##VIDEO ID:ODg6io7W-M8## go um good evening everyone today is Tuesday October 22nd 2024 and this is a regular meeting at the city of Asbury Park Zoning Board of adjustment chairman avalani can you please call this meeting to order I'd be happy to this meeting is being held in compliance with the op public meetings act chapter 231 Public Law 1975 adequate notice of this meeting has been Prov Ed to the coaster in Asbury Park Press by publication of the annual meeting notice and posted on Municipal bulon board and Municipal website all notices are un filed with the board secretary official action may be taken on the following matters before this board and this meeting is being recorded by ATV roll call Wendy Glassman here Daniel Harris is currently absent Russell Lewis Here Natalie pasini is absent Jill Potter here Tim slick here Vice chair Scully here chairman avalone here all right so we have 126 com stop uh an application that came before us actually six years ago um not the same owner but a lot of the same people um with the exception of Mr laka um but maybe somebody could explain exactly what will be doing with this particular application to that first let me tell you that we do have jurisdiction notices were in proper forms so we can proceed this evening I appreciate that Jack thank you okay uh when I swear in the witness the applicant I'll swear in our staff yes okay and uh there know I sent everybody the resolution of the prior approval so you could do a comparative analysis between that and this and from what I saw from a legal perspective was only one or two subtle differences between the variance application last time and this time except there's no D d4 variant any longer needed and there was one less variance uh for the location of any auxiliary power units or HVAC no longer is located within the setbacks so those two items are not needed this time around uh the rear and front yard setbacks were quite similar and there was a slight increase in lot coverage that maximum building coverage maximum building coverage uh other than that there's a different the house is different but uh from a legal perspective that's all I saw okay so uh spoken to Mr H I told him uh unless the board members want a lot more detail I told him he can put his put his case in uh and give us the abridge version uh unless it's required to go in more depth as as we proceed thank you chff okay so with that I guess I could swear in some witnesses you want to swear in all the proposed witness I'll swear there yours an individually yeah one at a time sir please raise your right hand Sol swear affirm the testimony about to give M be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes sir please state your name for the record and spell it John beleta B lza all right and my staff members would you please raise your right hands you s me swear firm the testimony about the given this matter be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes okay please State your names and your affiliation with the board Michael Sullivan Clark Kon hints board planner thank you jar FR board okay thanks Mr H the floor is yours thank you good to see you again same here good evening ladies and gentleman Thomas J hir representing the applicant uh as you've already covered in the beginning uh I was the attorney that represented the applicant um there's a few of you that might remember that were on the board then I don't know uh back in 2018 uh and this application is U other than the design if you will the house very similar as the board I think is aware just by seeing the basic application it's an undersiz lot although it meets the lot width the biggest problem is depth and so any variances as in the prior application really are driven by the fact that it only has a 55 ft depth so if you met all the setbacks you literally have no building envelope uh there is an dilapidated garage quite frankly on the property right now which is naturally going to be demolished as part of any approval uh it's also why there is a slight increase in building coverage we meet prior uh when we were here you had a far regulation uh which was violated it was a D4 variance your Orin has changed to get rid of far and create uh lot coverage uh we are almost 15% under the permit block coverage uh which more than we believe offsets any slight increase in the building uh we have the two parking spaces required on the lot um there is a variance for one of the cars slightly will be in front of the house when they're parked lengthwise on the driveway uh the rear yard setbacks are the same as the prior application and Mr blet will cover that uh so we believe and we meet the minimum sidey yard and the combined sidey yard setbacks so even with this small lot you can see most of the bulk requirements we're still able to comply with be very close to complying with and we did get rid of that setback for the air conditioning unit which is 4.5 variants before we now meet it so that's where our starting point is uh Mr bleta youve sworn uh give the board your credentials yes good evening everybody I'm John bleta I was the engineer and the planner for the previous application with sarum nordstom that was approved in I believe around 2019 uh I am a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey and also a certified Municipal engineer vice president of Nelson Engineering Associates Inc about a mile down the road LIC good standing yes it is licenses and so if you're a license then we accepted you then I think we should accept you now all right thank you thank you Mr belet will be supplying the engineering testimony we do have Miss Kone also to testify a professional planner end in the case all right uh I want you to go through the uh site you can see on those boards we we'll change them for John's testimony that's the proposed this is all part of your file of course the proposed house uh rendering and picture of a lot as it exists with the garage okay we just proposed house would be A1 part of part of the file yes yeah we'll make A1 A2 you you want me to mark that sure and then we'll take those down so John can get to his engineering aspect which is not that lengthy there's not a whole lot of engineering here with all due respect okay uh we have up here is the uh Trading andil plan at sheet number number four on in your packet of my plans and and that's part of A1 is part site plans okay so we'll make that a A3 A3 okay property is located on the east side of comto Street between 4th Avenue and Fifth Avenue it's also located on the corner of an uh to the south of the subject property comto Street has 60ft pavement withd 36 sorry 60t right of away uh 36t pavement withd with curve and sidewalk on our side the 20 foot wide valy right away RightWay with 15 ft of P surface in the alleyway um property is known as 126 comto street it's block 205 out 11 it measures 50 ft East West and 55 ft in the north south Direction uh it contains 2750 Square FT Property is located in the R1 single family residential Zone District subject to the qu requirements of the or1 Zone the lot is under sized for the zone and a variance condition exists for the lot itself that being it contains 2750 Square ft and the minimum lot size in the R1 zone is 5,000 square ft the existing development on the property which you can see in your packet on page number two the demolition plan there's a 44 square ft one-story garage on the property uh which by the way is a non-permitted principal use in the zone uh and there's also a bul variance for that uh garage the garage uh the northern set back to the Eastern or rear property line is 2.5 ft where the rear property minimum set back uh is 25 ft now the proposed development on the property the proposed site improvements are to construct a 26803 square ft four bedroom 2.5 story single family residence on a crawl space that has a footprint of 1,000 143 Square ft uh the proposed dwelling has a covered front porch has steps out to conto street with a walk it has uh we're demolishing some chain link fences uh proposing some nice vinyl picket fences and some solid fences and Gates uh we're also proposing a ribit driveway uh with a concrete apron and a depressed curve on Comstock Street as well as replacing the existing sidewalk with new concrete to make it a continuous new concrete surface for the concrete apron and that will provide uh parking for two vehicles uh on the proper proper two off street parking spaces as well as uh vehicular access onto compto Street uh Municipal Utilities sewer water electric are available in the Public Public right of ways now several bulk variances are required for the proposed development on the property as follows as previously mentioned minimum lot size of 5,000 square ft in the zone have applicant is uh in the lot exists at 20 2750 Square ft uh a 6t front setback is proposed from the dwelling to the comto street right of way where 25 ft is preposed in addition of aay window that projects from the proposed residence is a 3.8t setback to the RightWay line of comto Street uh we're proposing a 3.3 ft rear setback uh from the rear of the proposed residence to the Eastern property line adjacent to Lot number 23 uh where 25 ft is a minimum required in the zone and I may add that that 3.3t side setback is actually an improvement over the 2 and A2 foot setback that the existing garage has to that same property line in that same location and the three- foot split that was was approved in the first application that was a variance granted in that application yes 3.3 ft is now proposed and 3.0t less than that was actually Pro propos uh approved during the uh previous application and how does that rear yard set back match up with the um I guess the only home on that block to the to the north North in the next lot and just pop in before I answer Mr H's question one last thing uh a design waiver is Al those were all the variances and a design waiver is also required for parking in the front yard so to Tom's question now although the applicant there was no way to meet the front and rear setbacks on this slot because as Tom had stated the 25 ft rear set back from the Eastern property line heads toward the west the 25 ft front setback from comto Street uh those two lot those two minimum setbacks lines meet in the middle of the lot thereby uh creating uh no available building envelope for a uh any type of a structure so uh the applicant took some design considerations in account because he could not meet the front and rear setback lines but uh that was due to the unique size and shape of the rock uh however he designed the proposed residents and the site improvements in such a way as so as to not create any crowding or any substantial detriment to theing properties and to be struct and to the structur I'm very sorry didn't you sir um I'm just trying to determine if we have copies of that document that you're going over I it's not in my electronic the second this is it's not yeah I'm I'm in the electronic yeah I'm in the electronic version and it's not there do we have um an extra or can I just look at some I have it oh it's enough next one the Val yeah sure sure okay here's full size copies as well thank you I'm referring to sh I am on it now thank you so sorry to interrupt so you could see those setbacks that we were talking about on shooting number three and you can see the setback from the existing garage on the property on the demolition plan on sheet number two so as I was saying the applicant has designed the site Improvement so as not to create any trouting or any substantial detriment to the adjacent properties and I'll start with what he has done with the rear yard if you notice on the adjacent L 24 to the north is set to the rear property line that's the Eastern property line that extended is approximately 3.3 ft uh or sorry 3.5 ft and our re set back is approximately 3.3 ft to that same property line maintaining that certain type of a offset to the rear property line along that Northern line in addition that 3.3 foot set back is directly adjacent to a garage building on Lot number 23 so it does not direct so the the variance condition does not really directly impact any other residents in yard setback only that adjacent detached garage on Lot 23 so that was one way he mitigated any uh substantial detriment to an adjacent proper now as far as with the rear yard now let's take a look at the side yard setbacks so both one side yard setback of 6 ft minimum is net and that is towards the South towards the alley way right of way Line 6 ft required and 6 ft provided and the aggregate well let me stay on that side so a six foot sidey set back to the sound uh also has the advantage that a 20 foot wide alley RightWay in addition to that 6 ft has addional distance from the proposed residence to the house that's located on block 204 lot one to the South now as far as the aggregate both side yard combined setback requirement that's 14 ft the applicant has been able to meet that plus an extra 10.7 ft such that the aggregate aggregate proposed uh side yard setback of 14.7 Ft uh sorry 14 ft is required and 24.7 ft has been provided in addition now looking at the northern property line as I stated 18.7 ft to the northern property line where 8 ft is required 18.7 ft is is provided plus there is an additional 22 ft to the house to the north on lot 34 thereby creating a separation of 40.7 Ft between the proposed residence and the existing lot uh residents are Lot 24 to the north as far as the front yard mitigation goes Comstock Street has a 60 foot wide right away anding to now we 6 ft to the front of the building uhu streets uh provides an additional 60 ft separation from any residents across the comto street to the West so one last way uh that the applicant has uh considered the design was impervious lot coverage pervious lot coverage uh as we had stated the applicant is over the permitted building coverage however as far as maximum lot coverage which is 65% in the R1 Zone the applicant is proposing a lot coverage uh total impervious coverage of approximately 50.6% uh which is uh 14.4% below the minimum uh requirement uh in addition the project after demolishing the 44 square ft uh on story garage adding the new uh residence and the uh ribbon style parking uh he has added less than 1,000 square ft of of net impervious area to the site uh thereby uh this development does not even meet the uh what's called the uh minor development uh threshold of the storm water management ordinance uh of Hasbury Cork City uh in addition there will be no increase of storm water runoff to any of the adjacent properties all storm water is proposed to flow towards the paved surface of the alley and the pave surface of comto Street via Overland flow the engineer uh the engineer uh Mr Freda in his letter has asked that we do some minor uh roof drains with a popup emitter and submit uh pre and poost development hydrographs with runoff amounts and his letter and the applicant will comply with all of the engineering comments in Mr Frida's letter okay uh one last note and then I'm finished uh with my narrative is that there is a design waiver for parking in the front yard yard as we had mentioned in general the standard for a design waiver as many of you may know is to show a hardship or practical difficulty and to demonstrate that the waiver request is reasonable follows the intent of the municipal ordinance and the standard for relief of a design waiver uh per the ml section 40-55 D- 51b is that the board May Grant a design waiver quote if the legal if the literal enforcement of one or more provisions of the ordinance is impracticable or will exact undo hardship because of peculiar conditions pertaining to the land in question which we have described as an undersized for design thank you that's all I have of this witness question Mr beleta you consider making the front porch the full extent of the house uh yes the architect will uh go into more detail on that on as far as inside the footprint I mostly work with from the footprint out and the architect M Mr P will talk about the from the footprint in okay you mentioned a crawl space yes this is going to be built on a crawl space correct what is this what is the depth of that crawl space and how do you access that um so the reason why the it is on a crawl space is because we did a soil boring on the lot which I actually have a copy of here and it was found that the seasonable the uh the ground surface elevation at the soil boring 1022 seasonal high water table was at 97.9 and therefore the depth of the seasonal high water table below the ground surface is approximately 4.3 ft so we recommended that the lowest floor slap of the crawl space would be at 999 to provide 2T separation between the seasonal Glee high water table and the uh top of the crawl space slab uh that's why he's on a a crawl space rather than you know basement and Mr uh sorry P will go more into depth about the crawl space uh entry entry point Thank you regarding the driveway if we look at the plans from front to back so you you have 20 fet and then you have a six foot swinging gate and then another 20 ft what's the swing on that on that six foot gate how much of that 20 feet in the front is that gate taking up it looks like by scale approximately 5T each side so when you swing them open you have a 10t clear opening for the car to drive through so that's leaving 10 ft or that's leaving 15t for the car to be parked as opposed to 18 oh we're showing the gates uh swing out so when the car the gates BCT the uh the riving driveways right but if you 20 ft on either side of the gate right but if you're parking a car in that front the front 20 ft front 20 ft you have to leave 5T for those gates to swing so you only have 15 ft to park the car correct okay and then why didn't you have the driveway go back further another looks like you got approximately 7 ft to go back yeah well we wanted to leave a little green area for maybe a garden you you may recall the prior applicant wanted to put a small garden there leave some green space after the cars were spk parked maybe a little bit of outdoor area that they could use rather than just running the driveway all the way back to the rear property line if you did that though would you still need the the variance to park the car in the front yard if you ran it back that 7 feet and took away the 5T swing from the gate that gives you 12 feet um we would be able to we would be able to move it such that the uh parked car would be beyond the front of the dwelling but it wouldn't be out of the minimum front yard setback so I don't know if that would still but it would but it would less but it would lessen the effect of parking that car in the front yard yes it will by 12T yes okay thank you please s yeah um we briefly discussed the concrete Ag and the way it's proposed on the plan is concrete from the curve back to the front of the sidewalk and then they have ribbon going all the rest of the way I don't recommend that at all because you know pedestrians people traveling along the road uh you don't want the ribbons through the sidewalk area and I would recommend that to have an entire apron which is roughly 6t thick 6 in thick with welded wire fabric holds up a lot better to the car traffic doesn't cause a problem for people pans walk off the street so that that up up to the property line to the property line or at least to the back of the side okay okay yeah that's fine the board the rest of the testimony was accurate and I would agree with what was supp said okay sorry just another question on the driveway sir what's the purpose of the six foot gate if if you have two cars that you're parking in that 40 foot section what's the purpose of the 6- foot gate the gate in between the two parking spaces especially there's is uh in order to be able to it's to be able to stop stop wait one second sorry I can't turn it just turn it off fine I'm fine sorry okay sorry sorry do you want me to repeat the question or no okay we bisected the two parking spaces with a gate such that if they had one vehicle and they wanted to keep it blocked from The View on the street they'd be able to open the gates pull the car into the Eastern spot and shut the gates and have a little limit limitation of the view of the car from the street then if they wanted to park two cars they could park another one outside of the gate without having to open the gate okay well my concern with that and and I understand what you're saying one it's a picket fence so you're still going to see the car my concern is that is that that gate is going to be used as a backyard and now another car is going to be parked on the street and and we're going to have to deal with another spot but thank you for your you not do a like a sliding key it just seems strange but that that was the uh thinking behind that okay thank you any further questions for Mr buleta if I could just expand on that would you guys give us some assurance that um car the driveway as proposed will be used for two cars to bark um you know many times that brought up know you have two spots you only use one so I think that's the conservative so if you give us some kind of insurance that that won't be the case I think that would be helpful well we'll represent it that's why we wanted to make sure it was variance free we'd meet the two car parking requirement which indicated we did and that's the intent and I mean we can put the applicant on to verify that but yes the representation would be two cars are going to park in that driveway which was our intent to avoid a variance and that's intent how it would be used right if and sorry to keep beating this dead horse if if you if you if you move that driveway further back to 7 ft would you move the gate back the 7 ft as well if you ran the driveway all the way back yes would that be consideration I I need to take a five minute recess so that we can yes sir so I'll make a motion to take a 5 minute recess a second all right thank you Mr chair um if everybody is ready I'll take roll call um Wendy glasman Daniel Harris Russell Lewis Nat Natalie pasini is absent Jill Potter here Tim slick here Vice chair Scully here and chairman avalone here okay so Mr chairman Dan can participate in the discussion going forward won he won't be able to vote I understand because he's missed he missed half an hour problem that's okay his input certainly is appreci all right where were we I'm sorry Mr scol you were talking with mret I I guess my my my point was if you ran the driveway back the other 7 feet there'd be considerations to move the gate back the 7 feet as well thus reducing the impact of that uh variance for the car in the front yard by 12T I think the best question is would you consider eliminating the gate eliminating the gate yes it doesn't seem like it's necessary oh okay I think we'd have to check you know engineered and design you know that part of the plan so but it's not critical to the application so I I can't speak to their I understand Mr that I think that's what Mr SK getting at theut to [Laughter] the we'll give you an opportunity to discuss it with the client at some point so John's concerns can be addressed that will obviously increase lot coverage somewhat by extending the driveway back but I think we're I I don't have the calculation but we'll still be under I believe the because we're like 14.6% less on lot impervious lot cover 21 sare right yeah okay okay so that that gate across there we're showing that as a proposed 6 foot high open picket fence there it's higher than the rest of the fence you're saying so uh it's higher than the fence coming around the front yard but there's a 6ot solid fence to the north Jason to Lot 24 propos 6ot only solid fence along the northern and Eastern property lines and then we have a prop four foot height def fence along the is and conto street so there's different types so that fence and question I think the bottom line is if if the concern for the board they'll remove the gate yeah thank you Mr I think it's to remove the gate and also we're here to see what input we have from the board you know that's how they came up with the design I thought it look nice I think it would be to remove the gate and also extend the driveway at the you're still under the as Jerry said I think you're still under the Improv coverage and that would reduce the that's why we're here to try to work with the board when you have comments about concerns you might have yeah we're going to be very very slightly under but we should still be under the thousand square fet so what is the length of the extension on the driveway approximately 7t 7t so now there's a 10t separation between the back of the driveway and the uh East property line so so in the new plan that we send it'll be 3 F feet 3et right or if you wanted to stick with the 3.3 so it' be 69 okay yeah any further questions for Mr beleta anybody in the audience for Mr beleta you have any questions board Professionals for Mr beleta I do not no okay you may stand out thank you call the next witness our architect P roado sir please raise your right hand solemly swear affirm testimony about giving this matter be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do please uh state your name for the record and spell it yep Petro Rosado p i e t r o r o s a t o thank you could we have the benefit of your credentials Mr Rada uh yes uh I'm a licensed architect in New Jersey New York and Connecticut um my license is in good standing uh and active since 2016 since I first received my license in New Jersey um have you appeared before boards yes yes various boards so we accept your credentials thank you let's move on thank you Mr chair okay uh P you uh your firm and yourself personally have prepared the architectural plans that are before the board correct yes correct okay and um in preparing those plans uh you also became familiar with not only this lot but the neighborhood in general yes okay so you took all that into account and working with the client in terms of Designing the particular house that's correct okay and you worked with this client for quite some time to yes get the ultimate design we see tonight that is correct and there were other options other designs larger whatever but eventually is what was settled on in terms of having meeting the needs of the applicant to build a family home but yet have the least impact on surrounding properties that's great okay uh why don't you take the board uh through U you know and relatively briefly the architectural elements starting from either the inside first floor second floor however you want to start and then we'll discuss the outside there was a question raised by the chairman uh about front porch but we'll address i' appreciate that thank you okay um try to be brief um so this is the obviously the proposed home as a as a rendering I'm going to go walk you through the through the plants so before you get to the actual interior yes did you consider your design with a front porch that extended always to the front of the entire front of the house yes to mirror the other houses in the neighborhood which have porches that extend for the length of the home we did we did so we we consider many designs and this is sort of we you know what we came up with with the design uh one of the main concerns was the um the lack of basement that you know obviously we couldn't uh we couldn't build a basement uh and we tried to maximize the square footage as much much as possible uh and um also to create sort of a necessary footage for you know for a family call uh and that's what we sort of needed uh and that's how we came up you know what we we tried to integrate the the porch as best as we could uh within the limits of the lot and you know the lot size and so on so so that's we did consider it but we came up with this so your testimony is the water table is preventing you from building a basement or you're choosing not to build a is there a reason you're not building a basement or is this a choice just not to build a BAS so was sort of both a little bit of both you know it's a bit of a choice but also because of the limitations and the water the high water table that's you know within the site what is this height of of this crawl space the crawl space uh believe it's 2 feet uh I don't have the you know structure but I really it's 2 feet it's the minimum necessary it's 2 feet tall Yeah by how like what are the dimensions well the footprint of the house it's the entire footprint entire footprint of the house yes so you're obviously going to have some you know pipes and and so forth run down there is this accessible for people to get in be accessible through a panel from the outside a little bco door not a door just an access panel from the from the side of the house I see and they'll be crawling then that's all yeah no part intended very typical cross pieces and I assume this is the reason why the the first level the front porch is only a couple of steps up is because you're dealing with so right okay okay so I'm going to walk you through the house a little bit before you I just want to mention we are going to go through I know you mentioned and clearly correctly there's a lot of homes with the open front porch FR front of the house consistently they they have an a front porch that extends the length of the house or the width of the house right we spent a lot of time looking at the neighborhood looking at the different houses and the designs which they're going to touch on I think this is more about the bay window yes it's a it's it's not just the it's not just the porch it's also the it's the it's it's the level for of you know most of the Trump porches have steps in Asbury you walk up a set of stairs and it's atire so so the whole facade the front of this house is very unusual for aspirate Park terms and that's what I think we're all sort of trying to get at what was your inspiration I'm trying to figure out how how this front of the house was designed obviously the the crawl space is dictating where the porch is which is much lower than our standard porches in Asbury and you have half of it built all the way out with an a protruding bay window bay window so it's it's a very unusual house from the front for Asbury Park and we're just trying to get to why you came to this so there is another sheet um another exhibit that we sort of put together uh showing some of the houses in the surrounding neighborhoods uh I get the point a lot of the houses have uh porches that extend the length of you know the width of the house in the front uh but there is some Mo most of the houses most of the houses Mr R and uh most of the houses um but also some houses that have semi- recessed porches even the uh the house next door to you know on the other side of the alley has you know has a recessed porch uh and it's not very high either um has does have a couple of steps to rent it but it's not you know extremely high as some of the other houses does that house have a basement do you own um and we're going to show you some of the actually you know what while we're through some of these U uh so this these are some of the houses you know along CTO Street and Fifth Avenue and Fourth Avenue um obviously a lot of them many of the houses have the front porch and it's much higher but obviously because of the uh the lack of Base M we couldn't raise the house more than we you know we have um so that sort of triggers the low uh porch as as mentioned so um so that's just for the record isn't that second P picture on the top that's the house next house next to I have a question do you know how far where that that porch begins on that house cuz I walked by today and it looked like it's about at least 12 to 15 ft back the porch no no no the body of the house and then the porch extends out into the front yard set back so the actual house here the the the the second floor of this house aligns with the porch right because it's a recess porch and we just measured it and it's rough ft okay okay again we could have measure because it's somebody else's property but it's roughly 8 ft uh and we're proposing six so from the front so the frontage of the house is not you know uh substantially different than in this house um which is I would disagree with have to disagree wholeheartedly with that very it's very different than that house in terms of the distance from the well no cuz your bay window come is 3.3t from it's 3.8 ft I know we have the resolution from the previous application but do we have any design or R what what did we approve design wise very different it was very different would be really good for us to have that as a reference because it's being it's being used as leverage as a template and be really good for us because it was it was a very modernist contemporary right cuz the applicant was veral right she was an architect I remember being a very Progressive almost passive house right it was yes that's correct very different it was a passive house in fact at the first meeting the board kind of rejected the architecture came back with revisions to meet some of the elements but there were still three variances related to the metal roof to the various other elements of the house in terms of the massing and so on and characteristic that you're speaking of now in the ornamentation uh it was approved but it there were several waivers for it this is a much more traditional if I can use that term house than what was proposed and approved previously if you'll accept my representation on it it just resembles for me a townhouse and not and not fitting in with the character and the historic nature of what asber park tends to have as evidence on your display board and you guys have a wonderful example right across the street it's beautiful example beautiful example and and there's many other smaller um plots in town that have beautiful examples for you yeah going around the neighborhood I also did see many different varieties of of styles of homes go from shingle style to obviously Colonial uh and you know it just for example the the the front of the house that we're proposing it's very similar to that's the that's the side of that house yeah that's the side the side of that house that house is on Fifth Avenue that has a wrap it's actually the back side we know our neighborhood but you know it's uh I think that it's you know uh this is the design that we're proposing not to say that we cannot go back and change and make some provision um we just don't want to we're trying not to lose as you know the the square footage necessary I think what they were initially looking at was as Mr boleta pointed out when you see this small lot behind it is that garage the other house is going out towards Fifth Avenue okay it's over combined 40 feet away facing a different direction the house next to it is somewhat similar as he just explained so the house is kind of isolated it's not like in the middle of a block where you know we got front Forge front Forge front and all of a sudden we have this it's kind of isolated in that little corner except for the house acoss I think that was part of we don't have the same impact and there's two examples on the Block just west of you as well in is struggling I just I just go ahead so so I I feel like I'm sitting here and the board has a consensus about how they perceive the character of the neighborhood and the homes and the design of the buildings in the neighborhood and what they express they agree that this building does not do that the architect has just said we can revise this building rather than trying to convince the board that they're incorrect in their perceptions which they seem to be pretty uniform in why don't we I mean I would suggest we agree and I'm going to say this from an Urban Design standpoint you know porches are the connection between the interior and the and the social life of the streets right we know that as as planners and urban designers um and maximizing that not just makes it fit better with the architecture um patterns the architectural patterns of the buildings here and they of different eras but they seem to do this same thing with the porches um that that's also part of the the community fabric and the social uh interactions of the neighborhood um so I think you'd be well served to have a porch that went the whole length uh I also think that from a standpoint of uh the location when you have setbacks that are very close to the street the way that homes traditionally dealt with that was that they raised up the first floor so that there was some vertical separation between what happens on a sidewalk and what happens on the interior of a house to give that privacy so I think that those two elements Plus I think if you put the rendering back up what's what's very star when you see the rendering is that that the way that this roof comes out which is really a substantial deviation from how the neighborhood and the traditional roofs are I don't see that anywhere and that's and that's a stark Stark change so my suggestion is that what the board is saying is wrap around porch raise it up as much as you can I mean if you have a cross Bas there's nothing that ties you to the ground I mean you can raise it up a little bit more um and if for some reason your stair projects a little bit more I think that that may be a trade-off to actually accomplish that to be more consistent with the finished floor elevations of the buildings in the area so may I add something that's that's that's where I the second floor balcony is also visually concerning for me and you can regain some of your lost square footage from the first floor by having a complete second floor and not having a second floor balcony similar to the house next floor yes yes I wasn't suggesting board was incorrect I was pointing out that we have a lot of houses on these which I would never do I was just pointing out some unique factors of this we have a lot of houses on Lo and we know the neighborhoods very well and they're all Cottages Cottage Lots yeah it should read like a more like a cottage yes because that's what's on these Lots all throughout town we have lots of lots these sizes and and and and saying what I said I do want to say that the arrangement the way this building has been situate on the on the property is exactly the right way to do it right when you when you consider the proximity of the adjacent home that has their patio on the back where your driveway is by pushing the building back so you're not looking down on that by pushing the building back towards where the garage is here I think it's the appropriate relationships on the site to the adjacent homes all right so uh we've had discussions about other Alternatives obviously before we ever came here you know what what's possible what isn't I mean I'm not a design architect but uh we understand the issues that arise we understand the reports that you know in the nature of the front porch and it was discussed about how we make up square footage in the house we did that so on and so forth so it's not like uh the applicant had any thoughts about this uh they weren't sure exactly where the board would be because of again where this is sort of sitting in its own little corner of the world so to speak uh but we hear what the board saying and if that's you know a major concern the front porch you know uh extending in the front of the house which would obviously requires various internal changes to the house uh we have to take under advisement you know and and do work what we can with the uh addition floor plan you're mentioning getting rid of the balcony pushing the second floor out for square footage and know there's there's got some tradeoffs you follow me to try to find a way to get the additional square footage to make this a good family home uh with enough room uh and yet meet some of these architectural concerned with the the character if you will uh you know the neighborhood so uh I think that's what I'll have to do is take a look at that uh I know there's been some discussions uh you know with the owner and uh you'll have to work out where wherever you think you can make you know the adjustments inter internally to adjust uh you know where the porch now the porch is one thing about raising it I that's more of an engineering question I I I don't know what they can and can't do with that that's up to the engineer the architect that can be done so be it you know uh I'm just not sure with the c space but that that's something they'll talk about also all right so I mean obviously that's what we we need to address I mean the architect was going to show other things in the neighborhood the floor plan and we had our planner but there's no point I think in doing that at this point until we come come back uh and ask him for date and have the architect the owner have a chance and the engineer maybe even some inut that in terms of raising and you know Foundation Etc um to present that to the board and then we can conclude with our other testimony we appreciate that Mr H yes all right I I think that's the best course of action right now is to make some new decisions about the design of the house and then come back yeah yeah it's uh as I said it is different than what was approved uh we thought we were moving closer to what the uh you know the Asbury is like the town would like but not close enough so we will uh continue to work on that so um we have two meetings left this year um November 12th and December so November 12th we've missed deadline already right so it's going to be either December or into so it's December 10th everything would be do by the 15th of November which is December 10th nov should be November 15 we would need all the changes sent to the planner and engineer by by November 15th so that would or the next meeting would be the January 28th meeting all right if you don't mind is that agreeable yes what may I anybody have any issues December meeting I can't I can sense January says January 28th is the next meeting then I all right tell if you don't mind since you're going to making some changes I'm sorry I'm sorry since you're going to be making changes to these plans how about these changes that were recommended with regard to the driveway and have those accomplished as well pushing the driveway back further yeah so there wouldn't be any the gate yeah so wouldn't be any need for that is condition sure we have the time now it won't be a resolution compliance issue we would just submit it with the revised plan those two item yeah okay so so I'll make a motion to carry didde January or December December I guess the December date I think they want to move it the December date yes okay so I'll make a motion to carry 1206 comto to December 8th 2024 without further notice I'd like to add 10th December 10th December 10th I'd like to add to that please yeah uh Mr hman you wave any time constraints within which we have to act under the ml yes hereby on my client wave the time frames of this the board must act okay F no further notice no further notice is required so anybody that's here on this know that on December 10th is that the correct date December 10th at 700 p.m. uh we're going to reconvene on this application so there won't be any new notices s okay or publish thank you for your input for your time let's have a vote a vote need a motion that was like second John seconded how about a vote November 15th November 15th okay um Wendy Glassman yes Daniel Harris yes Russell Lewis yes Jill Potter yes Tim slick yes Vice chair Scully yes and chairman avalone yes and I make a motion to adjourn the meeting yeah one question I think about it yeah you did you called yes you can watch the video yeah if you watch the video he can vote I will send that and then that seconded second and then all in favor for