##VIDEO ID:EmpekwOXcQ0## little excitement in front of your house this morning huh see Craig little excitement in front of your house this morning yeah was she bad bad yeah she said there was like stuff all had to clean this off a bike was prostrated on the on the driveway she was on the street she was knocked out yeah it's amazing yeah so she must have had an incident you know an episode of something that made her go down while how you doing Z hey Z you don't have too many mories left you canel a few for me testing just we got n it's all we [Applause] need okay have n all is out there just okay weit so who's the other guy out there FR who's the who's the other guy out there that's the project attorney attorney okay e e e oh yeah's that they're changing something about the deck but I don't think change change hi everybody the August meeting of the C city planning board is now in session and in compliance with the open public meetings act notice this meeting has been given if anybody has reason to believe this meeting is being held in violation of that act they shall so State at this time hearing them we'll start with the Pledge of Allegiance Pledge Allegiance flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all hey Karen roll call Mr bazer here Mr Jones here Mr rigs here Mr Crowley here Mr Gorgon mayor mullik here council member Jagger here Mrs Reed here Mr lenol here Mr pusis here Mr krippin okay and we have a new member on the board everybody Justin Justin Rigs and um you're going to be compelled to take a oath okay can we vote on that before uh okay I'm not going to tort to you and make you read line after line I'm going to read it and then you're going to say uh you do okay got it all right I Justin rigs do solemnly swear or or affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the state of New Jersey that it will bear true faith and allegiance to the same and to the governments established in the United un States and in this state under the authority of the people and that I will faithfully impartially and justly perform all the duties of the office of planning board member according to the best of my ability and that I will gain that I will not use my office to Grant preferential treatment nor to seek personal gain favor or Advantage not available to the general public so help me God you so agree I do okay has he signed one of these or is this the one that he signs I was waiting for him to sign it in your presence in my pres yes honor sign my pres thank you okay we have the resolution to approve 615 Lafayette Street LLC block 1060 lot 5.01 anybody have any amendments to that to make a motion I'll move that thank you Dennis second so we have a motion by Mr Crowley um I'm sorry did Mr produc is second I'm sorry who second it oh Mr lolm so motion by Mr Crowley seconded by Mr lenhome uh mayor mullik uh I was absent should I abstain I'll I'll abstain council member Jagger yes Mrs Reed yes Mr Crowley yes Mr lenhome yes Mr rigs I was not a member yet so I'm going to abstain Mr produces yes Mr Jones yes Mr bazer yes thank you okay we have minutes of the July 9th meeting for [Music] approval hearing no Corrections we'll get a motion to approve those I'm move that second Mr Crowley motions Mrs Reed seconds mayor mullik yes council member Jagger yes Mrs Reed yes Mr Crowley yes Mr lhol yes Mr rigs abstain Mr puses yes Mr Jones yes Mr bazer yes thank you okay we have an application tonight Jason and Cinda cway I guess that's how you say it uh 501 Hugh Street block 1049 10.01 site plan preliminary and final and variance relief so John a hous are the DSE Law Firm here on behalf of the applicants Jason and Cinda Cy uh subject property is 501 Hugh Street here in K May it's block 1049 Lots 10 and 10.01 properties located in the residential seasonal zoning District uh prior to appearing this evening uh the applicant received approvals from uh the city of Kate May historic preservation Commission on May 28th of this year um the shade tree commission Public Works police and fire have also uh advised of their approval of the proposed application the only recommendation uh for denial that was received was from the city's environmental commission um and before we get into our um presentation this evening I do have an exhibit to provide to the board we have full-size copies as well as letter size uh but we have revised the plan slightly in order to um effectuate the the concerns of the environmental commission and alleviate those um through a couple of reductions in terms of um shade tree coverage that Mr Beck told will advise of during his testimony uh as is set forth in the application that was provided what we're proposing to do through this application is to construct an 18t X 25t inground swimming pool with P pav patio surround in the rear yard even though it's technical rout I'll call it it's it's a front yard but we view it as a traditional rear yard of the subject property um what we are needing is a single variance that's highlighted in Mr heres's review letter related to to um the connection between the P patio and the pool area which I think we'll get into shortly uh with me this evening uh here to provide professional testimony is Mr Andrew Beck told Andrew is a registered architect um with with a firm in which uh it's Thomas Beck told architecture and engineering Andrew I'm not sure if you've been here before or not but happy to elicit credentials Mr bazer if you'd like to hear them I'm just before he okay sorry um and we asking to in the board engineer do we swear to tell the truth nothing what you st you got I I do throw a few credentials at us uh yes been registered architect since 2012 uh I've been before boards in Wildwood SEI Avalon Ocean City Longport Margate I'm registered in the state of New Jersey I'm also professional planner in the state of New Jersey I'm also registered in Florida Georgia and Maryland correig he you good with that okay you have be good with that that anybody have any questions Mr ve no okay far away thank you um before Mr Beck told begins can uh we provide you with what I'd like to have marked as exhibit A1 Rich this is the uh revised plan um that we put together just to review this like I said addresses the concerns of the environmental commission yeah we can hand those ones out thank you you sir here I'll present Mr King I I guess it would make sense too I know we just had this discussion before we begin presenting I think there is a a a question related to whether or not a variance is actually required uh for what's being proposed here there was one variance like I mentioned highlighted Mr hur's review letter and looking at the terms o of that section of the ordinance I think when you take it in a literal sense there's an argument to be made that that variance isn't required I'm just wondering if you want to we can discuss that with the board now to make that determination what did you change from the plan you submitted to address so what you'll so what you'll see in the plan that was submitted to you is between the P patio area which if you're looking at the plan would be on the left side of the pool there is actually and Andrew you can show there's a strip of grass between the pool and the p p patio area that removes any formal connection between the two is there a fence there I'm sorry is there a fence between them no sir okay not all I'll be glad to let the board vote on that um I'd like to have Mr huris speak on it as well I'll just share my my personal opinion but my opinion doesn't matter it's your interpretation I don't view the connection as being necessarily a physical connection I view it as being in connection with uh in the sense that it's a it's a a patio next to a pool intended to help you know for people who are in the pool to get out of the pool and play near the pool and scream and yelling things people do in your pools I just view that as being in as connected to the pool not so much a physical thing if everyone could avoid that that um that provision by simply putting a in foot strip between there we might as well delete the ordinance so the literal meaning is one thing but the purpose and intent of it is the primary object so my view I think it's still connected with the pool but if the board feels differently that's they you know that's their View and I will not stand in their way Mr herles if he feels differently he can say so yeah I think I think it's important just to read the language of the the code term um of the section that dealing with that involves the variance because it it requires the board to interpret what connected means okay so the section that's in question is 52562 A1 which says all swimming pools including any aprons walkways or patios connected with any swimming pool semicon a shall be set back at least 10 ft from the property line they've done they've done that B may not be within the required front yard setback area they've met that and C shall shall be setb back from the front property line by a distance greater than the actual front yard setback of the principal structure to which the to which the swimming pool is accessory So the plan that I reviewed didn't meet that along um the the decator street side this is a corner lot so it has two front yards um what they're presenting to you tonight is they've disconnected that patio physically from the pool so Mr King gave you what he believes the intent is when this ordinance was crafted I believe that that was the intent was to make sure that these patios that are connected to the pool are often the the places of the busiest part of the pool there's noise generated from that and I believe the intent of the ordinance was to require setbacks from those patios along the front rear and sidel lines to protect the neighbors and the streetcape from those so um so I think what you need to do is whether connected means physically or whether it's like related to the pool and I think that's that your opinion Mr K the only thing I would C with is I think a couple times you said connected to the pool but the ordinance has connected with the pool and I'm not saying it would change my opinion if it said connected to but it does say connected with instead of connected to but the gist of it is people play around pools and we need the not just the pool but the areas where they utilize the pool to be a certain distance away and I think that's what it meant but if everybody the other folks have an opinion that maybe that is too constricting on smaller yards and it really means connected to that's that's up to them and I just have an opinion I'm not the judge so well we don't we don't make the we don't make the interpretation that's a zoning board's call isn't it actually I I believe you can interpret the ordinance is that is that what we should do first Mr you can do an in informal interpretation of your own ordinance technically interpretations are for the zoning board but in a lot of situations the planning board is also called upon to decide their understanding of their own ordinance and it's appropriate for you to do so there's a case that says that the name of which I don't recall but I promise it's out there so um I'm inviting you to decide if you believe that the strip between the pool and the um Patio near it um means that part can we can we say in in this specific application we feel that it's part of the pool instead of making that broad determination you can say oh yeah you can look at that plan and decide if you believe the ordinance should still apply to that plan as revised that's the question if you say yes then they need a variance if you say no don't so the question is based on this plan do you believe they need a variance that way you're just focused on this plan is that okay I I just have a quick question can you show me what the difference is again the Pao that's here actually on both sides of the pool so this would be on the West Side South Side they're separated from the pool coping by approximately 6 in or so with the actual patio so it's coping grass and then patio that the the area in question happens with the arrows are right no I understand question Happ to be this Which is closest right got it that I have a question too so if you're on the the P excuse me can everyone pick up a mic we can't hear I'm on Rick can okay thank you the this is the patio yes sir so if you're on that patio and you want to go in the pool you get up and walk straight into the pool yes sir so and and and this GR strip you're putting in there now is how wide about 6 Ines sir 6 in and you think that makes a difference that that question that the lawyer and everybody were discussing is whether it's connected physically connected or in association with yes sir okay thank you excuse me could you could we see the diagram on this side if you could move it so when you're presenting we can we can all see it well now they can't see it so maybe no I I understand it we're go over here with it right he's got it he's got it he's got it he's got where these arrows are that represents so this is cop s cor and now it's down to two we're good so we obviously are willing and want to proceed regardless of whether you believe a variance is required or not but it's going to change how I'm presenting the application is whether there is or isn't variance needed okay that's and that's the only reason I just want to point out to the board that regardless of whether you think there's a variance necessary or not it's still you retain jurisdiction because there's a site plan Rel and a site plan approval for permitted use right okay so it doesn't matter whether you find it needs a variance or doesn't need a variance I just want to point that up than so what sort of a motion do you need that a variance is required for the patio area being in the being actually not in the setback in the not being aligned with not being aligned with not being line with the front of the structure it it's supposed to be behind the front face of the structure along Decor Street and it does not meet that requirement right it meets all the other setback requirements of pools so the motion would be that make a motion that it does need a variance and then when they vote Yes it means it needs a variance vote no it doesn't need a variance yeah I think it needs a variance I believe I make that motion I believe it's connected to the pool get a second I'll second it Mr Crowley motions Mrs Reed seconds mayor mik any questions on the motion oh yeah any questions okay I think roll call thank you Mr Crowley motions Mrs Reed seconds mayor mullik yes council member Jagger yes Mrs Mrs Reed yes Mr Crowley yes Mr lenhome no Mr rigs yes Mr produces yes Mr Jones yes Mr bazer yes thank you right can proed good to proceed thank you so Mr beor if you can can you provide the board with an overview of this property and it's uh current use and what we're looking to do here uh yes the the current property's use remains as it as it is uh currently in the north part of the property there is a gazebo with plantings and kind of a Meandering Garden around that um we plan to take that out and place in a pool again with plantings around it as per your ordinance and then add to Hardscape spaces one directly to the South and one directly to the West our reasoning for this was simple the setbacks need to be required from the residential which is immediately to the East and then the commercial which is immediately to the north uh we're complying with all those setbacks it's just the technicality of the patio being in the space space between uh decator and the pool again the the house set back here is only required to be 10 ft however the existing structure that's there is technically 22.4 ft the pool is in total compliance with that it's strictly the patio which again is a Hardscape at grade and again we're on a corner lot so this is kind of a unique situation where this this patio space is going to be closer to the street which I believe in this makes a lot of sense considering the commercial that's directly behind this and the amount of foot traffic and other pedestrians that are coming down to cater uh we'd rather have any kind of exterior activity happening there away from the residential neighbors immediately to the East and more lively area of the street onto the West Side that's why we chose to put the patio in this location so and I think you just mentioned it but in terms of the setback of the pool itself the would you agree that the building the the I guess the face of the building set back along the cator it's 22.4 ft correct 22t 4 in well 22.4 so 22' 5 in and we're further than that to the pool again it's the patio space and my argument there is you know the patio didn't exist and that was grass I can still congregate on that space and wouldn't you want the louder space to be towards the street side anyway in this particular application where again we are budding a commercial use directly next door um again we're further away from any residential neighb neighbor to the east so if you're going to have any place to congregate around said poool you'd want to have it closer to the street where there's more activity more noise in this particular situation now Andrew just so it's clear if if the pav patio area that is proposed along decada were not there and it was grass as you just mentioned would we would there be a need for any variance relief right now there would be no need for variance relief okay it should also be noticed not noted though that again we are under an impervious coverage substantially this is we're still as you can see in the in the report from the engineer we're significantly under in the impervious coverage um we're allowed to be 75% and even with this addition of the pool because of The Hardscape and the Gazebo that was there we're only increasing The Hardscape by approximately 4.4% which is 57.2% significantly under the impervious so from an issue of runoff uh we don't see any issue whatsoever it's also fortunate that the back North corner I would say the northeast corner of the property which abuts the the commercial neighbor and the residential neighbor that's actually the high point so all all water everything flows from that back corner towards the street towards the cater so again I don't see any issue as far as runoff is concerned here we've added some additional grading on the uh exhibits too for the engineer as well uh we're also not proposing any kind of recharge system on the site again because we're so sign significantly under uh for the the impervious coverage on the line Andrew can you also briefly just touch on any proposed lighting whether you think there's any uh again we are not proposing any lighting we don't want to have any nuisance lighting for the Neighbors the only lighting that will be will be the lighting that's in the pool itself um and that will you know that'll be in the pool uh will not be casting any other light towards anybody else there'll be reflected light I guess inside the pool but no other light is proposed around the area around the pool at all and given the relatively straightforward nature of the the plan aspect of this application is it your opinion that both preliminary and final can be and should be granted at the same time this evening absolutely again we're not planning on changing anything with the use of the existing structure we're simply taking uh an area that was used as a gazebo and and other walking area into a pool space now I I know you've touched on a couple of comments but you had the chance to review Mr hur's review memor prior to tonight's presentation yes so he just touched on uh three of the comments he had on page two but he also uh indicates as we've asked for a waiver from an environmental impact statement and from a traffic impact report can you just touch on why you believe in your professional opinion those waivers would be justified here well again we're not changing the use uh the the number of rooms isn't changing the the number of parking space isn't changing we're not proposing to add any extra curb Cuts or anything like that again I don't see how traffic and and he agrees that a waiver could be granted here fairly easily again nothing's changing there you know it's not a water park it's it's a pool um and then secondly as far as an environmental impact statement again it's a very minor increase in impervious coverage uh one could even argue that there's going to be more water saved inside the pool some municipalities consider a pool as perious if that was the case we'd actually have a negative amount of uh we' have a decrease in impervious coverage not an increase uh so again I don't see much runoff we working with the environmental people to make sure that the the plantings are appropriate as far as distances species and sizes uh again we believe that we've kind of got that under control and now they're happy with what we're going to have so just to touch on that a bit as I'd mentioned at the outset we received the recommendation for approval from every uh local city commission except for the environmental commission and they had some concerns regarding the amount of trees and growing close to each other as they mature can you talk about what you changed on the revised plan that was handed out tonight to alleviate that concern or resp Yes actually they want us to remove more trees and bushes uh because it was too densely packed they wanted a little bit more spaced out so the the Hol specifically had more room to grow together uh they also wanted to change out some of the trees so the the two trees on the uh property will now be these um uh red bud trees and then the American holly will be kind of around the rest of it and then along the easterly property line we're going to have um the English Laurel along the easterly property line and again our Landscape designer from our firm has reached out to both the client and to the environment to make sure that they're happy with what we're doing again uh if we're lucky enough to have your approval tonight we'll make sure those updated drawings get to the proper people and the proposed Landscaping along the edges of the property around the outside there those will be tall enough to provide a natural buffer in terms of being able from privacy standpoint absolutely that was kind of the goal and again that's what the the environmental commission wanted us to make sure that we weren't you know tugging out the rest you know cutting off the uh the natural uh resources for the other plants and so that's why we actually cut down the amount of them so that there were they could grow into their mature natural height okay and then just in regard to the the general review comments provided in the board Engineers review letter would we be okay with adhering to those as conditions of approval tonight uh absolutely the only other comment was uh I know there's some discussion about the curban sidewalk being replaced this is going to be a gunite pooled I don't think they're going to have many heavy cranes I don't know if that should be if it's damaged or if you want to see that entire area actually replaced uh in its entirety along um this this location it's a standard condition that we evaluate after construction um especially when they those pool contractors drive over top of those sidewalks and break them apart so before we issue a CO we evaluate make sure that there's any trip hazards are fixed any broken panels of sidewalk are fixed we're not asking for the total replacement of the sidewalk along the front but you like to see that all bonded is that correct or no um typically no just make it a condition of appr approval so that'll hold up the certificate of occupancy before it's issued thank you very much anything else you'd like to add Andrew related to the application or request for site plan ofat approval Nothing by fencing for a second I'm Sorry by fencing where the fences are sure you want to go over that so the fencing's actually along the the perimeter of the site it'll be along the easterly property line the Northerly property line and then it set in ever so slightly on the easterly property line the front property line now there was a there is a modification according to the the historic board they would like to see us have a six foot high fence we have on our plan a 4ot high fence they want to see it as a six foot high fence so we would like to make that modification to a six foot high fence around around this area is the six foot high fence proposed in the front yard uh yes they allowed it they say around it but we're more than happy to comply whatever the board would like so there's another variance that's required if you're going to propose a six foot high fence in the front yard and again we're more than happy to keep it four however in their statement they and we still note four here so again if I don't have a problem with it it just technically triggers a variance understood understood can I just ask that four foot high fence is on decor decor yes decator we actually labeled it on decator um we can C and we have actually a 4 foot on decator we have a 4 foot on the nor of the Lee property line a 4 foot six fence along the easterly property line and then we were going to do a 4 foot property line between the property and the the pool itself the the main guest house um again historic board said that we can go with a 6-ft fence but we have on our exhibit that a 4- foot fence is here we we're more than happy to HBC wanted a six- foot fence along de cater they said a six it's very vague it basically says that they wanted a six foot fence around the pool what agency are you talking about the histore the hpc's approval HPC said the applicant intends to erect a new 6ot wooden fence with self-latching gate around the pool area right uh as required by the city of Kate May Municipal Code I had a question about that what part of the code requires that fence to be six feet and does it require that latch the latching is required the safety the building so they're referring to the latch system not the height of the fence there no requirement for 6 fo high fence as part of the safety provisions of that section correct any again we don't note it on our site plan at 6 foot but I did want to bring that to the board's attention I just want to make sure that the board you know we have we can go from four to six whatever they prefer the only area that we notice noted at 4 foot 6 was along the easterly property line and that's it it appears as though the HPC may have made a mistake here would it be appropriate since this property is in the heart of the historic district that we refer this back to HPC to clarify their thinking there's there's a ra there's there's an old nice along the outside I just seems like an important decision to me what Landscaping is a long life kind I told me there's a lot of there is a lot Landscaping one more proposed correct more proposed not more proposed what's there will be removed and this it will be replaced with the uh Holly American holly all the Landscaping is on the inside of the fence there's no buffering of it from the outside if you're on the street so so as you're strolling down historic decada Street there will be either a 4T or a 6-ft fence right next to the sidewalk is that right correct we've called out for a 4-foot fence again is it a new fence or is it it's a new fence it's a new wooden picket fence yeah they currently have a road iron fence which is like maybe 3 ft High correct I I just don't think the HBC was well focused on what they had indicated when we originally had proposed a taller fence that was RW iron was that it didn't meet the historic standard they wanted to see a wood fence because they thought it was more in line with the historic standards which is why we went to a wood fence it was it their recommendation that we went with that not at our own yeah we we weren't offering it it's a six foot part of it that's going to trigger a variance right I think that's that's the area concern for the board is how that how that six foot high fence that close to the the sidewalk is going to impact the streetcape there as a former member of the HPC I never heard them recommend a six foot high wood fence on the sidewalk so I I I have to assume that that was not what they meant actually have the application if anyone wants to see it I have a copy it says 6 foot wooden fence to surround swimming pool area surround the pool that's just a pool area this is a copy of the actual we have it it's in your packet concs the 4ot high fence along decer Street opens up that pool and the activity to the environment on the street which is quiet and vintage and people walk restaurants I'm not sure I can visualize activity right there might have been suggested maybe I I'm looking back now this is from May this we were before the HPC quite a while back what the requirement is that's indicated in the application what was required by the board was immediately surrounding the swimming pool itself yeah so this was for for purposes of safety around the swimming pool have a self-latching gate to access that pool but not from the complete outside of the property and surrounding it is within it that's surrounding the pool I I think they about a Safety Surround the pool I just don't think they were focused on what's along the cater and putting a six foot the cater I just you're correct tearing down a ro iron railing I got I'd have to hear that from actual HBC people to believe that can I also comment there to it it it boggles the imagination that anybody would recommend a 6 foot high fence at the edge of the pool that that doesn't it just doesn't make any sense no I agree with you well how could you get somebody out of the pool who's drowning unless you use the self-latching gate on the correct corre 6ot wooden fence corre the PO area around the right area no not around the that's not what I just heard this is around the pool what does it say this looks to me like it's around the pool did can you read it again I thought it said pool area it does it it says a 6ot wooden fence with a self-latching gate around the pool area yeah you can't just put it around the pool you can't get out of the pool so I mean I think it General you have to have a you have to have a 4 foot and again we're proposing the 4ot fenil on the property the PO Edge but again my question I guess is I yet answered could you gra this whole back St to ask them to clarify what they're talking about here it I I think we're looking at the entirety of the application here that Miss Keenan had a copy of and I think it makes it clear here in the cover letter to the to the board right this is to the HPC what we had originally proposed that they had denied was RW iron fencing around the pool area what they wanted was it to be enclosed by a white wooden fence that would match the existing wooden fence along the Northerly property line that's what they said we want to see around that pool area so we had agreed to that based on the recommendation to go against the the installation of broad iron and to use wood but that would assume that the existing rod iron fence would remain is that on the outside of the lot correct on the perimeter that's that makes sense to me as a recommendation as a recommendation okay I suppose it's possible that we could vote on the application and leave open a limited remand on the fence issue because I just I'm worried this board is going to approve something that they didn't intend and we're going to tear down an old rod iron fence to put up a wood fence that no one really wanted us to do so I just think we're kind of a mysterious area on this fence we be fine and I had a cryptic conversation about it outside I still don't understand what they want or what's what we're supposed to do and I I have to write this and I don't want to write something that understood we'd be fine with going back there for clarification on that issue it's a condition not an issue at all send the whole thing back now well the only thing is the HBC doesn't control the height yeah control the style of the fence and and that and that's it right so and I think everybody here agrees and six foot fence Ison well we'll send it back with that says that the board if this is what everybody wants if if they do get approved tonight which I'm not saying they will I no opinion on that I'm saying that if if if it is approved there'll be a condition that to go back to the HPC to clarify the um fence issue with the direction that the board doesn't want a six- foot fence on theator and isn't sure about what style fence they really want on theater right is that the Gest yeah I also would like to have the HBC ask answer why they checked off fences and swimming pool but did not check off the deck patio accessory structures additions there's no additions it's not and they don't they they don't structures on the they don't control patios they're dealing with structure all these things are on the plan and defenses and swimming pools and Def it's a little bit they also approv that yeah why would they approve something with this kind of inconsistent different places can absolutely Li so you're saying would be no liting on that all none none whatsoever hand it's a it's a guest house so there there of clure or is that pool available that pool is is it's available as they but if if there's hours of operation that you'd like to see put into play we'd be happy to abide by them but no we're not proposing any set hours of operation it would be much the same as any residential swimming pool or that side patio if they decided to do some kind of games at night there would be no flood lighting coming on clear on that correct yes did this actually go before the whole HBC board this was in review I believe this was done in review if I'm we've gone before the I'm I'm hearkening back this was done in review based on the application filed yeah so it was just done by the chair person proba I I didn't have to Mr Gill say we've kind the HBC has improved their process and Mr gorth has been doing a resolution even for preliminary approval we're actually getting a document that is um conceptual approval we're getting like a formal document this looks like someone stamped the application approved and that's why was this done why it's when did this May 24 was Chris there then I I know recent that administratively approved was there actual hearing your no but it is a subcommittee it's not just one person there there are three of them that meet every Tuesday morning and try to approve things that wouldn't need to go to the full commission is Chris there Chris is not there no that explains some yeah typically we would file those request to be reviewed in committee and if they deem it to be large enough where we have to appear then I would in this case they approved it based on our request to be reviewed in committee okay it just explains a little bit of the lack of usually we've been getting clear stuff okay understood the clarity of some of the more recent stuff we have no objection to to going back for Clarity on that issue none at all um can I ask a question so just so I'm clear and I think I'm really just repeating what you said Mr amuser but the pool itself needs no variance it's it's we are basically looking at a variance for the patio on the decator side of the street and the fact that it's being interpreted as connected is what draw triggers the need for variance um if it weren't deemed to be connected we meet the 10-ft setback that's required for patios Along on a frontage there there'd otherwise be triggered no need for variance Rel that didn't happen correct it didn't here but right there are alternatives that could that would completely alleviate the need for variance we just don't see it as being beneficial can I ask you a question just on on the design portion of it you clearly put the one foot strip in there to create a physical buffer in in that interpretation now that that interpretation has been ruled on right would you intend then to put the brick up to the pool if that was something you wanted to see we could but I don't I'm just saying it seems like a silly thing if that were to be approved the reason being was a physical Detachment is there a minimum of connection it has to be I what difference does it make if it's three4 of an inch or six inches or a foot right it doesn't doesn't I mean to me it's not connected anyway because it's concrete from a pool and them cavers they're not the same thing we did we even change that I don't think it was to be quite honest an interpretation looks like it just AED right right no it's always been that way I don't think we actually when we put this revised plan together it was more to to address the concerns of the environmental commission I don't think that the location of that P patio area in the pool has actually changed from plan to plan it's just a matter of it was picked up here highlight it and that's when I looked at it and thought well they're not connected and that's what raised this issue but we didn't actually change that the scale of this plan is much greater and allows you to see better right the other the previous plan was much smaller scale so it looked like it was connected so we have to address the fencing now right well again we're proposing for foot around basically everything except for the easterly property line which is a 4' 6 in so it would so can I can I ask a question to it so the full HPC typically would or would not hear an application like this that's with the fence with the fence so yeah they they pick and choose whether they hear they require a full board or whether they do work session because I I do hear what Mr Crowley's saying um and if we want to have a more um clear directional what the HBC wanted then I would recommend that the full HBC would hear that but that's just my and I I'd have no problem with that either fearing whether it's the subcommittee or the full board is fine fine I I'm trying to think about the logistics of this right so that you don't keep getting bounced back and forth between us right between this board and the commission yep because if they say that they are adamant about a six foot high fence that encroaches into then there's variance necessary and then come back here so does it make sense the CRA I think the board's direction to the HBC is we're rejecting a six foot fence we're just rejecting that so HB can do can that's the limitation that we're giving okay and it's it's so we want so in other words no you're correct so in other words we're asking the applicant to conform with the fence requirements with regards to height that are contained in the ordinance that means they're allowed to be 6' High and rear and the side but they have to dive down as soon as you get um even with the rear of the rear of the structure hence no variance hence no variance great okay I just want to make sure everyone's clear on that I would just clarify one thing I I think as we look more deeply into this H uh this um application or approval we need to talk to them about not just the fence but the decks and the sheds and the patios if their checklist says we we're looking at this stuff projects requiring the approv approval of the HBC inclue but are not limited to maybe we should be is there a shed we don't have there's no shed there's an equipment shed a pool shed somewhere isn't it it's not pool equipment it's just the pool equipment itself filter yeah well I mean it's it's not a shed it's free standing pool equipment that's screened yeah all right not a shed not a structure like lce work yes correct all right well fine okay in any event well to your point I know HPC will review lce or around an HVAC piece of equ or whatever I mean true if they got the application and chose to do it that way that's not that's their issue right I mean they must have a set of Standards what goes before a subcommittee and what doesn't but I think we're trying to now figure out with Clarity what their intent was and I think the only way to figure out what the intent of the HPC is not to look at what a subcommittee but what the full commission I think that's the point that's being argued and I have the applicant has zero objection to that we will indicate in any uh correspondence to the HPC it's the and your resolution will too that it's the direction of the board that the full committee hear this or see this and there not be a six foot fence that we will not put a six fence in the front correct so is the four- foot fence going to be the wood or is it going to be what is it RW iron or what rod iron is not going to keep is I don't know I don't know if that works for cool that's my question I think they Envision an internal all the time there's an internal fencing system around the pool cuz they these are guest houses I mean they they have they have to buy insurance and stuff they need like a real fence around that pool with an appropriate block and then they're going to have a I personally think it's going to be a really thick hedge r with exactly you're not going to see with a roar Iron Gate like there's been there for I don't know decades uh you know so that's makes sense to me that's what the application to the HPC proposed I don't think that they I don't think they focused on that I think they just so we're going to send it back for fencing so if we do so if we approve something like that if we decide to approve it then it's conditioned and then that's going to go back to HBC for their approval with with with the way we with Direction with Direction with our direction as it relates to the design of the fence okay and to the full commission or to a subcommittee full commission okay rich now you got me confused are got confused Rich yes sir uh what you just said doesn't fit this plan unless I'm not reading it right this says a right abiding the sidewalk is a proposed wood fence matching 4 feet high the fence is going to be on the sidewalk I understand that they I understand that that says that but I I'm not maybe the HBC says that that they prefer a wood fence over a rod iron fence I don't know but all I heard was a six foot fence I'm I don't know what their decision was so we got to send it to them yeah but with with limitation they can't require 6 f f come to C stre right what we have with HPC is is a stamp HPC approved on the bottom of the application Mr amuser wrote now does the direct does that direction change how this board should proceed though with with any limitation or or with the recommendation back other aspects of this application you can still vote on the I I mean I I I don't think it's like a full remand back to that you know the things that are the variant part of it I okay we we will do a lot of times we'll do conditional approvals that that mandate that the HPC or departmental commission have to review and here we're giving them specific right Direction just for my two cents since this application was approved they have changed their application to say do you if you need board approval check this box so that could have made a difference if they had known this project was coming to the board for approval thank you explain you uh you finish with your presentation any further no yeah believe we are I question uh you're asking for a hardship variance under under under the terms of 40 Co 55d so what we should touch on that a little bit I I think it's an easier ask Andrew in terms of the variant needed related to the pool and the patio area that are connected and is it your professional opinion that granting that kind of relief would Advance certain purposes of zoning sure this is an amenity that's Outdoors uh the amenity that was Outdoors before here was a gazebo that had substantial Hardscape around it as well albeit it was in the very rear yard of it but it did have paths and sidewalks that led to it so in theory those sidewalks that were part of the Gazebo were even actually worse than what we were the sidewalks that were part of the Gazebo you look on page pb1 were probably 5T off of the proper so in theory the accessory structure that we're proposing is actually better than what was already there now the existing structures front yard setback supposed to be 22.4 ft but the existing accessory structure again with paths where people could walk at any hour of the night have conversations have a cell phone conversation you know play tag little kids running around in that back area was still there this P this patio that we're proposing now will have a more private fence in some regard have more private Landscaping around it again in some regard and again we'll have a fully compliant pool as far as setbacks are concerned um we believe that's a benefit for the building is a benefit for the guests that are there uh this is in a area that is slightly commercial especially with commercial behind it so there is a sense of noise and pedestrian activity so that we believe that's part of kind of keeping that activity alive in that area and that patio area you've testified to earlier is is at ground level is a great corre it is absolutely grade there it's not like this is an elevated deck that people are jumping around on it's not a garage top deck or something like that this is down at grade and it's a relatively Mo modest patio it's about 12 foot by 18 ft it's a very small space I mean you're going to put a few lounge chairs out there for people to enjoy the pool and possibly you know just sit and watch their kids play it so this this statute on dealing with hardships we're I can tell you we're not asking for this under the hardship criteria it's listed there you're not substantial benefit under the C2 is what we is the more appropriate Avenue I think what's the substantial benefit again so we just Andrew do you believe that there I know you just went over some of the purposes that you think are Advanced um to put it in terms of what's listed in the municipal luse law do you see any intrusion on light air in open space If This Were to be approved this is less in height than the existing gazebo that's there this is basically a hole in the yard so as far as a visual environment impact I don't see that as being an issue again it will be fully landscaped as per the requirements of the environmental which will also give it some screening as well it will allow another amenity for more people to come to Cape May and enjoy the beauty of downtown and the historic area it's an amenity for young families to come down and be there you're a little bit of a far walk from the beach this allow that access to it it'll also be safer for kids than being in the in some of the ocean during a rip tide it'll be better for people who just want to walk around and get some exercise in that as well it's an amenity that allows people to want to come here more because you're providing another activity that they can do that's close to this boarding house so yeah it's a block from the beach and there's lifeguards that get you out of the water when there's a rip tide so having a pool at this location doesn't mify those concerns well and again the pool itself is totally conforming it's the Patty that we're discussing is the potential variance and again that's more of a hardship because hey if this building was built out further which it could have been and if you determined that the accessory structure which had Hardscape that was out further that again had it attached to the accessory structure and that the parking comes in off of Decor Avenue so technically all the cars that are parked there which are causing noise and starting up and moving in and out I would argue that this pool is certainly a safer alternative to that and also is a less obtrusive as far as size and space taking up can I ask a question based on what you just said would you agree with that Craig that the house could have been built further into the front yard the house yes the house itself breakfast the dwelling the dwelling could have been built into this yard uh it could it be closer to the street yes by you know but with without without a variance it could have been closer to the street setback for decator street is 20 feet so it could be thatr structure could have been up to 20 feet what is it currently do we know 22.4 I believe correct okay thank you so Andrew you just went over some of the positives that you believe are Advanced is it also your professional opinion that if this application were to be granted variance relief associated with it were to be granted it do you see any substantial detriment to the public good or the Zone plan ordinance of the city of Kate May again I do not it's is an outdoor space that is private from the public in this location it is an accessory structure that's on the property are you adding are you adding the the patio area on the building side between the building and the pool yes there's two patio areas yes there are in that patio area proposed on the bottom um is as far back as the pool that 22 feet 10 in so it's not in front of the face which is why we don't need relief with it and this is being run as a B&B yes tourist guest house is how they've been operating it's a guest house airbn yes question that quite frankly my office is right around the corner no huh they're saying no okay not there okay it's a single family house right hold on one second it's a guest house is how they I don't mind anyone has a chance to speak but you have to be sworn in and speaking to a microphone so you can't talk unless you're talking to microphone maybe you could just clarify exactly how does this uh property operate as a guest house as a how many how many uh rentals are in there there are in terms of the number I can tell how many bedrooms are in there in terms of how many rentals are in there at one time I I couldn't answer I I'm hearing a whole house so is it a whole house with five bedroom there eight eight bedrooms there eight bedrooms so one person would rent the entire structure and they could probably bring in family or do you rent out each room to different Unknown People I believe it could Pro my understanding is that the way that they operate is typically for those you want to test it I don't I don't so let's you want to have someone's it well I don't I don't have somebody here to do that at this point the one behind you I thought your client no no I don't what we've indicated is that it's a and on the application where we put number of bedrooms bath we all include that on our application and that is all set forth there in but there's never that that's the amount of bedrooms so in terms of how many people you can Envision being there what I'm questioning is I'm unhappy with a pool at this location in town on that street it adds a different flavor but now we're talking about fencing and uh the uh plantings I would like to and we are going to because you're going back to the HPC I'd like to see how that pool is really going to be buffered from the street um and and and for the amount of people and how it's used you know if you're renting out eight different units to many people or you're renting it to one person and it's eight bedrooms that makes a difference in noise level in my experience well their testimonies that it's a B&B they're running at the eight individual it's not one single family run that's well it's it could be done either way there's no restriction on whether it's got to be this way or that way and I know that they've had in the past my clients there's there's large if they have a wedding party they're going to take up the entirety of the of the dwelling but it's not as if that has to happen every single time you run it out a whole house when I looked into it it's always been a whole house I can easily get the answer to this but I would need a I mean the internet will tell you couldn't get down here I'm looking at it online it says whole house rental whole house RN eight-bedroom whole house rental good good good thing you didn't testify but I know that and that's what you know it's it's like wedding parties it's things of that nature is what the intended you know they try to bring them down when they're in the area at a local venue and that's where they all try to stay in one location the use is a permitted use it is and the accessory use is a permitted accessory use so we're not in a use variance analysis okay so I don't want us to get refer on a use variance analysis we're not use variance analysis the app is for a variance for the setback that's it that's it right to yeah Mr chairman could we hear from the public well um I think do you want to go over Craig's comments first is that is I apologize however you would like to do it yeah do the normal way I apologize okay Craig I'd like to summarize my August 13 2024 review memo for this application uh it's at 501 Hugh Street it's known as the empress it's in the RS residential seasonal District you've heard testimony from the applicant indicating that is an existing tourist guest house with eight bedrooms and they're proposing a accessory swimming pool um to be constructed it's an 18x 25t swimming pool uh it has pav or patio surrounds landscaping and fencing is proposed around the pool no changes to the use or the building or parking or proposed um and the applicant is also seeking preliminary and final site plan approval which is triggered because it is a tourist guest house question about sure I'm sorry to interrupt there but I wanted to make the question related to parking uh you indicate that it's an existing nonconforming do we have a record of a variance granted to this property for that I could not the resolutions that I reviewed are not very specific with regards to that I don't believe there was any relief granted for it um so I can't really answer that that I just assume it's an existing non-conforming situation okay does the applicant have any history on that the resolutions that Mr hur's reviewed are those that we reviewed as well I I don't think there's anything in the prior resolutions that I saw either that would indicate there was a variance specifically Grant it related to parking so they have seven they're supposed to have eight but it's sort of like a shadow variance it's been there it's what exist we're not adding rooms thank you it's been a B&B for a long long yeah the Bell Shield okay the 2010 resolution deals with the subdivision and there was three lots I if I remember correctly there used to be a bank with a drive-thru there that was taken down there was a new single family dwelling that was built next to this really the improvements that were associated with that minor subdivision really didn't deal with this lot okay okay yeah that's fine I don't believe in the ENC term on these documents um yeah there's no such thing as an ENC it's either PNC or it is a violation they're the two choices you have to establish it was a pre-existing nonconforming use with a variance or that predated the ordinance that's one choice or it's an illegal structure um so the magic words andc to me don't mean anything but we have an ordinance in our town because everything is so old and weird that we basically say if it's been around and I forget the numbers but I think it's 20 years or it's been around for 20 years we we have some issues finding old variances our system is not ideal okay yeah that's right we had trouble finding variances so pretty much if it's around for 20 years we consider it a pre-existing non-conforming structure I think that applies to parking as well would be my assumption so they kind of get a pass on that but I just want to clarify that that just because it exist there doesn't mean it's legal it just means it's there and then you have to do the steps to find an old ordinance old variance or you have to show that it's been there to meet our ordinance that greets that exception am I saying that right Craig I believe you are thank you and by the way as long as you weren't referring to me as being old and weird I'll accept your explanation I have never put that on the record I can have a few ad bill has on many occasions can can we vote on that okay okay does that answer your question was answered yes thank you okay I'm going to continue into the completeness review and this deals with the checklist required for preliminary site plan approval so it falls under subsection three of that four section 4175 c um and It Go transitions into letters letter e um I've asked that grading additional grading information be provided around the pool and the area of disturbance to make sure that there's no adverse impacts that any of the neighbors that should be provided as a condition of approval there was some information provided but I didn't find that it was adequate I I needed additional information it seems like this new plan shows a little bit more or a little greater detail um but I would like that still remain a condition of approval to evaluate letter F is very similar they have provided a stormw system however we needed additional detail of that system to evaluate and make sure that we're satisfied with the design of that so that should be provided as condition of approval letter Q the location of all outdoor lighting I believe they've testified that there is no outdoor lighting other than the pool that's the light that sits inside the pool right it's covered by water there correct no additional Lighting in this fenced in area or anything like that proposed none okay so if that is the if that's that's going to be a condition of approval therefore letter Q would go away um they indicating that there is no lighting letters V uh requires an environmental impact statement we supported a waiver from that since the site is primarily developed um and letter w a traffic impact report this is a permitted accessory use there are not increasing traffic or parking on the site so therefore we did support the waiver from those requirements therefore recommended deeming the application complete I'll move into the zoning review um on page page three of six which the zoning tables uh the first one is for the the principal use um the really the only change there is the lot coverage uh requirement of the residential site Improvement uh residential seasonal District uh for for tourist guest houses is 75% 52.8% is existing they're increasing that by 4.4% to 57 .2% therefore they are conforming um so they're not overdeveloping the lot with lot coverage um the next table down at the bottom of the page shows the swimming pool requirements um and I already read into the record be as we voted on whether a variance was required or not but there are setback requirements so there's a 10-ft front yard setback that is being met there's also a front yard setback requirement to the face of the structure that means any pool patio connected has to sit at least the face of the structure be located rearward of the face face of the structure this case the decator side that patio is encroaching out further past the face of the structure that is the variance that's necessary 22.4 is the required setback that's the setback to the face of the building 10t is proposed to the front of that patio along the cater Street side all of the other setbacks are met the pool equipment has been relocated as per our request to conform with the setback requirements all the other patios have been um modified to make meet that minimum 10- foot setback on either side and the rear yard um and the fence and railing has been discussed they are proposing that um we don't know what that is going to look like yet and until they get uh comment back from the historic reservation commission so there's one variance that you have to Grant along with the preliminary and final site plan approval it should be conditioned on the general review comments on page five of six five and six uh we've asked under item number one that the zoning table is revised to reflect the comments in the review memo all the variants should be noted on the zoning table item number two the construction details must be provided for the impro proposed improvements and we've asked for the paver patio details um to include the bedding details item three is my review of the stormw system that's proposed um just to summarize the plans must be revised to provide the design of the system with greater detail um conceptually it's we believe it's going to work we just need the construction details and elevations on that item number four so um the pool our pool requirements um were bolstered uh recently by uh city council and it requires a 4 foot wide planted Green Space along the rear and side property lines within the rear yard to increase infiltration add additional buffering improve Aesthetics and provide space for grading and the conveyance of storm water So the plan that I initially reviewed is not the handout that you received there but it omitted all of the Landscaping along the rear property line they're now showing that um but I would ask because of the environmental commission review comments I would ask that that plan be submitted to them to get their sign off before I review it and approve it okay item number five we talked about the lighting there's no other lighting proposed only the low voltage lighting within the pool um is proposed item six is the requirement from the code that they have to provide the pool safety fencing um and once again their plan indicates four or 4.5 ft fencing um we that's going to be clarified the height with the uh historic preservation commission seven is our standard condition that we evaluate the sidewalk and require replacement of that to the satisfaction of the engineer prior to us issuing a certificate of occupancy eight is um very similar that we require the inspection escrow and that the co or acceptance of the improvements shall not be issued until they receive a satisfactory inspection nine is that uh once again they have to provide the required performance guarantee and inspection Escrow because this is a site plan 10 is our standard condition because it is located within the historic district that they have to provide evidence of final historic preservation commission approval number 11 is are conditions that they have to comply with the recommendations and requirements of the fire department Police Department Public Works Department environmental commission and sha Tre commission we did receive an environmental venel excuse me let me get a sip of water here all right here we go we did receive a environmental commission report dated it looks like it is where's their date August 15 2024 it's buried in the comments um they recommended denial and they've asked for more detail on that Landscaping plan that's why I'm recommended that they refer it back to them to get their sign off on it fire dep Department recommended approval dated 82124 uh we received evidence of HPC approval but we've already talked about that and how we're sending that referring that back to them the police department recommended approval dated 813 20124 public works department recommended approval dated 81524 Shay Tre commission recommended approval August 21 2024 none of those reports had any additional comments with the exception of the environmental commission um which that's going to be referred back to them okay all right um comment number 12 they're required to comply with any and all applicable affordable housing requirements at the time of approval or issuance of building permits as appropriate and finally should the board Grant approval they're required to revise the plans to address any conditions that the board sets um and submit those to me for my review and approval and that's SU of my report and I'm happy to answer any questions the board has have any questions okay what we're going to do we're going to open up to the public yeah I have one question Ju Just for clarity where it says pull equipment with screening is that the pumps yes sir yes sir what do you mean by screening is that screening lce screening all right so that's all the pumps and all the equip yes sir okay so we will open up the public I I would ask you would move your easily anybody wishing to speak you come up to the yeah Ricky put that up there come up to the up to the podium be sworn in I have a few extra copies of my interested for for everyone who's going to speak tonight the way you do it is please no no okay I'll take it uh for everyone's going to speak tonight please state your name spell it and then give me your street and then I'm going to swear you in and then you'll testify okay so you're going to be the first day oh I'm the guinea pig stay your name and spell it uh Thomas scandin s c a n l a n address DEC or 128 decater Street okay sir do you swear for to tell the truth all truth the truth of guy I do um there was a document that the clerk handed to me was that from you yes just some extra copies of my remarks okay we're going to just take your remarks as you present them because really can't take writings of things that have been said so go ahead and just everyone will listen carefully recycle the paper okay so my grandmother bought 128 decar Street in the late 1950s my mother and my Aunt Marie went acquired the house in 1967 my first job was at Frank's Playland my social security card is 128 Decor Street as my address so I know the block I know the character of the community and I remember when that parcel of land in question was the Glenwood Annex I remember when it was a dve through bank then a retail store then a vacant isore for many years Franken Lois curo bought that property and turned it into a showcase for the street at considerable expense and effort asking nothing in return countless visitors to Kate may stop to admire and photograph this private Garden every single day I sit on the porch and see it if you allow the variant and allow the pool this attractive feature will be gone forever instead we will have an inground pool concrete patios and absentee landlords providing absolutely no supervision over how that pool will be utilized remember this is a whole house rental the owners are never there it's a business not a home a pool directly across the street from our house will have a negative impact on my lifestyle and that of my neighbors it will impact my ability to enjoy my property how do I know this but where I live in Maryland our neighbor behind us has a pool easily three times the distance uh from this one and there's a large stand of very tall old trees in between not 5 foot Hol Big Trees so we cannot see the pool but we can hear it loud and clear and if you live in Kate may you know how sound carries and if you know decer Street you know how busy and loud it can be now so let's not add an attractive nuisance to make it worse just the noise uh from the pool will have a negative impact on our street and and nobody really addressed that issue they talked about the visuals and all that but nobody talked about the noise then a factor in the visuals though The Patio Pools umbrellas towels hardly Victorian hardly historic and there are other factors to consider far too many for me and out of my area of expertise the size of the proposed pool is way too big for the location it's larger than the Icona pool for a 56 room hotel that's crazy and how much impervious service I'm not an engineer but there's already a seven to eight car parking lot so how much is too much and then there's the amount of water you know that is a precious resource here in Cape May water so how much is water to fill and maintain a swimming pool so that's and the list could go on so in closing the street address of the empress is Hugh Street so technically the area for the proposed pool is a traditional rear back yard but from Decor street from our houses it's a front yard fully visible from the street so we ask that you deny the variance and the pool while the variant may not violate the letter of the law it certainly violates the intent and spirit of the law so thank you for your time and uh my Aunt Marie has a few comments and she's been around a lot longer than any of us she she can stay there as long as the mic DRS over there it's fine half you want to come or stay may stay here in case I don't here here state state your name Marie went w n DT are you at 128 de cater as well address yes I I don't always understand um because I'm I'm the Elder Le ma'am do you swear to tell the truth member of this group ma'am do do you swear to tell the truth you swear to tell the truth okay go ahead I swear go ahead man go ahead I have test do it uh decer Street um we face right on 501 the side yard which is very extensive uh but decater Street for ever we have been front porch people front porch folks we rest there we eat there we party there we watched the world go by in in front of us there uh our front porches on decada street are the wonderful thing that we have in spite of the fact that we have had some very bad things across the street where the uh swimming pool is proposed to be um for aot long time there was a a house a little a mini Hotel on Hugh Street and it went out of business a long time ago uh and but on decada street was a house right in front of us which was located in the where the a proposed swimming pool will be as time went on uh the mini the really nice little mini Hotel left and the house that was on decada street where the proposed swimming pool um will be both of these houses were taken down so what happened next is that uh the bank said oh you know we have a drivethru and pretty soon we had a little building um where the proposed swimming pool will be and a loudspeaker talking to um the people driving in their cars the cars would come in Deer Street and go out Hugh Street well that went on for a while but I guess the bank I don't know maybe uh people didn't like it we didn't um so there was a little um uh shop put there so we had a shop there for a while that I don't know how long that went on but guess what was next a parking lot and I'm talking about right in front of our eyes on decater street so I am opposed to a swimming pool there the previous owner built He restored the house at 501 beautifully and at some point the land where the garden is now and where the proposed swimming pool will be he bought and made a beautiful garden and we all sigh and said oh boy at last and it is a has been a beautiful place where people love to look at it and uh it it was done really beautifully and but one of the main things that uh there is a fig tree there that's maybe hundred years old because the family that lived next to the where the garden is lived in that house which is now a a double thing um lived in that house for ever and planted this fig tree and they just loved the Fig Tree and on inspection now is healthy and beautiful and should never be destroyed I am opposed to the swimming pool I love the garden and I thank you anybody else like to speak hello uh my name is Kim gaglardi g a l i a RDI I live on Perry Street but I own the building adjoining uh the said property on Hughes uh 215 deater street I'm sorry go ahead say it again I we own the property on 15 de cater it's you swear from to tell the truth the truth we gu I do um I'll start with um I was not aware of the HPC um that it never really went to HPC it was just approved by three people which was which is uh kind of upsetting um because of the size of the pool I'm concerned about the size um we have Peter shields uh in town suites so we have two Suites upstairs we rent the bottom it's a store I'm concerned about the noise um the area that is there now was referred to as a quiet area that is going to totally change to a very noisy area um so I am concerned about the size of the pool um affecting the privacy of my in guests I um also want to comment on the empress advertises on Airbnb and they they say that they can house 16 plus people and they allow events which I'm very concerned about by adding a pool so they're going to have events bridal shower small wedding whatever which is loud and their arbnb also States the incorrect time um of the noise ordinance States 11 o'clock p.m. I think it's 10: so concerning um I'm also concerned about the character of the neighborhood how it's going to affect the street view the the appearance and feel of a historic neighborhood there's a pool right on the street front a fence loud splashing parties that's what I see um concerning the fig tree that was mentioned that's on my property I'm concerned about the roots this fig tree is about a hundred years old so we maintain that tree we pick the figs off of it every year you know we're trying to preserve the tree I don't want that to be affected um and I'm also concerned that this could lead to more applications for similar variances to be granted in the future you know we we renovated this building next door um we had to jump through hoops to go everything through HPC and to find out tonight that no one had to go through HPC is very upsetting so um my other concern is when you have that many people in a pool um I don't know do you need a lifeguard what what's the safety issue there the pool equipment is it going to be on my side of the property is this filter running through the night where my ingests are sleeping you know I don't know I don't know where all that is going um and I'm concerned about the six- foot fence as everyone has discussed that's along the street which probably isn't going to be very pretty and I think that's it thank you hello um I'm Kate Emerson I live at 130 decator street can you just say your name again and spell it for Me Slowly Kate Emerson e m e r s o n thank you address 130 decater street thank you very much you swear or for to tell the truth the whole truth nothing truth I do thank you um I so 130 deater street is right across the street from the proposed demolition of the park um tonight the owners are asking the city of Kate May planning board to wave the carefully constructed setback standards for pools and other structures in backyards which basically says as you all know that pool structures are not allowed closer to the property line than the main structure of the house and according to the HPC standards which I read are to be hidden from the view of passers by perhaps the standard should actually include hidden from The View and the noise this structure may cause to passers by and those living close by in this instance as you know the main structure is 22 1/2 ft from the property line and the proposed structure consisting of fencing patio and pool Greenery Etc are on or very close to the property line on Decor Street Mac often leads walking cor tours along the sidewalk and Mac runs trolley draes that drive by pointing out some of the private um cottages and this beautiful garden and its statuary the people live on decer Street in some cases their parents owned and restored these houses love Cap May as their parents did I'm also concerned about the precedent that will be set for other corner lot rental properties in the historic District whose owners might think that they could also add such a money-making feature as a pool to attract more business and charge higher rates I'm thinking about places like the Mainstay in the Abbey the Queen Victoria they and others all have some form of back or side yard that sits on the street in the primary historic district and could be used for a pool imagine pools on Colombia pools on stock in place also the seven sister houses on Jackson Street whose backyards face the street I can just imagine how the Ambiance of Jackson Street would change with pools lining the street side of those little architectural gems but not just pools pools come with beach balls flying into the street kids screaming where's Waldo parents yelling stop running in other words having fun in the pool which is great but not in the historic district prized for its adherence to architectural and historic values I and Kate May visitors who come here love Kate may not for the swimming pools that are starting to pop up through the town no I love Kate May and the visitors love Kate May for the Treeline streets that evoke a different time a quiet time uh time the sound of clip capping horses drawn carriages in the evenings and the gardens with hydrangeas and daisies peing out between the slats of the picket fences and not for the noise of a pool party that six to eight car loads of families can generate which is what is normally parked at the empress during the summer I and my neighbors actually live here and we have a vested interest in protecting the character of our street and our our neighborhood and that's why I'm here to ask that the variants not be granted so that the garden can be saved and the special streetcape of decer Street in the center of the hor historic district be protected thank you we're a toome that's frighten okay my name is jamee lions and this is my husband Mark sucher uh some of you please spell your name oh sorry I'm sorry j They're Gonna Make You Famous in a resolution you what your name spelled right don't you Jane Jane j a n e Lions L yo NS want my age no man I would never ask and my name's Mark sucher s u c he r s u c h e r first name Mark with a K some of you may remember my mom and dad I just need your address address 124 Decor Street and 516 Carpenters Lane we own both of those buildings okay do each of you swear to tell the truth the whole truth so we got I do we do I do sorry uh some of you may remember my mom and dad Jane and BR Jane and John Bratton 60 years ago in 1964 when the ferry came back again into space they made a decision to buy our house at 124 decer Street and we have lived across the street from the Hughes street ever since we don't think the pool is a happy place anymore if this goes through I know that Marie has taken care of this hisory everybody has taken history and all of that um what's really important to us is that when Frank and Lois came to Cap May they um bought for for lot lot 11 okay um they had already restored the empress and they wanted this to make it a complete piece um and now we think that this magic garden as we call it I don't know if anybody else does but it's a magic garden I want to show you it here is we'll mark that picture as 01 01 yeah I got exibit one written not already I'm sorry it's so small and we pass it around yeah we've got lots want some one for everybody here hold on I've got some I got to deconstruct here for a minute excuse me sorry about the mess guys and also what we have for you because my I my eyes AR they used to be so we we got to use the microphone we can't hear you oh sorry oh uh this is something that we just blew up from the plan because our eyes aren't as good as they used to be and it's very tight when we go over to the a building here to get a look at stuff we could hardly see it what what was it it's it four feet is it what is it we have that we have that in front of us yes okay so you have that now what I want to show you is this pool is 540 square feet just the pool here's Congress Hall this is a pool that is 450 feet square feet and with all of this it gives you kind of an idea because the flat plan doesn't really help me I need a picture and so if you look at this this this is a six is a plant that uh could be H okay uh so when you see this uh we have put around what the uh dimensions are so you can see it because this is not a square look down from you know the sky but it it does show how a what is it a 30 by it's it's um um 15 by 30 yeah which is 450 square feet fewer square feet than what is going to go into the small beautiful magic magic kit Garden marked the picture of the Congress Hall pool as O2 how did you measure the pools we actually forgive me we we we called Congress Hall and asked them for the measurements so they they provided that to us can you repeat those measurements because I I couldn't hear you certainly the the measurement of the adult pool because there are two pools at Congress Hall there's the the large pool and then there's the adult pool and the adult pool is 30t by 15 ft the proposed fool is by the way 18 ft by 25 ft um I I I'm happy to give them a hand up but if you read your um proposal and the and the site plan in front of you uh it reads 540 ft I think someone did a typo that should really should be 450 cuz it was back where the 18 by 25 is in fact 450 identical to the pool size at Congress Hall which is this is going to this is what will this will look at we were talking about umbrellas and how far are the interrupt for a moment and and certain and go over what you just said cuz 18 by 25 is 450 correct you want to address that the the total square footage is the water's edge is 18 by 25 but then there's coping around the pool so we wanted to include that coping so we had an accurate Dimension as far as that so in fact thus it's called impervious yeah impervious surfaces yeah so can I go ahead okay go back thanks yeah excuse me I just have a few more comments I'd like to make um let me get my glasses on so I can see forgive me for a moment now the um applicant is requesting a um variance based on um it's not a hardship variance it's could someone remind me again what's the question sir the the the if the application is not for I'm sorry substantial substantial benit benefit okay so the question becomes substantial benefit to whom because the real question becomes um this pool is as you've all learned now that it's it's substantial um and it causes it off it offloads its harm to the other uh properties around it whether it's going to be noise to the folks right next door whether it's noise across the street um it could actually in a weird way cause problems for the City of Cape May because a 4- foot fence honestly and i' we've walked up and down on ocean that 4ot fence while useful at all the motels does it really um discourage somebody who's coming out of the at 2 am or 1:00 am out of the uh uh bars um from saying oh there's a pool let's go check this out and again what they're proposing or at least what they were proposing before it goes back to HPC was that 4-ft fence backed up by five to six foot tall um American um holes and the American Hol have a growth rate of 6 Ines a year sideways and vertical so for 23 Hol that are being planted the question is what's the spacing between them how quickly is that going to grow together to create that impermeable wall that that actually Shields the pool I'm not I'm not a gardener much of a gardener but but I've looked that up so I tried to figure this out um I had beautiful language written I'm just trashing it sorry um just so so you get a sense of substantial benefit this this this whole pool is about incremental revenues let's talk about it in an economic sense a pool there is going to be let's say a $100,000 investment by the time they're done getting all the folks if I'm high tell me if I'm low tell me but the point of it is substantial investment and let's say they're currently getting $115,000 a week in the summer or they're making $7,000 including Airbnb fees in the winter or an October sorry that's the next avails no thousand my apologies and so the question really becomes and I know you're not here to judge the economics of it but if you're doing a comparative analysis of substantial benefit the question is substantial benefit to whom and also if I understand the the the opportunity for this commission is that it also looks at the harm that that a change can make so we've talked about you know who gets harmed who benefits I don't want look we own 516 Carpenters Lane that's that's the peanut butter company we know what it is to have a good tenant in there and want them wanting to make money we support their opportunity to make money they've actually been good neighbors and worked with us but in this case I think it's it's a pool too far um finally I'm just going to wrap up very quickly um you know if if you if you deny the variant what do they do do they put in that oversized pool that super sized pools I call it do they shrink the pool and um put in decks around it so that they're more consistent with a smaller pool size don't know that but it's possible and so the real and that that's perfectly doable under the code because at that point if you push the if you push the deck back to where the pool starts you accomplish a couple things that developers are very good at saving money and you could in fact save part of that Garden up front that creates that still allows you to have that view of the of Cap May as a Victorian paradise and yet allow them to have a smaller pool in the back I'm offering a what if something that is not an either or um again I personally prefer no pool but if I don't want to get in the way of them making some money because that's why they have it yeah but no that that doesn't deal with noise that's ma'am I no the qu the question to be in a microphone you can't talk okay let me let me let me read a recorded record for the appell court so they have to be able to hear the person testifying and I can't have testimony coming from the audience okay J jany jany I can I can I can cover that point the question Still Remains how do they um deal with the noise issue um it's it's it's a happy noise we all know that Pools by and large are happy noises but it's still noise and it's a you know I was going to be churlish and say look put the pool in you're going to be introducing people with a taste of Wildwood before they get to any of the historic streets of Kate May and I'm sorry that's that's that's harsh but it feels that way if you get a deck and a pool and all the noise that's my point and I thank you very much for your patience anybody else here to speak okay we're hearing none we will close the public portion take a five minute break sure take a five minute break that becomes microphone's off please e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e okay we're back in session uh thank you uh for the ability to to take that time I I spoke to my client we obviously heard some concerns amongst members I've heard the concerns of the public something that that we just discussed that that my client is agreeable to do is in an effort to alleviate the need for any variance relief whatsoever which I know was some concern from the public is the P proposed patio P area or P patio area along the decator street Frontage of the the property to the left of where the pool is we' propos to eliminate that in its entirety we'd propos just continuation of the grass that surrounds it at this point in time and by doing so we no longer protrude into the front yard setback in any way uh and it eliminates the need for that variance we'd essentially be here on a site plan application at that point we know that there were concerns related to defense and the addressing the concerns of the environmental commission which I think we can accomplish fairly relatively easily given the revised plan that we have here and the ability to go back to the board for Clarity on the fence but we would propose to to eliminate that and make this strictly a sight plan application conditioned on those obviously those two things along with everything else discussed by Mr hurles tonight I ask yes go get my mic um I I picked up there was quite a bit of concern from Neighbors I think from board members with regards to screening along to cater um and the proposed landscaping and I know you have to go back to the environmental commission yeah but I think a more effective screening at the front along that property line would go a long way to make a lot of people happier in terms of a screening the fence basically SC yeah on the back side of the fence screen well screening on the backside but also on the street side so you're not seeing a fence you're see more of a Green Hedge make a almost impen yeah you don't want to Landscaping feature along that front kind of focuses the noise and and understood completely can adhere to that like maybe 10 feet what's that 10 12 feet or so not just a 5 foot in terms of the depth of the land of the proposed Landscaping I I'm just so you're talking two or three deep in a sense is kind of what you're looking for there I think uh rich I have a legal question uh a swimming pool in this zone is a permitted use accessory use it's been accessory use uh does this board have the authority to not permit that use no um no double I actually did you have to permit a per you have to permit a permitted use you have to permit a permitted access it's not a use analysis so to the extent that it's permitted does the weighing of the balance between substantial benefit and substantial detriment come into the play there was no variance analysis necessary for that as the plan is modified there's no variance analysis but there still is a site plan analysis and it's a by right sight plan meaning you have to approve a site plan when you still are allowed to consider the impact of the proposed use on surrounding properties and um buffering and Landscaping similar to traffic design and traffic flow and and mounds they put around shopping centers and all that stuff even in a bught site plan you still get to manipulate the site plan in way that conforms the purposes of the ordinance so asking for additional landscaping for sound site on the cater is inappropriate in the request even in a byright site even in a byright application so I have no issues with the comments the engineers The Advocate seems amendable to trying to create a Sight and Sound buffer as best they can with Landscaping in the front but you cannot deny a permitted use or permitted access you can condition it but you can't deny it you're doing a site plan analysis yes I ask you a question uh to the applicant uh if you look at your plan uh then there's the wooden fence how far into the property currently does The Grotto goes the what what The Grotto the the front piece the grto mermaid the gr that's a religious term I didn't you're talking about the gr the gr that's in the center of the the landscaped areas the current yeah that existing they don't have a technical setback to that but it's it's very close to the middle of the of the lot middle of the back of a property so I would say that it's approximately you know about 30 ft to the center of it and The Grotto is about you know a 12 x 12 structure so give or take 24 feet to the edge of The Grotto so from the property line where the fence you have how far toward the pool does the current Grotto though help me out on that uh so the edge of The Grotto is actually the Inside Edge Of The Grotto and again we're talking about the existing structure this there that Inside Edge Of The Grotto is approximately it's it's about where the edge of the pool would be I'm just eyeballing it from down on the 22.4 but it's it's pretty darn close to to touching probably where the edge of the pool would have been the second question where where's the current fig tree located the 100 year old fig tree I think some indicated it was on a neighboring property yes on neighboring property all right and and again I actually happen to own a fig tree and I happen to have a pool right next to a fig tree and I can tell you that figs are almost impossible to kill um so and I don't want to kill my fig tree because I love my green figs as well my pool is literally 5T from my fig tree that you have a 10-ft setback from the rear and the side property lines they ain't no way this pool's going to kill that fig tree the only way thing's going to get killed somebody poison that thing to death you cannot kill it you can stump it down I and if they need another fig tree I I've grown fig trees as well so but it's not on your property it's not on our property but we will do everything in our power to make sure we don't damage the root all right so and and in your presentation you talked about uh the substantial benefits and I don't want to be offensive and I don't want to hurt your feelings but a lot of that is I considered to be fairly specious because you're not addressing anything but what's good for the property owner now I've eliminated that right that was in regard to the variance that we were asking for yes I understand that uh but in eliminating the variance are are we allowed to spitball here no no no spitball that's how you get reversed on things okay all right you make conclusions you can ask questions but no spitballing okay would it be would it be I'll ask a question would it be possible to make the pool smaller and Keep The Grotto as a streetscape presentation I don't know if then that would be considered part of the pool and then I need a variance for The Grotto because it's at a part of the pool now like it's an outdoor feature for the pool I it sounds like the board's already made a determination that was gone well but you said keep the gado yes well now is that attached to the pool I would move would it be possible to move the pool back what I'm talking about is The Grotto that currently exists on that property uh is a a pleasing streetcape and much more pleasing than a wooden fence but I'm I'm going to need the fence either way so the only way to do that would be to Rel you have a fence there it's a roll iron fence but you can't use that fence to surround the pool it's not pool legal just use it for the grot I'm just you know this is a okay try trying to salvage some benefit here because frankly the calculus of weighing substantial benefits substantial detriments is not looking good I would like to uh address the time I spoke of it earlier the time that that pool is being used if we could put some limitation closing that pool down at 900 p.m. um that would help the neighbors as well I think amendable to you but um I think there has to be some limitations for this neighborhood that's that's reasonable is it shouldn't they just isn't there a noise ordinance there's a and I was going to address there and listen I I I say this I was formerly the prosecutor in this town I know that this town when there's a noise complaint they prosecute it it's not something that goes unheard of or unanswered it's prosecuted and if and if here there's a noise issue the calling the police is the effective way to deal with it they should not have to call the police there should be a a shutdown at 900 p.m. and nobody should have to call anybody they should know that that's the rule and follow it understood this verbal change in the plans uh how can we vote on that we don't have to vote on that if it change it but then we don't know that they're changing it if they're changing to eliminate a variance you can't punish them for eliminating a variance no but yeah that's my question I don't want to punish them I want to know what we can or can't do about it you what I mean is I don't know understand the question are you saying do they have to come back for another meeting because they eliminated are they in fact going to change the plan they've eliminated a patio to remove a variance we let people remove variances right okay yeah right are are you going to remove the patio yes sir the compliance plans will show no patio it will also show reduction in coverage if it's applicable and anything but it's not going to exacerbate anything that was already listed it only make things better it's my opinion you can grant preliminary and final tonight you're you're looking at the same plan just minus that patio so there's less imperious with the addition of more screening though yeah more screening correct um yeah if you were uncomfortable with the environmental commission looking at the screening and then me signing off on that then I I'd recommend bringing them themy back but other than that there's no reason why not to Grant preliminary and final condition on all anything that you set for it okay what they give to the EnV what they give to the environmental commission would be a completed plan though cig yes I mean they would look at what how it is just less the patio correct yes and theyve they've agreed to provide more I mean ultimately they're going to look at they're going to look at a finished plan the environmental Comm that is correct I just have a quick question so they have 12 foot of buffer to put the screening of planning in right and we're not voting on the pool why does the patio have to go the patio requires the variant but we can still do that I mean it's not affecting could is not the patio it's the pool and we can't vote on that so yeah yes we because it's because it's a site plan we're voting on it no but I'm saying it's it's the the the the concerns are with the pool not the patio so why do they have to take the patio away they still have 12 foot of buffer to put plannings in why can't they run they run the risk of no we'll we'll deny them yeah and the other I will say because we just consider that I think the other aspect and public concern that we're trying to address by removing that too is when you have a patio there there was the concern about Gatherings and more noise and and by removing that I think we're going to you can never alleviate noise altogether but we'd certainly be proposing to lessen it by doing that can I can I ask a question a more basic one but do you have any idea if it's a saltwater or a uh a um Regular chlorine I do not know um I'm not I'm just throwing it out there that saltwater especially for smell um I would assume that the neighbors would prefer that I could certainly discuss it I can't I can't outright agree to it tonight expensive operat I switch mine to salt water mine's salt water too but I I can't answer that I'm just it's it's dense here right so I'm just saying if if if I was the neighbor I would not want to smell the chlorine um maybe I'm a little more sensitive than others but um and I think I first off I appreciate that the uh owner was willing to do that um hearing the concerns of of the public um and I would definitely appreciate the 900 p.m hours of operation I and I think that's important because if this were a commercial property we would be talking a lot more about that right but it is a whole house rental um so I think establishing some of those rules is is is important for the community I I just nothing to do with the variance or the site plan but I do I I feel for some of the comments that were made tonight as mayor separate from a variance discussion um people called it a porch Street I I agree with that and and I just said to my fellow council member we're going to have to look at the sidey yards on on polls because I just don't see this area as a pool area I I don't that has nothing to do with the site plan nothing to do with the variance that's now gone but I I ju I just say that for the record that I just I don't like this location for a pool um I would like to see it 25 fet I think is pretty big that was said as as a uh as the the measurements um I don't think they're going to have any renters or potential renters say hey I'm not coming because it's not 22 feet you know I think I think you could get that down to 20 22 feet I think that would be I just look at this this is going to get attention people are going to walk by this they're going to see a new pool here um I think minimizing this a little bit would make a difference for me personally um again 22 feet over 25 feet but I think it it it it makes it a little bit um the point of some of the pools at other locations at hotels in town actually resonates with me a little bit on a site plan issue um so I'd like to see if we could minimize it a little bit personally yeah if I and if I could comment just quickly I would have been a definite no because it's I think it's had a character for the neighborhood um I I feel for the Neighbors um I you know know I don't see it being a positive thing on which you know when we're graning a variance we want to see some positive impact from it I didn't see that um I I agree with a number of Zach's comments I think that's pretty important but um you know you know try to do your best to make this thing you know not noisy not visible and smaller um hopefully yes the smaller the better yeah um but uh you know good luck with it are we U are we now not voting on anything right there's nothing to vote on preliminary and final site plan it's a site plan site plan yeah can I just say one thing Bill while while I agree with Mrs Reed about noise I don't think it's a good practice to put special times on different properties because eventually who's going to keep track of all that there's a noise ordinance that they follow they follow why should they be any different than anybody else I think I think you could just say noise ordinance rather rather than a specific time you can just say in compliance with the noise ordinance but that would I think the noise ordinance allows till 10 p.m. which is what we were okay with but I think that's in opposite the kind of what we're trying to restrict it a little more and I understand I get it but that's going to be a impossible to enforce when everybody's got a different time like how do you know if the noise ordinance needs to be lowered than o00 then move it back for everybody course the pool on Decor street is no louder than the pool on Maron Avenue and why should those well these because these owners agreed to it okay and and and any any more these these these um this information's on the on the internet now anybody buying the house goes online they see it there's there's there's resolutions that are public record you got to stick by it too to to his point Mr chairman in regards to commercial properties again not that this is but I think most of the hotels in Kate may have even their own rules that are you know the polls close at 800m or what and I'm not suggesting that number by the way I'm just saying you see you know no lifeguard on duty P pool is closed at dusk I mean that's yeah pretty standard I I can say that we agree to to a reduction to 9:00 P p.m. I and I'd ensure that that'd be part of the resolution we abide by that in terms of a reduction in size I I I I can't sit here and agree to it right now but I can agree to a reduction in hours of operation the additional buffering that's been talked about along the cater subject to environmental approval you could impress upon the owners that will be very much appreciated if they look at the size of that pool yeah absolutely I can do that goes a long way same thing with with salt water as opposed to fresh water I I'll do the same thing with that item and it be nice if the property owner would show up I understand yeah I understand put you in a bad position understand all right any more discussion then somebody care to make a motion for preliminary and final subject to the conditions of which is going to elaborate [Music] the mo the motion I recommend being made but how you vote is up to you is a motion to approve preliminary and final site plan approval subject to the waivers and conditions outlined by the board engineer on pages two and three of his report uh the waivers being the well I want to ask a question Craig Craig we waved V but that's the environmental but they are going back to the environmental commission so I'll mention that later right no that's but not for an impact that's an impact study I understand I just didn't want to Cloud that got okay I'll get back to that and the traffic um study is wave and the conditions one through 13 on pages 5 and six um with a note on number four that the new plan must have environmental commission approval but that's the the for foot in the rear Craig wanted the environmental commission to look at that as well and then the other commissions I conditions I made note of as the application changed is that the patio is going to be removed the one on the decator side so that there's no variance required the entire patio is being removed the one towards decater um there will be a more effective screening along the cater with a depth of 10 or 12 feet to which the applicant agreed and it'll be approved at the discretion of the environmental commission and Mr hurless it doesn't need to come back to the board as long as those two are okay with it the applicant agreed to close the pool at 9:00 p.m. and the Mayors and other members of the board um requested the that the owner consider making the pool smaller and that salt water be used that's not a condition but a suggestion by the community leaders and the um want to check if there any commissions up things up higher those are oh and and the larger condition that the issues regarding the gates and fences are to the HPC for approval before its full board but the planning board is not in favor of any fence that has a height that is not consistent with the ordinance and specifically requests the board clarify if the existing iron fence is to be replaced with wood fence and whether the fence or fences are appropriate for the historical landcape um those are the conditions as I see them that's the motion I recommend being made but how you vote is up to you if you're going to vote no um I'd ask you to articulate why and tie to site plan considerations because the variance analysis is not appropriate for this um just one more suggestion on the fence if you're going to put the wood fence in maybe put that inside the buffer area leave the leave leave the wrong iron that's there long there and move it inside absolutely and I have one more suggestion uh when you put a pool in usually there's signage at the pool for safety no diving maybe on that sign it could be put pool closes at 9:00 p.m. if you're going to stick with that okay thank you anybody else have any other comments before we vote okay we need to we need somebody to make that motion I'll make motion second council member Jagger motions Mr LOL seconds mayor mullik the issues that I have with this application are outside of this motion so I vote Yes council member Jagger yes Mrs Reed I agree with the mayor yes Mr Crowley just a comment before I vote won't be I'll be brief uh the straight jacket this committee has been put in by their current ordinances makes this a very embarrassing thing to to have to do in my personal opinion uh uh swimming pool on the sidey of a historic in in a historic district which is the the main attraction for why Cape May is a Victorian National Treasure renders at least that portion of of decada Street No More Than A A Street in Wildwood with a motel in the front yard uh with the swimming pool rather in the front yard and it's just so inappropriate I can't even see straight but we don't have any choice because our ordinances are putting us in this kind of a bond U it it's uh frankly it's embarrassing for Kate May that we have to do this it's embarrassing for all of us that we have no choice but to do this and uh one of the things on this agenda later on is a consideration of Master Plan recommendations uh one of which is for the last 20 years to do something about swimming pools and T and tighten up that ordinance so that it speaks to the general benefit of the public and not the general b the particular benefit of one property owner uh in my mind there's a there's there's no there's no question that the detriments outweigh this but we don't have the right to say no so in that case and with those conditions I I am voting yes Mr lenhome yes Mr rigs yes Mr producers I have to reiterate what Mr Crowley just said excuse me as a resident of Hugh Street myself and living in the historic district you know for the past five years we've seen a lot of properties sold and become Full House uh rentals I've seen towels over banisters railings I've seen um just things outside the house that shouldn't be there when they were individual homes I see nothing that this will do to enhance Kate May and the historic district in any way I I don't know what to say on this I really don't but we're forced to say yes so with that I I have to say yes but I'm sorry I have to say yes Mr Jones yes Mr bazer yes thank you okay I know I want to that's okay so we have one more item on the agenda which is which is not really going to be a discussion thing tonight we're just going to go over over with Craig hold on a second G to go over with Craig Craig's going to go over with us some of the areas that he thinks we should be thinking about and when we get together next time we'll be talking about these different Craig I'll turn I'm just waiting till it settles down out there okay are we ready okay I prepared a memorandum um dated June 24 2024 um in which I highlight sort of the status of where we are with the recommendations that were contained in the uh master plan reexamination um and we've been picking away at quite a few of those items so I would like to commend the governing body as well as the planning board for not just throwing the master plan re-exam on the shelf and not doing anything they've been actively working at Implement implementing the recommendations on there so that being said there are some heavier lifts that are contained within there and and and so I'm I'm looking just as a topic of discussion as to where we want to focus on next um with with getting more of these things items implemented so um I went through and this is in the exact same format that it's contained in the master plan re-examination so I went through and sort of just took a look at what items were the easier lifts and the easier to achieve um item number one and I'll just I'm going to briefly go through the report if we want to Circle back and get more detailed discussion fine but item number one deals with definitions item two um just implementing uh the modern language uh for the intent of residential districts three four and five all deal with affordable housing um I can let you know that the city is actively working towards complying with their affordable housing you're going to be dealing with that in the coming year regardless of whether you want to or not um but I would just take a time out and hold off on that and wait wait till that comes to you um because there are some um items that need to be addressed I guess internally before it gets in front of you with regards to the plan item number six and seven 8 9 10 11 12 were all addressed item number 13 through 1777 deals with the Village Green in my opinion that's one of the more complex studies and um efforts that's going to have to be done with regards to the recommendations that are contained within that um in my opinion I think there's more study that's involved in that in making those recommendations um so and I think that's uh 13- 17 deal with the R4 District which is our Village Green area um item number 18 was addressed 19 uh should be a priority that's very easy it's just incorporating the uh Beach uses that are in the S1 District along Beach Avenue um our our ordinance is kind of vacant it doesn't account for those item number 20 I said uh was not addressed uh the way that it was written there was no recommendations were made at this time but tonight's meeting highlights this uh discussed the possibility to address the standards for pool Reg ations I think we're prioritizing that tonight after tonight's discussion right and that great was the the recommendation I was referring to yeah and I thank you for picking up on that and um so I highlighted that on my report um item 21 is a little heavier use item 22 23 and 24 I know that some members including the mayor have expressed some priorit prioritization of these and they deal with parking in the C1 District as well as Workforce housing um so I know that that was important to some people but that those 22 23 24 um all dovetail into that and if we're dealing with parking 26 and 27 also would dovetail into that um item number 28 was addressed through ordinance item 29 deals with fencing um that has not been addressed we talked about fencing tonight so that might might might be prioritized item number 30 31 32 were all addressed by ordinance 33 deals with uh parking standards um we can roll that I think the parking should all be dealt with comprehensively when we're when we're dealing with that um item number 34 was not addressed that's storm waterer that was pretty simple we probably prioritize that 35 is lighting standards uh we talked a little bit about that tonight but um the governing body has adopted dark sky ordinance um that deals with lighting it ended up in a different section that's not part of our zoning code so I'm recommending that we bring those into our zoning code so that they you know now require uh site plan review as well as variance control on that so but I mean I think the I think the framework for the lighting standards has been been sort of set forth okay um 36 and 37 38 have all been addressed by ordinance I won't even talk about those item number 39 is upgrade building codes and Zoning logs so are consistent to reflect the increased risk of storms and floods item 40 is revise the checklist application requirements um that has those two items have not been addressed um they might be a little uh heavier lifts are involved a little more work with regards to those item 41 42 have been addressed by ordinance item 43 were recommended changes that that affect FEMA I know that there's pending legislation with regards to that so I would recommend that we defer that and wait for recommendations from our flood plane manager with regard of that and the pending legislation and changes um 44 deals with the Kate May Housing Authority recommendation I can tell you that the city is moving forward with bringing them into the fold with regards to our affordable housing uh compliance um so stay tuned with that that's ongoing um but we don't really need to do anything with that yet um as well NN 45 just deals with the implementation committee is sort of what we're doing this de facto we are serving as the implementation committee for these recommendations um and that is ongoing process too so and I'm just going to turn it loose to the board members is there any specific things that they would like to focus on and have me sort of bring forth for first uh couple comments real quick sure uh parts of the you say it's already been done by code and and in some sections you cite the code but could you cite the code on all of those just so we know where to find the changes that were made I can do that okay there were several different ordinances so I didn't sight them I just yeah but I I can the next version of this that's what I mean yeah yeah just an edit really uh the second point I wanted to bring up what is the fact that the current master plan was struck in 2019 and in 2020 we had the whole covid thing and I think in terms of reviewing the master plan we need to be very sensitive to the fact that the covid experience changed the almost the fabric of what this community is in terms of housing in terms of uh commercial acquisition of public land for outdoor seating and the whole thing I I think we need to maybe make a new section if you want to that deals with uh the impact of covid on the nature of this community and I I take take a reference back to something the mayor said at a committee meeting recently and that is that we really need to take a close look at what Cape May is and what we want it to be uh as especially in light of the fact that so many things have changed in K May because of covid uh so a section on Co I think might be a good idea of going forward a CO impact the only the only concern is when we're doing this as a planning board that was never a part of reexamination I think moving forward when we're looking at these other recommendations we can look at it through the lens of experiencing covid but I we can't add a new section to the master plan unless we open up that process again that's fair that'll be fine that if if that's the approach that's a good approach I like that yeah I'm not I'm not advocating to open that up no I'm just telling you that's the that's what but I think what you're advocating is that any future changes we make to this are going to be sensitive to the impact of Co yeah we've all experienced it I think I I definitely agree with your statement the the world has changed since Co our housing stock has changed the Commerce of Cape May has changed considerably I would agree and so we're we're really behind the eightball in terms of planning for what K may could be if we don't consider that as quickly as possible that's just a comment okay that's all I had to say okay well then the next meeting at next Workshop we'll we'll tackle these things I'm going to start Pard me I'll start drafting uh memos to try and frame the the logistics of these new ordinances uh recommended ordinance or just items for discussion that we need to you know get consensus from the board before we move forward with a draft ordinance well the reason I asked Craig to go over that tonight so we would have time to think about it next meeting rather than jumping in cold that's a good idea yeah just I did have one more comment though uh uh the when I looked at this memo and I read the master plan a lot of the issues come up in two or three different sections of the master plan like affordable housing as an example is there any way that we could condense that in into a a discussion point which covers everything in every part of the of the plan or no yeah I focused on the recommendations that are in the land use section right land use element um because they're most pertinent towards land use ordinances right um there were other recommendations in there that wouldn't necessarily end end up changing the land use ordinance so I didn't really I I thought that this should be the focus at first okay but like as you mentioned before parking spills over into into its own section oh absolutely in the master there's a whole parking and traffic element right all right okay have any other comments oh wait can we pay the bills please thank you I'll second thank you we have a motion by Mr Jones seconded by council member yagger mayor mullik yes council member Jagger yes Mrs Reed yes Mr Crowley yes Mr lenol yes Mr rigs yes Mr puses yes Mr Jones yes Mr bazer yes thank you final motion motion toour I'll make that motion okay thank thank you Dennis all in favor thank you everyone have a good [Music] night oh thank you