okay we will call the meeting to order and Claire may we have a roll call please here here here here here here here here okay if we can stand for the salute to the flag I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all okay the notice requirements of the open public meeting law for this meeting have been satisfied a copy of the notice having been sent to the Asbury Park Press in the coaster and filed in the office of the Township Clerk on July 21st 2023 there is an emergency exit through the courtroom doors and two exits at the rear of the room there will be no smoking no new cases will be started after 10:00 p.m. and no new testimony taken after 10:30 p.m. in addition the applicant will be limited to 45 minutes of testimony all meetings will be video and audio taped and shown on the township of oceans Community cable channel channel 22 on Verizon FiOS and channel 77 on cable vision all cell phones must be turned off or if you need to make a call please make your call outside the room we have resolutions for memorialization Jason T block 180 Lots 1 and 2 1900 Sunset Avenue Ocean bulk variance approval Antonius uh cabus block 38 lot 95 for William lane Ocean variance approval and Keith galuk block 129 lot 22 1313 Garvin Avenue Ocean bulk variant approval and I will offer second here no yes yes oh yeah still here still present yeah I can't right you weren't here yeah you didn't vote on these resolutions originally he was either you didn't vote on these resolutions no I mean on the case uh no no you're right was one eligible yes yes yes done okay cases carried to December 21st 2023 to be held in the public meeting room Municipal Building deal in Mammoth roads in Oakhurst ashkanazi block 11.01 lot 3 1036 Norwood Avenue in Ocean memo Investments LLC block 7 lot 5144 Mammoth Road in Oakhurst and we have minutes for approval December 15 2022 and January 26 2023 we offering the minutes yes but I I'll offer I need to be offered separately because there's different votes okay so December 15 2022 I'll offer I'll second uh yes and chairwoman yes okay January 26 2023 I'll offer I'll second I wasn't here January no he withdraw his second IW but he's still here he's still here I I'll second if I was there a long time ago it's in January right yes yes yes okay we have our first case Solomon a block 63 lot 7 511 Mammoth Road West Allen Hurst R5 applicant seeks approval to construct a second story Edition with cover covered front porch uncovered side porch and circular driveway this lot does not meet the required lot depth nor does it meet the required front yard setbacks on both Mammoth Road and Myrtle Avenue and the rear yard setback Mr batty yes okay can you raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay and yes and we're going to Mark the pth B1 and I will ask Mr Higgins I'll summarize my report basically it's a corner lot on Myrtle involment Road it's regularly shaped um there are existing set back setb violations or nonconformities with the front the side and the rear and they're simply extending the house vertically up it's a one-story house they're they're going up vertically at those setback points so technically there are setback variances required because they're increasing the height of the house within the required within the required setback um the other issue that I had had with this application is that the ordinance says that the driveway access should be only from the street of lesser classification and that the driveway be located at Le 50 ft or 2third of the lot width whichever is less uh from requir originally they were proposing the driveway to be a circular driveway on Mammoth Road and they changed that now to have a circular driveway on Myrtle Avenue which is the street of lesser classification so that part of the variance is gone part one of the accesses for that circular driveway is within 50 ft of the intersection of Mammoth and Myrtle so there's still variance necessary for that but when you look at the site and you look at the house they if they don't do a driveway a circular driveway like that they they can't put the required parking on the site so it makes sense to do what they're doing and I don't think it's it's something that's that's that that B I think it's really a better solution than having driveway fet away where cars just pull straight in back out okay Mr matl uh the only comment that I had was that the project uh disturbs more than 200 square ft uh which uh the township requires a great plan when that happens um one has not been submitted but uh I would say that it could be a condition of approval uh if the board feels that way to uh have it submitted um for review okay Mr a can you tell us about your request in regards to I'm sorry in regards to just give us a summary of what you're requesting to do uh circular driveway on on mytle Avenue um that's basically the and also want to extend the second floor okay what are you building what you what are you going to be building who's this gentleman who po par me his architect why don't we swear in the architect can you state your full name please Thomas Lavin uh with Robert Hazel R and Associates architects 3430 Sunset Avenue and have you testified before this board before I have okay and can you tell us just a little bit about your credentials please I'm licensed in the state of New Jersey graduate of NJIT uh been practicing uh as a licensed architect since 2007 uh testified before this board numerous boards okay in this area okay can you tell us about the request please sure um I guess I can describe it from this basically have a 1950s Cape Cod which was four bedrooms limited space uh the house is on a crawl space and has no Attic So they have limited space the garage one car garage was original was um previous owner took part of that space to create Pantry so there's there's no parking in the G technically only one parking spot right now so that's why they want to do a circular drive to add more parking spot they want to raise the second floor because the two bedrooms on the second floor are under it's a c Cod so part portions of the room are under the roof so it has limited space so by raising the full second floor they can get more bedroom how many bedrooms will you have in total uh there will be five currently four two on the first floor two on the second floor there'll be one on the first floor now and four on the second floor so they're adding one about the only increase to the building coverage is they like to put a roof on the front porch That's inrease that roof doesn't does that push into any of the set packs yes the porch is already in the front set be further well the porch itself is in the setback but the roof is going to be over the porch by putting the roof over it so that would be the front yard set back um it's currently 20.11 yes and it's going to be 20.5 no the current is 2511 to the house and 20.11 to the porch porch yeah and but the porch doesn't porch currently doesn't have a like right so it's not counted right what it's not counted well I I think as far as the setback goes the zoning officer does count the measurement to the what as so the porch won't be expanded it'll just have a okay now is it correct I see two porches though there's one onle and one on the one we're talking about is the one on on mouth and the other murtle will stay the same right right it's okay okay any questions from the board a quick question um the houses around in the surrounding area they're all from the same era assume have others been improved in the same way or are others you know in the same neighborhood two stories now yes it's going to be keeping with the character of any other questions from the board okay question um just just um how are we going to finish the exterior on the everything's being redone it's going to be done in the stco Finish new new style Curr going be recited in a new R everything will be redone and new roofs everything will back new roofs y because we couldn't add the full second floor any other questions questions from the public okay motion to close the public hearing make a motion to close the public hearing second yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes okay and someone offer regarding the front yard setback side yard rear yard with the grading plan if I'm not mistaken there's driveway and the circuit the driveway the driveway within 50 ft of the intersection but there's also a requirement in Jim's letter uh some other additions on the plan great measur and stuff that you want on the plan no I think they changed that my initial letter okay so you don't need that no no okay wouldn't know that okay tell me that's out okay no I'll make a motion of pause a resolution a second the other com yes yes yes yes yes yes okay thank you thank you thank you next case is Isaac and Michelle mishan block 8.01 lot 20 52 L Court Oakhurst R1 applicant seeks approval to construct a detach Cabana within the rear yard setback the proposed inground pool is conforming minimum rear yard setback for accessory building exceeding 150 ft Fe in area minimum setback requirements of the principal building or 40 ft rear yard setback required 13 ft proposed and attorney is Jennifer Esco good good evening Madam chair members of the board Jennifer kmco behalf of the applicant okay and Mr Higgin and we're going to Mark the packet basically they have a garage and it's non-conforming because it's more than 150 square feet in area and higher than 10 ft in height it's a garage now that they want to change to a cabana right I'm no sorry okay I'm on the wrong I'm the wrong application that's right yeah I was trying so okay yeah a that constru it's it's 1,082 Square fet uh and basically it's larger than 150 square F feet in area and 10 ft in height the ordance requires minimum setbacks of 40 ft for rear yard setb back and a 13t rear yard setback is proposed um when I looked at it I mean they could put it in a fully conforming location and I think doing that would first of all reduce its ability to to relate to the pool but more importantly have more of a visual impact if they if they turn the building and had a 48 foot wall 10t from the property line which is required and the other wall that I'm sorry the wall I'm read it now I'm get confused okay that's the end of the Cabana faces the rear property line and it's 21.5 ft wide and the height is approximately 10 ft there's also a solid arborite screen 14t tall along the property line consequently well this is a large Cabana the visual impact is far less than if the 48 foot length of the Cabana fa even was 4 F away that's so much much wider it can't be seen from the adjacent property so I don't think it's major issue okay Mr matl uh my only comment was uh that there was potentially uh a drainage issue uh that I noted on the plan and that the grading should be revised to uh promote positive drainage uh and that was it we can stipulate to that okay and just thank you and just very quickly A1 is the survey that was submitted A2 is the plot plan that was submitted and A3 are the architectural plans that were submitted and then as A4 it's just an aerial from Google Earth that I downloaded and as you you see the subject property is marked in red the swimming pool is not in yet in this photo but when you look at the plan you can get the general idea of where it's going to be and as you see well we do need a rear yard setback variant it's up against a tennis court from the lot behind us a tennis court from the lot adjacent to that and a pool and what appears to be a pool house or garage on the property next door so from well Jim really gave the testimony for us um that this is a better zoning alternative than a conforming one based on the conforming one having more of an impact um I wanted to make sure you understood that from a negative criteria standpoint there really is virtually no uh impact at all I do have the engineer here um I don't know that there's much for him to add because we're going to comply I have the architect here and she could just if you'd like walk you through the plan to see it's not a solid structure there are two enclosed areas and it's generally an open structure in the other areas so I'd like to call up Anella and then obviously Chad is is here if you have any questions on the engineering I have her sworn I'm sorry can you state your first and last name sure and Kari e n k e l a and last name m a l e l l a r i melari okay and um do you if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth I do okay and Kell you're licensed architect state New Jersey and your license isn't good standing correct and you've testified here before correct abolutely not before those okay you've testified before numerous boards throughout the state correct and you I just learned tonight you teach architecture at NJIT yes I do I think we'll accept all right thank you and K if you could take that microphone over there and um I had indicated that the structure itself is not fully enclosed there are two small enclosed areas on either side if you could just point those out correct so we have this area that what it's a small kitchenet for warming food and then the laundry area and a bathroom back here and then a small changing area so really the only enclosed spaces are in the back left and right Corners so the and the back right corner mhm is the one that needs the setback variants relief from the rear yard correct and that area in question what are the dimensions of that enclosed area so the laundry area is 67 by 142 right so it's relatively small it's only 10 ft high and then you can virtually see through the Cabana uh along the entire front portion correct so if you see in these elevations this is pretty much open and the only solid wall is the long wall and that's uh meets the set back against the property line correct I mean I could go on but I see there's other people so if there's any needs the it does on the side yes any questions from the board there was questions about the pool equipment and where that's going I it'll be in a conforming location okay okay any questions from the public Okay so I have Madam chair all right a motion to oh motion public I'll second yes Excuse me yes yes yes yes yes yes okay well someone offer I'll offer positive resolution second next yes yes yes yes yes yes thank you very much and Happy Thanksgiving to everybody did you want that was your agenda that was in a sack of papers I'll toss it you don't have to okay then excuse me next case Tamara dobris block 3323 Lot 2 1901 Waverly Street Oaker R4 applicant seeks approval to keep the existing inground pool patio pool equipment and fire pit within the required front side and rear yard setbacks that were constructed in violation of the zoning approval just for the record I have to disqualify myself because she's my daughter's neighbor okay we have your report thank you okay Miss dolis if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay and I will ask um Mr matl if you packet and we're going to Mark the packet uh B1 thank you madam chair uh so this application is uh to um clean up work that that was uh previously done uh the there was a a pool installed in the backyard with a p patio and a fire pit uh there are setback uh variances required uh for the accessory structures the swimming pool uh and the patio uh they're required to maintain 30 ft uh from the front yard setback and 10 ft from the side and rear yard setbacks and the uh the pool um patio uh is 28 ft to the front yard uh it's 27 ft to the pool equipment and then uh 4 feet to the side uh from the side yards of the of the patio and 4 feet to the uh fire pit and 3 feet uh from the rear yard to the patio uh so those are the variances required um the property is on a a corner lot so they there is the uh the issue of having two uh 30ft front yard setbacks uh which kind of reduces the building envelope um that that is available um I'll ask the applicant is uh is there a fence around the the pool no not around the pool well around the around the backyard yes and is is that I see it's existing six foot PVC fence is that a solid fence yes so you can't see the pool or the patio or anything from the street or from your neighbor's properties no uh and from an engineering standpoint um uh I I noted in my report uh that the proposed development results in an increase in impervious surface it doesn't exceed the maximum impervious uh it's not a major development so it's not does not have to comply with the D storm water RS uh regulations but uh I would just ask if uh the new impervious would have any impacts on the neighboring properties have you had any any drainage issues uh as a result of the the insulation no drainage issue I check with my neighborhood is um no drainage and we have a lot of PLS and um I also have a um like a Water Garden on this side and the water just go and I don't have any other any other questions or concerns this is that's yes okay Miss dolis can you just tell us about your um yeah I think she had some problems with the with the contractor I think they would know about that can you just tell us about your your um request the previous issue and what's leading uh you to come here today um my request is um I'm seeking approval to keep the existing INR pool the patio the pool equipment the pool wood fire pit and this ring area with the front the side the rear um yard setback um when they construct the pool um build the pool he told me that I did not we had concrete before around the pool and he said for the fire pit I did not because it's favor we did not need um to get um a permit I kept asking him are you sure are you sure he said yes and he's the professional since that's what he did and um I believed him and then later on um when they come for inspection that's when I find out that um I needed a permit for the fire pit um the fire pit um we build the fire pit I buil the wall because of the fence um to make sure that um just in case there's any Sparkle like the wall will stop anything going close to the fence we had originally had um Mulch and I remove that I put all Stone down so just in case for any type of emergency um to protect the safety of the public and that's basically okay are there any questions from the board questions from the public okay motion to close the public hearing I'll make a motion to close public hearing second yes yes yes yes yes yes yes okay move someone offer I'll make a motion for pause of resolution second [Applause] yes yes yes yes yes yes yes okay thank you best of luck thank you okay our new case is fallis Family Trust block 60 lot 13 800 Mammoth Road ocean R4 applicant proposes to construct an addition to the existing second floor the property does not meet the required lot depth the dwelling is pre-existing non-conforming and that it does not meet the required rear yard setback minimum rear yard setback 30 ft requires 26.3 in exists 26.3 in proposed although existing dwelling is non-conforming in that it violates required rear yard setback the proposed addition further extends the violation and the attorney is Thomas J Hirsch good evening good evening okay and do I'm gonna Mark the packet okay and we will hear from Mr aens this is another application where the applicant is again going vertically up without increasing the horizontal distance of the setback violation there is one small addition that's being tucked into a corner of the loot the house the house is not straight along the back it does have a jog that small addition is being tucked into the corner but again that the setback of that addition is actually greater than the setback of other portions of the house so I really don't have a problem with it it's in a regularly shaped lot and I think we're just trying to make the place better okay Mr matl uh I don't have any engineering concerns okay Mr H good evening thank you uh obviously Mr Higgins I think it's pretty well covered the trust of the planning and and Zoning variances required uh I'd like to uh uh call Mr urino Anthony urino as our the architect to give the board a sense of exactly where what you heard verbally is on the plan in relationship to the rear property line and the and the property to the rear to show that there's you know clearly no impact by these improvements um so I'd like to call Mr Mr Arina if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay and have you testified before this board previously I'm pretty sure I've been here okay okay thought so and you're currently a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey I am okay okay thank you please tell us about the I want you go to the board with the microphone and uh just take us through the take the board through you know what's there what what the where the additions that Mr Higgins referred to in his report exist in relation to the rear property line and to the property uh behind that okay the the existing two family portion or twostory portion of the house is the main box of the house and then there's a Breezeway and then a two-car garage the addition that we're doing is the second floor Edition is over top of the Breezeway and the and what was a garage is now going to be turned into a master site and then there's a small addition towards the rear here that will go the full two-story height now that's what what they were referencing with the 26.5 to the corner of the main two-story portion of the house and the 26.3 to the existing garage and then 26.6 to that new addition so it's kind of a saw too uh kind of following the the line of the property line and as you said the uh Mr Higgins said it's an irregular lot so that rear property line runs on it the sharp angle that you've just shown correct correct and that's what changes the actual setback so the portion of those structures actually violating the setback is really a small portion of those structures because the line keeps getting further away as it moves along there triangular shapes there's a portion this little triangle here that crosses over and this little triangle here over the existing garage that crosses over the setback line and the uh to the rear uh explain to the board what what's uh on the lot behind where these uh PR or lot variances uh for the most part it faces out towards the the empty rear yard of the neighboring home that other Home faces where it faces Joda okay J Road and that that home's a substantial distance from this proposed Improvement correct uh yeah it's uh about 40t from the existing house maybe 45 ft from the addition uh the two-story Edition that we're doing and then even further to the corner of the garage okay uh thank you that's pretty much the basis architecturally of what the setback variance is and why it exists because we already have the garage essentially at that that setback line so it's that's where the structure is if you're going to build on top of it you're going to have that same setback thank you okay I do have the you know representatives of a homeowner here but I so if we have any further questions I'm happy to call them but I think based on Mr Higgins report and Mr aro's testimony covered the variance issue questions just one the if I'm understanding the the demolition plan over the proposed plan that that little Nook that uh Jim was talking about that gets built in a primary bedroom like the piece I guess that the only real addition to the floor plan correct that's not in the setback right that's outside of the setback this there's a portion of it that is within the setback this is the first floor plan so it's there's an angle that kind of cuts across here okay so this this corner is over because the property line is like this so it it's no closer to the property line than this point or this point got it okay the facade will match the rest of the house uh yes and roof and roof yeah and the roof yes yeah there was there was no discussion about changing the whole house siding or Roofing it's all any other questions from the board questions from the public motion to close the public hearing I'll make a motion close second yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes okay will someone offer I'll offer positive resolution second yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes okay thank you thank you ladies and gentlemen have a great holiday you too okay our last case Joseph and Sharon Sofi block 61.6 lot 15 517 Palmer Avenue West Allen Hurst R5 excuse me applicant seeks approval to partially convert an existing detached garage into a caban accessory buildings over 150 ft cannot exceed 15 ft in height and must maintain the required 15% of lot width or 11.25 ft side setback and 30 ft rear setback 19.5 ft height exists 19.5 height proposed 2.7 ft side exist 2 uh fet side proposed 3 ft rear exist 3T rear proposed the detached garage is pre-existing non-conforming and that is exceeds the minimum height and does not meet the required side and rear yard setbacks no building or structure um part thereof shall here and after be erected structurally altered enlarged or rebuilt except in Conformity and the attorney is Mr Robert T Farber thank you madam chairman and Ladies and Gentlemen of the board I know Mr Higgins is going to give his feeli in a minute but very very briefly um I just want to clarify something Mr mat on your report there's no variance re required for the pool that's proposed or the patio around it this is solely for purposes of converting the pre-existing garage to a coolhouse in part and part garage uh it should be noted that the actual configuration in terms of the size the roof the height the location is not changing is merely going to be knock a wall out make aan out of part of it but in terms of coverage there's no change I do have Mr Levan here to testify and describe uh we were just was possibly still sworn in even though not for this matter so and uh because there was a concern potentially about some drainage concerns um I do have the engineer our designer here um to testify Mr Scott Lin if required and uh I spoke in my piece Jim your turn I'm in the right Pew now on this one basically they're taking a garage that exceeds 150 square foot which is the uh threshold for allowing them to have it 5T off the property line and the 15 ft in height it also exceeds so it's required to meet the front and side and rear yard setbacks of the principal structure and the garage doesn't it's uh setback side setback is 2.7 ft where I believe the side setback is 11.24 ft is required and the rear setback is 30 ft and 3 feet exists so they're basically just taking the existing garage they're changing a portion of it for a cabana and leaving a portion of it as a garage um there's no expansion of the of the garage it's going to made it look a lot nicer I think when I look at the architecture it's going to be much more attractive it's really a technical variance because they're changing the use and making some changes and new ordinance say if you make any changes you need variances if you're not coning okay and we'll mark the packet before Mr mat laac uh thank you uh Madam chair so my my uh engineering comments um did not have to do with the garage as uh Mr Barber indicated they had to do with the uh future inground pool which I'm assuming is to be built at the same time as the the garage conversion um uh mostly that uh there were um there was a discrepancy between the survey and the plan showing whether or not there was an existing fence um I asked that the type of fence and the height should be specified uh and then the if there were any uh drainage impacts um and uh how storm water would be collected or or handled so that it would not Nega impact the neighboring properties any concerns um such as those we can abide by any conditions of improval uh in terms of the pool though that is again not part of the application is only for the uh the uh garage conversion and I might add that I think the code official would probably address a lot of that when the fool is ultimately built so I don't know that that's a variance matter regarding the pool and the drainage for it if You' like to address it we're prepared to but I I don't think that's a concern because that would be compliance in the construction of the pool but um if you are ready I can present Mr Levan who uh has sworn before and is beautifying Ocean Township one house at a time my artist Mr Lan you're a licensed architect of oh you need to be sworn in do youir to tell the truth the whole truth I do okay licensed architect of the state of New Jersey yes since 2007 seven correct associated with Bobby hazelrig correct and uh you've testified before this board numerous times including about an hour ago correct we ask mam chairman that uh Mr Lan be allowed to testify yes an expert and Mr 11 would you kindly describe for the board exactly what you're looking to do what the client is looking to do okay we have an existing two-car garage two overhead doors with a side entrance in the back there's a ships ladder that goes up to a loft so what we like to do is the left side which will be closest to the to the yard and the pool convert that into a cabana The Loft axis would be removed they want to open up the the ceiling of the Cabana side uh The Loft side will remain on the garage side and there'll be a pull down stair for at attic access for storage um um the outside on the front there's a there's a hip roof which is in bad shape so they're going to remove that and match the existing roof just to square it off the entire structure will be resided in a stucco finish to match the house which is in the process of being redone so it'll match the house the the roofing will be redone to match the house also that's there's some existing windows that have been previously removed that are covered with plywood those are going to be removed and filled in properly so everything is nice and clean and finish okay nothing further okay um if the board has any questions regarding water or flow I do have uh I do have Mr Lynn here if you require but again I think that's something that would go with compliance with code officials when the pool is built it's not really a variance issue okay Mr Steinberg just a question because it was part of the report about the drainage and storm water should we have them um it's up to Matt because we're gonna Ben [Laughter] Ben that's have to be compant when they go for their permit right it the the pool itself will have to be compliant a a grading issue I I think maybe we can if if the uh engineer is here I think we can hear from them just to get it on the record okay can have a seat I think when you construct the pool you have to do a grading plan anyway yeah the the uh the plan that was provided does show proposed grades um it's it's a little unclear to me exactly how the the drainage patterns are going to work so I I think some testimony would would help would benefit okay all right um could you please swear in Mr Lynn Mr Lyn do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay and Mr Lynn you are uh you have 35 years experience civil engineering work you've testified before this board as an expert and many times in the past am I correct I have not appeared before this particular board but I have appeared before many other boards in the state of New Jersey Oh I thought you were in notion no was not first time um uh we'll accept Okay thank you Mr uh Lyn you were privy to the discussion about drainage and water flow concerns pertaining to the proposed pool uh could you just uh discuss and address that please absolutely uh so there's actually two plans that have been prepared by myself on behalf of DS engineering where I'm an engineer for uh the the plan that you you have in front of you is for the addition which is the addition site plan which covers what we're discussing here this evening previously there was a pool grading plan prepared and as Mr Farber said this is being submitted under a separate application as part of the plan when I prepared the pool grading plan there is a trench drain which uh perimeters if you will the proposed patio which would be of a tile surface that Tren strain would intercept any runoff uh onto the any of the other adjoining properties and is directed to the street via a popup emitter so to address Ben's comment I I think that should suffice I think that that's acceptable okay any other questions could uh could you submit a uh send me a copy or do you have a copy of that I believe I believe a copy has been submitted to the town already I don't think I received a copy of that grading point so that we don't believe it could be we don't believe it also uh just just to clarify as well in addition to Ben's report uh I did receive a a report uh from uh Greg blash um which I've already addressed his comments and submitted the plans and they should be forthcoming any day now so I believe we've addressed all the engineering comments both from Greg blash and from okay any other questions question for Jim or or Ben I didn't see any anything in the reports but is there any concern about reduction in off street parking by losing um I look I did look at it and there's a very long driveway so there's plenty of parking okay any other questions that the long driveways that's a characteristic of this neighborhood right Mr far do you know that the neighboring behind is there a a garage like mirroring where this garage soon to be I don't know the answer to that question but my clients would if you would like to ask them the house right next door has a very long driveway and no garage I'm looking at a Google aerial right now behind it it's behind I imagine I imagine there one kind of mirroring it right yeah so it won't bother anybody any other questions questions from the public okay motion to close the public hearing take a motion to close public hearing I'll second fire tonight yes yes yes yes yes yes yes yes okay well someone offer I'll offer a positive resolution I will second we're done for Mr Kirk's last vote that he hears here yes yes yes yes yes yes okay thank you thank you thank you and before we adjourn the parade will now come in for Mr KK who I know would be mortified but thank you for your service Mr Kirk instruction and a motion to adjourn all motion second all in favor