[Music] she goes you can always tighten it up as you go and you'll lose weight like get something get don't get a without a zipper open it up yes there's a public hearing we have two applications so okay so what will happen is they'll present their application we'll ask questions and then we'll open it up to the Public's com but there were times where so you Google really long and hard I could walk road couple daysad couple looking at the blue backwards so then I started when I got really confused I could drop Bread on kind of find my way back to never but the difference is I'll show you the H app the H app is like it shows you where the hotels are show you where the one that we yeah PR yeah do again a minute yeah no yeah J got you thanks you got all right everybody ready welcome to July the 1st 2024 land use board meeting we will start by saluting our flag I pledge aliance to the of the United States of America to the Republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible liy and justice for all pursuant to the New Jersey open public meetings act adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by posting on the bulletin board in the entrance hall of Beach Haven municipal building and mailing the same to the beach Haven times and the Asbury Park Press this meeting is a Judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision for each individual application deorum appropriate to a Judicial hearing must be maintained at all times Mrs edles here Mrs Leonard here Mr Balo here Mr tinquist here Mr Stevens here Mr Jenna here mayor Davis Mr meal here Mrs ball Miller here Mr lafredo here Mr Wang here miss King here Mr Halperin [Music] here we have ordinance 20249 C which pertains to the signage regulations everybody get a chance to read that resolution that I have a motion to approve the resolution well so if we can let's um Mr little good evening let me swear you in Mr little um we'll discuss with the board his his consistency review and then once that's done then then the board can vote and we have the M he's swearing this you swear me in for this I'm going to swe you in for the whole swear or affirm the testimon before this board this evening will be the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth I do there's an answer all right so for this this is the ordinance uh reiring the Flags correct yes so I reviewed it basically it's not inconsistent with our master plan so I guess it would be consistent I mean there's not much here I mean we uh you're allowed to I guess display an American flag any time correct why don't you tell them what changed the words words are removed in here that said um I guess you had to have them on the building is that what it yeah and that's that was impossible so it says U I guess the sentence the operative sentence here there should be no limitation as to the number of American flags which any business may wish to display provided that they do not interfere with pedestrian movement or traffic so it's only the American flag Y correct no other flags feather type flag shall not be permitted that's it that's all we got that's it yeah some some um some businesses reached out to council that they were unable to display their American flag from their building so they were putting them implanters and whatnot and the ordinance doesn't allow that they have to be mounted onto the side of the building however we we made exceptions because it's the American flag so all businesses can put as many American flags as they want it doesn't have to be mounted to their building my only question is the safety I it are they secure in these Planters well enough that I mean I don't know how big a flag you're talking about are you talking about those little teeny ones that people stick in Flags or big flags no I mean you if you've walked around specific businesses you've walked through them and no they're they're not I don't think they're cemented into the Planters but they're secure enough and it the ordinance does read that they cannot inhibit The Pedestrian right away so if they're blowing into pedestrian right away then we'll have to take you know steps to prevent that okay any other questions board has can I have a motion to approve the resolution I so move Penny 19 Kenny second second Thank You Cher Gina we need do roll call since we have all nine regular members here those are the we don't need to get to the AL okay Mrs Davis yes Mr medle yes Mrs ball Miller yes Mrs edles yes Mrs Leonard yes Mr Stevens yes Mr Jenna yes Mr tinquist yes and Mr Balo yes ordinance approved okay moving right along Old business we have application 20246 uh Ship Bottom Brewery that was carried last meeting and they're back they're seeking to add food distribution with their offsite preparation good evening James Raven on behalf of the applicant Ship by Brewery testing I think we're okay as Mrs lenhard noted when we were previously before the board last month the ship autum Brewery was looking to serve food within the brewery from outside vendors and there it came to be known that John Bell mascal who's the owner of Bay Village had not signed the affida of ownership which is required for the application to go forward since that time we have submitted an affidavit that's signed by Mr mascal and the applicant Mr mascal are now on the same page with respect to when the food will be served they've reached an agreement that from mid April through um I'm sorry from October through mid April is when the food will be able to be served within the brewery so not during the summer months from the outside vendors and it's not something that we're looking for the board to necessarily put in the resolution in the in the event they were inclined to approve it we'd like to keep it between the landlord and tenant that's the agreement that they've reached it's within their lease so if they decide to change their mind on when that may be served rather than making the applicant come back before the board we'd rather not have any limitations within the resolution itself as far as what months of the year the food's able to be served um why don't I call Mr zaro up again just to confirm what I've set forth and we'll answer any questions the board might have raise your right hand do you swear from the testimony we give before this board be the truth the the truth yes sir so as uh Jim was uh talking about we have reached a agreement with Mr mashkal um about when we're going to serve food and we're going to do it in the offseason we're just looking for approval so we could have a food source at the brewery um from our standpoint we have the affidavit signed and notified so I believe that would be the last thing that was required from us Mr Raven the um I did receive the update of ownership I believe at our last meeting last month we marked exhibits A1 to A3 with photographs for the record because this was an issue which is what led to the Jo why don't we Mark the work sure and so the board is aware Mr Raven's request about not putting the agreement with the landlord about when F will be served in the brewery not putting it in the resolution that's an appropriate request that's not an appropriate land use based condition of approval so it's been represented to us that's fine but it's an unlawful condition so if it were to be challenged at some point a judge would strike it accordingly so I appreciate your cander Mr Raven um assume your client will stand by to test them agreement the landlord and if in fact it's somehow going to be memorialized between Mr zaro and M M that's even better and then that would be the way it could of course be enforced right just so the board knows to recall no food trucks this is solely to allow ship bot Brewery to have some vendor come in now in about between the month of August excuse me October mid April to serve food based on like a preset men right exactly we agree upon a menu so all the testimony that was given at our last hearing is in in for correct any questions for the board I just have one question is are the restaurants and the food establishments where you also are tenant of are they only allowed to serve um chip Bottom brewery beer are they allowed to serve any type of vob do all the other do all the other tenants have a restriction on that them as well as you have a restriction on yours the tenants Inside Bay Village yeah um they don't have a liquor license to I know are they only going to be serving your your beer or are they allowed to serve anything that they want I guess if they were had a liquor license they could serve whatever they wanted it's just odd that a restriction is placed on you and the same restrictions aren't placed on other businesses in Bay Village it's just that no I got I got what you're saying I guess that's a tenant landlord thing and yeah just an odd restriction no I think thanks for bringing that up John at the last meeting uh some of the uh public testimony was concerned that the food EST stabins that were being utilized were outside of Beach Haven and they they thought it was more appropriate to use uh because obviously they're paying taxes in Beach Haven can address any prioritization of using Beach Haven food establishments uh in terms of the food distribution yeah we would like to use local um restaurants um that could help us out that's not always possible um especially in the winter months that's why we're looking to have this condition to have food place because a lot of people AR open win so we're kind of limited to what we're doing but yeah we we want to support people that support us and support local so I have no problem with that any other questions for the board questions we don't have anything further thank you thank you so much for your time you have questions did you ask for a motion yeah I'll make a motion for approval thank you I'll second H did you second yeah so it'll be the same n last mon okay Mrs ball Miller yes Mrs edles yes Mrs Leonard yes Mr Jenna yes Mr tinquist yes Mr Balo yes yes Mr lafredo yes Mr Wanger yes and Miss King mayor was here last oh oh my bad the mayor Sorry Sorry Miss king um Mrs Davis yes application approved congratulations thank you uh moving right along we have resolution 20248 401 Center Street that was the snack bar right that's for holiday snack Barack this is the memorializing resolution approving approving that application anybody have any questions about the resolution not ever hold your piece and I have a motion to approve resolution 20248 motion to approve thanks Jerry second any Mrs edles no yes I'm sorry yes Mr Jenna yes Mr Balo yes Mr lafredo yes and Mr Wanger yes resolution approved all right public hearing portion tonight we have application 20231 13301 North East Avenue the applicant is seeking minor subdivision after hpack approval of the demolition good evening everyone William Askin Askin and hooker on behalf of the applicant uh 301 North Beach Avenue LLC uh we're here tonight uh discuss a property located at 301 North Beach Avenue in Beach Haven I have with me uh my client is Terry Mohler is a representative of the LLC 301 North Beach we have Jim brazowski also here to testify as a professional planner and a professional engineer we also brought along our architect and in case the board had any questions about the proposed architecture if indeed the application was approved um tonight I think everyone's aware we're looking for a minor subdivision the resulting lots are uh somewhat less than uh the minimum required lot size we're looking for a uh variance from the strict interpretation of our code here in Beach Haven to allow lot sizes of 4,687 a half square feet uh um and uh the two lots would be uh 62 and a half feet wide and 75 foot deep the board is probably also aware that the depth the depth of these Lots as proposed is entirely consistent with all the other Lots in the block and uh the proposed width is actually greater than many many of the Lots in the block so we do believe that um uh the um C2 variance for special circumstances is the justification for uh the board to consider as a legal way to uh approve our application and we'll have Mr brazowski present some of the facts of the application that uh can be considered by the board in evaluating whether or not to approve our application so with that and I don't know if your attorney wants me to swear in all the witnesses at once or one yeah okay sure so everybody please stand up Terry stand up as well yeah raise your right hand please you swear from the testimony get before this board to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do simp okay we'll start with Mr Bowski does the board recognize his qualifications or okay thank you for the record my name is James Rosas a licensed professional engineer and professional planner in the state of New Jersey and an employee at horn Tyson and yod since 1997 um the the subject property is located uh southeast of the intersection of Beach Avenue and Fourth Street uh the property has 125 foot of Frontage on Fourth Street 75 foot of Frontage on Beach Avenue um and contains an area of 9,375 square fet um it's currently developed with a uh a church and a parkk accessory parking lot um what the applicant is planning proposing to do is to um remove the church and parking lot subdivide the property um into two lots uh Each of which will have 62.5 foot of Frontage on Fourth Street 75 foot of depth uh and each lot will contain um 4,000 4,687 and .5 square feet where the minimum uh requirement for a new subdivision is 5,000 square feet therefore each lot will be 32.5 Square F feet short of the 5,000 SQ foot uh requirement um the uh the the lots that we are creating We Believe conform substantially to the uh other Lots uh is particularly in the block but in the neighborhood overall whereas we we're going U east of this particular property we've got lots of 31 foot of Frontage 44 foot of Frontage 50 foot of Frontage um each of these have 75 foot of depth so these Lots even at sub even subdivided are larger than a lot of lots uh in the block uh the eastern most uh Lots in this block uh do have uh widths of 69 and a half and one of 64 foot of width so there are some lots that are a little bit larger uh but they're still similarly sized to the 62 and half by 75 foot uh lots that we're creating each of these Lots is we're proposing to develop a single family house on each of these Lots the the homes will have four bedrooms so they're not going to be U enormously large homes um adequate parking will be provided off off of Fourth Street there will be no driveway access off Beach Avenue um uh we believe that the this subdivision um is a with the um variant for lot area uh is is a better plan for the neighborhood than to build one big house on this uh over 9,000 sare foot lot the the lot will be graded to to run drainage towards Fourth Street and Beach Beach Avenue um that's basically all I got pretty pretty simple couple quick quick questions uh Mr brazowski um we are in a residential Zone correct we are in the RNA and the proposed development the structures that are proposed on the Lots do they require any variances at all from the code no they do not okay they're completely compliant the way the way they are in fact the the two buildings that we're proposing uh have a total U yard areas going from east to west of 46.5 uh feet so there's going to be plenty of light air in open space in fact between the two proposed structures is 25 and a half feet whereas uh if we built one house it would be you know more of a a wall across the entire lot it would take up more light a and open space that what we're proposing that's all I have uh one other comment is at six with the 62 and a half foot Frontage these lots are still going to look from the street larger than other Lots in the neighborhood directly across the street they're all 50 foot wide Lots across the street the depth of lots are over they like 100 102 105 foot of depth so those lots actually can form but these lots are actually going to look bigger from the street because of the 62 and a half fo Frontage so I I I think that you know again I stress I believe this is a better plan for this lot than uh strictly conforming to the uh 5,000 SQ foot Lots the the variance again is 312.50 square foot per lot I have a question um I don't know who's going to answer this uh this has not been approved correct correct well Rec you say this it's a a drawing of the houses on the Lots we we have full sheets that have been I think they've been submitted to the board really just as a courtesy of the architectural plans I never seen those I just seen this but hpac has not approved these they have hpac has approved no they have not approved the house correct so I looked at the minute so just for the record the demolition of the church has been approved by hpack according to the minutes and Mr little and I talked about it and I have them what has not been approved is this subdivision hpac has said that they want the applicant to come to the land use board the land use board if it grants this subdivision application as a condition of approval Mr Askins the applicant agrees yes to go back to hpac for approval so that's agreed as a condition of approval correct correct while I'm on it and since I'm talking Mr rowski you've looked at Mr Little's May 21 2024 review letter yes you agree with all the comments contain there no issues no issues and the applicant as a condition of approval will comply with comments of the board engineer as well correct correct yes board have any questions I have a question okay bar so what Provisions are being made for street parking uh there's uh uh each each building is uh shown with two a driveway one driveway off of U four Street for each single family residents the uh on the subdivision plan car driveway coming off four Street for the Western Mr just if you would take the mic or if you're G to keep talking from over there that's fine but just so we can pick you up please sorry two c Cuts so how many public parking spes I know the rest of the board yeah I see two cars actually we may it looks like one two three four five places are lost public on the street on street parking that we're losing yeah two that's second car back is three parking there's no way you can get out without that taking three on that first house on the corner well I've got we're we're putting in two new on this plan I'm showing we're we're losing three and adding two so the net is one if you think that the net is one reduction well I don't think there's people that you have the stack people in the stack driveway that's not going to happen as soon as they can get a parking space in the front of their car front of their house they're going to take up a public parking space so they don't have to back one car after the other car so yeah well here's the in order to have that I don't understand why you're not losing five parking SP because my mind there's three here and here you got to lose that one and that one for that part of about that turn even though you're adding PE but you're adding people you're adding more cars that weren't there before you see what I'm saying well I'm also adding two on street parking spaces there's a driveway an existing driveway that comes off of the east side of the church out onto Fourth Street um there are there are two parking spaces that are indicated to be two new parking spaces so we're oh I see what you're saying that are not there now yeah they're not there now so we're adding to okay got it so you're GNA do two curb cuts for each house there' be one curb cut for each house but two double 12T curb cut for the Eastern house which is uh permitted uh for a house with uh one garage this this house has no garage so one 12 foot curb cut and an 18t curb cut for the uh Western house which is permitted because it's a corner lot and the corner lot permitted up to 24 the near foot of Bonnie I have a question for our okay what's the standard here it's benefits outweigh the detriment or yes so it's not a hardship this is not a hardship so when we get to the end I can go over for the board if You' like me to but this is not a hardship this a flexible [Music] C2 can you go over the whole H thing again sure so hpac has approved the demolition of the church at that same meeting they wouldn't Grant approval of the subdivision which is required under ordinance because they wanted to see whether or not the board would approve the subdivision which kind of makes sense right you don't the car before the horse as a condition of approval therefore the applicant has agreed and testified under oath that if the board approves this application as a condition of approval they have to go back to hpac and get H pac's approval if they don't get H pac's approval subsequent to our approval they won't be able to subdivide and build the two homes we' had I think I recall we've had situations where each pack has approved something that then came to us which we didn't approve so we don't have to approve this all they so sorry I me like a building somebody is that be step no this is they're coming us for for subdivision in the variance that's it well then they will then go back to hpac if we approve tonight to see if hpac approves what we did if h P does then they can go for if hpac doesn't then they won't go for if we deny this then there's no need to go to aack because we Deni it and their recourse then would be to if they want to go to supremor court and challenge our denial you know these the structures you're going to present they to present the H pack and say you know these are the ones that you want to build these pictures they they are they are and when we again we submitted them to the board just as a courtesy we didn't we required to bring the architecture here but we did in case you had any questions or any that you wanted to make comments on it that's all we thought you would want to see it you know and and and confirmation that there are no other variances that would be required to build these houses other than the the uh uh lot size do we know how many bedrooms are in each one of these houses proposed is four right four each yeah I just want to make sure on the parking so we're good you know if there're four you need to on the bottom where is the parking exctly driveway be it's not shown on WE these vend can you switch picture so we can see you want me to put that just for the record our architect said that the renderings were done before the site plan was finished and they do not um show the proposed parking on the SES so that's the house on the corner the top one is the house on the corner corner so it's parking would be to the left left yes that's just for the west house right East is where it's going the one to show I don't is it shown on no no yeah those renderings the Eastern house has stack parking in the Eastern side yard where that rendering shows the two spots in front of the house the Western house has the two spots in front of the house ask forgive me the I you mention my Miss Jennings I have a question so when you're saying the this new lots are conforming to other lots are you also going to conform a lot of the homes around there are less than 35 ft in height is this house also going to the maximum 35t are they willing to conform to a lower height to match the surrounding homes if you're going to say that those lots conform to the other Lots there's smaller homes on those lots uh these homes as based on the architecturals that my office received the uh Western home will have a height of 31.4 feet and the Eastern home will have a height of 32.8 feet so so they're so they're small than 35t but [Music] yeah Bonnie I have a question [Music] John I would like to hear some testimony about the historical design guidelines from from the architect um my understanding is that the hpack recommendations included recommendations for window configuration uh Cedar rail systems cedar lattice placement front stair with some of those issues so I I was wondering if if we could hear some testimony regarding the actual architectural design of these two new homes just so we're clear Mr Halper and if Mr askon if you're okay having your architect answer some of those questions I'm fine with that that's not before us hpac will deal with that as I said earlier what's before us is the application to to subdivide this lot into two lots and the one bulk variance if approv as a condition of approval the applicant has to go back to hpac where all these issues and questions you just asked will be addressed now that being said Mr asking if you're willing and you want to have your architect answer some of those questions that's fine yeah we're willing anything answer anything you want anything at all we bring it up um yes to answer your question um the materials that we're proposing uh is true cedar siding cedar lattice was brought up as a point of discussion with the H pack um boxing out the um some of the pilings under the left side of lot 1.03 which is to the left here so that it looks more similar to the porch that was something else that was discussed um questioning him about the rooftop deck but again they they didn't make any final decisions until uh we present before you and potentially get approval for the subdivision understood thank you what um there a lot um 1.04 is at the maximum uh square footage of living space allowable so that's um so that's 2342 sare ft um the corner lot is slightly smaller than 23 uh 2331 Square ft so their floor area ratios respectively are 50% and 49.7% where 50 is allowed any other questions I just have a question I just you really need to clarify for me like what is the substantial benefit of having these two houses versus the one house why are we allowing two houses and going against our zoning ordinance which requires 5,000 square feet for all new subdivisions it seems here that this is just for a profit rather than any type of public good what's the benefit here yeah what you're going to get is uh two houses that are of similar size to the other houses in the neighborhood and as opposed to one house that's designed like basically if uh if we built one house take these two houses and mush them together to get your 50% floor area ratio wind up at the 4,000 you know over 4,000 almost 5,000 square foot house um you you're going to wind up you have you're required to provide four off street parking spaces you're going to get more light air in open space as I uh suggested before we're going to have 46 and a half linear foot of uh sidey yards between Beach Avenue and the easterly lot line whereas with one great big house um you might only wind up with uh like 19 and A2 foot of uh combined side yards uh so we're we're really you know opening the corner up with you know nicer you know houses that conform to the other houses uh in the immediate area um you're not going to get one giant house with a a great big wall that fronts on uh Fourth Avenue uh you're going to get uh u a little bit more parking than you might uh require with one house so I I think it's just a better plan to to allow this property to be developed with two uh smaller houses that from the street you're not going to notice that these lots are 32.5 square foot smaller uh than they than the the ordinance requires they're going to look like they're on 62 and a half foot wide Lots um they're going to be nice looking houses with with nice Street fronts um it's going to be an attractive uh improvement with plenty of light air in open space um and adequate parking uh as required by the ordinance Mr baski are there any other homes in the neighborhood that are5 feet wide or any other lots that are s developed with a single family home that are 125 feet wide not in the immediate area now and and is it your opinion that the development of this property following the subdivision into two lots with two single family homes would be more consistent with the neighborhood scheme than developing as as 25t lot with one home that would obviously be much bigger yes sir I a question if we're we're called to way the benefit first the det is there any testimony about how many people we can expect and how many cars we can expect under both each scenario one house two houses as we look at the population in as far as uh how many people um these are C have eight-bedroom home on a 75 by 125 foot lot or or even a 10-bedroom home like it you can certainly build a very large house on a 75 by 125 foot wide lot so I I would think that it's going to be comparable that the number of people the the difference being is going to be that we're providing four off street parking spaces whereas a a large home I do we go up after three after five we after five you go to three that's it yeah so you can put more but once you go to five bedrooms in it's three parking spaces yes so with that great big house with eight bedrooms that would be similar to what we're providing here we would only need to provide three off street parking spaces um so we're I I feel like we're benefiting with parking we're benefiting with light air and open space and and I honestly don't see the detriment in providing two houses that conform to um you know the the the rest of the neighborhood in in scope and size um and I think that it's going to certainly an aesthetic improvement over the the the church that's sitting on the corner now well I kind of agree with Jamie um skip Tool's house is on a large lot it's a big house on a large lot it's got to be 125 ft across that house and it fits in the historic work district and looks great so I don't really go for the two I mean I think either would would work I really do think two small would work and one big would work the thing that interests me is that you're not going to 35 fet I that's what upsets me in the historic district when these people build these houses they go up 35 feet and everybody else is lower it just looks out of place um but that's that's about the only thing I can say that I mean I think one house would be great I after Sandy everybody that had 100 foot lot came in here wanted the money sold one lot build their house sold the other one another house it is an increase in in um all our infrastructure more cars more people more everything it's nice to have some open space around you and there are people that'll pay to have space around so I don't I think either one would work really a big house or two little ones but if it was me and I had the money I'd buy the Big Lot and build a nice house with some yard and space around me that's just my opinion anybody else have an opinion question before I open it to the public Frank what do you have to say what do I have to say I mean obviously two smaller homes would be much nicer in the neighborhood than one large home it'll work either way like but why would that why would two be better than one I think you just have more open space more light air open space and the other homes on it'ss when say well if you have one house in the middle you got open space all around numbers are the same true if you have one house over to the side you have open space on the whole side that is true you still have a 50% FL a ratio so you still get the 4,000 something square foot house you know the house could be on a corner lot the house could be 7 and A2 foot off of one street 15 off the other so the may get closer to the road than these will you know I mean the board has to weigh the options so either one will work you're absolutely right thank you what's the setback for driveways for like beach like if they were to shift the west house a little bit put the parking on the driveway like right on the corner there well you normally want the driveway right on the corner you don't want that beach has a County Road and the county is not going to want driveways on be no not driveway on the beach I'm just the driveway was on Beach Avenue side you would have an 18t drive right I don't know you'd have to watch the site triangle on the corner I'd be a little conern be nothing there except car right but You' still have cars block I you know again the problem we have right now is reviewing a subdivision hpack hasn't approved any of this and everything's going to conform to the your you create to two lots so there's no other variances associated with this 300 foot per lot right I mean even though we're looking at drawings like this the H pack has to approve that doesn't mean h pack might say yeah move the house one way or the other I don't know if they have that Authority but I know they look at architecture stock and unfortunately you know again H pack you can't have a garage under your house in this zone so you're limited in but aren't they allowed to put one in the back eventually yeah I think you can but um you got to meet I don't know if there's enough room to even separate garage and nothing's F on these drawings right now would indicate that well I think we're getting off track worrying about the houses we need to worry about the subdivision so if I M chair I'll I'll charge the board I'll give the board what the standard is before we vote after public comment if any just want to remind the board of this each member can vote his or her own way you don't have to approve your after die you vote whichever way you want but please keep in mind when you vote that your vote is supposed to be based on the evidence and testimony that was presented so far we have uncontradicted testimony from the applicants planner and youve just heard from our engineer so I ask that you keep that in mind when you vote vote how you want but the vote is supposed to be based on the evidence presented so keep that in mind that I I understand I hear everyone loud and clear everybody has personal feelings but as a quasi judicial land use board your test to vote on an application based on the evidence that's presented and so far there's uncontradicted evidence with respect to this application thank you I have a question yes n um I just looking at these plans um it looks like they there's no room for a pool is there any way they can fit a pool in there in these places and why are you asking that I mean only because I I just um I you know I just think it's it's crowded as it is and if you put a pull in it would even be more disruptive to the neighborh well that's that's not up to us it's not up to us tonight to deal with that that's something that I just don't looking at this it just looks like there's not but okay uh thank you um if no one else has any com or questions I'm going to I'd like a motion to open I have one question yes John um in terms of curve and sidewalk designs is that something engineer get involved with yeah time once the subdivision is approved we do a bond estimate to guarantee that curb sidewalk improvements are completed they have post a bond they have to post inspection fees and at some point make inspections to you know sure everything is installed for code okay all right can I have a motion to open it to the public please I motion to open it to the public well you're the public that's what the public opening is for second thank who is the first Jamie oh Jamie all right if you'd like to speak come up say your name get swear sworn in talking the mic the mic your name yes the mic you can pull you can pull it down there you go okay my name is Katherine TLO your last name please t a t l w your address 129 4th Street raise your right hand please you swear airm the Tes give before the will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but theuth yes I do thank you go ahead um I'm concerned about the of the appearance the the one with the two-car uh it's not it's like that's their front yard um it's half their front yard the um there's no requirement they don't have to have garages or anything you can't have one under your house no I don't mean under your house what about back of your house well I don't know that there's enough room on these Lots well the impact on the the parking there is it's hard for me to think that we're going to have that we're not losing spaces because the people that have the the driveway that's the stack driveway there's going to be a car parked on the street they're not for that house else um the if there's one house does it have to be giant size what what about having some space around it don't the size of the house as long as it complies with the that's up to the okay I'm directly opposite the houses so um it's hard for me to um it's hard for me to in to visualize what what we're getting especially because they they show the house they don't show the cars um the the cars parked in their the driveways and in front of them so I just have a concern for that about that and um I guess when this apparently what I heard the state came in and made the um the angle of the number of spaces because there used to be on right side of the street the house on the corner had two spaces we had three um and so um that's why I question the the parking you know they're saying how many spaces there's going to be because um it because of that so I just have a concern about that I'd rather have one mediumsized house thank you without a pool there anybody else my name is Bruce young uh my address is 400 North Beach Avenue which is the northwest corner of for and Beach I do yeah I am a little concerned about this also uh for a couple of different reasons one question I have is there a permeability uh issue here uh with regards isn't there a requirement here just doesn't look to me like there's a whole lot of permeability around those houses so but you have to understand we're not voting on these houses tonight okay we're just voting on subdividing the property putting a line down the middle of it and subdividing the property yeah all of this may come up later it may get moved by the bur may never even come before us so it's impos it's possible then that the houses couldn't be that big if if there is a permeability yeah okay anything's possible yeah let me say one thing we have an ordinance that maximum impervious coverage is 60% of the lot that includes the house so 40% of the lot has to be permeable right so and that's an ordinance requirement so if the subdivisions approved they have to comply with our ordinance I don't know how big the church is right now sitting on the property but probably covers a lot more than these two houses well that church was built before we I understand from a permeability standpoint one house or two houses is going to be a lot less of an impact than the church yeah my my house for those people who are familiar with it is one of the older houses here in in in Beach Haven um and I've watched uh on Fourth Street a lot of construction uh that's kind of changing that neighborhood a little bit uh I'm looking across the street at the approval that was given for the U Island Baptist Church uh uh and I I don't know how tall that is but I'm guessing it's probably 34 feet 11 in um and yeah and uh and I agree with h with the previous statements that uh I would much prefer to see uh homes a home I prefer to see one home uh that limits itself a little bit with regards to the actual hate of the building in order to keep it more attuned to the way the rest of the neighborhood is and and what used to be uh my personal opinion is I think one home on that lot would be the ideal situation uh I I don't see I don't see a big reason for having two two homes on that lot uh other than a financial consideration um I am very concerned about parking uh once again with the uh with the new building across the street from me I suspect that Sundays are going to be a little bit of a parking issue anyway and I'm old enough to remember when when that was actually the church and parking was really difficult uh way back then so for the record um uh once again my my home is one of the old ones and uh uh I I just I don't think you can squeeze two homes on that lot uh uh and still have it conformed with the rest of the uh the neighborhood thank you thank you very much is there anybody else that would like come speak to this good evening hi Jim my name is Jim Kelly I live on Fourth Street and what I want to talk to I am on the road but okay I do it again go ahead some of these members know I'm on the road but it's okay have to I understand go ahead I do thank you my question isn't about the houses side the lot or the parking my question really is to this group here each of you had to go to training and one time or another have taken the oath they've asked for a good many variances it's hard to find a hardship in this project that would then justify or bring a bring you enough justification excuse me to have give a variance so I think as this project moves forward the questions and there's a list of them in the letter they sent out to us and I assume that's the correct letter it came from the lawyer I think we need to look at it as to what benefit the community will get if by any chance we give them variances that allows them to cover more space not the 5,000 square feet I'm not going to discuss that you all know that but I think as a community member and having been on Force Street for 45 or 50 years 46 years I think we need to look and what the other adjustments will be if we give them variances thank you for your time and your effort just so the board's aware Mr KY thank you very much they're not asking for a good many vares they're asking for one for a lot are that's it they will otherwise comply with every other provision of the list all establishes permits and licenses on the letter the lawyer sent out I don't have the letter in front of me I can tell you that they're asking for one Vari lot area for each of the two new okay thank you I I I understand thank you J anybody else good evening uh my name is John pegan I'm executive pastor of Island Bible Church PS and Paul a g n k o p as and Paul fs and Frank uh representing Island bible church across the street southwest corner of uh North Beach and fourth uh 310 North Beach Avenue I do uh listening to testimony tonight you got a tough decision in front of you but I wanted to speak on behalf of of the um applicant who has been u a good uh partner with us uh by allowing us to park uh construction vehicles um our contractor's vehicles on this property during um our construction season as uh as we're building um alleviating uh parking concerns on the streets and he also allowing us to use this parking lot for our sun school program as we're unable to use our lot this summer but uh we have reached out and had cooperation but uh um wanted to point out point that out to you as you have a big decision to make tonight anyone else no can I have a motion to close it to the public motion second penny so before there's a motion you to approve or deny this application since the question was asked here's the standard that theant must show or improve C2 variant that the purposes of the municipal land use flow will be Advanced the variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good the benefits of the variance outweigh any detriment and the variance will not substantially impair the intent and purpose zoning plan and Zoning that's the standard that applies to this application so that being said ER can you just restate the zoning ordinance so the board knows please what exactly the square footage in our in our ordinance is so this application is Seeking a variance for Section 22-10 A2 which requires a minimum new lot area of the subdivided lot to be 5,000 square ft or 468 7.5 ft is proposed so it's 312.50 the 5,000 square ft and 50t a lot Frontage now obviously when they did that they had something in mind um so graining a Varian for something less than the the 5,000 square feet how does that affect what was was the thought originally behind this it's it's they had a purpose they didn't leave it okay let's just leave lot sizes where they are they were very specific on what they did Mr Stevens I understand your point that's what boards do land boards deny applications for Varan all the time ifpr testimon evidence is presented there are ordinances not every application will comply with every single ordinance in this case the applicant will comply with every ordinance except the lot they presented their testimony reasons why they think this should Grant this board has the authority to go it doesn't mean it has to because this is a bulk variance not a use variance in order for this motion this application to car there's a motion to approve we would need just a majority which five out of me every board member that I said earlier is entitled to vote as he or She's Fit I just pass that the board make their vote based on and testim you all any questions questions I have any questions no the only thing I was going to tell you when when that ordinance was done years ago there was a I believe there was a lot of concern that there were 80 foot Lots out there that could be divided into two 40 foot lots and so I think the council at that time said hey look let's make everything brand new 5,000 to keep the density down in this particular case we're short 312 Square F feet per lot so you know you have to consider that in terms of whether you know is that detrimental the master plan and or could you grant that variance based on what our attorneys presented in terms of you know what the law is yeah I almost don't mind like if all of a sudden you don't have the frontage you might be a little bit short but the bulk area to me is what has more important but keep in mind that the all the percentages in the ordinance the lot coverage and everything else go with the size of the lot correct you're 35% lot coverage it's not 35% of 5,000 per fee it's 35% of the lot size that's being approved so everything is getting smaller based on the percentages but that's increasing the density is what I'm saying yeah two homes you're absolutely right instead of one to reduce the frontage doesn't necessarily reduce increase the density but when you do increase decrease the area you're increasing the density yeah we've had we've had some subdivisions where the lot width has been 48 and half feet but the lot area is over 5,000 which you're not which the density is fine right that's my concern valid point any other questions comments yes jry so this is bit abstract kind of question but what percentage I didn't expect you I didn't you know that I'm just I mean so what I'm trying to establish in my brain before we vot on this is this 5% of applicants or is this 20% of applicants apply forit 5000 feet I think in this particular Zone if I'm not mistaken a conforming lot leaves 4,000 square fet just so when you do a new subdivision you need 5,000 so we have sections of town mostly the south end of town has the 5,000 s foot Lots the North End has a next 40s in the in the North in the northern zones but that's the old section that's the way you know everything was a 20 foot lot people bought two lots you got F well based off what you just said Frank clearly then when you're making a zoning ordinance to increase the subdivision to 5,000 square feet you're trying to decrease the amount of subdivisions if the standard was 4,000 feet and you go up to 5,000 fet corre you are trying to decrease the amount of of subdivisions correct and the truth of the matter is there's just not many large Lots left and it seems that you know they're just people are just kind of fishing them out and trying to find them and and sub and subdivide them that's absolutely right that that's why they're here exactly so um for me um unfortunately what Mr Kelly said you know what benefits will the community get I don't think the community is getting um benefits here they might have allowed people to park in their parking lot that's being a good neighbor I'm sure that they're all all very nice people I know some of them they are very nice people but for me as as a board member and the zoning ordinance are there for a reason they have a purpose and for me there's just there's there is not this a substantial benefit light air and open space the numbers are still going to be there you still have to have 60 40 it's just that for me the benefits just aren't there for the community still one question from benefit and I don't know if prob complex but taxwise is thereit I I don't even know if you can consider that's not that's not for us to bar so I think this is a tough and and the reason I say that is in my Heart of heart I think two smaller dwellings would actually look nicer there than one larger house some quick math it's it's about 4% short of the 5000 foot% but on the other hand you know I'm opposed to an increase in density that we are imposing anyone else no all right I'm going to ask for a motion to approve or deny this application for subdivision I'd like to make a motion to deny I'll second who's the second Jamie Jamie Miller Jamie biller not Jamie B Just the board I might have given this little instruction before this is a motion to deny so please understand a yes vote means you are in favor of the denial not in favor of granting it it's the reverse okay it's not a motion to approve where if you were against you would vote no it's a motion to deny so a yes vote means you're voting against the approval of this application everyone understand I've had this happen before where the board second board members didn't understand because it get flipped around from what's normally happens okay Mrs Davis yes Mr medal yes Mrs ball Miller yes Mrs edles yes Mrs Leonard yes Mr Stevens yes Mr Jenna yes Mr tinquist yes and Mr Balo yes application denied thanks your consideration ladies and gentlemen thank you yeaha I come never [Music] never where we now right it's in the here all right moving right along we have application 22409 JS Pro LLC 404 aort uh applicant seeking a minor subdivision in variance in the rb2 family residential district yes good evening James Raven on behalf of the applicant JS Pro LLC uh the subject prop is located at 404 iroy Avenue it's a 90 by 100t lot and with the applicant there's an existing home on the property that the applicant is seeking to demolish and to subdivide the property into two single family dwelling Lots which would each be 45 ft by 100 feet and one thing that's important to note in this application this is located in the RB two family residential district so a duplex is permissible on a side on a lot of this area the minimum lot size requirement for a duplex is 6,000 square ft and a minimum width or Frontage of 60 feet here we have 90 ft of Frontage and 9,000 square feet and I'm going to Mark as an exhibit here and distribute to the board I'll mark this as exhibit A1 this consists of two pages page one is sheet three of the Beach Haven tax map and in that sheet three I circled block 53 which is where the subject lot is located and then sheet two is the same page but I've zoomed in on block 53 which is our block and highlighted some of the Lots which I will discuss once I distribute these this exhibit so this will be A1 thank you am I supposed to see this next page that's why I all right that's better thanks okay so as I stated sheet one is the full page of the tax map which is sheet three and then on page two we've zoomed in on block 53 and so all all of the highlighted yellow and red lots are the lots that front on Liberty Avenue on the south side and on the North side are all the lots that front on iroy Avenue then Lots one through four front on West Avenue Lots 13 14 16 and 17 all front on the bay so the subject lot here is the one that's highlighted in red Lots 24 and 25 so every other lot that fronts on Liber or iroy are all 45x 100t lots and that's what we're looking to do these two they're actually still separate tax map Lots 24 and 25 but the existing home that was constructed there is um one house that straddles the property line so it has now merged which is why we're seeking to subdivide it into two lots so as as I stated previously a duplex could go on this slot but the applicant feels that two single family dwellings would conform more more to the neighborhood being that the entire block that FL fronts on both uoy and Liberty are all 45 by 100t lots and the ones in front on West Avenue are all 50 by 80 so they're 4,000 square feet the variances we're seeking are both lot area where we're proposing 4,500 square feet where a minimum of 5,000 is required on new subdivisions the minimum lot size requirement is 4,000 square fet but because this is a new subdivision we are required to provide 5 ,000 and we're also requesting relief for the width where 50 fet is required on new subdivisions and we're proposing 45 so Bruce Jacobs is present from gravat Consulting Group he's going to provide the planning testimony and I also have John cassal on behalf of the applicant first I'll call Bruce Jacobs Mr Jacobs squir the testim this Bo will be the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth yes I do thank you um Mr Jacobs would you briefly recite your qualifications for the board yes uh Bruce Jacobs I'm with the firm Gravette Consulting Group I'm a licensed professional engineer and planner in the state of New Jersey I appeared in front of this board about a year ago um I have been uh I'm a planning board engineer in Lacy Township I've been practicing in the in the area of engineering for 36 37 years thank you and I've appeared all over ocean mommoth and County the board accepts his qualifications yes thank you so Mr Jacobs if you could give an overview to the board what exists currently at the site what we're proposing and what the variances are that we're seeking okay the property is located approxim on South side of acqu Avenue approximately 80 feet west of West a West Avenue and uh as stated earlier there's an existing dwelling on the H on the lot it's a it's a double lot uh the existing dwelling goes from side setback to side setback and what we're proposing to do is demolish the existing dwelling and construct uh or design uh create a minor two lot minor subdivision splitting the lot back in half of where it was originally uh that would make 2 45 by 100t Lots that's 4500 square fet we acknowledge that the subdivision ordinance requires 50 by 100 so we're shy uh U 500 square fet per lot um as noted on the exhibit A1 you can see that there's 14 of the 15 Lots that front on uh iroy or Liberty Avenue are 45 foot wide 100t deep so 4500 square foot Lots um the exception in that area is is the lot in question that's a double lot that's 90 feet by 100 feet which is 9,000 square feet discussing this with the applicant we we looked at the pros and cons of things when we were looking at creating the subdivision and decided because the house was went from setback to setback it would be better to have and it even though it would be conforming and we wouldn't have to come in front of the board we could create a duplex on the lot and and match similar to this existing house and go setback to setback uh but we looked at the Aesthetics of the neighborhood uh in the in the entire block and chose to create two lots where you could create 32 feet of linear foot of open space between the Lots as opposed to 16 um this is a C2 variable or uh variance request we believe that uh it it meets the conditions of the ordinance that uh in the sense that it it could be granted by the by the the municipality the houses that would be proposed would be of a an aesthetic pleasing historical look um it would be conforming to the uh neighborhood in the size of the lots and it would be compliant with the uh FEMA codes and the building codes and as a result we believe that there would be no detriment to the public good or to the land use ordinance if the subdivision were granted because you could create conforming duplex on the site that would be conforming to density whether it be two single families or a duplex same density and provide the the proper amount of parking a minimum of two parking spaces per unit and uh it would comp uh meet the intent of the ordinance and and it's my professional opinion that it there would be no detriment to the to the neighborhood or to the uh to the ordinance or the master plan so Mr Jacobs you feel that two single family dwellings at the site would better fit the neighborhood scheme than one duple one duplex on the entire lot yes because they would be the houses that would be placed on these 45 by 100 foot Lots would be of similar size to the rest of the neighborhood okay so and and the density is the same whether it's a duplex on the existing property or if we subdivide and build two single family dwellings the density would be the same correct yes that is correct and they would all be conforming to all the rest of the bulk requirements of the Zone okay and do you feel that there's any detriment to the Zone plan or zoning ordinance if the board were to Grant this subdivision no I do not okay and with respect to the existing home versus any new homes that would be constructed are there any benefits there with respect to flood codes it would be the new buildings would be conform conforming to the new building codes as well as the uh new FEMA codes as well and any the new homes would be an aesthetic improvement over the existing house that's there now yes okay okay and in your opinion as a professional planner the benefits of having the two single family dwellings and approving the variants outweigh any detriment yes any questions from Mr Jacobs many speak toor moving do you know at this time how many duplexes are in that block 53 at this time I believe there aren't any none none yeah if I was looking at that today if there are any they would be non-conforming in the sense that at least the ones at front on iroy and Liberty each one of those lots is developed so if there is a duplex on one of those it may be a pre-existing non-conformity but they wouldn't be legal duplexes on lots of that size but I'm not aware of any duplexes but I did not look at every lot no you need a minimum of 6,000 square feet and 60 feet in width question are those single family houses there are there single family houses that are on two different Lots the there each lot is developed um I I didn't bring enough copies for everybody but I do have an aerial photograph if we want to mark that there's also one on my map so I'll mark is exhibit A2 this is just a a Google aerial photograph of block 53 and it shows that each one of the Lots that's shown on the tax map that we marked as exhibit A1 is developed each each lot is developed there's no houses that straddle the lot line on two of the Lots I don't know whether any of those are duplexes as I stated previously but I'll mark this as A2 I'll show it to Mr Jenna and then I'll bring it to Mr selli and and as Mr Jacobs noted there is an aerial shown in the top right corner of his plan as well it's black and white but you can make out that each of the lots are developed 21 I think it's 22 and 23 look like house number 412 is joined yeah what Lots Tom 22 and 23 yes there's one house the house it looks like it's the house right next door to the property it looks just like it's one house to me if I'm looking unless these are two separ two separate houses yeah the house th those are two separate houses believe to the West immediately to the west of our lot I know on this it's showing just as 412 but it's my understanding those are separate houses that's not one house those are two separate houses on 45 by 100 foot Lots the two lots to the west of our lot yeah I think it's due to the angle any other questions to build a sing that's correct yes no comments if not I'm going thank you okay Frank no comment no not this time thank you as I stated Mr Cal is present I don't have any direct questioning but if the board has questions he'd be happy to answer them so I just is the same where's my notes the same benefits light air and open space and no duplex that's what your that's what your benefits are benefits are those the the zoning allows for two family dwellings I'm aware and that's what we're proposing is instead of a joint duplex we're proposing two family or two single family dwellings and you feel that that would look better in the neighborhood than than the duplex having the two separate L it would look consistent with the Neighborhood Mr aan you just say that there's two tax they get two tax bills no there's one tax bill I just mean there's still identified as two tax slots 24 and 25 but they've merged It's all under one tax bill yes so I was that was that was my next question does that go away if you don't if you don't merge right even if we tore the house down we would still need a subdivision because it's merged at this point you mentioned that uh having two single family Welling is more attractive to the neighborhood than a duplex but you don't have to a duplex right yeah that question was just asked yes that you could build a single family dwelling on the lot but uh as we stated a duplex is permitted at 6,000 square feet oh we I don't have that electronically but you could look at it here just atle Ms on the street house on thank you Mr Jenna any comments I'm going to open it to the public can I have a motion to open to the public thank you Jim thank you second is there anyone in public would like to come up and speak to this application subdivisions I don't want to but I will because it didn't look like anyone else my name's Susan Gerard g r a r d 1600 West Avenue yes um uh I live right next door to the property that we're discussing and um I I had three issues one is kind of the global issue from the last case it's the lot size I mean there's a reason why City councils go through everything they do to put zoning together and they do it with a lot of thought and it takes a long time and um it's a reason I mean I remember after Sandy I had to you know gut my house and start over I even had to get a variance so I could put stairs up to the front door um but it's there's a reason why we have it and this in this case it's even more than the previous case it's 5,000 you know or no 500 uh square feet per lot that you they're short and that that concerns me I mean everybody has play by the rules yeah my house was built probably in 1970 it was my mother's house before mine and um my other two things and these are like just my personal nitpicking is um they don't have to have a setback as much it goes to 45 feet from 50 feet and that will actually affect my view of the bay I know it's personal and it might be Petty but I thought I'd throw it in because these things are personal that we're dealing with and the other thing I'm concerned about and I don't know somebody told me this you know neighbors down here everybody talks to everybody um something about they weren't going to have off street parking and you can't find a place to park on a weekend down here on our street it just fills up and I've got I can probably put what three cars in in my driveway but um you know it it just it's not going to work when you then put in two homes there that previously everybody pulled up in on their stones in their front yard and that's not going to be there for them to to park in I mean Maybe I'm Wrong uh but you know we got a quite a discussion with the last case on driveways uh but those are just my those are my three issues thank you thank you hello hello how are you my name is Lisa Adrien a d r i a an I live at 16005 West Avenue so just little bit around the corner do you swear I do I would just like to say that I am against the subdivision um basically because there are the rules and the laws that are in place already and so I think that that should just be followed and um there doesn't have to be a duplex there it could be one home and that's what I'd be in favor for that's it hello Jim Skelly I live at 4 7 Liberty Avenue our property backs up to the house and we've been there since 2001 even to the previous owner I do and thanks for the time um I didn't really come prepared but it seems like the questions that you've been asking yourselves from the previous situation is similar to this situation and my question as I understand it is that this request is coming for two ordinances that can't be met so the Builder or the owner um is asking to do it um I don't know why a duplex came up and to me that sounds like a like a thread almost like if you don't do this we can put a duplex in it's totally different issue they they just have they're not meeting their requirements I'm against having two houses behind my existing house as opposed to one and I don't understand why we would give them I mean what is the benefit of having more cars on our street West Avenue is a very nice street it's very popular with bikers uh with dog walkers with Walkers with joggers it's just an area that you put more and more houses up it's going to be more and more dangerous so I would ask you to consider that because I don't see the community benefit um I do not there are several people that could not make this meeting today to the personal issues that houses directly back up to this house that are that are against it they can't be here tonight I know there's a gentleman that was on uh on on the line there I'm assuming he'd be against he lives across the street from the propos lot but I'll let him speak for that thank you for your time thank you very thank you is there anybody online is there hand up there's a hand one can you hear me um it's a little low okay I can hear you but not much can you hear me better now better louder you make it louder hello yes we're working on your sound go ahead uh my name is sigd Kip SI G all right you're going to have to speak loud because you're coming in very low okay I'm going to yell my my name is sigd Kip s i g r i d last name k i e p and I live at 414 Holio can you raise your right hand please do you swear affirm the testimony you give before this port will be the truth of whole truth and nothing but the truth I do okay could just try to keep your voice up so everyone can hear you okay okay and I'll make it short I would just like to say that they're talking about the 45 foot Lots being consistent with the neighborhood and right across the street on iroy and on holy well on iroy for sure those homes are all on conforming live they are not there's not a single house on iroy that is the frontage is 45 and um I agree with one of the previous comments that they say they're approved for a duplex which makes sound like a threat um I think the residents on the street my street poio icoy I can't speak for all of them but everyone would much rather have a single family home like the buttericks had for I don't know 30 or 40 years so I just want to voice um that I would be not in favor of subdividing the lot thank you thank you anybody else anybody else more Brian mlin um I can't hear you yet can you unmute your microphone okay can you hear me okay yes we can okay I'm at 1504 West Avenue I'm on a as cigaret said we conforming lots I'm on a 52.3 by 100 foot lot and Mr mcglen one second raise your right hand please sure you swear affirm the testimony will give before this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do thank thank you go ahead okay so I live on 1504 West Avenue which is the corner of West and iroy U across iroy I'm facing uh the butterick's you know Mrs butterick's uh old property and there is really no parking on iroy um I do have a little access into my back yard but uh most of the time for the last 30 years I've been parking on iroy so parking is a very big concern to me um and I've overheard that there was not going to be any off street parking on the lot which I you know I can't peree because um the parking is really needed um also I'm in agreement with everybody else um I think a single family home would be better for the neighborhood I think um uh putting two more families on our street would just really overcrowd the street that's really all I have to say thank you is there anybody else in the audience like to come up I'm Moren Skelly I'm with that guy but I'm going to give my perspective on it too what was your name I didn't Skelly I'm at 407 Liberty right behind I do one thing that no one has mentioned is the drainage again we're right behind the butterick's house and the house next to us was recently um torn down and built by Keller and since then the house pushed to us used to have t 10 feet and now we're the 5 feet so we're already we're still low we're a Cape Cod um as all those houses were before if you live on this island year round and you drove down that Boulevard last night we just have to start using Common Sense we live on a bay block I've seen the change in the bay block over the last couple years so how you could even think that we could go against these zoning laws I I love what people said that's why you put them in place because years ago these houses were Cape cods I lost all my son I can't see the sky why are we here I work at the library every single person that comes in there says this is a beautiful place thank you for restoring it that's the place I want to live in and I hope you consider that thank you anybody else in the audience can I have a motion to close to the public so move Penny second I'll second Jimmy yes thank you before you do sure in the event um the board were to approve this we didn't address this but I assume went for the record that your client will agree as a condition of approval to comply with the comments contained in the board Eng June 17 2024 yes that's correct little good I'm good right now you guys make a decision just wanted to address some of the concerns of the public so I know there were a couple comments about the the fact that putting a duplex there is a threat I didn't mean it to come across as a threat Mr Cal purchased the property with the intent of developing the property with two units but we felt that Mr cassal felt that to build two single family dwellings con formed with the neighborhood and fit in more than an oversized a duplex I say oversized not really oversized as Mr little noted in the prior application all the coverages are going to be the same whether there are two uh whether it's a duplex or a s two single family dwellings FL FL area ratio is going to govern the living space on the property whether it's two single family dwellings or one duplex but fact of the matter is too with a two single family dwellings you will actually provide more off street parking than you will have with a duplex because with a duplex uh or it could be the same because a duplex you're required two per unit and then uh with a single family you'd have to be two or three depending on the number of bedrooms so I suppose the the off street parking would actually be the same whe whether it's a duplex or two single family dwellings but it comes back to Mr Cal wants to build homes that fit within Beach Haven you know Beach Haven's not customary particularly in that area I know there's some on West Avenue not far you have some big duplexes but a lot like this we feel two single family dwellings fit the scheme of that neighborhood much better the houses would be built to fit in the neighborhood and for those reasons and the reasons set forth by Mr Jacobs we would request that the application be approved thank you Mr a quick question because MERS of the public I think at least one US is there or is there not a provision for off street parking this application what was the all Street all street parking right provider it's not being oh it is yeah we would have to comply with the off street parking ordinance the board hasn't heard that testimony but the members of the public I thought said they heard rumors that there will be no all Street part I'm sorry both both homes would conform to all bulk zoning requirements which would include providing the requisite off street parking spaces okay there's no bulk variances being requested with respect to the homes to be constructed the only variances are for the lot width and the lot area any other questions any questions thank you yeah my my one comment I guess again to our attorney if we were to a resolution approving this can we can we set the side yards I know it's the combination for a side yard is like 16 feet can we request the outbounds of this subdivision be a minimum of 10et no long as they comply no okay and the same with the front yard I mean Mr Raven unless you want to talk to your client and if that's something they me but generally speaking Mr Stevens I understand what you're asking if an applicant the landowner complies with the setback requirements we can't force them to do something less than the Min required but if the applicant were to agree presumably we can make that a condition of approval and I'll just with just to clarify with a two family dwelling on the one lot you'd have a minimum combined sidey yard setback of 16 feet total on both sides and with two single family dwellings you'd have 16 ft on both lots and certainly the duplex wouldn't necessarily be built the width of the whole lot but it could be so you're looking at a minimum of 16 foot of sidey with if it's one lot if it's two lots you're getting 16 on each so a total of 32 feet of sidey setbacks yeah when I'm asking you to agree if if they are two single family lots that the side yard to the adjacent owners be a minimum of 10 ft which allows you you're six feet on the other side and I guess the other part of that was was oh the neighbor on the corner spoke and said she'll lose some of her baby and all all I'm asking is whether the front yard can be held to where the front yard set back is now I don't know what that is I can't tell this not very yeah that house I went by yeah it's 15 feet uh the is the exis front yard setback so one of the points I think uh we're making is right now you have the five foot setback against the easterly Westerly property why not make that to 10 foot and put the two5 together in the middle that way less impact on the neighbors they'll have more space if this was yeah that yeah whether it be five and 11 or well the the two FES would be you would keep 10 foot off the easterly line and at least 10 foot off the Western Line and the smaller setbacks on the interior new line sure that would be acceptable 10 10 feet is fine I would never request five feet because if you screw up right if we held 10 feet on the the outside of each proposed lot then the it would be a minimum of six feet on each of the Lots because it's a minimum combined of 16 so yes the applicant would be amenable to that to providing a minimum of 10 feet so that would be on on new lot 24.01 we would be a Manimal to providing a minimum 10- foot sidey yard setback on the Westerly side there and on new lot 2.01 we would hold a minimum of 10 foot sidey yard on the easterly sidey yard setback and we we would be happy to file a deed rest restriction to memorialize that if the board were inclined to make that condition I have a question Jim so you just in your closing argument you said that when your client purchased the property he really wanted to fit in you know with the surrounding neighborhood so why would you even consider a duplex if there are no duplexes in and around that area the intent here is to build the property and to make a profit again right no I said his intent was to build two units so whether it be a duplex or two single families he wanted to build two units but thought that two single family dwellings would conform more to the neighborhood than the duplex but it's not fair to say you know a duplex would definitely not fit in in that neighborhood so to say that you're you know you're coming in in best intentions in mind that's not the best intentions the intention is to make the most profit but yeah I wanted to be upfront that the there was comments about we'd like it to be a single family dwelling but the intent the whole time was to put two unit so I just wanted to make that clear that that the thought was that two single families fit in better than a duplex and I still do think that's the case at this at this point that's a single family home on that lot it is correct and there's no thinking of putting another single family home on there right we're not into that got it okay I I have the same concerns as the last application is that the the zoning ordinance that was put into place for new subdivisions was 5,000 square feet clearly when the council voted on that subdivision for 5,000 square feet they're well aware that there are undersized lots and again to limit the amount of future subdivisions there is a number that's given and it's 5,000 square feet and that's we we have like I forget who I think it was Mrs Skelly we have to start doing a little Common Sense here people fish out these properties and they try to subdivide them to make the most property or the most profit and are not looking out for the benefit of the community what is the benefit of the community here there is no benefit for the community Mr Raven is there uh without seeing do do you have plans for this for the the houses um I I I didn't submit any plans I do have because this house these houses potential houses unlike the other houses can actually have a garage underneath correct correct is that the plan because I think that helps to do with some of the parking issues that there's potential they have to conform to the parking they have to no no I understand that and if they put a garage in you know what happens with the gares for for the purpose of answering the question is it okay if I have the applicant respond even though our Cas is in so to speak is is the board okay with Mr cassal answering Mr Met's question why don't you come on [Music] up I I'm sorry what was the question again so and just for the record Mr cassal you are the sole member of JS Pro LLC correct okay so the difference between the other one we just Deni and yours is the fact that we don't have viewers who could actually have a plan to see what the Aesthetics would look like in that in that area um even though it's the same it's different we're trying to pick the lesser of two evils for both of these properties and and looking at at at Jim's response on this is what's the benefit for the town or benefit for the other not not threatening wise understandingly so you can have a duplex there no problem and cause probably three times the amount of damage to the neighborhood as far as as livability in that area square area density and stuff square area ratio and density so I'm just trying to sometimes the Aesthetics can help so if you have a a garage and there's no case for any parking of a garage if parking gets tight on this property people going pull into the garage is what I'm thinking I understand parking trust me I here and I live uptown where it's even tighter all the time so um understanding the parking aspect of it if there is a garage maybe that's that's something that that could come into consideration as far as my my personal thoughts correct the we were hoping to build a house more to the beach Haven aesthetic with the cedar shingles the cedar shakes parking underneath off street parking lessening the density of the impact of the neighborhood matching everybody else keeping everything conforming instead of doing a duplex like we originally thinking to do the per purchas of the property was to do something on a large lot that was in a zone that could be a duplex I like the area I work in the area I work in the area every day to assume that I'm selling this property we may stay there I have a young family we may live in these homes I may sell one keep one I'm not quite sure what we're going to do it depends on what happens but the aesthetic I would like to keep is the Beach Haven look that's what I grew up with that's where I live that's what I kind of love to do in the Beach Haven area I did not want to build a box that was going to be a rental and then maximize density and create parking and overflow for all of the neighbors and everything else the idea was to build something very aesthetically pleasing and not the beach not the Long Beach Island box something that was more conforming to what Beach Haven was what's the square foot this house is it maxed out for the lot um the most you're going to get is a four-bedroom house 2200 square feet is what we're looking to do which is conforming to what would be for that size lot and that size area 35 foot height probably not we're looking not to do reverse living we're probably looking to do more of kind of like the historic district type style so kitchen on the first floor parking underneath get kitchen on the first floor 35 we're probably going to be more like 33 34 doesn't make my decision I know I know this is this this is very tough looking at like I said it's the L to certainly you go either way understood other questions Mr Cel thank you thank you [Music] more questions not Mo hands can I have a motion to approve or deny this application speak in the microphone hear that oh my goodness I'm asking for a motion to approve or deny this application for subdivision yes Jerry I would like to make a motion to what a motion to approve the subdivision with the two VAR subject to the conditions of approval that the applic agreed to me compliance with Mr Little's letter as well as the 10 foot side do I have a second hearing the neighbors concerns I I understand exactly where they're coming from and I'm going to Second Mo you're going to Second the subdivision for two lots yes so this is a motion to approve it's the opposite of the last application a Yes means are in favor of granting the application just keep that in mind Tom say I agree so second Jerry's okay do I understand what you said about the so listening to listening to the neighbors then I'm listening to the neighbors and and with with concerned for their well-being I understand um I have a house going up right next to me that I had no say in because they fit all the setbacks and I've got a monster so it is I mean he's trying to be within the neighborhood and be neighborly hopefully it works out that way so I agree I just think that aesthetically it fits the neighborhood never there's a motion in a second Mrs Davis Nancy you're first she called you your name yeah she called your name there's a motion to approve a second you vote no no to the motion to approve yes okay okay Mr medal yes Mrs PA Miller no Mrs edles yes Mrs Leonard yes Mr Stevens yes Mr Jenna yes m Mr tinquist no Mr Balo no motion carries 5 to four thank [Music] you motion application's been approved [Music] to go okay I'm moving right along we have approval of the minutes everybody get a chance to read them no Corrections changes everybody in in approval say I I you're negative no nay approval of the bills July bills all in favor say yay yay uh new business a three-person Review Committee has approved the following applications Haven ice cream ice cream to be ice cream hours 1 to 11: 1 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. and the catino Italian Coastal Cuisine this is the one that's going in Bay vage Bay Village Bay Village beastro 14 yeah be where beastro 14 was that's it guys I just wait can we just discussed something sure okay um it's seems that with the two application let's do this let's adjourn and then we can have a discussion I think I know where this might be going we don't need to have this right okay's motion to there's a motion to can have a motion to adjourn so move I second so can I go now minute wait hold on let me make sure