Central to the meeting was the contentious installation of a garage door on Cookman Avenue, which deviated from the approved design. The board scrutinized the discrepancies, noting that the door, valued at $65,000, did not conform to the historical integrity required by the board’s original specifications. Architect Jeffrey Bell and Matthew Gates, the owner of the Asbury Pale House, provided testimony on the issue. Gates explained that the door’s manufacturer did not meet the design specifications, leading to a misaligned installation. “I thought it was correct… then when I really looked at the difference of the two beams, it’s they’re offset,” Gates acknowledged, highlighting the extent of the deviation.

The board emphasized historical preservation, expressing frustration over the repeated need to address compliance issues post-installation. One member remarked on the tendency of applicants to seek forgiveness after deviating from agreed-upon plans, stating, “I just tired of giving forgiveness.” The board collectively insisted that the garage door be modified to match the original design as closely as possible or risk further enforcement actions.

The discussion also highlighted financial concerns, with representatives noting that correcting the door’s issues could cost up to $65,000. Despite this, the board remained firm on the necessity of compliance.

In parallel, the board assessed the security protocols at the Asbury Pale House, stressing the importance of maintaining current security measures. Public comments raised concerns about the reduction of security, with local residents like Elisa Bennett expressing fears over potential disturbances if security were diminished. “The idea of taking away security is very frightening for me and problematic,” Bennett stated. The board unanimously supported the need for security, particularly during peak hours, where up to six security staff might be present.

The meeting also tackled seating arrangements at the ale house’s bar counter. Gates requested an increase in bar stools from five to eight to manage standing patrons better. The board discussed the proposal, with members generally agreeing that more seating could mitigate crowding issues. They emphasized the importance of enforcing a “no seat, no service” policy to ensure patrons complied with the seating rules. Public comments, like those from Mary Beth Boyle, underscored ongoing violations, noting, “There were eight place settings at the bar on June 10th of 2024,” and emphasized the need for adherence to stipulated conditions.

As the board deliberated on these matters, they also touched upon the implications of enforcement actions if the establishment failed to comply with the requirements. It was clarified that the current door’s non-compliance could lead to citations by city code enforcement, potentially escalating to municipal court if not addressed promptly.