##VIDEO ID:AWScrW87NMA## want my Dr [Music] two of wires [Music] C that's not Che call Bo being order please rise pledge to the flag the United States of America and to the Republic for it stands one nation under God indivisible andice the 48 hour notice is required under the open public meeting met as Noti meeting was emailed on January 23rd 20124 and published in the as the co-star and the coer a copy has been placed on the bulleting board in the B office and the copy has been fil with the B CL um mayor Fox is excused this evening Miss Hernandez here uh Miss Mahoney is excuse this evening Mr Marco pres uh chair mayor here Mr Mayor here Mr sh here miss Riley I here miss sarine here miss Bernell here um miss boo here Mr seith is excuse this evening and Miss re in his excuse this evening um also present is Mark Krick attorney of the board Gerald fra our board engineer and or Bo a couple things to go over before we start Please be aware the meeting is recorded for transcription the public is asked not to interrupt comment or any way disrupt the presentation on the meeting in general once the land's board opens an application the applicant or attorney May will make their presentation with Witnesses and professionals members of the board will ask questions and cross-examine each witness of the applicant as need members of the audience will be able to ask a questions of the applicant and Witnesses based on testimony given at the end of each witness's presentation at no at this time no comment testimony or evidence from the public will be accepted the board may call its own Witnesses once the applicant has concluded the presentation the board opens the public comment por of the application public is welcome to comment present evidence testimony regarding the application each person must be sworn in under o is limited 5 minutes if desired the applicant may cross-examine you based upon your comment or testimony one hearing date is needed to complete an application it will carry for future date no new application will start after 9:30 unless the board now be agreed as concluded in a timely manner and the board will journ at a reasonable hour and ear will witness be called provide testimony 10 thank you okay there's no new correspondence I next is the approval and Adoption of our meeting minutes from the regular meeting of July 18 2024 with motion for approval second Mr Mayor yes uh Mr Marco yes Miss Bernell yes Miss yes uh Mr CH yes and chair mayor yes thank you um as far as our resolutions I just want to make a note for the record resolution 20 24-19 is going to be held over until our September 19th meeting I received an email from Richard Stone um requesting that be uh able to review it um he thought there were some minor revisions that needed to be made so um we will be reissuing that resolution and it'll be more memorialized at our next meeting so the uh first resolution we have for memorialization is resolution 20248 this is approval of use variance and V variances to reconstruct a second principal structure which had been damaged by fire Dennis and Roberta MCD block 18 Lot 21 516 Parkplace Avenue a motion uh Mr Mayor yes Mr Marco yes Miss berell yes Miss Boco yes Mr sh yes and chair mayor yes thank you uh the other resolution is resolution 2024 -20 approval of both Baran is to reconstruct a home and accessory garage with apartment Michelle bladder and Grant first uh block 63 lock 20 314 third make a motion to Mr meor yes Mr Marco am eligible for this one yes yes um Miss reell yes uh miss boo yes and uh Mr sh yes thank you uh so the first application we have under consideration um is really just a request for an extension of time that was for our old planning board PB 20/2 this is request for a third and final one-year extension of time for Coastal custom Builders lot 32 lot 17 and 18 803 and 811 Main Street the applicants requesting a third and final one-year extension of time in order to resolve an outstanding issue pertaining to affordable housing as it relates to the project the affordable housing issue is expected to be resolved shortly and is required in order to obtain resolution compliance and for the applicant to be able to move forward with the project the applicant represented by Thomas J H asquire and and uh Mr Shook You will be refusing yourself from this request yes please all good evening ladies and gentlemen Thomas J representing Coastal custom Builders as Mr indicated application letter application file uh this is our request for the third oneye extension that's pered law board's discretion obviously first to granted uh the first one was more involved with Co and stuff but the second one was related to condition about affordable housing and whether we did have to supply it we didn't we had to make a contribution so there was substantial U dialogue in correspondence with Mr Cher myself Mr the bur and this beam and U eventually uh we came to the solution so we submitted a proposal to Mr chair and U July 26 U Mr chair rised that discuss with the Govern body and that Jennifer be and I have been authorized to draft ordinance which per the new development as we had outlined in our so finally uh we've gotten to that issue because until we've resolved that one resolution compliance we couldn't of course move forward with approval and purpose so actually this approval go through uh as we proposed it we will in fact come back to another site plan uh although they're drafting an ordinance essentially will be without variances to effectuate the affordable housing settlement so this obviously is providing affordable housing units as part of this resolution but because we don't know these things have taken so long before in so many months we want to make sure the current approval was still protected under the one year extension so actually ordinances adopted and again maybe back in front of you for that that my question will it come back for us again we we don't know what's really going to change I saying everything has presented originally it just reconfiguring the inside and which doesn't the counil typically what happens they adop an ordinance for him that that's solely for that L that lot John Mr H is represented that they be coming back to that par for this evening their entitled are the municipal please for one more extension yeah original original until we get that one resolved and then there's no public make motion to exension one year who's my second one year from the expiration of the last Mr I think I thought it was you be through September 23rd 202 okay uh Mr Mayor yes Miss sine yes M Hernandez yes Miss Riley II yes uh Mr Marco yes Miss berell yes Miss boa yes and chair mayor yes thank usually not this Bri it's kind of refreshing it's kind of refreshing you're welcome have a good well see remember [Music] remember so our next and final application under consideration this evening is Lu 23 26 use and both prances for the removal of an existing rear one-story dwelling and construction of a garage with apartment Brian Downey block 60 lot 3 619 4th Avenue applicants proposed to remove the existing on story dwelling at the rear of the existing 2 and a half story dwelling as well as the construction of a new detached garage with apartment the applicants represented by Glen Williams Esquire um m sarine is um isus dis application um due to her relationship with the um and she's leaving she's going she's leaving good night um and the mayor and Miss money are not here this evening but they would not be able to participate because of some experience thank you for ease so good evening Mr chairman members of the board and board professionals my name is Glenn Williams I'm here um on behalf of the applicant Brian dowy on application L 2326 property involved is lot three in Block 60 commonly known as 69 4th Avenue in BR the beach the application this evening is seeking your approval and getting a required variant for is described in the application filed October 10th 20 2023 and outlining your board professions review letter of May 10th 2024 simply to remove and rebuild the rear rear Cottage as a garage Department the public notice requirements have been satisfied and I confirmed today the those estate taxes have been paid and so I have three Witnesses here with me this evening uh we have Courtney wallison uh C wall architecture who's the project architect we have Gary Dean who is a professional engineer professional planner Dolan and Dean consultant Engineers he's here in that capacity we have Brian Downey who's the applicant who really doesn't intend to provide any direct testimony but is here to answer call than Mr so we have the three of them just come up Mr Danny also just in caseable you raise your right hand please do you swear airm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing the truth proceeding than okay thank you so with that I'd like to proceed call our first Witness okay so Mr Al your affiliation with this application is as the project architect is that correct yes okay is also my primary res as well yes okay and so I don't know if you've testified before this board before but we intend to offer her as a licensed architect so if you'd like you can please share your educational and and LIC and I have presented to the board previously I see yes this was the um she yeah on Main Street it was the church and they converted it to a single right should Courtney I'm going to turn over to you than so much and thanks for joing us tonight so this proposal like I mentioned is also my house and and I are Partners in life and we from the Architecture Firm main so our house there's an existing two bedroom rear Cottage that's um it does not meet the setbacks on both sides we do want to tear it down and St the footprint to meet the setback but we the first story garage and then one bedroom apart so the whole uh square foot just gaining inum um we're adding an outo shower there will be an hbac condenser uh we also have to chop up some of the concrete within our backyard to meet the impervious soil coverage [Music] um yeah just to give a little bit of color on the existing conditions of the house well it's not in color it's not in color was it on is it on the website in color you get the IDE very than the building is inair and it rather than trying to reconstruct in it's current form want to re it and the new building as I said it's smaller a if you go to a00 please so we have the that's will have access by the stairwell to the apartment above and the garage is open garage there's the shower and the condenser on the north of this new building and that's our rear guard as it will be there's more concrete it as it stands now and the second floor of this new building will be a one bedroom apartment washer dryer bathroom small kitchen and we have a couple skyl on the roof try to minimize the number of Windows very the exterior will be Hardy Board Plank and then a little bit of an e siding just comp things visually um that's about it I do have a question staring right at us yeah how do you get two cars in that garage you have problem sorry how you get two cars representing two cars in the garage would you have a problem we certainly do so can we go back to the surve have a run yeah we do the yeah so do that proper to you or the neighbor it's it's ours they they have a 10 for one easy it's not an easy sorry a 10 foot wide piece of property goes out to the Lane so's it's a funny little we're I mentioned before the meeting to the attorney um right now from an engineering standpoint you can't make the turn put two cars in that garage so they do have a 10-ft wide drive right they that takes you back to their property it's behind the lot next to them to their West but the building would have to be moved forward on the property by at least another 12 15 ft to be able to get course to turn and get into that and that's something that they can do that without any additional variances that I could tell but the lock converges it's not a rectangle right so if it gets moved forward there may be the need for a side yard setb because of the configuration of the lot but it would be minimal it would be something like 6 in or something like that right now they don't need sign from they but they need the variance but they need well you just can't put cars in it makes no sense to build a garage when you can't put cars in so with then that said the other variance is the big one that's scaring us face well they have to have a variance for for a garage apartment because lot is under something that's why they're here and because that small portion of their lot is in the G so there's these issues we tend to address with our professional planner Mr Mr uh Gary and so we can Courtney can answer she can answer and then you can ask again because our professional engineer plan is prepar that's testify to this issue specif what's Kelly has brought up every is a 4500 foot property right Town ordinance requires 7500 for well it used to require 5,000 it just this is 5,000 right but you're not so so the day after the day after the application was filed the ordinance was introduced to a yeah that's theing please make make your so just go over where the driveway is sure you you and as Christine stated this piece is in partially in the commercial Jer what would you say the perent I'm just curious just the percent it's the least of the issue be curious what is the percentage of that portion that's in the GB versus an R1 oh it's minimal like 10% 2% even less than 10% it's probably because this whole lot is all in residential and this one little piece not no there's a house 621 they have this is a parking area that I believe is utilized by by 621 there signs up a Lo place is thater neighb yes okay they just have it I drove past this that's all they just parked their car they park the cars there and then these guys have a paid dri next to it but you really can't maybe tell when you're riding by neighbors actually that as the one thir house at 62 on thir Avenue right has the fence that goes okay any questions than you Mr Dean good evening for the record Gary D N professional address is 54 Oland Street in Ocean growth New Jersey uh by way of qualifications graduate of Lehi University with a Bachelor of Science degree in civil engineering um I've been practicing traffic Engineering in Municipal planning for the past roughly 40 years um a licensed professional engineer and a licensed professional planner in New Jersey and both licenses are current and in good standing I've served as the Municipal Traffic engineer for Asbury Park in in the review of land use applications and also currently in Wall Township but I've been qualified before 400 different planning and zoning boards throughout the state but to the best of my recollection this is my first appearance at please thank you thank you um as you've heard described by the applicant the property is has some unusual configuration and if I could I'd like to show you it's nothing more than an exhibit from your uh zoning map as well as your land use plan so it's I've just it for ease and understanding what I will ultimately describe as a hardship associated with the property if I can approach the dat we can mark this applicant A1 sure I may not have enough but what I what I what I'm sorry what what I've prepared is from your master plan uh the colored component oh thank you for doing that the colored component of this exhibit um is the land use plan um from your master plan and in yellow are Residential Properties what I've also done what do we references a11 it it is a I'll call it a zoning mized colorized ex the the yellow represents uh residentially used properties red is uh in the GB principally District fronting on Main Street in a heavy black line You'll see um well it's not labeled that is the zoning line that is the boundary between the R1 District to the East and the GB Zone to the West curiously that zone is never been reconciled to encapsulate Residential Properties and this particular property which I'm labeled as PQ um has as you've seen on the exhibit this tail this this little strip which is the driveway in question that extends into the GB Zone there is no proposed changing use of that strip it is currently used for vehicular access and parking that use will continue to remain but we are here before you should you feel that the removal of the two-bedroom apartment that is on the south side of the lot and replacement with the proposed garage apartment um while that's permitted in the R1 zone I'll say the motor vehicle activity associated with accessing the garage is not I'll say expressly permitted in the GB Zone however your GB Zone does perm residential uses of second and third floors as uh primary uses or principal uses and as a conditional use also permits town houses so the concept of having some residential use in the zone I would say is not that significant a deviation from your zoning ordinance you know for example putting a commercial use in a residential Zone sure that's a use herance but this activity OCC today arguably we are decreasing the intensity of use by getting rid of a two-bedroom apartment which is not permitted in the zone with a garage apartment so it is improved it is a proposal to improved the lot that I would submit is consistent Wick a R1 zoning um I have a second exhibit I don't think it it adds much Clarity but I've um I will introduce it the uh A2 which is what here it is the an excerpt from the applicant's uh site plan and all I've done is and again it's not engineered with any element of precision but I've now taken A1 and super enlarged it to show the property in question and that zone boundary so to the right of the red line is R1 to the left of the red line is GB and you'll see it splits the property this is a hardship that runs with the parcel irrespective of the use um as we've indicated this proposal seeks to eliminate a pre-existing non-conforming use and in its replace uh in its place again make a one bedroom garage apartment associated with that will be improvements to the property that also decreas the impervious coverage um in your uh professionals review it indicates that the existing impervious coverage is now at 72% and that will be reduced to 60% uh in addition the building coverage will also be decreased from 35% to 32.4% so even though it's a pre-existing undersized lot uh we are certainly this application moves it closer to conformance with your Zone plan and zoning ordinance um and in my opinion as a professional planner that promotes general welfare and constitutes one of the special reasons that is required in the grant of a use variance even though the only use in question we're describing is a 50ft piece of asphalt that will continue to remain and has been is presently used for residential uses um we're we're also improving uh storm water runoff with the decrease and impervious coverage I do understand and share the concerns about the narrowness of the driveway and ability to get a motor vehicle into the garage if we were to pull out an ordinance and say I was designing a shopping center or looking at the residential s Improvement standards to be able to pull smoothly into a parking space requires a 24t aisle we don't have however this is not a publicly accessible structure it'll be used by the owners who are the applicant they Architects they designed this to meet their needs um to access the garage and I did identify that in my initial betting of the application it means a couple turn to get in and out it can't be done in a single movement the expectation is it will be a low volume use again it's not a it's not commercial park it's but candidly their headache to deal with it also means they don't have to store a car in it your garage requires a I mean your ordinance requires a garage apartment for the storage of Motor Vehicles doesn't specify automobiles so things like jet skis or anything that has to be registered with Motor Vehicles golf carts low speed Vehicles all have much greater maneuverability and that in my opinion meets the appropriate test so that it will be used to store a motor vehicle and your ordinance describes priate garages as storing Vehicles so we understand the applicant is acutely aware of I'll say the con strength of that limited driveway width it can't be widened it can't be improved but it it will adequately serve and I've consulted with them on that I I can't disagree it doesn't meet you know as I said the standard that comes out of the book in your um professional opinion as a traffic engineer could you explain how someone would get in the garage kind of what that multi-point turn would look like a little bit um there's two ways to do it one you could back in the driveway and back into the garage makes the turn easier because the car pivs better moving backwards turning rears however if someone were to pull in traveling eastbound they would angle their vehicle as they start to pull up to the garage and then back up and pull forward and back up if anyone ever watched Austin poers it took 5 million turns to turn the golf cart it can be done how would you get out same way just back out again to the right one of the things we discussed with the applicant it's not featured on the plan is to provide I call it a backout key which is a little extra bit of black top 3 to four feet whatever fits between the southeast corner of the building and the property line that gives a little extra black top for that uh to back further out before pulling forward so let me ask if the whole proposed structure was just pulled forward at least six seven8 ft wouldn't it make a world difference I it does two things one it increases impervious coverage where it's a decrease now and it it's going to remain black top would it be more maneuverable it would be so it diminishes the the Gap in the space between the primary structure and the garage apartment and it compromises you know what little yard there is understood and and I see that as an issue um but you know they're not going to own the property forever somebody else is going to buy the property someday they may not be as good of drivers as these people are they might have a much larger car you and we I just can't recogniz the board enough that for this to be approved that garage needs to be pushed forward it's got to be able to have it so that the average driver can pull into the driveway use it use the garage also if there's a car in the garage there's no way you're going to be able to get a second car in there as it stands right now it won't happen so I think it's in your best interest to to move that Building forward as many feet as maybe your engineer thinks he's he is a traffic there I would think at least 6 78 F minimum so can make turn and still probably have to do a two turn to get in at least the second one um you know they have two structures which means our ordinance says they need four onsite parking spaces um they have that with the two-car garage but if they can't get two cars in the garage and they don't meet that so they're going variance for that isn't the alley a one way the yes but that that really isn't the issue the issue is once you're on the driveway accessing the garage I really don't see any other way to do it and I know you want to hold on to that backyard l space but the only other functional way that I could see is that and I'll refer the board and and if you have exhibit a11 that shows um and and I'm looking at the left hand side of that sheet it shows the two cars getting kind of hung up on this driveway issue in parking but it still doesn't it doesn't address the real issue and the real issue is garage apartment on 4500 foot property two stories and the whole thing it's it's totally against our orance well what's there today is Works no well that's in your opinion that's in your opinion I was going to ask question what is the square footage of the building that's there that I can't answer that be thing the sare footage that the existing build bigger than I understand how much um I'm sure you know it's on The Zing page 100 you come so the existing rear cage you're more important than I it's 642 ft and now it's being reduced to 535 kind 535 this says 560 this A2 but the actual in one bom is and right now you're saying the existing PR is 6 642 642 so little over 100t the same yes stairs yeah there stairs internally right and so you could you could canel the the second floor and scoop one of the cars forward but you know also be a little this also other comment you made also too regarding planning a two a two bedro not do to one bed if this application does not go forward applicant still has that piece of proper still has that one has that building if they want one bedroom they can convert the inside all the want and they can they can put lipstick on this building to make it look prettier we can't force them to take it down they can't expand it they can't can't change it but they can change the internal and they can change the siding Cosmetics they can do the Hardy Board on they can make it real dir one bedroom even though it's not legal still but as soon as you change his footprint and now you want to expand upon it this is aumy fr you just said expansion we're Contracting and two things happen one what's going semantics you're changing by 100 sare ft but you're also going up correct so let's let's just let's call it what it is it's two two story garage apartment on a lot that doesn't supported it's not legal and the prior zoning of 5,000 ft or Z get S so either way it doesn't go forward understood but as as a planner I'm obligated to reconcile where we have a pre-existing non-conforming condition that that also has and I didn't explain because there is no garage on the property that means we'll say for discussion purposes for vehicles now all need to park on Arrow Streets and knowing that parking is a sensitive issue and opportunity to get two of those Vehicles inside has some minor but nonetheless positive benefit what happening right now in terms I'm sorry what's happening right now in the park where are the four cars the four cars where are they going right now on Street technically they could use the driveway for two cars okay right so from our let's look at this they do have two onside parket spaces they need two more but they need and I I know you're doing your job and I appreciate it and and and and I understand the sensitivity it's I I always look at it and say you have a a pre-existing non-conforming use in terms of two principal structures on the same lot so that is a zoning violation although grandfathered or protected and secondarily you have a two two-bedroom apartment on that property which is which is also not permitted it could be but if you're trying to lessen intens you could theoretically take it down to one bedroom make it a nice 100t bigger than what you're proposing yes but you could clean that up we can't do a thing about it and it's because again we're stuck with this leg use this term a lot Legacy zoning that Bradley Beach we're stuck with and here we are and and and that's where again my role as the planner is is to say in my per profal opinion you have a superior zoning alternative in front of you with this proposal than leaving it the way it is not withstanding those violations in your opinion which I we're not we're talking some minimum minimum minimum size footprint change reducing it and that's and that's that's that's lot but what's not is trying to take a 4500 foot line put a twostory building on garage apartment in in a small lot like this this is we fight this every week or every month we see this and we didn't change the law we didn't change the rules to go to 7500 how the Town Council so it just got it go the other direction not small understood it's just in this unique circumstance and every application needs to be considered on its own correct is um applicant is not seeking to put a two-bedroom apartment on that property not withstanding it's under it's there and collectively as as as a not a governing body but a a decision maker getting something that meet your zoning plan or is closer to your zoning plan I always think is better and I understand that well make it conform that's that's the ideal always and everything else beyond that is a compromise there we go and and and a compromise in this instance is we're making it better and and I hear what you're saying I I don't know how to articulate uh that any better um and and we can certainly consult with the applicant in terms of if the garage shifts northward does that cure your collectively concern I'm not addressing just you in terms of the relief that we're seeking in other words let's say shoved it 10 ft forward and I can pull the car in in One Sweep does that get you where you want to be that's youve heard two now hear two people you can read between the lines that moving it what's what still doesn't address the overing ISS honestly if this was 6 months ago or eight months ago still like a 5,000 foot lot coverage and this was at 4500 I think palatable to listen to it and figure out what to do with the cars and how to get them in and make it instead a more pleasing but you're now almost 40% under the threshold of having a garage apartment like that's a huge increment and I think that's a big thing for us to take on to grant that regardless if you can get a mini a Fiat a golf cart or a jet scan there it doesn't yeah it doesn't matter it's unfortunately your Council passed a ordinance meaning I know you don't live here but you guys passed for 7500 sare foot lot to have G departments and that puts us in the position or at least myself to say no no and that's a condition that's endemic to the property obviously they didn't create it and when we went from 5,000 to 7500 sare ft we were already approximately 70% conforming with that new rule we're now over close to the high 0s of non-conforming so you guys are not the only ones who have this issue it's other people who have come in that are asking for that and we just for and if this was you know 7200 square ft I think it would be a potential conversation but 4500 excuse me if you can't keep yourself contained I would ask you to leave is that M Mr Mr yeah I the back of my shees I feel threatened and I feel harassed up here so I would appreciate if you can take yourself outside or behave like an adult don't be shocked please so excuse me I apologize for taking time to I understand how what has changed and and as I've said I I we what's there today and I imagine many residents in the community want more yeah this is an applicant that interestingly wants less marginally marginally but they want less less less building area less impervious coverage and one less bedroom again to distinguish it from probably 98% of what you normally hear I think this one rests on its own merits but I we obviously have to huddle up and if if at all possible Glen I don't know what else I appreciate but You' he you've heard the board and I I need to open this up to the Public Public questions of you also right please any questions Thomas 6 Third Avenue Mr Dean uh would you perceive the addition of the uh parking spaces to be a positive benefit to this application in a town that has a parking issue I would now um I noticed that the ordinance does allow uh a distance from the principal dwelling of 20 ft so according to my calculations that gives you approximately 2829 ft to work with to make that garage more functional um is that something uh that would be considered I I is not my application I'm merely testifying and sharing my opinion based on the plan that has been filed the hypothetical wh ifs are I haven't evaluated that as I've indicated moving the garage closer to the principal structure like you know has some compromises to it um and and it's a balancing of whether being able to pull a car in in one easy turn outweighs impervious coverage and and more landscaping and better functionality of those two structures but we would need to evaluate that as the function would be the the best would it not well depends on function in other words having a nice backyard where one can you know live and enjoy quality of life as opposed to having an easier move into the garage as opposed to having a conforming number ofing well this application won't have a conforming number we we were we were providing two as zero exists today so I've heard the engineer stated previous that you par two cars in the driveway so apparently there's two today the I'll say there's a driveway they would there're a tandem Arrangement so if someone pulls all the way through the existing structure it then blocks the car behind them so it's it's just a strip of I wouldn't characterize it as as a dve and and this property as exist could be renovated could it not as with any and and the uh there's there's been no testimony there's anything wrong with the existing structure but would you say wrong or any compromises structur oh I don't know oh okay I believe um the arit now 24 would that be the standard for you as a traffic engineer for proper Ingress and erress to that garage in my opinion it can be done with less I wouldn't be here advocating if but I didn't think so it it makes it I I'll say a conventional parking lot like one would find a chop now I would submit that the vehicles that Park along the alley today are backing out in only the width of the alley which isn't much wider than what we have here so people are somehow able to do that with all of the head behind the commercial uses that front M so they're doing it sure but but you do have enough flexibility without triggering a variance for distance between structures is that correct well there would be other variances created and and again because I've not done a layout I I I can't speculate as to what other Rel might so we really don't know if an increase in the impervious coverage would still be under the existing imper corre okay great thank you I saw your client she yeah thank you very much just just with respect theing applic our I have no one to blame for myself for that but we did submit it before thein change so I am very sensitive to that just so is is the argument that so so the argument that being app the time of application was thinking and we were hoping to not have to debate that issue isue because it was that's I looked at the timing of the application as it relates to the introduction of the ordinance the application was filed before the ordinance was even introduced and then it was subsequently approved in in December of that year so what was the application for November 27 November 27th 2023 before the coordinates was introduced no year later so this's a long timeline so we submitted this application in October of 22 the ordinance was was introduced I literally to the zoning officer or to this board to the board I have November 27th 2023 there well there was that was the initial irations and other things and then it was incomplete December 15 2023 we got a second submission March 13 2024 and then it was deemed complete on May 6 2024 right so the original application that I have that was signed by the applicant seems like the day before and so but we know there was a long history because Coury just confessed that the cobbler has no shoes and so they're working on their own account and it took longer so that's why we didn't we didn't come here presenting time of application and it was still under sized but it was 5,000 but less now it's 7500 I think the uh it was no Mark's looking at me it was submitted prior to the adoption ofet I'm not arguing that but I 22 I didn't have an application in2 Accord to your records that was submitted November of 23 was the ordinance adopt uh was it in December or did it get kicked away January we had emergency December meeting yes so then we said in December we were forand to adopt it so it was a matter of two weeks so essentially but we but we did we send and we said that it was inconsistent I know it didn't officially get adopted until the beginning of 24 so we're talking the council grandfather I think they're protected by the prior they protected by the prior so I guess the point being made is you still need a variance but it's not as egregious of variance I still think it is consider we're 8 months just just saying before us that's the standard to apply is was it 5,000 yes 5,000 still need VAR but we're not talking about yes but we have used that 7500 Logic on other things that have come UPI before this meeting doesn't matter but same it depends on when they were correct right but we have had things submitted prior now this uh this as your Council can can also confirm this this whole Juris Prudence I've been doing this for 30 years and I've been in your seat and shared my complaining what my town and I was elected official my C this is in reaction to uh municipalities that would quickly move when they didn't like an application to change the zoning ordinances uh after the application submitted so there was a body of lawsuits and case law etc etc that evolved to what they call the time up the application rule so the the rules that exist when your application is submitted is are the rules that apply even if it changes after I ask a question this is a this is a major twist if we'll watch the movie this will be major surprise why wasn't this introduced but talked about right from the GetGo as this is this is actually an overriding issue because now you're throwing this in here you're expecting us to take to double back I don't agree with with Kelly's point of view 4500 sare F feet I don't agree with that 5,000 fet was the limit 5,000 that is the reason why we didn't make a point is because in either event it was undersized right so the fact that it was less undersized under the prior rules then we should we should even consider according to you know Council you have to consider because that's the rules that apply right until until Miss won brought that up it was not going to be so we weren't going to consider that as as a point so this we have gone to a resolution I mean a a motion and you may have won you may have one you may have chosen to walk out and Rec configure um and come back again I don't know what you have done but this was not going to be discussed until Miss wson brought at the very was like oh by the way I to say what I said was that it was more palatable I didn't say it was agreeable at 45 which isine I think it's agreeable I don't think it's agreeable I said it was palatable but not agreeable and you're getting more feedback now than most people get okay so if we can I'd like to take a brief recess talk to our clients see see where we're going I'm taking it back this this is the first I'm taking it back all of a sudden whoops to tell this sorry like whoops forgot to tell you this by the way we we put this application before the ordinance change we didn't know this and I don't even know what seem remain to this in a sense does it never complied even before just the [Music] standard okaye I wasn't I wasn't trying no no no no I'm not just we get we get taking a 5 minute break I said like I have she had got sick while she was in there with some kind ofat they tested for but it was some kind of inhalation bacterial something or because it was ined it would be they got um she had finished the sing lost it's been weeks she got sick on I want to say so she follow with her and they sent her [Music] for but they you know we needed to get her out of there you know and I'm glad we did I'm she kind of weak um yeah yeah she had fallen right before we left her vacation and she was in the hospital five days then she got moved to the rehab um so now she's on a walker um and she said she feels more comfortable with the but when she first got sick in there she had a fever for like the first couple and then after she finished the round of antibiotics she has not had fever only CH has annoying cough no voice and she constantly feels like her head is and um and I think it's throwing off like CU her congestion I think it'sing off her equilibrium is Mak nervous about walking should ask antibiotics because I was like me everything could [Music] very well shake it put your ear up [Music] and put in a new neighbor anyway and it was and I my mom saw delivered in the bo maybe something wasn't one to go like other than she didn't really go partaking [Music] anything don't want I was like fine how she stay has like a little Shuffle to her and whatever she doesn't really pick up her Fe she need a new back they're not going to give [Music] that's if Will to I yell at she was when she was in the [Music] [Music] take it get a good night she's like a zombie keep upst [Music] she's having a hard time iorder of and out of call back work please do a roll call yes please we'll go one second uh Mr Mater yes M Hernandez yes uh M Ry yes Mr Marco M for now here miss Bo here Mr sh here CH May here thank you okay so Mr chairman we have uh you've given us a lot to think about and consider so we'd ask that we adjourn the meeting this evening give us an opportunity to go back take it under consideration come back with the redesign we to work with your board professional to see what we can do to further bring it into to your satisfaction we the rest of the evening and continuation of the to how long you need I would I would schedule for next next mon for September do we have you have opening I do have an opening I have um two applications that were just fairly recently submitted so I mean they would be scheduled shorts they're not scheduled yet I'm waiting on complet so we'll carry to um September 19th I will not be [Music] else so the DAT is September September 19th 2024 with no further notice thank you very make a motion for thank you everyone [Music] In fairness I actually was not mad and