of the uh evidence that you're going to put on the record here should be focused on the building that's out there um and should not spend much of any time on what's you're going to replace it with because the standards kind of really want to know what's there what's its relation to the district how is its removal going to impact the district in the surrounding area so I'm not going to prevent you from making a record uh Mr Davis but I I think what the Chairman's concerned about is just keeping it to what's relevant to that part of it so with that that I'm we're making a record here and I want to give everybody a chance to be heard but we should keep it to what's relevant to each each portion of this all right can I call Mr Andy first Mr Andy are you through are you the authorized member of Addis yes and um Addis owns um all the structures that are the subject of the demolition uh permit application request that's before the commission yes um and uh are you familiar with the beach house structure which is part of the demolition request I am and um Addis purchased that property is that right correct um approximately when um in your estimation was that structure built uh around 2001 2002 and with respect to the aspect of the demolition permit that seeks to demolish a portion of the laam mer Hotel structure obviously Addis owns that and operates the hotel correct correct and you're familiar with that structure yes um and that structure that aspect of it that we're seeking demolition first of all is it is it heated uh it is not it's not winter I so come coming the winter time we do have to shut down operations there uh just because it's exposed at the time we had to build to the crown of the road which was a big um which was a big focal point during the application back in 98 and because of that it's not winterized everything's exposed underneath and we do shut it down because of that and do you know approximately when that aspect that portion of the hotel building was constructed started in '97 completed in '98 okay um and in order to you're you're asking to demolish these structures in order to expand the hotel correct correct and that's all reflected on the plans that Mr mcle prepared that are submitted as part of the application yes that's correct okay any questions for Mr Andy before I turn to Mr MCC anyone no I i' just like to see you make the points you need to make you have nine nine points to make I have them right here in front of me thank you I even put a sticky on it this time to make sure I had them so Mr MCAS you're the architect that's been engaged by Mr Andy and you submitted the plans that are part of this application correct that's that's correct okay um first there's two structures that we are proposing to demolish one is the beach house correct correct 1318 New Jersey Avenue and the second is a portion of the laam mer existing Hotel structure right which we describ as the South Hotel wing all right I'd like to Mark a document into evidence which I'm going to Mark as exhibit a one um and I'll ask you to just identify it for I'm distribute this to all board members if you wouldn't mind passing that down sir uh can you just identify what A1 is and what those plan sheets show um A1 is copies of a demolition and construction permit for the uh 1318 New Jersey address which is also known as the beach house correct and what does it show it shows that a demolition permit was issued in August of 2001 for the original structure and a new construction permit was issued if I'm reading this right the same date uh for a new construction so does that actually I'm sorry these are all demolition the proposed I don't see the proposed in here it's just demolition is that proposed that is proposed okay so I'm going to Mark as A2 so you just identifi the demolition permits as A1 under the mark As A2 this document hand this out to the commission members what does this show this is the uh permit applications or actually a copy of the actual permit for construction of a new uh two family dwelling and that was issued 827 2001 okay and based upon your review of that is it your uh opinion as as an architect that the beach house was constructed in or around that time frame that's correct okay um I know you submitted as part of a revised plan set um and let me first indicate you you've had the opportunity to come before the commission to have the application reviewed I believe at least twice now informally correct uh that's correct during the review sessions to review the the demolition application and the propos and you submitted new plans correct we did and as part of that did you go through the analysis of the nine uh criteria that are outlined in the demolition section on page 63 of the standards uh we did for both uh the beach house as well as was the South Hotel wing all right starting first with the beach house sure I'm sorry how many pages is so the stapled version A1 has three sheets associated with it I'm sorry four and A2 is just one page okay thank you okay thank you certainly so did you analyze the criteria in your written submission we did can you recite to the board how we have identified each of the criteria sure um so with starting with the New Jersey Avenue property 1318 New Jersey Avenue um for um item one it's historic architectural cultural and aesthetic significance um obviously you're looking at the construction permits um the building is approximately 24 years old um the report from the uh commission indicates that it's a non-contributing structure um consistent with the fact that it was constructed in 2001 the the uh commission's report also the historical survey also shows that it was of an indeterminate age so obviously the the construction permits here kind of answering that question for us um so that kind of reinforces the fact that it was not a historic structure um as it is 25 25 or less years old with regard to number two its current potential use for the purposes currently permitted or proposed uh it it exists today as a two family uh dup Le Lex structure which is operated as transient lodging by uh Lam mer the beach uh beachfront Resort um it could certainly continue in that effect uh however the proposed use that we'd be looking at it would not be suit suitable for as the proposed use that we're considering is banquet space which requires larger column spans which would not be possible uh given the configuration of the building and obviously its construction type uh with regard to number three importance to the municipality um and the extent to which it's historical or architectural value is such that removal will be detrimental to the Integrity of the district while um we see the building as a well-maintained uh period influence structure it is as noted in the survey is a non-contributing structure we don't see that the absence of this structure would necessarily be a detriment to the historic district on the whole we do understand from several meetings that we've had of the nature and importance of this structure and it really is in regard to that transitioning that you had mentioned before transitioning from the C3 hotel motel District to the R2 District that is on the opposite side of New Jersey Avenue and with the plans that we've submitted you've attempt to replace that with another structure that you believe will act as a transition understanding that approach for this property uh in in that Arrangement 2001 we did seek to take that same approach with our development of the proposed that's correct and you're going to explain that in further detail when hopefully we get to conceptual review we certainly will okay um with respect to number four unusual uncommon design or craftsmanship I wouldn't say that there's anything unusual or uncommon about the property itself again well-maintained um well-appointed structure but I don't think that there's anything that's demonstrated in this structure with regard to craftsmanship or construction or um construction technology that would be of Merit that is worth saving here versus any other typical construction that could be found within the past 25 years uh within the city so uh moving forward to number five the extent to which its retention would increase property values promote business um I don't think that retaining this property is going to increase property value for the district uh for this neighborhood the existing properties on the north side of New Jersey Avenue are all well maintain um properties shingle style properties in good condition uh I think it's a strong um representation of that style and the the neighborhood in and of itself has a character and context um this property being a non-contributing property of common construction I don't think um furthers that I think that um removing it would not be a detriment to those adjacent properties with regard to number six the impact of its removal on the historic district um this property uh again non-contributing property um certainly is complimentary but I don't think that it is deleterious to the historic district by removing it I think it's an example of a style but I don't think that it enriches the district um I would I would even consider whether it potentially dilutes some of the older structures that may be in the area because it is um kind of paying homage to and representing the style but is not in fact you know of that age um with regard to number seven the structural soundness and integrity of the building we didn't find anything that was um structurally deficient in the property however um the structure itself and the configuration of the way it has been designed and framed it does not lend itself to the proposed uses that the owner intends to pursue um and I think eight and nine are not applicable here because we're not seeking to relocate the structure all right I have some questions from Mrs Westfield um and I'm going to mark this as A3 this a curriculum V for Mrs Westfield which microphone you here you want to use yours thanks s up here okay thanks um so Mrs Westfield I I I think this is your first opportunity uh to appear before the HBC here in Kate May City could you just uh give the commission a little bit of background about yourself and summarize what I've marked as A3 absolutely my name is Margaret Westfield I'm a registered architect in the state of New Jersey have been for the past 35 years I'm a historic architect specifically I work exclusively with historic buildings and new construction within the context of historic districts I served as the state historic preservation architect underneath uh in the historic preservation office under uh Governor Christine Whitman I've served on the historic sites Council I've been the historic architectural consultant to numerous hpcs throughout the state I developed the design guidelines for the Main Street New Jersey program as well as for nine other municipalities and um I guess that's it okay that's enough um and you heard Mr mcc's testimony as to the criteria and the HPC uh standards correct I have um you're familiar with the beach house correct I am have you personally gone through it I did and do you have any and you also are familiar with what I marked as A1 and A2 which are demolition permits and construction permits yes um do you have an opinion as to whether or not this is a contributing structure within the district absolutely the reason that I was gotten involved with this project is because the uh property report that was that is part of your surve is is very misleading it's um this building I've walked through it is all of One Piece At All Dates to 20012 2002 I looked in the crawl space I went up in the attic I looked at the framing there is no remaining portion of the 1950s Rancher that previously sat on this site and um the uh the although the survey correctly says that is non-contributing it kind of raised the question of could this in fact be a mid 19th century building and the answer is no it is not but it was L designed and that's why she was misled I've done property surveys you know bur Wide Property surveys Citywide surveys before and it's you know as you move from one building to the other it's very easy to come draw uh conclusions that may not be substantiated with further research so we did further research and that's how we have presented in front of you the um the demolition permit and the new construction permit that that clarifies that the why this is in fact a non-contributing building and it's one that is that does not um add to the significance of the district in any way and you're familiar with the criteria for a demolition permit I am and you heard Mr mccc's testimony did you take any issue with this testimony or anything to add to it no in fact he and I collaborated on the responses that were he presented okay um the second aspect of the demolition relates to the La Mer structure as Mr Andy indicated a portion of that is to demolished correct have you also analyzed the criteria under uh the standards for that aspect of the demolition we have all right what's your opinion with respect to that um so uh we'll go through the criteria again I guess um starting with number one historic cultural and aesthetic significance um the property the South wing of the of the hotel complex is a non-contributing structure obviously outside of you know the period of interest for um for our area um the proposed demolition is one-wing of the overall building um which shares a pretty similar and consistent aesthetic all the way around the building so where this building to be removed that aesthetic and style is still consistent and maintained throughout the balance of the property uh with regard to number two the current potential use for those purposes currently permitted um the existing building is obviously a hotel use transient lodging um it's challenged by the fact that there is inadequate HVAC at as Mr Andy's kind of already pointed out furthermore and probably almost more importantly the floor levels for this South Wing do not align with the balance of the building and the balance of the complex and therefore POS POS challenges with regard to operation and ADA compliance so um the primary thrust again for this uh Venture really is to build those back at the same elevation so it's um consistent floor line through throughout uh with regard to number three the importance of the municipality um I don't think that there's any um historical importance to this South wi to the public or to the municipality um we are rebuilding it and it will be rebuilt in a very similar fashion consistent with the balance of the complex so um no significant deviation there uh number four um the extent to which it is of such old unusual or uncommon design or craftsmanship again I think this is probably um probably a style that you see throughout New Jersey along Coastal communities uh block and plank hotel construction um Not Unusual not uncommon very very um common to see it up and down the New Jersey coast number five the extent to which the retention of this property would increase property values promote business um we would put forward to you that reconstructing this would actually promote business because it's going to make it more usable to obviously disabled public and again allows us to incorporate other uses into the properties which is what the owner's um intent is at the end number six the impact of its removal on the historic distri district um we find that the removal and replacement of the structure would have no appreciable impact on on the historic district um number seven this structural soundness and integrity um we've kind of already touched on while the structure is sound we do have to deal with those issues with floor changes it's something that would we'd like to have resolved and improves things operationally improves things from Ada standpoint also allows us and reconstruction to bring it into compliance with the flood plane requirements and uh again number eight number nine we're not seeking to relocate the structure so they do not apply Mrs Westfield um you heard all that testimony from Mr MCC I did you also toured the South Wing I did uh of the lam mer complex right um do you take any issue with Mr MC's test do you believe that aspect of the demolition affects structure that is similarly non-contributing to the district I do that's all we have as to the demolition aspect of the application I do want to remind the board that you actually did take a vote on the beach house at the January meeting so initially we're asking to reconsider that um the survey as Mrs Westfield indicated had Lang language indicating that the structure dated back to the 1950s we think we've demonstrated through A1 A2 the testimony of Mr MCAS and Mrs Westfield that that's clearly not the case this is a structure that was built in the early 2000s um and secondly we ask that you uh consider the demolition request for the portion of the lam mer structure whether you decide to take that in one or two votes I leave that to your sound discretion but that's all we have on the demolition as a as a point of um of geography think we ran across this last time did most of us think of Beach Avenue as running East West and New Jersey is running East West and Pittsburgh and Trenton has running north south so I think of the wing you want to demolish as your West Wing and not your South Wing because if you do that I think it's the whole building in the center okay so so but but I did I did look at the plans I know what you're seeking to demolish understood I just can't get it out of my head when the geography goes the demolition site plan which was included within your packet U just for everyone's Clarity this this is the wing that we're looking to demolish the hotel and the beach house is on the upper that's correct the beach house is upper right and that also shows why you guys are confused because the north arrow is actually at an angle so you can go either way he's going one way and you're going the other way in in the there's there's a reason why this is referred to as the East End of Kate may it moves East West um would would you like me to make a motion or you want to have debate over it or whatever I'd like to just make a few remarks before we do that uh since the meeting that we had with the full board we did have a uh a meeting with John and I think Kevin where we met with the Architects and the engineers and uh you know tried to get a better understanding as to what was going to be proposed there because that was the hangup I mean it's not so much that there was worries about violating the demolition permits it was just you you know what is going to happen there that would be very much out of keeping with what you have also expressed as the you know kind of the New Jersey standard for construction which is not really Kate May's standard for appearance of buildings so I I would say we did have a a pretty good meeting on that and I'm sure we're going to hear a lot more about that in your proposal just want everybody to know that that meeting took place and that was one of the biggest considerations glad you we all happy about that one um yeah before we have a motion I I appreciate you're going through the accepting the position that we want to hear demolitions independent um and I think um um your presentation is clear we didn't officially accept you as expert testimony but um I think it it's for foregoing conclusion that we accept you as the confusion however um uh was that um 24 25 years ago when this building was built the idea was to provide a buffer between a the back of a commercial U building to the back door neighbors the other side of the street which are um for the most part contributing structures and it was at it was at that softness that we um uh were reluctant to approve in my estimation the demolition not because it was built during um the period of significance but because it um reflected a softening between a hard back commercial building and buildings that were built during the period of significance so uh it it was an exception it was an unusual position um and uh I'm I'm reluctant to um approve something like that not again so it's clear is we're looking for that softness so should this be approved then we will clearly look for that on the next phase which you wanted to do to begin with but is not appropriate so um with that do a do I have a motion I I had a question okay chairman um you know it's not an historic structure but it really is a visually striking building that fits perfectly into the fabric historic fabric of this community even though it's not historic have you ever explored the option of maybe relocating that building whether by selling it or moving it yourself I don't believe that has been explored um I don't know that it could well as an option to demolition that's my question yeah sure I to do it you you need first of all the F ratio for that you need basically a double lot which you know you're talking economically it's just not really feasible but if I may want to back up real quick to address Mr Copeland all the buildings that we've done are constructed after that beach house went up so the building that we built in 98 that was the only one that was there existing when the beach house went up in 2001 the main building was built in 2006 the laundry building was done in 2010 and then the restaurant was done in 2019 so this whole commerci commercial aspect we didn't appear until mid 2000s so this is way after so any talk about buffer you're really not taking into consideration the timeline of when we actually started doing the add-ons it timeline is is interesting but the fact is it does provide a buffer that that was that was the point between a a hard commercial building and and the neighbors across the street so that was that was the point of our last meeting and that was that was the point of the denial not not that it was historic or not a timeline but but that it provided a a softness to these neighbors that have historic buildings do we have other questions or comments well I mean it's a question do you want to hear before after the motion I can make a motion and I can talk about it I can talk about it now uh I mean us usually I would make the motion and then we would talk about it but that's fine I'll I'll I'll say that let's make it a little bit easier um because we have two demos really right um and so let's take the second Demo First with a with a motion and a vote so the the the demo of the wing first all right I would I would I would move that we approve the demolition application for the west wing also known as the South wing of uh of L property I'll second that motion motion by Mr Tesa seconded by Mr Becker Mr copelan yes Mr Carol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson yes Mr Tesa yes Miss Wilson stck thank you think would you like the second motion um would you like me to speak to the second motion's whatever you like can I make one comment if you don't mind just to the point of the the appearance factor and how that ties to the the properties across the street maybe another way to think about it is what does it look like in the absence of that structure and if that structure were missing today if that were not there just just a what if essentially the back of that property would be a large parking lot and service yard and that's that's that bu that building to some degree I think it you know provides that that connectability to to the historical structures across the street it's the only thing along that back that actually does that well because of the the appearance of it that that's exactly why we think it is relevant and germine and very much appropriate for you as commission members to look at the structure we are proposing to replace the beach house with so you have an understanding that we've attempted to incorporate a addition that we think does offer that transition and that we went through two informal meetings um it was a very blank facade that was originally proposed that is not what we are proposing now you have those plans Mr mcccc has provided testimony onto it and and we ask members of the commission to look at what it is being replaced with in the context of the demolition permit even though I know chairman Copeland doesn't I I I understand his comments and I take it in the spirit that they were offered but that's number one number two and and I'm sure we're not going to agree on this but I do want to State it for the record your ordinance indicates that in considering permit applications the historic preservation commission shall not consider use zoning requirements for setbacks density height limitations or lack coverage in finding appropriateness as those fall within the purview of the planning board and the Zoning Board of adjustment that use that is um there on the property now and the use that we're proposing um is a permitted use within the zoning District that we don't believe are you into are you into the are you into the second application or are we going to talk about the demolition of the 13 18 Beach so Mr hammer and asked the question is it going to be replaced with well yeah I understand but I really don't want to get into a debate with you but well it's also true that we consider streetscape views as well as other things and streetscape is how you see it from the street so you can call it density you can read the ordinance but this commission has jurisdiction over streetscape and that's a principal concern I'll get to that when we get to your your your second proposal I can deal with your application for demolition but I don't need to know right now about what you plan to do because I can see that in the second application I think my point in in raising my question was simply that if if you were the neighbor across the street looking across the street at the property the only thing that today you know allows you to to feel that you have a streetcape that is consistent with your own buildings and comfortable to look at and so on you know um aesthetically pleasing is that building the rest of it is a parking lot a parking garage and some service structures that's and I think you're I think you're absolutely right that that there has to be buffering involved here and and the lack of the of the of the uh structure and it's being demolished does eliminate was once a what was once a buffer does it mean that there can't other buffers that's that's that's where I'm coming on this and our position is there going to be a new buffer and we'd like to present that to the and you need to convince us of that but I I mean I can make the motion I can not make the motion but I want to make a comment on the on the presentation relating to the the beach house demolition I I think that you have accurately characterized that as a non-contributing structure um I don't think unless there's a compelling reason that we um uh that we have to deny applications for non-contributing structures that we ought to um move in that direction and and and be more and and do more of that I also think that on the preponderance of the evidence of the factors that have been testified to and reinforced that you've made the case for a demolition of that beach house structure I I believed that before um I believe it better now because you've made made better testimony than you did last time so that's that's my view of the of the application in so far as it concerns the beach house that's how I intend to vote it's how I voted last time um before we um accept a a motion for demolition two separate distinct motions regarding the beach house portion um just to be thorough in our examination is there anyone in the audience or in the public um that has a question about this beach house Demolition and no public um showing interest um I would start with a motion to accept the demolition of the second property did we just do that yeah I'm sorry we did did we do the wing we did The West Wing we did the wing I'm sorry you mean now you're doing the be you mean the beach house beach house so 1318 New Jersey Avenue which is the house the two family house sorry say then I'll make that motion okay do I have a second second motion by Mr Testa seconded by Mr Stevenson Mr copelan um as we mentioned at our last meeting this is a unique situation for demolition um um before this commission um and so I preface my my vote with a comment that should this um be approved um by this commission that we in fact will look very strongly at the replacement building to make sure um the burden will be on the applicant to demonstrate that the new structure will be as sensitive um to the community and to the neighbors in particular and um given that U then I will vote yes thank you Mr Carol I will vote Yes as well Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson yes Mr Tesa having already explained my position vote yes thank you Miss Wilson strick I will vote Yes uh I but I wanted to clarify that the survey as Mrs Westfield mentioned was somewhat misleading and so when we looked at it last time I couldn't vote Yes I also disagree about point six I think that demolishing it removes a transitional element that softens and I just want to go on the record as saying I have reservations about that but I'll vote yes thank you all right May may we move forward with the conceptual review yes so I'll turn back to Mr MC I know we've submitted updated uh plans uh correct that's correct and that resulted from two informal meetings that you had with the commission that's correct all right um can you walk the board the commission through what the nature of the improvements are um what's going to be demolished obviously now what's going to replace uh the demolished structures sure so uh if you turn your attention to the screen what we have shown is the proposed site plan for the property what's the she number the sheet number is HPC 0.01 and was included in the submission um the intent here really is to um as we discussed demolish both The West Wing of the hotel and the beach house in order to provide space for an addition to the hotel complex which allows for Bank space and to reconstruct and modernize the 51 hotel rooms that formerly held the position of the West Wing So you see the 51 rooms located here the banquet facilities basically located in an L shape here um these um additions have been done um and have been modified in several iterations from the initial submission that was made at the end of 2023 um and to walk you through New Jersey Avenue across the top of the page you'll see um this hotel Wing which I guess would be the north Wing uh that projects out to New Jersey Avenue which is existing the proposed addition for the banquet facility would be immediately adjacent to that but set back slightly from that Frontage so today this is a 20 foot set back here I believe we are at 30t here um that leg comes down um and we basically honor the majority of the beach house property um with garden and buffer landscape space so um for instance where there was a driveway here before that's being filled in to allow us to contain or excuse me to continue a landscape buffer which starts basically at their West property line and runs all along New Jersey Avenue on the south side up to a new entry drive here um that entry Drive being loading facilities for the property uh this l-shape again is the banquet space so service facilities here proximal to the Loading area and the actual banquet facilities back here against the balance of the property uh some I believe I'll just say several feet scores of feet from the from the property line um and then we have again to the immediate West the hotel Wing here which through several iterations of revision which we can look at further you'll see we've tried to um articulate and kind of take that same transitional approach that was used on the beach house property on this property as well again borrowing um tools such as proportion scale and Rhythm to to break the addition up before you go to that you said certain driveways are being eliminated to New Jersey Avenue how many so uh just to kind of reiterate that this was a former driveway to the parking lot which is being eliminated and the existing beach house property has two driveways today so on one on either side of the property so those are being removed and so where we had let's say three two at the beach house and one here we are eliminating three and and I gu putting back one so that's a net loss of two driveways and that allows you to provide a uh more continuous landscape buffer some uh I'll say 20 feet approximately from this drive to the Western Property Edge okay the overall the overall width of the proper is about 300 the overall width of the property to Pittsburgh is 400 400 that's correct uh so taking you through the plans um this would be the first floor plan so if you are familiar with Lam which I'm sure you all are um you enter the property off Pittsburgh Avenue right here into what amounts to a drop off space for the hotel um our proposal um exists here and over top of the parking area here this is kind of hard to point with the touchpad um so the to the event space would be located here off of the existing parking lot um the portion of the building that is closest to um New Jersey Avenue is relegated to um service facilities so basically dark uses no um no windows no it's not going to be a burden on the um on the on the street or Jason neighbors it is a loading area there is um three frontages to this property so there's only so many places a loading area can be located um and so that is why this primary function is here here in the what I'll call the peach area you'll see is lounge space which is basically we're entering for um for vents you're entering here and then you're circulating up either via elevator or stair um taking you to the second floor again you'll see this is in Gray is the existing property the white areas that you see here are actually attic space because the existing building has uh floor to floor Heights of some 9 foot and change we are introducing attic spaces so that we can have obviously higher ceiling areas in um some of these Hospitality spaces so uh to the immediate left of the plan you'll see the hotel rooms for the second floor located along here and again that elevator and stairs circulating up to the next level so taking you to the third floor you'll see the spaces in yellow that's the core of the banquet function so we basically have two rooms here each that can service approximately 100 people 110 people uh with kitchen support space here connected by a Carter and then pre function space here so um guests are coming up they're Gathering here for um pre function cocktail space Etc and then the actual event is happening in here this is um primarily being geared towards uh wedding venue and we've stipulated in our submission to the plan we've submitted an application to the planning board correct that's correct we've stipulated it's not going to be used in the summertime months correct that's correct um again hotel rooms along the western or left side of the plan that you see there there's no gain to the hotel rooms that it's a that's a wash that's a 51 units being removed 51 units being replaced um one of the things to point out to you um along the lines of trying to break this um addition down obviously this leg has been broken into a module that you know is consistent with the type of construction from the period in terms of the width of the frontage in here with approximately I'm going to say 30 feet I might be a little bit more than that then it's stepped back to an area here with it's approximately 65t Frontage which is on as I pointed out earlier a lawn or landscape space which is concealed by quite a heavily buffered uh landscape area in the front yard and I believe in that uh submission we did provide a landscape plan from the landscape architect um and then at the not not to this commission not to this commission no okay um then we can certainly provide that it has been provided to planning board I guess is what I'm thinking of so um the Northern end of the hotel Wing we have a bump out shown here that again is an attempt to break down the scale of this hotel wing and the scale of the hotel block itself this is pretty close to the original dimensions of the beach house in terms of Street width and when we go to the elevations you'll see how we Tred to uh again use that method of um seeking to provide a transition between the commercial property and the neighboring properties um so going up to the fourth floor again these white spaces that you see are all attic areas above the the banquet space and then again hotel rooms along here on the western edge so uh and one other thing to point out this bump out portion of the hotel Wing is actually one story lower um so that's two stories over parking as opposed to the balance of the hotel Wing which is three stories and which is comparable to the existing which is also three stories over parking so um getting into the exterior um you'll see an overall elevation from Pittsburgh Avenue here um largely existing obviously the addition is on the other side of this wing of the hotel but you do see some treatment internally facing the parking lot for the event center entry um the excuse me um South elevation facing Beach Avenue um the area immediately to all the way to the left would be the hotel Wing that is being demolished and reconstructed generally in the same footprint at the same number of stories and the intent here really again is operational and um modernization dealing with the HVAC dealing with the ADA compliance um this building aesthetically will look very similar to what is there today and is intended to tie into the overall aesthetic of the lam mer property so in EN large plan here you can see obviously each of the units facing Beach Avenue is going to have a large slider they are separated with um columns which I think we included material for in the materials package railings fronting the balconies and then we are treating the roof with a uh parit uh pent roof with aluminum standing seam which again matches the balance of the entire property moving forward to what's probably of most consideration is the elevation facing New Jersey Avenue so if I can zoom in here a little bit what Sheet's that this is HPC 2.03 or I guess let's not zoom in because it's enlarged right above it so the existing building you see here this is the existing hotel portic casair with its roof this is the existing portion of the north Wing which projects out and from this point over is the new addition so here we see the 30 foot wide um service Wing which is shown here in a larger scale uh which we've gone back and um after meeting and with the Review Committee discussed um varying approaches for this we've introduced Windows we've introduced a lower pent roof line over the loading area to try to reduce the scale of this building um and introduced two garage doors um instead of the initial single uh I think 18t wide door that we actually probably more than 18 ft that we those are the two steel garage doors you show in the cut sheets that's correct so um further back here um is what we would call the banquet area this is the portion of the building which is set back probably I I believe between 60 and 70 ft from the property line You'll see here some detail on it um in the colored elevation um which we can zoom in on a little bit um and the thought really here was this was to celebrate um um celebrate the spaces that are behind it right so we have large Gathering spaces behind it so we put large windows we figured it's pretty far back from the property line so we wanted something to kind of articulate this facade again we're carrying a Cornus all the way around all of the wings of this addition to reduce that scale once again um we've introduced a water table around all of the areas uh of the addition and um again broke it up with fenestration and took the similar approach to what was used on the existing building with faux balconies and and railings in front of Windows we're kind of taking that same approach here on the banquet area we're taking it here over top of the loading area and again kind of as a play introduced windows at the fourth floor which kind of work along with the cornice that's being added to um almost mimic a a um a cornice or a freeze so lastly we'll talk about the hotel Wing which you can see probably better here um it does still have parking below it as you know we need to meet our parking requirements um however what we've done is try to screen off areas of the parking that we could between structure here and here and then from the second floor up you can see we've got um we've got divided windows with shutters we took the center portion here and projected it out from the hotel Wing again to try to again borrow from the spirit of the beach house articulating that with both column surrounds railings dropped beams and again with the sliders behind um and that is accented with a standing seam aluminum roof and um dropped beams at every floor and then again the standing seam up at the top of the hotel Wing itself overall so that kind of summarizes I guess we can look at the west elevation which is the interior sidey yard elevation um which not surprisingly similar to what the previous was with balconies in front of each of the hotel rooms large sliders again with the railings columns between the units and standing seam roof above the overall finish of the hotel Wing or the overall finish of all the properties is a combination or all the areas of the addition is a combination of either stucco or what I should probably more accurate call exterior instulation finishing system um or Hardy plank um wide exposure CLA side the windows themselves um with the exception of larger window areas which I think we have to work with an Anderson product the balance of them are um vinyl windows to match the vinyl windows that are on the balance of the hotel building itself um and I think that kind of largely addresses how the building's approached overall from a conceptual standpoint but I'm happy to um entertain any questions you might have and maybe we should flip back to this elevation 3D 3D oh actually that's a good point so further in our set we have several uh 3D views of the property um this would be on New Jersey Avenue looking toward the addition uh where you see the hotel here with the porches standing steam roof and columns this is the um banquet space further back in the property and then you have the proposed service Wing here this is the existing um North wing of the lam mer today so you see that setb from the existing to the proposed and then set further back to the banquet and then somewhat further out almost in line with the service Wing is the hotel the Landscaping shown here we tried to be as accurate as we could with species they're they have ornamental Maples as well as uh Evergreens and and um lower level plantings at several levels is a very deep landscape buffer um and we tried to um make the best use of that land that we are creating by eliminating parking the the parking drive and the elimination of the beach house and Addis has retained Belo and Bower as its landscape architect that's correct um and I I don't know if you can access your email but I did email you the plan we submitted to the planning board yeah unfortunately I cannot on here okay but we're happy to supply that we can to the commission and the original proposal that we that we we didn't get to in January but the original application I should say we submitted yes did not have all of the um articulation that you have added that's shown on HPC 3.01 correct that is correct and you did that in response to the Comm receive that was that's exactly correct we had two meetings with the Review Committee um and both were very um informative for us and useful in in trying to find a way that this property can relate to um or act as again as a transition to the established neighborhood or Residential Properties across the street um and also allowed us to design in a way where we could try to maximize that landscape area and use it as a buffer before I turn to Mrs Westfield are there any questions about that presentation Mr mcle you guys get a report from Mr hurles yet for your site plan application I do not believe we have we just submitted it I think last week okay all right we did meet with the planning board informally uh to present the concept met with Mr King Mr hus got some feedback and the plan was just submitted 10 days ago I will say well I my the reason I bring that up is because the elimination of that egress point from the parking lot is a would be a positive consideration for them would be a positive for the street skate but I don't know if that's a positive for parking and safety and erress so it was one of the items that was suggested by Mr heris and it's in part yes okay why in part we incorporated into the design okay I'm sorry is is the testimony now going to be on historic factors relating to this with because I will have other questions yeah what was your question there's another part of the presentation that they haven't finished yet no yeah I'm I'm going to address that that's my my job so you're familiar with the standards you're familiar with the uh factors that go into this development that Mr MCC just described correct yeah and and Mr MCC if you could could you f um enlarge it so it's the top view there yes because that would facilitate my uh discussion HPC 3.01 yeah yeah that that's that's good thank you um so the you're you're kind of looking at the landscape buffer but I'm talking about what you're looking at beyond the L landscape buffer and um specifically I'm talking about your design guidelines your design standards for site placement which is on page 58 and height massing proportion and scale which is on page 59 and the standards that you shared with uh the community there um specifically um the idea that uh standard number four for site placement site new construction to be compatible with the surrounding buildings that contribute to the overall character of The District in terms of setback orientation spacing and distance from adjacent buildings and what we've tried to do in response to the feedback that we got in meeting uh with your design committee is to break up the scale of what is being proposed in both the service wing and the hotel uh Wing by um responding to the character of the beach house um and adding the projecting portion that you see on the right that comes out with with porches with a column columns and ballist with the lower roof line uh with the fenestration patterns and the Rhythm and scale that you you currently uh have in the beach house and we're applying that to this um North no no no West West well no the North End Of The West Wing you go okay to to try to help make a transition uh in massing proportion and scale um between the the wing of the hotel and that commercial use and the neighboring buildings on the opposite side of the street which are much more in character with with this um projecting section that you see here so on when you're looking at at your standards on page 59 standard number one design new buildings to be compatible with the surrounding buildings that contribute to the overall character of the historic district in terms of height size scale massing and proportions and so that's what you see us trying to do here um number two the mass and scale of the new construction should respect the neighbor and contributing historic properties in the streetcape as a whole that was what was driving this design three historic Heights and widths as well as their ratios should be maintained you'll see that we've done that here as well um and preserve significant view sheds which does that one doesn't really apply in fact if anything we're we're trying to um buffer it further uh and then open it up with land do you think we meet all the the standards with the design that Mr MC has described that is that is my professional opinion as a historic architect it's all I have chairman welcome any questions you may have um as a before we open it up for the group um you mentioned a landscape plan we don't we don't have that yeah my apologies I thought it was in there but we certainly can provide it and that landscape plan we will be looking for details um on not just the species but some element of size because as you know you can plant a little stick 50 years from now will be a tree um so I believe they have all the sizes um scheduled on the landscape plan they're mature specimens yep yeah I mean we in terms of establishing a buffer I mean really mature and it's really difficult for me to cast my vote here although we're going to shoot for con you know for a conceptual here um Without Really knowing the guts of that Landscaping plan because I consider it really material to um to to passing on this on this issue um I will say one thing and that is um however that Landscaping plan comes out we have used the device of of supplying a landscaping plan um which is accepted when we give an approval here but we require it to run with the land and we require it to be maintained and we require the city or its design to have enforcement rights with respect to that think of it as a covenant burning burdening the land so so that's the kind of landscaping plan I have involved in mind uh again subject to whatever you've shown it's not just a plant and forget situation I I think we owe it to the neighbors on the other side of New Jersey to be sure that the structure no matter how well it's buffered improved moved back and made consistent I think we owe it to them to have a um um a plan here that's maintained for the future the that issue I I would agree agree with your comments as you could tell from my comments we in fact could deal with that um in the motion with regards to requirement ing approval by the Review Committee um and the other issue the other issue before we just open it up um you're looking for conceptual and you mentioned planning um with regards to the number of parking spaces you need um is that a zoning issue that you have to deal with well happy to answer the question um it's a planning board application because the use is fully permitted um but we are also seeking a c variance for the number of uh parking spaces required which the planning board has jurisdiction over it does not have to go to the zoning board if I remember um Lam mer is pretty well topped out in terms of available parking spaces yeah we've we've um unless you're stacking them up on top of each other parking spaces is off the top of your head we didn't come here to deal with that because not really this is a question for information question for 182 and you said you have 54 units right now and with all these changes there'll still be 54 units 51 51 units correct but you're adding a whole banet facility that's correct and that's going to bring in another big parking request I'm I'm assuming part of our application that seasonal it's seasonal only so it's and we have a traffic consultant David shopshire from shopshire Associates engage he prepared a parking assessment study we've submitted that as part of our application and he's going to have testimony on that issue by seasonal only are you talking about the the only seasonal problem will be during July August or it'll be I'm sorry when outside of the summer season so the banquet facility will only be utilized after Labor Day what do we we the two dates were September basically mid June well the management is familiar with the density of parking in in that area for High season so I understand dining room uh in season the so the only dining room you'll have is that little one on the front corner well there's an expanded restaurant yeah now yeah well is that correct Mr Andy that's a small little restaurant where uh we just gave them permission to the the old restaurant was the question was are you going to use the banquet facility as dining space for your residents in season from June to September no no no and then the the no to answer question no but the event space is only going to be for the guests of the hotel not outside so in other words if you're booking a a web at the bank facility you also have to book a block of rooms in order to secure the space so you're essentially double counting for parking because the people that are going to be using the hotel rooms are going to be parking on site and they're also going to be patronizing the event as time goes by enforcement nightmare with those kind of things it always But as time goes by people forget a lot of these issues um as planning um asked for a um a deed restriction on the things that we that you're now presenting we haven't been heard we haven't had a hearing um for this group um would you for our understanding would you be willing to accept a deed restriction on on use no so it's outside the perview and I don't mean to be short about that it's just outside we submitted outside the purview of this commission that's a use issue if if that comes up in the planning Board review context it might be something that we agree to um but I can tell you that our submission is that it will only be used outside of the summer season there will be a resolution prepared and we surmise that is going to be incorporated as a condition of the approval and if it's violated the owner applicant will be subject to zoning enforcement uh by the city yeah and to address any concerns I mean we've never been in violation of of any we've I think we're the only applicants that go for new construction uh you know three or four times in a row now we haven't had any violations of exceeding any capacities or uh doing anything that we're not supposed to be zoned for so I mean I'm not sure the problem that that I I would see is is not next week or next year or two years but 10 years from now um when all this is constructed forgotten um and uh it is zoning and planning and we're very careful not to U get involved in zoning and planning issues as we would ask them not to get involved in historic preservation issues um but I think it's telling that you're not willing to uh offer them a deed restriction so I they hav't asked for we haven't yeah never came up they haven't gone I asked I asked the question if if they did was he willing to agree to that and he said no I thought you said if we if if we wanted to give it to you as a result of this application the answer is no if it comes up in the context don't trouble yourself you're going to get a covenant with respect to the Landscaping so already but if it comes up in the context of the plan we'll review it we'll consider it it may be something we agree depends on the context of it it it would have to be negotiated with the board and we're willing to do it yeah it depends what the Covenant is I mean you can't just give a blank check we got to know exactly what the covenants are to be and we'll comply you know if it makes sense should we come we just can't give a blank check like that I was just trying to confirm and document what what you said you were going to do that's all and we've always we've had Integrity through and through we've always done what we said and we don't intend to change that so I would consider exceptional review we have seriously based on the planning board's evaluation of all the other issues that they're concerned with and then come back to us with uh what they're going to do to give the proper parking uh all the details like closing in uh all these views underneath the garage areas that would affect the neighbors the the picture showing the landscaping around it make it look pretty nice but it's that it's three stories over a big open thing on pings underneath which is exactly what we're trying to get away from in new construction in the in the K May area are you commenting on the merits of the application uh I'm just trying to understand the nature of your comment to help them keep moving I would say a conceptional review but with a very big warning that this means a lot of things have to get straighten out here before we would ever give a final we we understand it's a you know it's a larger scale project there's a lot of complexity to it so um it's understandable that you know there are considerations and and and that's really why we're looking for conceptual only at this point and then one other thing I just wanted to point out um throughout the overall proposed development the only area that is maintaining still um parking below is under the hotel so the other areas are all the way to the ground all the new areas all all the way to the ground the service area and the banquet space go all the way to the ground the only thing that's up on columns is the hotel the new the the new edition the new hotel Edition well that's one a big I just wanted to make sure it was clear and that's and that's again our motivation for the landscape we had many many discussions about things going up to meet all the new stand we're starting to look like you know the North Carolina coast where sitting sitting up on PS because of flooding conditions there are ways to you know correct that Y unless you think we're not ever involved in parking um we we are considering um exactly things that Tom is referring to and that is um Citywide standards to be recommended to the city council for purposes of considering an ordinance that relates to standardizing under Structure Parking so happens structures like laam mer would be exempt from that at least as we've discussed them so far because it's commercial operation and we understand your need to maximize the use of of your property but we do get involved in and will be involved in talking about barking situation are are we going to comment otherwise on the merits got some coms yeah we to open it to the commission for sure comments so with regard to the north end of The West Wing I concur that you've done a reasonably good job at mitigating the mass of that by virtue of layering of space mainly because you've got a porch so you've got right some depth to the facade corre you've made it almost the width of what the former beach house was almost the height of what the former beach house was you're almost exactly matching the setbacks of all the houses across the street because all the houses across the street are more than 30 feet from the road right so that all kind of with the exception of driving underneath it which I think the landscape might be able to mitigate enough even for pedestrians that I think you've done a pretty good job at and should be congratulated thank you on the other hand the middle wing where the service entran is which interestingly you didn't address in your presentation is I think um a streetscape disaster I can't mitigate you're referring to the steel doors in the open driveway for the service entrance that's only part of it right so that's a massive wall yes there is one setback but notice that the piece you've got on the North End of the of the West Wing is roughly 33 feet wide if I'm scaling it properly but that middle wing with the addition of the um service area is over 70 wide now yes there's a setback in it but the mass of that setback 12 or 13 ft it still will read Because of its proximity to the street only 20t or 30 ft collectively not 70 ft wide it's more than double the width and it's a full story higher it's a four story Mass on the street facing a whole collection of I would say showcase historical structures on the other side of New Jersey further I think um deteriorated by having two m massive steel loading dock doors facing the street now Mr MCC we had I I really appreciate the discussions we had in review because we talked about some other ways that you might be able to mitigate that in terms of where exactly that those loading dock doors are I think that whole middle section and I we could talk about all kinds of great design ideas but you're a good enough designer to figure that out yourself that's the part that I cannot abide the mass and scale of it in terms of Straight From Page 59 of our ordinance right so this is not something I'm making up it in no way in my mind is matches the height size scale massing and proportions of that existing neighborhood particularly the houses across the street and in good conscience um to protect the historical character of that street I cannot approve the current design for that centerpiece um I I appreciate your comments and I understand where you're coming from in that regard the one thing I would point out is um the further we I think taking the wall further back with the loading area um I we were I guess we were drawing a relationship between that wing and the hotel wing and and trying to create a dialogue with regard to their setbacks so taking it further back I feel like maybe creates a little bit of Fusion in the overall massing of the property but but certainly um you know again this is conceptual it's certainly something that we can continue explore I I don't know whether this is consistent with John's remarks or not but I really have an aversion and I think the residents of New Jersey Avenue will have an aversion to a driveway with service areas and trucks driving up to two large steel doors no matter how far you set them back if I had my personal ability to comment on that I would say that that service area for Access needs to be pivoted around and the trucks cannot access it from New Jersey what they do right now right we did talk about that there's a way you could make that happen well there is a way you can make it happen but it would result in being over in impervious coverage I'm sorry I didn't the amount of Paving that we would need to make those turning movements for those trucks so what's white because we don't have a landscap that's Landscaping did I not understand that you applied for variances we have you could apply for a variance could Trying to minimize well I appreciate that but we're trying to keep steel doors in a big driveway and trucks from going in into New Jersey opposite those houses we're trying to protect just one other comment the the the Romeo and Juliet Balcony that's sort of stuck on the front of that four story high wall that is you know roughly the width of a house um I understand and I appreciate that that's an attempt to to m at the scale of that but it almost exacerbates the scale distinction by virtue of the mass of that wall relative to the Teeny tininess of the little stuck on piece of the balcony that's the kind of details I said coming back I I mean I some of the things I was looking at you know there's one one floor that has shutters on some of the windows and all the shutters are not even size to the windows there's so many details that would need to be corrected if in fact the planing board said we're okay with the site plan I think that would be a time we could spend a lot more time sure trying to clean up those details I I don't think we can grant conceptual approval with so many conditions that would I mean I mean I think the discussion here can be useful to you in terms of the thing we're say things we're saying and and there has been an advance here so it's it's not like we aren't making progress but the number of points that are raised here tonight I don't think allow us to vote for conceptual approval approval for this application even as improved before before we go there though um we have some other members of the commission that should have a opportunity to comment um I don't disagree with you but um having said that uh other comments Janice well I had a question um about the Landscaping uh on the pictures that you have one and two you see the existing trees that are buffered are they going to be preserved so um if I can go back to this thing we've a we've agreed that they're going to provide a landscape plan we agree but I just want to know if they're going to preserve the trees uh I just want to understand which trees specifically we're talking about so I'll give you I'll give you an overview of how the landscape plan was approached um obviously we've tried to plant as much as we could through this area so that white area is all planted area that's all plantings um the street trees that were healthy in the eyes of the landscape architect were maintained the ones that were not were to be replaced the Landscaping that is in front of the existing what I'll call North Wing which is in the area of where they currently store their trash and recycling those trees were not shown to be removed so that's exist existing to remain as are the um plantings and trees that are in the existing landscape that um buffers the existing parking lot so those all remain as well okay because they're mature trees and they could help the neighborhood survive this which is going to be quite a test thank you John did you complete your comments couple comments for me um uh bill I think Tom and John said it correctly uh coming to the design committee those two uh times over the course of the last couple months was iterative in kind of pushing us to this point so I think that the plan that we would have seen in January um didn't get to the plan that we're seeing in March without a little bit of you know hard work and kind of collaboration and partnership along the way so when I when I hear Tom and John I talk about the things that are missing which are clear um and I knew that the the doors were going to be something that we hit on you know I I think that it gets back to the idea of the design committee that that you know bi-weekly or every Tuesday meeting where you know in collaboration we could find a time to bring Bill back in and talk through some of those issues and see if there's alternative ideas that can be presented um because I do agree those those doors are going to be I don't want to say prohibitive but a huge challenge yeah I I don't have a problem with that we found it helpful and I again it's a I mean it's a larger scale project than maybe some of the other ones typically see we fully expect that with that complexity there's going to be a lot of back and forth can I ask our attorney if this goes to the planning board do they need a ruling either yes no or uh or uh conceptual they don't need it but I think they're going to want it I think the applicant's going to want it because both the zoning and planning board are going to want to know what does the HPC think of this application so what I was trying to look at was just the dates because it looks like you just submitted to the plan yes so they're going guess in May is there going to be the hearing I was going to say Mr hles is going to do a completeness review you may get some comments back yeah might be another plan change to address his comments so in other words if if we had maybe the applicant had an opportunity to flush out some of these comments at another review committee meeting and then come back next month may maybe for conceptual all right um before before we get ahead of ourselves do we have comments at the other end the table I just had a question regarding uh you've had several meetings with Review Committee and um obviously they gave you recommendations have those recommendations have been incorporated into what we're seeing now yes we believe so maybe not to the exent with the exception of the service yard yeah I think we have as a part of that Review Committee I would say they've partially been included in it not to the full extent and then the issues that were brought up tonight are new issues not issues that were previously no not actually new issues maybe service I think it's the reaction of the whole commission to you know to what was suggested by I'm just saying not knowing what was recommended in review I just want to know if they are in the same boat responding you know the same the whole to the Review Committee the whole thing seemed like a contest of seeing how many people could get in a telephone booth and you know it just it's so crowded on that property as is that you know we're trying to say uh in fact I one thing I would even say the new hotel that's going up well why couldn't that just be three stories that allow all that extra parking go to serve a whole new business that's going to it but now that's planning board stuff I just it is number one and number two we disagree with that assessment we adhere to most of the bulk standards in the zone coverage Etc we think this is an appropriate plan of development and we think the only major variance is the parking and we think we're going to be able to satisfi that and my question is hopefully we're all moving forward together the I mean but but it seems to me I mean my my perception of where we are is that and and it may well be good for you to have conceptual approval with conditions as we would State them but I don't think we're prepared to do that tonight so here's the so so so would you like me to make a motion to table this the next meeting before we do um Jim we we still have we're trying to get around I'm sorry I'm I'm getting I'll just I'll just make a comment because everything that I'm hearing really talks about the parking is a big issue and then if you go to the planning board um and they change the site plan drastically then it's going to clearly change what we do here um and that's my biggest concern you know taking a look at you know this and you know what we look at you know on the back end of everything so um I'm just gonna say that I think it's also important as we go forward here we look at the lighting plan and and others parts of this this application too the lighting plan is in for two reasons one is that you know so much of the activity of the hotel actually now faces onto New Jersey so you're going right into the you again the C the houses across the street um depending on how the lighting plan works and the second part of it is you know we are supporters of the dark sky initiative and all the other things that that go on here as well so that has to be taken into consideration of course one of the things um might be reasonable here because I can't imagine a conceptual motion that's going to capture everything that we've talked about um and it seems appropriate that um we table this until you've had a chance to gain some kind of understanding and acceptance of what it is we've all been talking about and giving you an opportunity to develop a plan that addresses some of those issues so it just seems um we don't know unless we go around the room but it seems like there's there's a chance you won't get conceptu if if I'm understanding the timing you will have at least one more HPC meeting before your planning board procedure goes and and what I'm suggesting is that between tonight and the next HPC meeting if we table this that we'll have a chance to make better progress and give you a conceptual approval with conditions at the next HPC meeting that you can then take to the planning board and say look we've been through the HBC and they gave us the following three conditions four conditions I mean it's clear we've making progress but but I don't but I'm not at a point where we've made enough progress that I would know how to articulate a conceptual approval tonight can I add something to that because the the one of the concerns was uh Mr Becker's concerned about that centerpiece and a lot of comments about that door and I know the app is designing you know the plan for the for the planning board to minimize the extent that you have to ask for relief but if there's some way to solve that door problem with a creative parking solution and maybe it results in an impervious coverage variance but you go in with a request that balances the need for that variance with maybe uh you know wish list of design items from the HPC obviously it's not always that simple it's not that simple and I I'm not suggesting that but if you have to go to two boards it may make sense to see if it's worth exhausting that yeah so coverage obviously relates to storm water impacts that and that has to be assessed so there's other look our goal is to make everybody in Kate May City happy with respect to this plan of development but obviously there are competing issues with respect to the HPC and the planning board and our job is to try to Mel those together as best we can to your point Mr Testa if it's a matter of one month and we can get on that April agenda I I don't think we have any objection to a motion to table but if it's going to be beyond that I to me to me the timing works better for you for us to do that but I do think the the commission yeah that'll be part of it I do think the commission at some point obviously you'll want to take a vote so that the planning board knows of your comments of your intent when we go into the planning board so that no doubt about it about but you you don't want R upon your yeah you don't want my vote tonight all right so do I have a motion to table this until the next Mo motion to table the application here um for scheduling at the next upcoming HPC meeting which is April uh which is April um applicant waving though the statutory period it's April 15th and the applicant consents to that correct yeah as long you just want to make sure and again I know the February meeting was canell so you have a quorum for that meeting for April 15th so but so far you excellent thank you so much so I'll second that motion second it with the invitation for Mr MCC to come and join us on another Tuesday morning or two and we can chat about other design Solutions collectively so that you're not you know we need a motion I I think the motion's been made I need to be seconded okay we need a vot motion by Mr Tesa seconded by Mr Becker Mr copelan yes Mr Carol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson yes Mr Tesa yes Miss Wilson Str yes thank you thank you thank you for your patience tonight thank you thank see you neighbor thank you hey Mar it's good to see you again have have you been right okay we're going to take a it's five minutes to8 we're going to take a five minute break and then we'll meet back here at 8:00 my court report is going to dismantle all your microphones so be out of here by the time you're reconvened yeah thank you thank you oliv maret so are you enjoying the porch over at the end of the other day yeah not going to be yeah I you know I haven't been over there much since the new owners took over maybe twice you oh yeah yeah is just yeah least it's nice to get outside you know oh I used to go there they used to have like a $5 cheeseburger night it was a great cheeseburger for five bucks yeah yeah it went up a little bit yeah looks like an old surveillance like there the undercover cops there like a press briefing here or [Laughter] something plus that thing that thing keeps getting bigger and bigger and bigger yeah it's just ongoing I know it sounds you want to get that for you oh pleas [Music] work this is it final stretch huh video launch my video something stretch that's it it's going to be a long one off right this make everybody happy they're all like pretty tired right now so Tom I hope you're not going to take two hours well it depends on you guys it's not Tom who'll take the two hours it's it's Catherine oh I will try to be succinct I want to be Church oh I'm sorry am I am I lock get over wish we could get over this uh thank I mean for being sick course I'm like I'm getting in that fgy yeah and I'm also got like got the worst FY eyes and I think I was walking around the gardens oh jeez that'll and I think I have hay fever yeah I believe it you know I never was a big H I never really put my eyes are just yeah just burn up okay let make sure you don't have a runny nose now you be talking and I'll be dripping all over the place Jesus there a little mini water there you see get you through the next couple [Music] hours thanks for that LE good that wasn't my phone number I don't know number you gave oh really so I respond to that but my office please give me a f I played it off oh yeah great here me A3 he's from uh Bronxville New York composer interesting it's 5 minutes after 8 and the HBC is re reconvening with the next order of business is um Lord 1239 New York Avenue block 11:32 Lot 27 it's a contributing property there's a rear addition um new garage roof Dormer siding Windows deck and porch repair and HVAC so with that yeah good evening everyone um I'm Tom Lord I'm the owner of uh the home at 12:39 New York Avenue um it's great to be here for final approval of this renovation project it's been a a long journey uh but my wife and I have been very pleased and thankful that um it's gone so well so far um the plans have been well received uh by HPC last year about a year ago uh for conceptual approval uh recently very well received by the zoning board and also by surrounding neighbors um I'm here with the Architects cathine lorence and will horis slack um Katherine will review the new drawings and um um and some of the changes uh from the original submission um that were recently approved in full by the zoning board I mentioned the last HPC hearing a little bit about my f family's Heritage and at 1239 has been in our family for four generations uh I was fortunate to purchase the house in 20 n to keep it in the family and fortunately at that time uh my parents had to to move out because they could never they could no longer handle the steps due to health issues um preparing for our retirement years in Kate may as they say Aging in place is one of the main drivers behind this renovation and it includes the uh addition of an elevator so steps will there will be an issue for us in retirement um and you'll note from the architectural design that the elev Blends in very well with the house structure is not noticeable and that's very important to us as a corner lot um it also includes a complete rebuild of the garage that's currently an isore and on the verge of collapse um you don't notice as much when the trees are in bloom but right now you can see it's sinking a little bit um but we appreciate your time consideration uh we hope you find that these project plans are are reasonable uh not only in improving um the streetcape but also the look keeping the look and feel the existing structure structure uh from HBC perspective uh you'll find that this renovation U will allow our home to be more in compliance with the HPC standards because our current home has a siding that's all vinyl and most of our windows are also final so with that I'll turn it over to Katherine are you in this picture on the that's that's Hurricane Agnes 1972 so we haven't had I don't know I was out boting somewhere down New York Avenue um in the uh resubmitted application there is the booklet which I will refer to in a minute uh there is also uh um site plans whoops it says right here we have uh we have complete uh graining and and um landscape plans so uh we can refer to that if if need be and we have uh the architectural plans but the first thing that I thought would be the easiest is it was a year ago that we presented we we received conceptual approval but I I just sort of want to go over what what the project is and I think if we go over these exhibits these are the exhibits that I used at the zoning board which we got um approval for all of the items that we requested so if you look at exhibit one exhibit one on the left on the upper left shows the existing house and then on the upper right shows the proposed I'm going to go over the plans with you in a minute but there is one item on the proposed that is different than what we had shown you originally and that item is this uh a deck going over the back porch and one of the main reasons that we put that deck on the back porch is we had no place to put the HVAC unit other than right in the middle of the backyard uh We've pushed the house back we're keeping the garage in the exact location uh but we have a ramp going down and I think that uh as we discussed the other options this turned out to be the best option um it goes I think in in line with the building and um so I wanted to point that out to you as the biggest change that you all uh may not remember if you remember this building at all because it was a year ago and you guys see so many buildings the uh bottom shows the existing front on the left hand side and then the proposed front on the right it's in essence the same we're going to replace the windows with wood uh windows in the booklet I I identify the gel wind wood windows Prime to be painted uh we are changing the front door a little bit but we're keep we're going to repoint all the Brick we're going to put new wood lattice underneath which right now there's vinyl uh we are and again as a reminder what we did is as we increased the size of the Dormers but kept them in style uh with the house um so if we go to exhibit two which is the second page what this page I think identifies is the existing side of the house this is a corner lot it shows the old garage that were have gotten approved approval to to demolish from uh the HPC and it shows the existing H existing house then on the bottom of the page we've pushed out the house along with the so we could add the elevator and push the house out we've we've built a the maximum size height-wise an 18t height um garage matching the original doors um and matching the Dormer on the top one of the driving factors in addition to um floor area um lock coverage was the tree and at the end of this you'll see the tree is a memorial tree to a family member who passed away it is a beautiful crepe myrtle tree and if we were to build a new garage uh we would have killed this tree and um so then if we go to exhibit three on the on the extreme left is the existing first floor in the middle is the proposed first floor the red line that I drew across shows where the existing deck ends what's in pink is what is new so to the bottom of the line hatched is the elevator and we uh added a little to the kitchen uh also what you'll see here which is on the outside is a ramp that takes the people down to the elevator which is accessed from the uh lower level the basement level uh because right now this the house is almost one story above great um so the ramp would be uh we would have planting in front of the ramp and it would all be pavers going down the exhibit four shows again the E existing second floor on the left hand side it shows the proposed second floor which we are pushing out now over the elevator and over the extension of the kitchen and you can see the deck which really isn't a deck that anyone is going to use because it's going to be filled with the condenser units which one they have to be above grade so that they would be at uh they would be at least of five feet sticking up in the backyard up on some kind of platform here they're on a balcony hidden by the railings um on the the next one is the third floor and we show the IC area which is used as Tom's daughter's bedroom we increase the size of the Dormers to give her a little more head Headroom and we put a bathroom up there and that again is shown in pink if we go to um exhibit five we are now showing uh the new and showing the new ele uh the new garage and the location of the ramp that takes you into the rear of the house the front of the house of course is remaining exhibit six shows the old garage which is being demolished and the Beautiful crepe myrtle tree that now will be saved because we are able to keep the new garage in the existing footprint of the old garage you have prior approval on demoing the existing garage we we have gotten a zoning approval for that everything and HPC demol yes and we got we got HPC approval for Demolition and Zoning for yes going back in the same location yeah and then the finally just for for your all Amusement is an old photograph that was taken from a plane at around 191 a a blimp a blimp a blimp around 1920 and the arrow shows you the house on it the Peter shield in the garage okay so that's just uh uh the project in a nutshell um and uh I do have here the uh resolution and it will be it's attached to the uh booklet so I thought I would go through in brief the the packet just to make sure that we're all understanding what materials were asking for and there's going to be one item that uh may be uh will bring to your attention that there may be some discussion so we are talking about replacing all of the windows which now currently every window in the house is vinyl uh we're going to replace all of those windows with new gel wind wood windows the the kitchen windows are wood R not all the not all those are coming out though you're right okay um we are going to replace the roof with asphaltic shingles uh will was good enough to get up in the attic and looked and saw plywood plywood underneath so there is no evidence of uh wood shingled Roofing um I'm going to come back to the siding the deck will be wood it would be either mahogany or epe um exterior doors would be wood the garage since it is new would be Hardy Board plank uh the driveway and it's not really a driveway because we're trying to limit the amount of um loot coverage is a a brick pavers I have pictures of those um there may be one on exterior Carriage light off the garage the HVAC equipment is above on the balcony and we are going to repair masonry so I if we went to page three all of these items are identified but there's one item that Tom wanted to uh bring to your attention and uh originally we had designed this building and when we got conceptual approval we were going to put all wood shingles on the house they have since gotten pricing on this and it's uh it's going to be like onethird of the budget of I mean it's just something that we're throwing out here and being upfront about um because neighbor across the street which is also the same type of house that was renovated 10 years ago the neighbor down the street which was renovated about 7 years ago they're all Hardy shingles so I know that new uh design standards have been published but it's my duty to represent the client and they have asked that you might consider the house being sided in Hardy um shingles we did do a lookie and a cut a hole in the uh vinyl the house now is vinyl sided underneath the vinyl is asbestos and underneath the asbestos is clapboard um and and wouldn't Clapp birs be more appropriate for the house and perhaps less expensive than shingles yes clab Wards would be uh less labor intensive so material and cheaper yeah and and more appropriate for the it's a contributing yes property so the date of the house was the date of construction the date of the house is uh I I think it's around 19 clearly east cape made development company stuff I mean it's 194 1914 well well clamp board was becoming pretty common oh AB absolutely C fake and clapboard were still but I mean it's CL it's a testimony to the original house that it was that it was Clapper side 1890s you had clappers I mean yeah but this is this is a uh this is they say between 1909 and 1911 yeah uh many of the houses there are about I believe there are at least uh two dozen houses that were built by the same developer this is part of what was called the east K May real estate development company and their scheme was to sell lots and find people to build um and it went great until they collapsed in 1916 good old Peter Shields and and and many others yeah but we we've interrupted you Katherine but I would just share with you at I you you know what our standards are and a contributing property putting something other than wood and um clappers would be appropriate I would also add that the new construction on the garage should also be um uh comparable materials to the house so so if we were to put wood clab boards on the contributing building and then matched the appearance with Hardy Board on the garage would not that be except acceptable because they are not right next to each other they are about 40t from each other and I don't think uh too many people other than maybe this group here who has very sophisticated eyes would know the difference I I would argue that this is a contributing property in K May and it's appropriate to continue with but it's a new it's a new garage but it's a a brand new garage and it what doesn't that fall under new construction it if you're if you're looking at my my interpretation of our standards would allow for the Hardy plank on the garage but not on the house I'm sorry so my interpretation of our new standards would allow for Hardy plank on the garage but not on the house I mean to to focus to focus for a moment on the house it's very clear you did the right thing in terms of making the inspection you've certified what the materials were and there really is wood original wood collaborate under there with this kind of certification on a contributing structure on that house we can't allow Hardy Board on the house but since the garage is a new structure our standards would allow for that I'm just the stand the standards would allow for it but what would be the point um good point I mean you you have a contributing house you're really rehabbing the entire house and um adding a garage it just seems to have two different materials u i mean it has the virtue that that the garage the garage is a small structure yes so so doing a small structure in planking I I I mean obviously Hardy board's got to cost something I'm not familiar with the current prices but in terms of an economic situation a small garage done in planking would be much more complimentary to the house I think what we're trying to clarify for you is that our I believe that our standards would allow for that but that wouldn't be our recommendation our recommendation would be to use the same clabbered siding on both the house and the garage because they were meant to match correct and because by the way even though you're knocking it down and you have demolition to do it in the historic property report for this house it does talk about that garage having an historic component as a as part of the contributing key contributing aesthetic feature of that property so not sure when it was built though I know right no no it's all right it's gone because we're we've already approved the demolition because it's collapsing it's going to fall down if we quick well my question is um and and the reason why you know we wanted to explore this is that um the uh um other what we call bird cage houses similar to ours uh the one on 1129 New York Avenue also Corner a lot probably most recently one done in 2019 has the um has the uh um the wood the Hardy Board wood with the shingles and it looks nice and and I don't know if we could have that as an as an option you know we we were doing cedor Shake originally that and we were okay with that till we started pricing it out and then looking at it you know how would be different than the garage so well clapboard is going to be a whole lot cheaper than Cedar shap and and I think we're saying that the house we feel that we feel that the collaborate is more appropriate yeah than the shingles I don't know CL gotun that by GG it's just horizontal wood siding just just horizontal wood siding instead of the Hardy plank I I think I think Gigi had wanted to have the option of cloud board and she's even the one that had mentioned Gigi Tom's wife uh had mentioned that maybe that would be a more affordable option more affordable than Cedar Shakes yeah mhm so our architectural drawings show Cedar Shakes but that's a matter of we could change that to clab board MH uh with the click of a couple of buttons and and with a and with a condition to your approval that's that's the way it just be if if we were approved it we would we would approve it with a condition that it be X exactly um if for one moment if we could just come back to the sighting and get to the general design of the house and the addition of the U porch on the back M and the Dormers if we could get to that and then come back to the siding um I'd like to see if we could get uh design approval for the house so that we could I mean we'll come back to the siding but if we could get design approval for the house um we have a the full set of architecturals even though you might need a magnifying glass for some of this because I know I do I can't read the writing um but I I don't know if you need me to walk you through this or if you just have questions well we really approved the design of the house before and now you've added the addition of the second floor coming out to hold the uh air conditioning units I don't really think you need to go through the description of all the other elements in it unless unless unless they're different then now everything else everything else in the house is the same as you had originally uh viewed a year ago with with the exception of the um little balcony in the back to put the air conditioning unit so I I just only have three questions the the width of the Dormers being expanded was that approved in concept okay second question question is um are the stained glass transoms still remaining or what are you doing with those yes they are going to remain great and third question is um I see that you've removed the chimney although your the the historic report talks about that as a um key character finding historic feature so I see in your floor plans where it could be problematic but the exterior portion of that chimney is there any reason why you wouldn't keep it we're talking about the the stain glass the Chim the chimney the brick chimney there's two Chimneys in that house and they really don't serve any purpose other than pipes you know for the heater um and every other house renovated this model they all got rid of their chimneys well we had I believe I don't have the minutes in front of me yeah yeah I believe we had talked about the removal of the chimney and there was there was no problem at the time okay I'm just I'm asking only because in the historical report it specifically states that that's one of the key character defining historic features of this contributing house in in the very last paragraph okay we're talking about this jimney here right the one for the uh he heating unit there's two of them where're going to John the expansion of the dormers on on the on the third floor would knock one chimney out right if you look on yeah so the where that you're adding that roof in the back it it would it both chimneys are gone it looks like and then yeah it would make it really challenging to keep that chimney where you're adding that roof in the back and and the Dormer I don't think you could do it and the Dormer actually no it's actually in the corridor if you look at the floor plan Y in in plan it's in the corridor but it doesn't matter where it is in the house because you could still support it on the exterior if you wanted to if the expansion of the drumers around that we're we were going to use all the space that the chimney was in so if we were to keep the chimney and if it were possible excuse me pick up space we we would have to just support it from the roof and take everything else down I mean it would just be a fake chimney so that that's a question I have for all of us look where they look where they are right yeah I I I have to say I mean it it's it's true that it says that it's considered in the survey but one of the things I think about this application is that it's so well done in terms of the Improvement of a structure that had some questionable things like the vinyl sighting like the vinyl windows I I see it as overall improving the the the structure and its presentation it's important I I I would be willing to surrender a chimney for those improvements so what I just thought we we should raise it because it's called out as a yeah I I see it and I to me it's a balancing act y I agree I got one more play for the Hardy Board so the Hardy Board would also be an improvement no no no Tom because you did the survey showed the clabber underneath nice try it's just because you're taking off five layers of Gunk that's true so so we're we're done with a so I I basically think with the discussion I've heard the chimneys can go the CL the clapper's fine but the clav should also be used on the garage same material same wood just this wood wood to be yeah wood yeah not Hardy Board but Cedar Shake would be an option too if we want to go back to that yeah on the house and the and the garage it would be acceptable yeah y would so it would be we would have the option of doing wood Cedar shake or wood clapboard on both Cedar both buildings cedar shingles we want to make sure we're using the right term but I think deciding is it truly claer or is it just beveled because the ones I've seen it's like a small bevel with like a 4in exposure not a clap well we're going to talk about the reveal pretty thick against all we're going to talk about the reveal on the what's the exposure Dimension yeah I've seen them I didn't measure that no we did not measure that I've seen them like 3 and 4 in that that would be pretty narrow I think four four to six is what a problem um and six would would be a bit much for Kate may I think four is is appropriate it's still visible where you've opened up I didn't I'm sorry I didn't see yeah she's not but but didn't you state that when you went underneath the the asphalt vinyl then asphalt then there was clapboard underneath there yes and was that you believe that was the original Robert it's very should really match that it's it's very thin but what's the reveal oh it's the little Cedar four does look like it's super thin which is used all over Cape May a little thin it's almost like 38 at the bottom like an eigh at the top it's almost like nothing nothing for weather that's why it needed another L stff over that's why they put uh well it covers quite a bit I mean they're long no they're like this long no the ones I've seen they're like this long so that probably only has a 3 or 4 in exposure right yeah that's what I'm saying anyway oh anyway so they would have a 4 in exposed wood or they would match the exposure that you have on the exist existing uh clapboard that you found we would take a picture and we would put it on our architectural drawings when we issue them for permitting and your compliance officer could compare yeah by the way thanks for looking at the roof because the roof looks a little lumpy it must be you must have the third layer yeah it's in your standards now so uh we're trying to follow all the rules no because it it if you look at it from the street you you would guess there might be Cedar under it yes but it's been repaired over the years and they only allowed three roofs you look up oh I think we've seen some we're going to have more than three piled up got one coming up with four layers on to any um continue on so are we ready to make a motion why not John why don't you I would like to move that this be approved for final so wait minut is the presentation Catherine we're ready to make a motion unless you want to continue to yeah I'm done yeah okay so I sat through that other one so so I would like to move that this receive final approval with the caveat the provision that the house receive wood clabbered siding with no more than a 4in reveal or 4in exposure and recommending that you also use the same siding on the garage why do you want to do that no you guys you guys want to require it for both yeah I mean but I'd also like to add the applicant said could I do Cedar on both buildings would be shakes or CL okay so let me let me start over I have I have a question I mean if we're looking and like we're going back and seeing what the original period sighting was shouldn't we put that on there not Shake I mean if it was clabber I I would agree I I agree it's especially when there's evidence of what was there correct that's what standard I think the the conditions the conditions that hope John will add to his motion involve cladding with wood it could be clap word or it could be it could be shingles obviously we would recommend The Clapper M because that was the original material that's my point exactly so but but it's should be I think their choice as long as it's all wood so many of the houses on on those streets are are are shingled and yeah so couldn't we have Choice Y and with that's what we like that with the condition being that whatever you choose from the wood clabber or the cedar shingle that it's consistent from the accessory and the principal structure yes you got to pick a lane yes yes they're both going to match and even our drawings do do indicate that they sighting so so could we consider Chris's statement um the completion of John's motion so let me try it again see if we can keep Consolidated this keep it really simple yeah I know but before you do that yeah um we have standards and the standards are clear they're not guides they're they're clear and it says if there's evidence then that's why that's why I was going to make I was going to make the motion that it Be Clever citing because that there's it's that's in that is in compliance with our standards to me that's what we're here to do is uphold these stands I agree okay Carry On okay so I would like to I would like to move um or make a motion that this project be granted final approval so long as the siding is horizontal wood clabber siding with no more than a 4inch exposure on both the house and the garage I'll second it motion by Mr Becker seconded by Mr Carol so let me can can I just for my own clarification ask if this is final so if the if the owner wanted to use shingles they're going to be denied using shingles from correct this I I I don't want to vote against this motion but um if the neighborhood is I mean and I understand that clabber is the prevailing the the prevailing form of construction in a lot of Cap May and houses in that era but it appears that the neighborhood does have a sign ific number of shingled buildings and and if the if the if the owner wants to bite the bullet for extra cost for cedar shingles um it's it's not inconsistent with other things in the neighborhood I would afford him the choice it's inconsistent with our standards I mean but the original material is wood clabber and he proposes wood shingles consistent with the rest of the I think there's one other thing though um you included the picture from 100 years ago when that house was there before the others and then you mentioned that the clad board that you found looked maybe the word would be insufficient um I I think there's probably a little more investigation to figure out what would actually sheath the house the way you need it sheathed for year round use because it wasn't probably built for that right exactly it's very thin and you know we want the house to last another 100 years and um you know that's why we were we were we wanted to investigate the the Hardy Board because it you know we understood that you know conform more with the architectural Integrity of HBC it was more accepting than it was before um the house I mentioned at um 19 or 1139 NE o Conor's house one block away on a corner um their house was built in 1910 and they have the hard board shingle so I don't know how they got that but I mean that you know I know we can't get that now but it'd be nice to have other options because this is our one last house and we want it done right and most of all want my wife to be happy with it but but I don't I don't think that most important part I don't think that we're requiring to use that same old almost almost like balsa wood it's very thin maybe but I mean that's what they used back in the day I have a cottage behind my house that has that all over it but I think we we're just just requesting you to do the the lap siding with the same reveal and of course it could be a better material but Jake we're not requesting the motion requires it to be wood Clapper yeah can I just can I just say something well well no we should okay I hear you well I mean so so in I don't have a lot of experience with all these houses I I'm working on two of them right now but one thing I noticed is that whatever's down there now to me is like developer quality it was enough to look pretty sell the house but even the planking on that siding is not straight and true some of them have gaps like a quarter inch it's just not a very good sheathing job we have one we're working on right now and to put in like I'm going to call it like a double 4 inch look like all the vinyl they came out with later on with that type of material I really don't think it's I mean if if if we wanted to do it and we had to do it because that's what the clients want to go with we'd have to do more than just put a a shingle on we don't always have to sheath the house or something because you're not going to get nails in you're only there's only and I know you're going to hit the Gap if they're is what you're referring to a rough covering a a rough first sheathing and not no the first sheathing is like 1 by eight maybe yeah she sh like ship doing 4 in so nail holes and the big gap so if we elected to go with a shingle it's going to give us multiple layers to actually be able to make this thing weather tight that's probably why singles were done over time your siding would would cover those gaps easily that but additionally normally the way things it's it's handled is that you put like half inch or 3/4 inch plywood and then tyac and then apply the exactly the siding so you wouldn't just be putting the siding against the studs no no no no it's not against the studs it has it a typical like a 1x8 okay all right U planking and it's usually there is something between there it's usually set on a on a vertical which stops the building horizontal racking so it's not diagonal it's horizontal horizontal rough Shing and it's like nail space now because it's so old so yeah we're not asking you to replicate those those thin you know I mean clo sting Cloud board on we would like to be able to have the option of making it thicker a bead bottom so it has a shadow yeah no I wouldn't agree with that not a bead but wood clabber sighting that is you know it probably is 3/4 of an inch thick so you would have 5/4 inch we have a sh Corners yeah yeah yeah some of the most beautiful houses in town have exactly that that form of siding it's it's appropriate for the building it's appropriate for the city I can I just talk to my client just for a second and well you do that I can I can I can just ask so the motion on the floor is final with approval of clabber only both structures right with a for w wood lap siding instead of coll colliding you're going it's your motion you can overlap yeah I just want to understand what I'm voting on that's not a bad plan well at this hour it begins to get question and the answer is yeah I would like to be able to because so many of the houses uh on that street and the streets Beyond are all got shingles and they look so beautiful I I happen to be fond of the shingles I understand what you're talking about the standards but Janet made she made a pretty important point that that house I mean we have evidence that that house had horizontal wood siding on it because it's still extent it's there it's under two other layers of subsequent material so therefore since that's the evidence we have that's what we need to replicate and that probably predated the shingle houses on that street or they got choices you know maybe well they just they just recited them they recited it later so the point is that we have historical evidence that that's what was there therefore our standards require us to replicate that that's pretty much why we're making the motion the way we are Jing M your house is more important I mean you could look at it that way it was there first yeah well that is true well it's it certainly will be if if you do the the sighting as such it certainly will be the most authentic house among those houses and and given the other things that are being done um in terms of improvement yeah I mean it's it's going to be a terrific place and I mean and speaking to the merits of the motion I have no other problems with what you've done with respect to any of the changes do we have a motion yeah I'll finalize it the motion is to Grant final approval with using wood lap siding of a similar exposure to that which is existing on the house probably 4 in on both the house and the garage and I second hey thank you wait we didn't vote yet motion you're not done you're not done yet close on the hot seat you may you may be here for got so tired you may be here another hour motion by Mr Becker seconded by Mr Carol Mr Copan yes Mr Carol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson yes Mr test yes Miss Wilson stck yes thank you Bravo thank you thank you we're done all business next I don't I don't know much about CL it's going to be beautiful I've never seen it I will you're going to love it um before we go to the next you're going miss the fun before we go to the next application I would remind everyone that we can't begin a new application um after 9:30 and so I continue to make the same offer I did before we'll put you on top of the agenda for next month du that's uh Duane and Carol yes which is two uhhuh okay so you'll be on you'll be on top okay thank you next month we have any other volunteers well we're the clock is running so we'll see okay next order of business is mullik 808 corg Street this is a contributing property looking for solar panels and the applicant will have to identify who he is and uh good evening everyone Zach mik 808 cordi Street owner of the property uh going to pass out a little more information thank you um thank you in fact uh first off thank you and I'm G to try to go through this as quickly as possible because uh tonight is a good example of your volunteerism and we appreciate it um I actually was not going to be making this application I was hoping the uh installer would be making it but they could not make it this evening um obviously I understand the HPC standards in regards to the solar panels um street view obviously being very important I believe that the design that you have before you tonight uh takes that into consideration um so that none of the solar panels thank you are visible from the uh front of the house all of the solar panels are on the rear uh at least the rear exposure of the roofs so um on the front a frame and maybe I can direct you to where I'm talking about the first page of the um A1 of the plan um just to make sure that this is clear A1 thank you um the front of the house is uh to the very left side of the page or the uh basically the west side of the page that would be Corgi Street uh just pointing out to show that there are no solar panels of course on the front of the house there and then I would there are point to the panels that are on the back exposure of that roof again cannot be seen from the street um the solar panels on the midsection of the roof which cannot be seen by the street and then the back location of the um back rear A-frame uh again all the solar panels none of the solar panels I should say are on the um Street side exposure of the rear addition to the house as well um the panels themselves um specifically uh look for the latest and greatest um made in America but also um a very high High um energy production rate efficiency rate which was important because we didn't want to have any of the solar panels visible from the street so the panels that we did have we wanted to maximize the efficiency so frankly spent a little bit more money on a higher quality panel but that's fine by me that's exactly what I want and I don't want to see the panels from the street from the street um and they um have 100% efficient they will um produce 100% of the energy for the house not that that matters for HPC but with this design uh also just point to the um the racking system is also the latest and greatest um the racking system is only 3 and 1 12 Ines off the roof most of the older uh systems that you see elsewhere 6 in Plus off the roof so this really uh the panel itself too I should point out is less than an inch and a half in thickness so they're they're getting um better quality and and less uh width also point out the uh inverters for this are the micro inverters that sit underneath of the panel there are there is no big inverter on the side of the house um and that's basically my presentation what getting the electricity from the solar panels down to your power source right is's running down the side of that I believe that's shown the question is how's that covered or I should say we we could prove it that it's going to be covered in light material or something how would you like how would you like it I mean I want to I want to cover it I don't want to be able to see it I mean so um whether it be landscaping or whatever I I frankly don't don't want to see it either we we've been requesting that it be boxed in with material like the sighting wood obviously yeah so I I I think so what side what side of the of the house is the meter on the meter um is kind of tucked in the corner of staying on A1 um if you can see where it says S1 um I will say this is a little misleading considering that I have a side porch that isn't shown on this uh roof design because obviously that side roof it's a metal Red Roof that will course not have any solar panels on it but it's not shown on that design so I just want to let me flip through here yeah on the aial actual photograph you can see the side porch roof there's essentially a little Nook I'd call it there where I have a garden there that would that's where the meter is it's kind of a nice location that's hidden um um that's also where the gas meter is it's kind of kind of on purpose there the edge of porch and the back Wing yes yes there there's about a there's about a 6t to 8T area there that's between the corner of my porch and the rear Edition um that's where we would come down with any electrical and would be happy to cover it in any wood to to hide it which I would want to do as well yeah we've been asking did it be normally it you know it's like a 1 by3 and and a inch and a half and it's just boxed in and painted or or stays natural with the whatever the house is I'll paint it the hide it frankly as much as possible so I only have two questions sure are you going to have to cut any of the trees so that in the summertime the uh panels are not shaded I didn't want to do that I did we did um do some trimming already which has been done so no more trees will be cut of course that was done in in collaboration with the shade tree commission my yard was really shaded to be to be blunt I was having a lot of trouble even growing grass but this has the virtue of putting your panels on the South Side exact house which is the good side for the sun and the side away from corgy Street exactly so but you can see from the trees that that that's also where take it that you're you're representing at the blue here right is is is the is is the part where the the the panels will not be right I also yes please so um I believe that's when you're facing the house from cgy the house to the left is so close that there's no way that you'll be able to see the panels on the the extension piece that connects the two Gables no but the the lot to the right of the house when you're facing it when you're walking down toward you will be able to see the panels Up on the Roof there in the connector piece the Segway between the two houses maybe from my neighbor's from my neighbor's house but other than that no and and like I said they are as low and flat as it could possibly be I mean they only they only they only go off of the ground uh off of the roof in this case obviously three and a half inches Z also you know when I first looked at these drawings here the on the roofs I'm like oh my God these are going to stand out like a sore thumb right but I visited the site three times today and the slope of the roof it it's almost flat right yeah so it really does doesn't have that impact given the height it's flat so you can't really see the surface of the roof from ey height on the side yes it's that's that's that's the key part the only the only part that that is questionable was the view from the right side the open side and and the roof is like that so the panels are I mean I'm I'm just taking the representation of the blue here is where um they're are not and and that looks to me like it's not visible from the street thanks Jake because I wanted to drop by today and I couldn't oh I I to visited the property it's almost flat I don't think you can see the panels right do I have a motion I would motion I would make a motion to approve this installation this is this is marked as conceptual um any reason why it shouldn't be a final approval I I would I would propose that this could be final we have we have really should be final I we have all the specs I mean we have all the specs on it would you add the the the line should be covered in your motion oh I'm sorry so I'll move to approve as presented for final approval with the caveat that the electrical connection be covered so that it is um not exposed absolutely do I have a second good all yours Tom motion by Mr Becker seconded by Mr Carol Mr copelan yes Mr Carol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson yes Mr Tesa yes Miss Wilson stck yes thank you thank you thank you all very much and thank you thank you for your hard work you should you should do this for living hello oh yeah next order of business it's cool it's um 911 Madison Avenue this a contributing property and it's Roofing it's key contributing it says contributing on no I'm sorry contributing good evening Mr chairman it's not that nice good evening members of the commission uh we'll try and keep our application as as simple as possible it's a fairly simple request that we're making here and we realize you have other things on the agenda um my name is Peter Chan as I am an attorney at the law firm of Highland Lin chap pyro located in ralton New Jersey my office represents the applicant uh job ittz very briefly the property address that we're dealing with here is 911 Madison Avenue block um 1111 Lot 12 um as was pointed out by uh Mr Carol this is a contributing structure excuse me sir I'm sorry can you introduce the other two parties one more time introduce us oh yes absolutely so to my right and the uh commission's left is my client Mr joob ittz uh and to our left to my left and the board's right is our contractor uh Mike Pettis my pronouncing that correct one uh and again this is a contributing structure um and really what we're looking to do is replace an asphalt shingle roof with an asphalt shingle roof um right now um as mentioned in our application there's at least three if not four layers of asphalt sitting above uh cedar shingles uh the first layer of asphalt we suspect was um installed approximately 90 years ago so almost a century ago it's been asphalt shingles for for quite some time uh in fact PR the historic property report it says quote the roofs are clad throughout an asphalt shingle um so again the application is very simple we're looking to um replace an asphalt shingle roof with an asphalt shingle roof um with that I'll introduce my client Mr ittz he wanted to make some comments as well for the board so take it away uh good evening everyone uh job ittz itz Kitz just didn't want to have my attorney go on the record and not say something myself um Mr Tesa good to see you Mr Tessa and I I believe sat together on the briefly reformed parking advisory commission a few years ago all all too brief um so it's going to be back in this room uh on this side of the table I guess uh I grew up coming to Kate man from Philadelphia I'm very familiar with historic properties my day job I serve as the executive director of The Old City special services District it's the business improvement district like the Washington Street mall for Old City I'm frequently testifying at Philadelphia's historic commission I understand the importance of that uh it's part of the draw I mean a lot of the draw to Kate may I grew up coming here as a child came here every summer with my family uh one week and always had the dream to to move down here or at least have a second home here I did get that dream when I purchased 915 Madison next door the other side of the twin uh and we thought this was a vacant we thought 911 the subject property which is a vacant property and we didn't know who owned it the owner was ill and she was living in Maryland deceased and then uh we were able to to move over next store and our goal over the long term is to improve the property um and we did that in the first instance we purchased it in 2021 we had to do the windows so that was an over the counter application to you uh the windows in 2021 if you remember there was the lumber short from the pandemic and W not coming down from Canada we could only afford to do half then this past year we were able to do the second half and in a change of insurance companies the insurance company came and inspected and said oh you need a new roof and we said we got to go through the historical commission they said we'll give you the year uh Mr Pettis said you'll be okay for the year but we need to get this roof done and the issue is that we want to do other things too down the road but there's an impetus to to get the roof done first like we can't even paint it until we do the roof and if you've been by there it probably hasn't been painted in 30 years so and Joe very quickly just for the sake of the record when you said the windows were over the counter you mean they were approved in Review Committee yes yeah we I submitted an application for the windows in 2021 but we could only afford half and so then we did it again in 2023 same exact Windows just for the upper floors is there any evidence that there's Cedar um shingles under those asphalt shoes I don't know if it's shingle it's I believe it's Cedar Shake um um there there is evidence of that as our as our contractor can testify to um but it hasn't been a cedar roof for some time again it's been asphalt Jingles for n on a Century so you've been in the attic and looked up Tom they they've filled out the the proper representation for with a uh contributing property uh the standards are clear when we're looking to replace the roof if there's evidence of original material then it should be replaced with original material um and then your next question is going to be well that's expensive and and I would share with you the Secretary of Interiors is not especially sensitive to the expense of maintaining a historic property no I I do understand that I guess my question is if I submitted that evidence in the application which I believe I did did so what is the possible outcome for a a hearing in front of the commission right is there a possible outcome where the commission says we have to De we can deviate from that standard well we don't deviate from the standard um it I mean I guess you could find some weird little circumstance where where we might but this is really clear and although there is a complication because according to what you guys have investigated and found on site the original house has evidence of cedar shakes but the addition does not so I could not tell from what you submitted what constitutes the addition and what constitutes the original and if the addition would have is there any way that it would work with the addition having asphalt shingles and the original having Cedar Shakes is that something that would work for you we we we did we approve have approved that in the past we've done we've allowed hybrid stuff the problem is that now we're very diligent at looking at what the original materials are that's the reason for the rep sheet you guys filled it out honestly and it revealed under all that asphalt so there's a caveat wood roof the caveat to the hybrid is does it make sense the way the roofs are configured between the addition and the original house to have two different roofing materials and without a roof plan or elevations I can't really tell I mean that's I mean it's pH Mike is potentially having the original structure as far as we know it to be Cedar Shake cedar shingles excuse me and the addition be asphalt is that something that would be possible from a Contracting standpoint I you can put the in the same way like your are maybe you can put see the shck up and down there you can put jingle because down there is plywood there no know LA strip or anything like that but up there is a SE so just to be clear on the addition you're saying right now it's uh asphalt shingles over plywood so you yeah so we could continue with that on the addition and then potentially have cedar shingles on the original structure that right now has Cedar on underneath on the on the on the lower porch uh look like a only plywood and Al chingles don't look like a c sh right so in your opinion so what I would suggest is that maybe we can approve this if you would agree to do asphalt on the addition and cedar shingles on the original where it originally was with the caveat that maybe you come next Tuesday morning and show us a roof plan showing exactly where cedar shingles would be and where asphalt shingles would be so that our compliance um uh what's inspector can when he comes out into the field will be able to distinguish what's supposed to be where there there's three elements to this really and correct me if I'm wrong but just looking at your building from the street it's there's there's three things and what let me characterize them and then you tell me if you agree there's the front porch so there's a roof that's visible from the streetcape there there's the original building which is three stories I guess and then there's that rear addition right is that that's correct that's what we're dealing with mhm and uh Mr Pettis was it you indicated that the rear addition it's just Plywood And asphalt shangle correct and then you went moving to the original building you went to the top and you saw four layers and there's Cedar Shake under that and then the front porch you indicated that that was plywood and asphal chingle correct but that's the most visible part of the structure too so that's just wanted to make sure that we're all talking about the same thing nice clarification y so it seems to me that um clearly the front porch would have been Cedar the original house would be Cedar the back addition um probably not um and so we have so we're clear on what we're doing because we have a compliance officer that's going to come and visit during construction and we have to give him clear information as to what is supposed to be Cedar and what supposed to be shingles so if we could get a roof plan um to review for Tuesday morning we could I I believe we can then approve it so if we have a if we make a motion to umove the replacement um on the body of the house in the front porch with cedar shingles and the addition in the back um with asphalt fiberglass um just can I ask a couple questions are there any preferences about the asfa whether it's color shape Etc anything I need to be aware of before I submit something as much color matches you could do with the cedar shakes remembering that the cedar shakes are going to turn dark right uh so if you're if you're when you finish this thing and you have beautiful shakes right up front glowing gold uh you could know that they're going to turn a little bit right and uh match it asphalt doesn't age as well plus you one dimensional right you want dimensional shingles okay um and then just to go back just so I can get an answer clear so can understand where I am procedurally is there any circumstance where this commission would deviate from the standard not for financial reasons is there any circumstance well there there's certainly except can be exceptions to the rule but the preference is to if there's if that material exists and there's evidence of that yeah job not not in this case I mean there there might be hypothetically actually we're making an exception and we've done this exception this is a compromise that we've already done the addition in the back we're agreeing with asphalt fiberglass dimensional we've done that on 10 or 15 houses in town where no I I appreciate that what I'm trying to understand is if there was no addition and I don't want to get no hypothetical and I understand there's another applicant so I just want to be brief but if there was no addition there would be no opportunity for relief for an applicant who similarly situated at this Commission right that's correct which makes me wonder procedurally what that applicant is appealing and what their due process is they're appealing you can you can talk to your attorney yeah there's but I appreciate the consideration for the rear I don't want to disparage that I just want to put that on the record yeah there this board has to review Things based on the standards that they have you know there's a review process and an appeal process for that so just just to help you with that on page 21 of the standards it clearly Del lates exactly what we're saying yeah and that's all on the internet too you don't have your own copy but I mean we can we can move this along procedurally um grant the final approval but make it conditioned on the supplying of a roof plan uh and that the only the rear addition be asphalt chingles with the main part of the house on the front porch being cedar shingles sounds like a pretty good Mo or or we could just wait until they submit the roof plan and approve it in review well that's what I'm saying Tuesday morning what we would do is make those conditions but the conditions be satisfied by producing those things for the Review Committee what which which can then be approved in review assuming it so it' be approval in review as opposed to us voting on it and if we can't get it by Tuesday you'll have another one no no no that's not my that's we're going to have a motion okay and we're going to vote on it okay um what what we doing is conferring Authority on the Review Committee got it to to satisfy conditions that are to be this coming Tuesday that's that so that gets you without having to appear in if you do the conditions you don't have to appear in front of us again we hope Ju Just to be clear when we say roof plan what's the board's expectation of that the applicant's going to generate a down look on the roof showing exactly what like we just saw with the solar panels kind of like a grid 2D bird's eye view of the roof asphalt shingles Cedar and material cut sheets mhm yeah you want to choose your stuff and show us the cut sheets right but but all that can be processed by the Review Committee great so did was that your motion John I didn't make a motion okay well then I'll make one you were doing pretty well okay I would I would vote to give the application final approval um but subject to the condition that a roof plan be submitted uh and cut sheets be submitted um all of those things to be um produced and reviewed by our Review Committee with authority of the Review Committee to finalize the approval I would I would want to add to that though that um we're we're approving Cedar on the main body of house on the front cour and the addition in the rear um what what what he said asphalt fiber as asphalt are you okay with that Judy I'd like Chris to reiterate the motion can we get a second first please well first we have to make a clear motion before we can second it I I understood the motion the the the it's a we got three elements of that Roof System the first two front-facing porch the existing building will be Cedar shake the rear addition will be asphalt shingle the applicant's going to provide a roofing plan aerial view of the roof cut sheets for the Review Committee to review which can then be approved in committee assuming those that's what they do that's what they do and I'll second it great motion by Mr Tesa seconded by Mr Carol Mr copelan yes Mr Carol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson Mr Tesa yes M Wilson stck yes thank you much you very much I'll be back next order of business is Drake 325 Congress Street 1031 D60 this a contributing property is a side Edition screen porch driveway P strip Mr chairman I lived within 200 ft I'm going to recuse myself okay um for the next applicant it is 9:15 do it 15 minutes well the question is whether we can get through this in 15 minutes I'm trying we'll try yeah we'll try but just so you're on notice you just stare in Mr far the back of Mr Fan's head uh laser beams all right uh good evening everyone um my name is Paul Faron fulam Design Group here with Mr Drake of um 325 Congress Street he's the property owner um we got approval for a similar project um at 325 Congress uh about two years ago uh in attempting to extend that approval uh had some commentary um that was exchanged with members of the commission on certain elements of of the approved project um effectively what we were trying to do is and what is probably the best case scenarios is to hold up these this board to show you um what exists what was approved and uh what is proposed now so what was approved is actually colorized in the center and what's important to call out I think is the addition that we're proposing in the rear of the property uh actually extended Beyond with a different roof pitch the adj uh the adjacent shed Dormer that exists on on these uh on the main roof line um so what we did to uh make that look a little bit more seamless is actually make sure that we matched the pitch of the roof uh so that those shed dorms are consistent from front to back uh they do exist already on both sides uh of the main Gable and uh the intent is to make it look as though they're just continuous uh the historic building report does indicate actually that those extend effectively the full depth of the house already so our addition which is extending again towards the rear uh uh would incorporate those shed Dormers uh at the second floor level as well small changes to the sidescreen porch for a reconfiguration of a of a uh staircase that's actually all the way in the back now as opposed to down the side of the property I believe some of the comments also pertain to Landscaping in front of the house um as you may be aware this house was lifted at one point um so actually Foundation windows that are located in the foundation wall facing the street were recommendation at the time of the of this commission um so we don't want to necessarily mask those with Landscaping we understand the height of the block of that Foundation uh maybe a bit Ging but it has been that way for a long time so um certainly happy to enhance the Landscaping to mitigate the view of that block wall but um in the sense of bming or any other massing to the landscape we're concerned about water infiltration in in the basement level crawl space level uh because it is a lowline area as it is so I have a a an immediate comment and that is our standards on page 54 require that when you have an addition it be subordinate to the original building at the roof height of a side or rear yard addition should be lower in elevation than the existing building so continuing that same Ridge particularly in this middle elevation here would be inappropriate in accordance with our standards it's not differentiated and I I do hope that it would be taken into consideration that this was submitted and approved prior to the adoption of the new design standard obviously we're here for a reason um but we would hope I see that would not fall on ear and is there a reason why you're wrapping the peers with brick as opposed to what they are now that they're suo wrap to match the remaining of the found remainder of the foundation I think that was um a suggestion to the client to kind of enhance the aesthetic of you know of that Foundation level or brick level the pier level beneath the porch so the peers are always freestanding if they're wrapped with brick is that what you're saying that's how they yeah so they're never engaged in the foundation wall no no okay CU right now the side porch is already um there's kind of an open open area beneath the side porch and that main Foundation W this house um as some other houses the generic design of the house as you'll recall was really right on the ground I mean that's the that's the design um and so is when you elevate it like that it it already becomes a challenge the addition I appreciate um not covering the windows I would appreciate but um I'm sure there was a lot of discussion about Landscaping this block Foundation of course time yes um which has not been done so it it seems to me that um my reaction is the the way you're planning the addition is consistent with our standards um this Foundation exposure is not um even though it was a prior done in a prior period um and as a condition of of approval it seems to me we would want to see a a for real um landscape plan that would deal with this street side of the property so Warren to be clear are are you suggesting that the freestanding peers would be inappropriate and no the peers are they're only where the deck is right he's he's referring to basically this I see exposed block area that faces power Street you know that has some small shrubs there but that that should have been covered in landscaping and by now would have been covered the only other comment I have is that the the jelman wood windows that you're showing are actually clad the 5500 series is a clad window and we would require since this is a contributing structure that these be um wood primed on the exterior not clad and we need a cut sheet on on that can I ask a quick question uh were you the owner of the property when when you when it was raised yes you are okay so the conditions of the approval originally when it was raised the issues that are being discussed right now the landscaping and um and and the cladding of the uh the pillars um was that part of the condition of your approval of your previous approval I I don't recall that it was um we may have talked about the Landscaping but I don't recall that it was a condition of the approval that we received we we can go back and file but we would never this there's only two or three houses that I recall the city that are like this and two of them have been elevated and as soon as you elevate it it yeah I mean it changes the look and we would have insisted on a burm and Landscaping um but I don't remember a burm I do remember Landscaping as a condition and so now we should add it the brick Pierce I don't I don't have a reaction to regarding a prior prior presentation what's in the packet the resolution guess I'm confused about what's changing from the approved resolution that's what you're here for right resolution correct um the shed second floor shed Dormer roof on the northwest side um is actually adjusted to mimic the slope of the adjacent roof um and then uh actually excuse me Side Porch extends a little bit beyond um the southeast face of the of the house that arched opening the furthest Southeast corner of the building um so the deck the deck also being slight slightly reconfigured yeah all all elements that were approved previously correct correct they're they're less conspicuous they're actually in the rear of the house supp to the side that's right that's right your picture in the middle looks like a totally different property than what we're seeing from the street it's this the back of the house H that's the back of the house that's the back of the house this yeah this is the back of the house side facing the the widest area of the lot um and candidly I think it's aside from the front which is obvious I think most people because of the of traffic also observe this building from a perspective so you kind of see how that Arch opening the void in that Arch opening kind of carries you through to the side porch and towards the rear of the property in two Dimensions it's not as on either side really it's not as appealing as a perspective view that you would see from the street gate these were little like British country houses right on the around with flowery Gardens all around them I knew they had to get raised but you know this is just such a an enormous change in the appearance of the house it's already raised well it's already raised right but now with you know the uh ongoing additions and everything that uh it's very disturbing but we already proved all that the picture in the center yes was approved picture in the S was approved well this resolution this these two colorized images are two years ago what were when was it slight slight right correct wasn't yes sir have you started this project so this um excuse me has the project been started since 2000 since you got the approval so so the request is for an amendment to that right for everything that's on that one correct plus this yeah so you probably want to mention that resolution in the approval okay right because you're still asking for all that approval plus more now can barely see it right I mean I would I would hate to say more because it it's really not more wor it's really just fre adjustments it's it's very minor adjustments but we're you know respect this commission and are performing our due diligence to make sure that nothing that does get constructed uh looks anything different than what was approved without coming to discuss it with all the members here already approved I'm sorry they didn't get they didn't get the resolution in pack so that's why this have to go to the zoning board um not as no we we're just you raised it up pursuant to the code correct which was done how many years ago was done here 11 years ago yeah I mean the house was sitting on wood a wooden Timber foundation and it we received quite a bit of flood damage with hurricane s with super standing and so something had to be done with it because it was uninhabitable at that point it may it may turn out to be the hour and my flagging attention but um what we're seeing here today are just small changes to uh a an approval for a certificate that we've already passed on two years ago so so so I'm I'm really not quite sure what we're doing here I I mean I'm sorry to say that I I think um what there there's some minor tweaks to what has been approved before yeah and I I would um make a motion that we approve the plan as submitted um with the condition that a landscape plan uh be provided to address prior issues with regards to elevating the house and that the windows be primed exterior not clad as submitted approve or conceptual based on the Landscaping plan in the window's this is a final a final approval being I well we want to see uh the landscape plan and we want to see the cut sheet on the window sure I mean I don't I don't I don't object to that but I'm saying they already have a final approval from us or at least a conceptual well this is Chang Chang but these are material changes this is it's changed make they're here tonight asking for how long do approvals last uh two years two years so so I just makes no difference to be to to be clear I know I regard some changes as more important than others but to be clear this is this is a motion for final approval with those conditions I understand that correctly yes and the Landscaping plan concerned about this this the face on Congress the foundation and and I I would hope that we'd modify that to say that the Landscaping plan as submitted be submitted to the Review Committee and that it be approved the cut sheets on the windows but but all all those things are are conditions that be satisfied by submission to our Review Committee I'll second that motion do we stand motion by Mr Copeland second by Mr Becker Mr copelan yes Mr Carrol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Tesa yes Miss Wilson stck yes Mr hammer yes thank you thank you um it appears to be 930 um so the next order of business is 523 Bank Street 1054 sl22 with a non-contributing new house thank you guys for being expeditious oh yeah yeah those two connect right well thanks for getting us in well you you have another problem though we have to be done by 10 o' or oh we will try to be succinct we all turn into munchkins or something my name is uh Kevin oant project manager at Fenwick Architects this is Larry prey the developer hello hello we've both been here before so um our application is for a new construction on a newly created vacant lot you all have the package the second sheet shows the subdivision plan by William Sweeney uh the proposed construction is on lot 22 which is on the right side in this plan so there's nothing there right now so there's no historic structure report uh the proposed uh home is twostory residence it's going to be set at the minimum flood elevation so it'll be about seven steps up it's a traditional style with a cross-gabled roof cement collaborate siding with some cement shingle siding at the side Gables double hung windows with grills in the top sash there's a full width front porch vertical picket railing um you look on sheet A1 you'll see the site plan the home is set at the minimum setback 20 ft thanks to the new zoning um the steps can project 5T so that's the plan um closer to the neighbors we don't have a setback survey the neighbors um but um at least we can push it as far forward as we can without any variances uh there's a onecar garage it's at the rear of the property with a ribbon driveway which uh which is consistent uh with your guidelines um there is a small pool totally uh behind the house a small PA patio in terms of streetcape on sheet A5 we have the photographs of the existing adjoining properties they're almost entirely twostory dwellings there's one on story dwelling everything else is two or two and a half stories so we think that we are compatible in terms of scale and proportions to all the uh existing development it's similar scale and height and um if you look at number 537 it's a very similar massing even to the the house that we proposed on A6 is the required 3D try to give you a a visual of the whole street together you can see how it fits in very well with the existing pattern of development um and the material Cuts there's the in the application package and on A7 is some more information open up for any questions you have for me can I hear your name again Kevin olant o l a an DT thank you and you're with Fenwick correct yes thank you architect I'm not a registered architect in New Jersey okay so Kevin the only question I have really is on A4 when we're looking at the what you have labeled right elev it's actually the left elevation yes that is so your left and right elevations are mislabeled so you might want to correct that just consistency but on the what is actually the left elevation drawing 2A the little Windows the little two little square windows and the and then the double little square windows in the upper right hand corner seem really odd and I'm wondering why they are configured like that that's the stairwell well I understand that but the one the um for example the window all the way to the right on the first floor has like a 9t head height and that's really the bottom of the stair so there's no real reason for that to be up I just so odd there's actually um three steps it's a landing there and three steps up right so that would be you know two feet so I get the S foot height but why would you not want to be able to see out that window from that Landing it's a it sill would be way ahead above your head we've built this model before to where I stand and I'm looking out at it by the time we get up those stairs we've built this house probably seven seven times okay he's very tall that's not a not an untypical configuration even but this scales at the bottom that that sill is at 5'2 which is normal average eye height that's why I'm wondering why it's like that stair and that's with that's with going up three steps to that Landing no I understand that that's that's not an abnormal thing but the question is is it really a functioning window for being able to see out and would that be appropriate we don't have any problem lowering the window okay actually actually I have to be honest with you usually move it to the oh Alo Mr Price saying he he wants to move it to the front my apolog not have it on the side oh this is a model I've done several times and I tend to move it to the front of the house and uh it's I end up bringing it down yeah and put it kind of right next to the door to the left so actually that window really doesn't exist so I'd be more than happy to move that because that's how I usually build it can can you just clarify again what are we talking out here you're going to move a window this window the window that's on 2A at the front right corner right here on A4 I agree so while you're on it the other question I have is on the on the first floor plan 1 a there appears to be an post um to the left side of the porch that doesn't show up in your elevations I'm wondering if is that do you really mean that that post is there that's not a full height on the first floor plan G8 to yeah that would just be a n post but that do that doesn't show in the elevations either so I'm just trying to figure out what it is ah yeah oh where am I to well is it a newal post no you there shouldn't be a post there there should not be there great elevations are accur on the front of the house the first and second story has uh two big Windows side by side uh but the shutters are not half the size of the window opening can you spread those windows apart so that the shutters could reflect the fact if closed totally they would go over absolutely and could you also consider maybe on some of this big opening side that we could also incorporate some shutters to give a little character to the size of back to your first I think there's a problem with those windows on the second floor plan there's a a you can see on the second floor plan on on A2 that why the windows can't go wider and at both floors uhuh so I think a better solution would be take shutter off to have shutters that well either take off or have shutters that are double fold double byold shutter well we could take them off if you look on the street you see there's two shingle style homes that never had shutters and there's a couple other homes that don't have shutters to mix that creates a problem over here on this side when you want to put shutters m i mean shutters shutters just really help give these houses the character that takes them back a little bit to the time of the so excuse me get rid of the L closet where's the linen clo here you move the window out a little bit oh I totally agree with that okay I think that's a great idea so why don't we just move the we'll spread the windows out and we'll do hat shutters that are appropriate size for the window and we'll we'll get rid of that closet upstairs okay are we looking at 1B right now um 1B on A3 a A3 so what are you going to do you're going to change the windows we we're going to move the windows further apart so the shutters can be half each shutter is half sash opening operational and and both first and second floor they'll appear operational right that's a lot of money in other words if they close they would cover the window and then and then you're going to add shutters um on the left elevation same A3 same to all four Windows well I think we got to look at the left the right elevation as well it's yeah H I'm more than happy to put the the uh hinged Shutters on the front but in all honesty I'd like not to put the hinged Shutters on the sides um I'm not sure you would need hinged shell hinged ones on the side yeah I'm more than happy to give you the shutters but those hinges stainless steel babies yeah yeah I think that but but if they are are designed so that they go on the the uh side rails of the window and they look like they would close and close they would meet in the middle very nice that's what most of the shutters in town are even even some of the original houses okay I'm guilty of that myself well I love those uh shutters that actually we put I don't know several houses and they're beautiful yeah yeah but they're by the time I was done 30 grand 30 Grand yeah yeah that's not the labor cost it's just a material the shutters inches so shut we're doing Shutters on the on the sides wide enough that they appear right half the sash opening uhhuh and on the front of the house we're moving the windows so that the shutters will appear again to cover correct could the outdoor shower be real wood rather than uh PVC well I usually use the azac MH the azac and then I usually put a on by4 around it mhm in ASAC is that acceptable yes what's the construction you stick build it with I I do as much as it might say vinyl I don't well it says in this in the schedule in the application that it's cellular PVC yeah which is as which is ASAC the fence um just just a comment that first off I don't see where the fence is I I on the plot plan a 6 foot fence but those vinyl fences that are 6t High um I they they're always wobbling around I am more than happy to put the wood fence with the little lattice portion if we get into the six Footers yeah I do that a lot down in K May point Y that would for that area I agree with you the wood would yeah 6ot Cedar with a lattice on exactly basically the same picture we have but in good I did want to commend you guys regarding the use of the simulated dividing light Windows you don't see that too often on new construction it really helps it blend in um so where does it where does this fence drop down in the size I don't if if you look on the um plot plan the fence is only in the rear for the pools enclosure so it's a dash line with little hash marks on it see this yeah uhhuh how far down the side does it go it just goes the there the corner um we're sitting here is it all right if I can bring it kind of up to the front here well then you have to put gate in well maybe I put the gate here but then I could just keep the 4 foot to here yeah well is that acceptable okay so my apologies I'm making a change yeah but I I I I just didn't get the change where's this fence going to go now um Larry's asking if he put He would like to put it down the property line where the driveway is 4ot fence along the property line on this side M on the botom of the page next to the driveway next to the driveway and then it stops at the front of the be on the property line if you have an agreement with your neighbors it's going to be 6 inches in in if it's not it has to be 6 Ines in correct right great to get an agreement with your neighbor it's much easier to maintain it's better to it's better to back off but let's continue because I still don't so it's going to drop down to 4 feet somewhere and then it's going to be elevated to six feet and then is it going to go the property line all the way only to the front of the house so that it wouldn't be in the front yard but from the rear property line rear property line up to the front of the house but not the front of the property line correct okay that's the 4ot 4 foot and the six foot section it's behind the garage correct and it wraps around to the other side of the property and stops at the shower enclosure and then there's a gate or something right there's there's like an 8ot gate at the driveway oh wait oh you oh you want to run across the gate across the driveway well no at the back of the property no this other side right here lar this other side put the fence here okay actually that's a good idea yeah my apologies so you're right we have a gate on the the gate is at the driveway defense from the garage to the house the porch and then there's a gate to the driveway gate for the driveway across the driveway no no yeah there's a walkway from the steps to the driveway there's a little gate in there see a little circle half circle there okay on the other side of the property over by the shower where is the fence's the shower it runs from the corner of the shower at the rear of the shower to the property line and then to the back corner of the property is is there a gate there okay we're going to add a gate there yeah I mean it otherwise you got to walk all the way around the house to get to the show from the pool okay I think we need an awful lot more on this plan we're we're talking about many things that we're talking about and Larry's agreeing but we're not seeing them on a plan I no I would agree I think we ought to change this to conceptual and and come back to us with a a final plan showing the windows the shutters so I do have a question fence do have a question about those shutters in the um again the left elevation 2A on A4 the small Square Windows would or would not have shutters I think it would look better without shutters personally that's what I think too I just wanted to make sure okay so if you're if you're in agreement if we make this conceptual we can then talk about these changes and then unfortunately you're going to have to have to come back because we're going to need a motion for this a resolution rather you guys going to the board for this or going to the zoning board for this no it's proba right okay so you know one of the Alternatives is you guys could take these comments and revise the plan that would be satisfactory to the board and come back next time with them too is it really you it's that much we're talking Miss we're talking some shutters that's all we're talking about no there's the fence is impossible to find on this drawing and you you you you've already been talking about elements that you're going to change and you're moving the windows yeah yeah didn't think it was that much but so is this one where we could also approve it with the caveat that those changes we list them and those could be approved in review the problem is then we don't have a resolution well you don't have a res I mean we could like the last two yeah you could have a resolution that would be on the table next month and it would have all this stuff in writing about that's why I've been kind of taking notes here trying to figure out what are you guys proposing to do um and I could we could laundry list that and do do it that way I don't know if the board's comfortable with that though given how many changes there are well we've we've we've changed from doing that because there is then there is no resolution and then when the place is being built and and our guy goes out and looks at it he's looking at this plan yeah but it could be that review doesn't happen until after we adopt the resolution that everybody's comfortable with next meeting you know we we don't have to do the review after this meeting we could do it after we figure out what we're voting on have a resolution and writing vote on next meeting and then next time there's a Review Committee after the April meeting everybody could all that I mean all that's saying is final approval happens at the next meeting subject to conditions that a Review Committee approves that's all that's all I mean you can give it conceptual now but with a lot of suggestions which which put leaves them in the same place that they would be if we wait a minute we' twice tonight we've already passed a resolution stating that it's approved so long as the Review Committee has documents such as a revised elevation in one case right so in this case we would just list the four four or five things like the shutters and the and the fence and the windows pass a resolution these guys submit revised drawings so that we have documents that our inspection officer our field advisor can use and we can approve it in review correct I don't see an issue with that as long as it's been it was an issue with Bob I don't I don't want to make theal argument it's only an issue if these these conditions are so unwieldy that the Review Committee doesn't have a grip as to what they're revie that's there's there's a danger unless these conditions are set forth very particularly and and not just a discussion about fences and a discussion about shutters and I mean there's a there's there's a fair number of things I I I don't think you can give it final approval with conditions tonight too there's just too many things missing on the plan well so say you and some of some others too um I mean true the other ones were fairly minimal in terms of what we had to approve in review and clearly defined I I I'm trying to be helpful here but I I think we need to see a a plan we made changes here um what I don't want to happen is you come up with new conditions at a new meeting that's why we resolution for conceptual review okay we are you would give his conceptual approval then correct with the list of have to come back for a final right and we would give a list in that resolution of the things we're asking you to revise and and in the spirit of that why don't I try and go through this reverse engineer this discussion and then see if there's anything else for the good of the order um I'm going to start with the thing that I'm still confused on which is a A4 2A what what were you guys talking about earlier the eyes you want to see it from the street what was that moving that window well it was moving Windows around well that's sheet a three is where we're moving Windows right well we you you talked about 2A before though right well it's a little guy it's a little 2A on and Mr Price said something about right we're going to take the window in the stairwell it's on the lower right corner of that drawing I move it to the front that R is going to be removed okay and it's going to be added to the front facade and then the light it's going to move the light isn't there a light on well the light will be between that'll be still on the stair Landing so the light would still be between the window and the door the outside yes so the the little window uh on A4 2A is going to be shown somewhere on 1B next to the door yes to the left of the entry door okay mhm all right and then while we're on 1B a page A3 you're going to spread the windows on the front elevation and provide shutters that are half the width of the window when hinged shutters I think I heard hinged they'll be hinged on the front facade right and then on 2B same page you're going to add shutters without hinges wide enough that they cover cover the window essentially yes okay and then the shower um is going to be ASAC it's already called that way so okay all right that's not a change then it's just a clarification uh and the fence you have cellular PVC it's going to be Cedar plus lattice on the top right yeah as depicted in Cedar portion the six foot portion will has lattice on the top then the 4 foot portion is okay but don't no lattice obviously on the fourth four that'll be solid okay and you're going to show that on the plan and where the gates are right and then so what about the right side elevation the double hung windows will get non-hinged shutters uh on on both sides on both sides except for the little Windows right so the double hung Windows only get the shutters okay I will make a motion for uh what he said concept conceptual conceptual approval based on the items that we've just uh been reviewed with by with our attorney I'll second but certainly good enough for me and and and so so with those changes you come back for final approval then that's your conceptual I said after those changes you come back for final approval are we voting uh sooner or later guys understand all this yes who's uh first the next time back is that the lamir anybody else on the agenda after them already for next month we just have we have we have two the folks who surrendered their place yeah okay all right so might make it at 9:30 well it's it's it's 9:58 and we can't have any more discussion after 10 o' I second the motion we appreciate you listening actually because we two minutes motion by Mr I was trying to be polite seconded by Mr copelan Mr copelan yes Mr Carrol yes Mr Becker yes Mr Stevenson Mr Testa yes Miss Wilson stck yes thank you thank you thank you thanks s keep you out um open to the public for discussion no public showing an interest we'll close it to the public um discussion um the payment of the bills I sign the um the one issue that um we just want to take a minute I know it's late but we'll take a minute anyway um we have received another award and um unfortunately I I was not available to attend the award presentation I've asked Tom to go in my stad and some others of you have but I asked Tom to just give us a two or three minute this award was uh coming from the New Jersey historic commission one of the three major commissions that all of us and Kate May deal with the historic commission the historic Council the cultural trust and the Arts Council so uh they went through and looked at all the organizations in New Jersey that have received attention guidance and funds from the historic commission and decided who they thought probably did the best job uh in the state and the most amazing thing is the two that they gave it to were both organizations in Kate May the CCA where an awful lot of that is for interpretation of history and I think a lot of that had to do with their interpretation of black history which certainly help that application and for us it was you know our new standards and uh you know our review and the way that we presented them to the public was also something that came out too that they thought that was a very proper thing to do to have several different sessions uh for the reers the uh Architects and Builders and for the home owners so do we have another nice plaque to put up on the wall next to the door uh it's actually a beautiful GL a glass thing but I and Tuesday you're going to present it to city council yeah and um unfortunately you know I I couldn't be there um but the agenda for City Council has this as um for the book and it it it it's not it's not for the the standards book I think was I know I saw the book on the final but I'll take a look I I think it's it was for the was definitely on there but I think on the dra I thought you were presenting tomorrow night yeah okay but it I I think it's broader than the it is the the award is for more than the book for more than the book exactly right so it's really for uh the HBC contribution we're more than just the words on the page wow can I cover one more thing oh this picture that I'm showing is from public works and they're working on the uh little uh old B little small Gazo Bandstand at the at the cove and they have enough wood to make these little brackets to put on the columns on the roof and I told him I would try to see if I could get an approval for that from you guys and oh come on Father we need a motion for this is this a city application are we it has to go to the state oh this just like a c sh I you got a problem I I think I think this clearly shows that past 10 p.m. we are incapable of I hate competent work well people are going to say if I have to make up I wanted to come after 10 and we got a thank you so Tom yes that doesn't count no but but it's a city projects well then it has to be reviewed by the state so I would suggest um no and then we'll just do it yeah so so um did you actually say that no I have witnesses no I didn't so I didn't hear anything I'm going to I'm going to take it that the curfew hour having been passed that we are not taking up any new business um or continuing the meeting much Beyond 10 o' so we do have another issue that I um I I'd asked um John Becker to update because I wasn't able to attend the the African-American contribution to our National Historic Landmark Was Heard um on the 14th and um literally while that meeting was going on I was with the family with a the development of a birth of a new grandchild so I couldn't attend the meeting I did send a letter though uh supporting the the project um I wasn't able to share it with you all and and and with city council because I did it while we were driving to the hospital um but it was a nice letter trust me um so John where where do we where did they wind up I know there was a real concern about it being tabled um and did not get tabled it got approved um there was an hour and a half discussion Zach was on there there the whole time and so was pip and so was I um and Zach spoke briefly and so did pip briefly I forget exactly what the issues were there was something about um the inclusion of one or two other uh individuals and or buildings that should receive some some mention in the report I forget exactly which ones this the discussion was it went all over the place and then came back again it appeared like it might get tabled and finally they said no no no there's a difference between the comment was there's a difference between the quality of the of the of the um intent and the quality of the or the the wait a minute we're approving the intent we're not approving the document so what they were looking for were some details in the document that need to be finalized and there were also when I thought it was going to be table they were looking for some things that you really couldn't document so is there to be a final version of whatever it is that was so the person who was represent who was making the presentation Andrea tingi yeah and it it appeared she knew the document inside and out and appear as if she was taking responsibility for making the revision yes so so for those people interested surve document that we RW that we all looked at yeah and um and then there was some mixup on what was communicated and so finally um Andrea tingy from the state took it upon herself to rewrite the draft with Nancy she made a great presentation she was really good yeah so this this really um this we get these Awards recently and that's really exciting but for me this is a culmination like a two years where it's a hard work by a lot of people to recognize a part of the community that has not been recognized and should have been and so now they will be so so as I what I think is accurate correct me if I'm wrong this is the first um Charter for a National Historic land Mark District in the country that has revised its Charter to acknowledge the contribution of the African-American Community is that correct yes yes but it's more than that this is the first addendum to a national landmark and in fact it seems like maybe a year ago when we proposed this um the uh State the state the Secretary of interior through the park service literally two weeks after our discussions with the Park Service they presented a seminar online seminar for what it what's required to amend the National Historic Landmark so it's a lot they they saw um the value of this but also the complexity of amending u a landmark um so they they presented a whole seminar which some of us sat through so um speak any sitting through and then and then there were several versions of this and then finally with a lot of work from Kate May because uh Nancy did a lot of work with support from the HBC personally and then when took over um there was a whole laundry list of things that had to be back this this though is really a significant um happening the city should be really yeah I agree absolutely the the the library the ReUse of an old school an abandoned black school just a absolutely significant project nationally and the first African-American District in the state and now these I didn't know it was the first amendment to uh a national landmark really really significant nationally what what's happened here and I agree weing a lot a lot of work um it's too bad you didn't come to the one in Trenton because the CCA were really recognized there for their for their publication and a lot of people were there um that was they had a bus they had a bus so I think you would have really appreciated that award but also the commission made a point of how unusual it was to have such large percentage of attendants from South Jersey and we're really South Prett pretty tough to get any further south I mean I think we had 39 people there northern Delaware you know the other component of what they were talking about at that shipo hearing was the idea that this will in fact be used since it is the first one almost as a model for others to do the same thing therefore they were kind of giving it an extra close eye and magnifying glass on his precision and yeah yeah I think two things happened they wanted to do it they're motivated to do it because it's an exciting project and then at the same time they wanted a lot of detail to support it unbelievably because it is going to set up a precedence and the city is restoring two of the buildings the city has purchased and restored two of the most significant buildings in this District so also um there's some Grant things in in the city that are dependent on this being approved so hopefully we will get it all the way um approved by Congress it is interesting though isn't it we have this we've received what I call three Awards we got the award out there we got the award there now we have a third award and then we have this uh culmination and uh 15 years ago Kate May was on the watch list of the of the National Historic Landmark so we've come all the way from then we got a new chairman being on the watch list so all thanks to the work of everybody I mean this that's that's a lot of work and we have the best city council I think I've ever worked under in all my years in K May wow that's saying a lot yeah yeah so anyway anyway yeah and and a new prominade expansion and and Improvement project what what was that like 6.7 million yeah yeah room for more but it is it is notable that it was $100 million and we have 130 mil of coastline .7 million is disproportionately favorable to the city of Kate may but enough of all these accolades anyway enough self congratul may I just make one comment because we're going to we're going to presumably get on to the parking issue next time around um I just wanted to to point out that the draft of the memo to the city council that was circulated here which Bears the the the upper Legend J comments is is just reflective of some of the things I've said that I think Chris incorporated into the memo this not my memo and these are not all my comments so we really need to just be sure that you all I was trying to give you credit well you did and but it's not all my memo and then my comments are in it but please don't think that it's my memo unless it's a really good memo well you can claim credit for that I think it started out as John's memo it and then it evolved it evolved this is like the fourth iteration of this it did yeah so hopefully next month we nail it down along with the okay Chris Chris brought a really good idea to it by splitting it into two potential options yeah I thought that was pretty smart I see a long meeting coming up in April no it won't be it won't be like this anything else oh I just I just like to to make an announcement um that that the um the city is moving the HPC and the board office to um where the fire inspectors were so we're getting a much more significant office uh will be much more respected and I have discussed with the manager getting um a case for the hallway to put some uh the ward in and some other things that are upstairs and around the building uh we will rehang the award anything that's in our offices will be now in that office or outside in the hallway so that'll have that might be H we might have moved um by next month actually head around the corner Karen and I right across the hall yes right across from the tax office okay terrific thank you all it was UN I tried to cut it off I tried to cut it off