Mr Rob present Mr gini here Mr Mr Leonard here Mr rodus presid Mr Walter Mr first here miss Christie here chairwoman got I'm here adequate notice of this meeting of the Bedminster Township Lage board was filed with the Township Clerk sent to the Bernardsville news The Courier News and to all subscribers and posted at the Township Municipal Building one Miller Lane Bedminster New Jersey on January 12th 2024 please stand for the pledge it stands one nation God I'll open it up to the public for anything that is not on the agenda sorry anybody has anything they'd like to talk about is there anyone in the audience or anyone online if you're online you can uh unmute yourself you can raise your hand you're on your phone you can use star n no not seeing anyone close it to the public all right uh we don't have any minutes this uh this um Paul um old business we gonna pass over that again yes now skip it we'll skip it tonight okay um okay uh we have um 20 206 that's still on for me we see we still we see okay and uh 2475 that's uh ongoing until April meeting so we can start with h maliss how you say it pleas yes it is good here by the microphone so you can yes please good evening my name is Anthony spaco I represent Anthony and Teresa mise in connection with their application for use variance relief just very you want to go to completeness it's already been done done wonderful okay uh I'll just make a brief open statement I usually don't but uh in this circumstance the the factual pattern here is a little unusual I that I would um the mes bought this property uh last year and frankly were uh duped into believing that this was a legal two family home uh the listing for this property uh was list there's there were two listings uh one for single family homes in in the single family home listings multiple listing it identified it as two family it was also listed in a separate uh multiple family listing uh with the Garden State multiple listing service there are two electrical meters that service this property there are two mail boxes there are two separate entrances the property's uh taxed and has been taxed as a two family they had every reason to believe this is two famili uh they wanted to do the right thing after they purchased the property and came into to secure construction permits and to their shrin construction runs a pass zoning and zoning said wait a minute this is not a two family uh I made an Oprah request and as part of my application I submitted uh some letters uh two letters from the zoning department one from a zoning officer that I know and one that I don't one dates back to 1987 advising the then property owner and it was signed by a Walter Hawk uh maybe you really need to be an old-timer to remember Walter Hawk I don't remember wal used to live next door to the old Municipal Building okay well I was around I was around in ' 87 but I don't I don't I didn't know Mr Hawk who said that this was a not a legal uh two family and basically you need to do something about it and then there's a second letter from gentleman that I do know Jeff Price uh who was the zoning officer in 2015 and that letter was addressed to Gary Matarazzo who's the individual that my clients purchased property from advising him that this was an illegal to family and that he needed to basically do something about it uh I spoke to Mr price after Mr and Mrs mise came in to see me and asked Jeff if he had any recollection of this and what had transpired and he did not uh there is nothing else in your records that IND indicate that any enforcement action was taken that there was any effort to abandon the use the tax records that I secured by way an Oprah request indicate that this property has been identified as a two family home uh and taxed as such since at least 2014 I don't know that that was the earliest they could go back and look at their property tax cards so those are the facts uh that I think are uh uncontroverted there are all the all the documents that I referred to were submitted in part of the application they include uh the two letters from the zon officers again one dated December 1 1987 from Walter Hawk the zoning officer a second July July 21 2015 from the uh then zoning Officer Jeff Price there's a series of photographs that uh show the entrances separate entrances that I'll review with my client also included in the application were the two multiple listings uh one that lists single family homes that references the property as a uh a two- family home and then multiple family listing that identifies the property is a two- family home the tax cards that show that uh since 2014 the property's been taxed as it at least 2014 taxes a two family some nice photographs that show the two separate electric meters two mailboxes um the facts are what they are uh to call as my first witness uh Mr mise please thas is going to swear you in so just raise your writing do you swear from to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth shall be God yes sir and please state your name and address and spell your last name my name is Anthony mise 127 Somerville road that Minister and my SP my last name is m m IC thank you Mr M and if you would be seated and near the mic that would be great Mr M M you're here with your wife Teresa correct yes wife Teresa and uh did two you purchased this property last year yes we did February of last year yes prior to your purchase of the property did uh you uh have the benefit and advice of a realtor and you look at the multiple listings for property yes uh we originally saw the house listed as um on Zillo um we were searching um for two family homes out in Somerset County and when I saw this the home here in bedminister um was actually very excited because we administer this beautiful Town um reason we were looking for two family was you know we have six adult daughters and we were we're actually at the point they ages 20 to 32 and rent in New Jersey is not the easiest thing these days so we were hoping to having access to a property one of our daughters works out here in Hillsboro um that being said in the multiple listing on Zillow I called my cousin Doan ashel who's a realtor um out here in Somerset County and and then I I went out and saw the property with her we we went out and uh and it was a to two families two separate entrances I never had a reason to doubt that it was not a two family there's two electric meters um there is one boiler but a lot of older homes like that had one heating system for the whole home I thought nothing strange about it um cop these copies of the uh listings one and the multiple listings single family homes that identifies the property as a two family and then multiple listing for multi for yes yes yes they showed us this and these uh I'll just hold these up I don't think we need to Mark these separately these were uh submitted with the application package I'll also show you a photograph that was included in the uh we why don't we mark them just because that way we can talk about them more easily so A1 will be the listings collectively the the two listings okay two okay and then we'll mark if we can as A2 uh this is a photograph depicting the two mailboxes correct and did you install these or were these here when you bought the property they there was existing real old ones I did put new ones so that's h also a photograph that shows I I'll just hold this up so you know which one I'm looking at this is Mark this is A3 this is towards one of the by one of the entrances that shows the two electric meters is that correct that's correct yes I also 84 which is another closeup photograph of the two electric meters is that correct that's correct and these were here when you purchase property yes they're very old meters you can see now describe the access to the property F interor the first floor uh enters through the front porch uh single entrance uh that does the whole first floor and from the first floor you can go to the basement um the second floor entrance is on the side of the property it goes up to the second floor there's no connecting stairwells at all interior of the house I'll show you this Photograph that has a stairwell on the side is this the access to the access to the second floor yes all right we'll mark this is a we up to six time yeah and then when you go up those stairs soon as you walk in the landing there was actually where they had the washer dryer for the second floor unit and the washer dryers were in the basement um for the first floor again I didn't think it was not a two family At All by no means how uh did you learn that this was not a legal to family right the second floor apartment is is very dated probably 70s even be honest with you so we decided to uh remodel the second floor so I went to the building department and filled out proper paperworks to redo the bathroom and the kitchen for the second floor and uh I submitted all the papers as we did and then it was kind of a while for the permits at first and then they kept asking me for more information um which I provided down the road and then I think it was like June I think we started the permit paperwork in like April and in June that's when uh they told me I had to go meet with the zoning officer uh to uh talk about the house not being a two family at that point and and then then I met with Susanna the zoning officer and she showed me those letters that Tony referred to um and then you know now we're here why don't we do this why don't we Mark the uh 1987 letter as uh A6 and the 2015 letter as A7 the best of your knowledge is properties being taxed as a two family is that correct yes I'll mark the property tax cards that secured through an open request collectively as a as part of the application we submitted A current survey of the property I'd like to just to focus your attention for a moment on the the layout and the availability of parking for for cars in your experience how many how many cars fit into this there's there's a a detached garage towards the rear of the lot that correct that's correct it's a twocc car garage and can two cars fit in that garage yeah and two cars can fit in front of that garage oh easily yeah that driveways like on average 20 foot wide it's about 125 ft long or something at least 125 ft long I mean how many how many cars have you seen parked in this in this driveway uh I would say you could eight cars in there if you really want an issue has been raised and we'll have our engineer address it uh about Vehicles backing out onto summer Bill Road which uh we acknowledge is also known as State Highway 202 have you experienced any problems or are you aware of any accidents or any difficulties backing out of the driveway I've never had a problem backing out I'm how a site distance in each direction oh it's very clear because the houses are set back pretty far off the uh the prop you know the street line okay I would just also note that it looks as though this property has been used as a two family uh I don't know if it's continuous but at least intermittently since 1987 I'm not aware of any incidents there's no there's no record of any problem with cars backing out onto the road I'd also uh suggest that if this cannot be used two family it's going to end up a large larger single family home uh and the likelihood is there'll be teenagers there and I'd rather have two apartments with mature adults backing out onto the drive out onto the road of that must be as opposed to teenagers doing so that will be in one of the apartment one of the bedrooms in this home but that's just an aside in a personal observation after having uh paid for what I used to refer to as Fleet insurance for my teenagers when they had cars in in any event uh is there anything else you'd like to add any information you like to provide to board uh no I just you know I'm just hoping for the best on this meeting okay any questions for Mr mise yeah I have one Mr mise um do you feel that you misrepresented when you went to buy this out from the previous owner they did not no not at all cuz like my I said my cousin was one of the Realtors with my realtor um all the paperwork read two family home uh the sellers lawyers paperworks full r two family home I I felt I I wasn't misled by any you know means I I I could see if I was idiot and I seen a for sale by owner sign on the guy's lawn and I made a deal direct and didn't go through the channels I did um but you know mention that is because if they're telling you it's a two family home and they knew it was not based on a letter from 2015 the letters were never furnished to anybody except the previous owner but the previous owner is the one who sold it to you right the previous owner he knew he knew so he M misrepresented to you that it was a two he misrepresented to the real estate why why is there no recourse after him you're looking for relief from he's moved out of state we've tried to communicate with him and uh the response has been radio silence yeah we not heard anything back so so depending upon on where this goes that may be the next Avenue that we have to pursue we'd prefer not to we hope we don't have to but that certainly is an option I have a question when the Fire official went there to inspect the smoke detectors can you tell me the outcome of that inspection it passed which I I you know I wait wait wait it passed do you do you have the document yeah they had a closing that was a closing document well I mean do you have it here that would that would note on it if there two separate units or it should that's a question I asked we've asked that I didn't uh I didn't represent the micas when they purchased the property I don't have that document but uh Mr maliss asked me this question earlier about about why was that issued and I I said and I don't mean this in a derogatory way but but sometimes Municipal officials don't always communicate someone who goes and makes an inspection to see if there are the re requisite number of smoke alarms and fire extinguishers they just look to see there's two kitchens the bedrooms they make the inspection the fact that this was taxed since at least 2014 as a uh last 10 years as a two family now you would think that logic would dictate that someone in the tax collector or Tax Assessor's Office might communicate with zoning now is it tax is it two family or two useth because it is allowed to have commercial on the bottom well it didn't have an approval for that either didn't have an approval for it but it is it is tax tax as it two family says or a multiple use as a well I I you can be the judge of that I can tell you what the property tax card says what it say I don't know how that works I don't know if you know when was the when was the last time the assessor was there I I cannot answer that I don't know personally but there is a comment on the tax card change from class 4A two to the word to and then the numeral two for 2014 second floor unit updated that is the notation on the tax card because that zone allows for two uses so someone could be on the bottom someone could be on the top just not two rental units from my understanding you you you would still need a site plan approval for that okay and there was never a site plan approval before that I can tell you that generally speaking when the Fire official does a smoke alarm inspection he doesn't know how many uses units there are he just says passes or doesn't pass so there wouldn't be a notation on on the on the smoke inspection that it's two units but he would know that there's two kitchens right he but but that's not that's not what he's there to look for right Mr M when from the outside it looks like a single family house I think that's clear to anybody who drove by they wouldn't necessarily it doesn't present as a two- Family House presents as a single family house there's one door in the front of the house uh you didn't you know sometimes when you you just have a feel for certain things you didn't have any any concern whatsoever when you when you walked into it that this didn't feel like a two family house this to to raise a question in your own mind I understand that all the representations by selling Brokers and listings and all that stuff and maybe even you know the meters and the address and all that stuff seem to support two family but doesn't look like a two family doesn't feel like a two family and and for you not to be like concerned that maybe this was something that needed to be resolved before closing um well how I me youing clearly two entran there is clearly two entrances to the home the the first floor and the second floor do not connect at all there's no like other door lock where you can go up a set of stairs so when they do a walk through you have to you walk through the first floor unit you see the kitchen the bathrooms you know the first floor unit has has two k two one kitchen two bathrooms two bedrooms and living room um you walk outside to enter the other the second floor you have to physically go outside not you know it's not like one of those two family houses where there's one door and there's like two doors and you go up you exactly you physically have to go outside to the second floor unit and the staircase on the side is actually super structure you know it was added at some point after the yeah it was added probably 1980 or whatever it was so at least it was a conversion in Your Mind Correct absolutely yeah it's a house is 1920 or something like that it's an old own it's clear it's clear it was converted just because of the way the entrances are laid out it's obvious that it was converted and it was converted it looks as early as 1987 yet for whatever reason this continued to fall through the cracks there was a letter written in ' 87 this is not IL legal to family there's a letter written again in 2015 but no definitive action was taken I'm not pointing the finger of blame or responsibility but it's just a fact that the use continued it was taxed it was used for that purpose it was represented and misrepresented by the prior owner that it was it was illegal to family he had received the letter he got he got the 2015 letter it's addressed to him so he knew it was not a legal he had to have known and the fact that he didn't respond to the letter that I wrote to him a pretty pointed letter I think speaks volumes he had to have known had to have known I know so then I just where's your recourse with saying us or with we're not here but like that's the prior owner doesn't own the house anymore he can't do anything about the zoning no the approval so they need where do they go to us go after him for misrepresenting the house and attorney yeah doesn't get them the two family house that they think they B right oh let's let's go back let's go back a little bit um Telly please give the exhibits to the board secretary and pass those around they haven't already okay so have they been passed through the board you right it came down to me last Tony I just want to confirm C there's no record you've searched there was there was no a appeal or prior variance for this property right nothing and this case is solely a D1 use variance and variance plan not an appeal of any kind of order of the zoning officer right correct you're not an appeal so this is a case of tabula rasa again it is irrelevant really what happened in the past what is relevant is what whether the applicant demonstrates to this for the statutory criteria for a D1 use variance for a two family house in a zone that does not allow that uh that means that there is no harm no detriment given to the applicant because there was a violation in the past but also no benefit given to the applicant because there was a violation by PR owners that case law is very straightforward we don't penalize this this applicant but he also doesn't get any free ride because he has had a history here that is apparently uh and admittedly non-compliant I I agree with everything Mr con he's approved to you the criteria both affirmative particular suitability for for the proposed use other special reasons Plus rep and the negative criteria um and because it's commercial or multi family it it it involves a Medi standard which is an enhanced burden B on the AFF criteria so although the factual history is something we can have in our record that you have to decide whether that in any way helps decide whether it's particularly suitable and generally speaking that history doesn't make it something particularly suitable and I'm not even convinced that having been used is relevant because if it was in illegal use it could have been a very stealable illegal use of the property I'm not saying what happened was it was stealth people but uh not really that relevant because it wasn't lawful to be us so so it's a tabular rasa blanks slate they're starting their case let's let them finish their case and the board can decide whether all the criteria met Frank is let's follow up to what Tom just said Can can you explain 26 to us a little bit more detail in your in your memo without the planning jargon St I think probably probably the the order of presentation ought to allow them to present their case they're probably going to bring somebody in that's going to talk about this directly address that speciic and I think that I can probably talk to you a little better about that after the fact than to try to tell you that now that's fine have a planner that's that's here to testify to address statory criteria can I can I answer your question again Richard about the two family thing the house directly next door is also a two family and it's a legal two family I understand and it also looks like a family home from the outside because the homes on that street are they're built 100 years ago you know they're not new construction substantially larger than yours correct though it's a larger two family but I thought there was a precedent already but um I I'd like to ask a question um I'm going to digress just for a second Tom wanted us to talk about what the presid is but what I'm trying to do is understand what the township did and what their oblig ations were at at some point in time so in 1987 Mr Walter Hawk the zoning officer said that it wasn't zoned for two family it was that because the current owner put in an application for a permit to change it over do do you know what what prompted that letter that's my first my understanding was that it was a two family dwelling at the time was being used as a two- family dwelling and it was a notice of viol stating that it was an illegal to family dwell I don't know if there was a construction permit applied for at that time that generated that letter or whether it was just became known to the zoning officer that it was being used as a two family home okay that's exactly what this says it's part of your package it says this come to my attention properly it's being used a dwelling which constitutes non use the Zone which is located this violation blah blah blah use this office time period to arrange for our inspection with assure compliance with this direct and then the record go silence and then fast forward to 2018 Mr Right brought been brought to my attention offic right Rec letter uh that the construction through the construction F that the work you have been performing without permits that the sub property has created a two family environment this type of dwelling unit configuration is in violation of section of the ordinance an inspection of the residence is requested to determine if two family dwelling has been created if so a summons will be issue to you citing the use violation it is arranged for an inspection within 21 days of the SL okay so I have a follow-up question and maybe Paul R can help us with this the property has two electrical meters yes in my mindfall don't they have to be permitted when you break a meter up to from one to two when you add a meter shouldn't someone have records of this being a permitted use or permitted splitting of the meter well the answer is I don't know I think we heard a case last week where there was a permit issue to split the meters and there was never an approval for the two uses so that's you know and and and we're going back to the mid 80s here and if there was a permit issued it may or may not be in the records um so I don't know I I I don't think that means much except that it's been there a while and I think like like Tom said the the application here is about whether or not the D1 variance is appropriate history is history and history is nice but history is not doesn't carry the day right I agree history doesn't carry the day but the reason I took pains to uh put on proofs as to the history and M's knowledge and involvement here is that we're all human beings if these were the people that had made an legal conversion and then came to and got caught and came to you I've had clients over the years that uh they subscribe to the philosophy it's better to uh ask for forgiveness than to ask for permission that's not these people they they did the right thing they went in for construction permits they had every reason to believe that this was legal to family they've really done nothing wrong I think their Reliance given the the layout given listings uh and things they only was reasonable uh that's all no more no less but you have to judge the application of these merits anybody else from the board have any questions for this witness right open it up in public can I ask you a question before we do that Sor um who is isn't it incumbent on the part of the Realtors either repres representing the seller or the realtor representing the buyer to in their due diligence to confirm that this was because again clearly it was a conversion to confirm that this is a because you know the sellers you know was was getting M properties perhaps it was an income property for him you as far as he's concerned that's what he's going to sell money for selling there a two family than a one family all good you know that's his motivation but there Professionals in this process that seem to me have an obligation to confirm what they're representing and neither one of them did the buyer broker or the sellers broker don't they have a a legal responsibility to do that I don't I don't think so rich I I think that in the process of securing a listing the listing broker would ask the seller to sign this disclosure on this disclosure he's certifying it's a two family okay that's the Realtors out okay they're not they're not uh experts they're not title Searchers okay so I don't think I think that the fact that as long as they had a disclosure like that that they would be covered now that doesn't yes but that doesn't mean a broker can't go above and beyond okay and certainly you know somebody didn't go above and beyond in this case and the title search didn't discover this the title search is not going to identify a use that's permitted or not a title search goes to whether the present owner has legal title whether there are any leans or incumbrances against the property it doesn't go into zooming but it also doesn't matter right that's what I I want to just let's let's try to move away from this discussion not that I understand just because it's not m tabul laasa is meet the criteria for a use variance for a two family house in a Zone interesting enough vn2 allows a single family house does not allow a two family house and unlike the VN Zone which we were talking about last week the vn2 does not even allow an apartment above a store right that's in Frank's report but I want you to know that so I don't even want to talk too much about who responsibility was to investigate not investigate why because you don't determine anything about Mis representation negligence malpractice uh misrepresentation honest representation believability of of of the history of this property you determine did they prove their case for use variance which we they are still doing I'm going to make two two sentences one is Lou I have experienc with illegal apartments and uh people managing to get electrical boxes over and above what those zoning LW requires okay and the second thing I'm sorry Tom goes to what you said uh all of this goes to somebody's credibility and I think you know we always somebody's credibility but I'm done thank you thank you so let's go we finished with Madam chair the zoning officer wanted to to say something she's on now oh she is okay all right deser yes hi good evening everyone um I just wanted to log on and let you guys know that I personally had the opportunity to work with the applicant um I got involved when the permit was I'm sorry uh even though you were sworn last week that was a different hearing so please raise your right hand do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth so I do I do again I'm sorry please state your name and spell your last name my name is Suzanna Caris last name is k a and I'm the zoning official for Bedminster Township thank you Suzanna so I just wanted to put on record and let the board know that I did get the opportunity to work with the applicant um once this came to light um I can tell you guys that sitting in the conference room and going over the entire file to let him know um that the property was not permitted for a two family home was um unfortunate um I do want to acknowledge the fact that he did go through this entire process there was no enforcement on my end that had to take place for him to be in the seat that he's in um to present his application um but I do think he was misguided uh during the process and I don't think he had any aware of what would have been created um with him buying the property thank you of course right any anyone else that's it from the public we have we're closing public I think we you were at a point where you were going to ask if anyone from the public had questions of this would yeah I did hear the yeah no one then no one all right then I'll call my next witness for sir please raise your right hand do you swear from to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth shall be God I do and please say your name and address and spell your last name my name is Ryan Smith SMI I am an engineer and a land surveyor licensed in the state of New Jersey I work for yanac con bille and Aldrich address is uh 460 Main Street Chester New Jersey 07930 Ryan I don't think you've T testified before this board but have you previously testified before I have testified before many boards I have not been V for this board so we don't need a lot of qualifications but a few gentlemen would give some ifications we can recognize them okay okay I have a bachelor's degree in surveying engineering technology I have a master's degree in environmental engineering I'm a licensed dual licensed land surveyor and professional engineer in the state of New Jersey both my licenses are current uh I have testified before many land use boards planning boards and uh Boards of adjustment in the state of New Jersey most notably and most recently Bernard's Township Harding Township chadam Township Chester Boro Chester Town ship uh just to name a few I'm also class three member on the H pakong landu sport thank you uh Brian Smith we will accept your qualifications as professional engineer and Lance surveyor and please go ahead okay uh I'm here to give a site overview uh we're talking about 127 Somerville Road also known as Route 202 it's Block 33 lot 17 it's located in the vn2 restricted Village neighborhood District uh the lot is long and narrow it starts at the beginning of the road it is 65 feet wide and it is 200 feet deep tapering down to 60 ft wide at the rear of the property uh it is an undersized lot 12,490 Square fet versus the 21,780 squ Ft required uh as I mentioned before the lot width is 65 ft versus the 110 ft that is required in this Zone however but the grandfathering provision of your code stays that smaller lots lots that have 60ft width that were in existence at uh as of December 18th 2000 are considered conforming so this is a conforming lot for width with regard to that grandfather it is developed by an existing dwelling that we were referring to before and a detached garage the gravel driveway enters from Route 202 on the right hand side uh the lot has a gentle slope from Route 202 to the back of the property raising about 4 feet in 200 ft so it's basically flat but it does slope slightly towards Route 202 uh the principal dwelling has a front yard setback of 57 ft versus the 40 ft minimum it's complying there the side yard setback however is an existing non-conforming 7.8 ft versus the 20 feet required uh the rear yard setback is 104.5 versus the 45 ft required again complying the detached garage uh has a side yard setback non-conforming at 2.2 ft where 10 ft is required the rear yard for the detached garage is 46.7 Ft where 10 ft is required so that is comping coverage calculations that I did based on the survey performed by my firm uh yielded a building coverage of 99.4% where 15% is allowed the lot coverage however is 36.4% versus the 30% allowed that is an existing non-conforming coverage uh as we mentioned before the driveway is a long wide driveway uh 16 ft wide at the road goes out to 20 ft before it tapers down to about 14 feet where the house pinches it between the property line and the house and then it goes back to 16 feet wide before it enters into the detached garage um it provides substantial parking and a lot of passing room because it is again flat and it's wide you've had the uh opportunity to review report from the township engineer Paul Ferraro dat February 6 2024 with this strange Boswell letter head on I don't know I think I think that looks good with you in fact I got a letter recently at the top it said Boswell engineering and at the bottom signature block said for Arrow engineering you know that that was just a computer is Die Young die hard really in any event you you have uh Mr Ferraro's report and I'd like you to address the comment number coms number one yes okay uh Paul in accordance with your letter you said it is recommended that the applicant engineer investigate alternatives for an on-site k-turn area to allow residents to enter Route 202 while driving forward um I took a look at the site plan and I did do a driveby on the site and it is possible to to put behind the house between the house and and a detached garage to put some additional pavement or maybe some grass pavers to pull in there but what that's going to do is that's going to block any parking that would be in the back um I also looked and probably would be depending on your your preference you could in front of the large tree in front of the house in between the RightWay line and the tree you could put a pulloff area the pitfall with doing that is a lot of times when you put turnarounds in front yards they become parking spaces and nobody wants to ruin this streetcape by putting cars in the front yard so there are two options there but both of them would require additional pavement and we're already over on lot coverage so there's going to be a tradeoff there uh if we're going to have to add again there are no proposed site improvements with this presentation this presentation is purely for the D variants uh we are not proposing any site changes whatsoever but if the board would like us to look into that further we would be happy to look into it further than what I mentioned just now in your professional opinion go ahead you going talk about I was just going to ask you one more question about the about the uh the driveway in your professional opinion is it uh you think it's safe to back out on to 202 from this driveway and in title 39 section 4-17 point1 of the state vehicular code uh no vehicle shall back or make a turn in a street if by doing so it interferes with other vehicles it is not illegal to back out of your driveway but it is the requirement and the responsibility of the person operating the vehicle to operate the vehicle safely without interfering with other vehicles so it is not required that you drive out frontwards it is definitely a good idea in this particular case I find it to be unnecessary in my professional opion the uh second com I go back though I don't understand why what's the Restriction in the backyard by by theing space Tom Tom let me let me just comment on that because that's that's where it was going to go because the more the more I look at this planned the more something strikes me in that um you've got four parking spaces but if the wrong person is in the garage the other person has to back out onto the street let that person out and pull back in I think it may be prudent to take those two stalls rotate them 90° and put them behind the patio yes it's going to create a couple hundred square feet of additional impervious surface but what it makes it makes in a two- family use you're going to have vehicles coming in and out more often you're going to have four vehicles there more likely than two and what it does is it allows cars to get by each other even if they still some will be able to turn around but even if they're backing out all the way from the garage at least they don't have to have a car behind them like car in space three or four somehow back all the way down the driveway and the other one go past it and and Shuffle around that way to get the car out of the garage are you saying Paul that if you created those parking stalls turning them 90 degrees that someone could use that to in effect make a k turn and then well I I I would use those as the parking stalls and leave the area behind the garage open so that means people who Park perpendicularly can you turn around excuse me I might be being I muted her because we don't do that this is not the point where the public would make any comments so um we'll get we'll get to that but the the point of creating them rotating these stalls 90 degrees and sliding them over does create some opportunity for turning around for for vehicles first off the two vehicles that are parked out side and if the two vehicles that are outside are not there um when somebody's pulling out of the garage then that those Vehicles could turn around too I think it's I think it's a reasonable way to to make this make this work because I it is a bit of a concern with the Stalls uh railroaded like that I comp I Paul I agree with you completely that that would definitely solve the issue the question that I would have for you would you be comfortable with you putting grass papers in there so we don't create additional runoff or if I did driveway and actual pavement would you require a drywell because we're talking about 3600 almost 400 square feet of additional impervious coverage which we would need to add I I not sure I agree with your arithmetic because it be about 20 by 20 which is 400 square feet on my calculator maybe on the surveyor calculator I I actually used 9 9 ft * 2 18 * 20 is 360 and 20 by 20 is 400 all right so we're talking about the same number right but but but the the threshold for drywalls is 1,000 sare feet it's a th000 yes okay so you would not have to do that would you be comfortable if the board was uh was inclined to Grant the variance relief that's requested could that be a condition that could be satisfied administratively through your offices that the board I I I would not have a problem with that it's ultimately the board's decision I think uh perhaps while um the planner is doing her testimony you can run some quick numbers and figure out what that proposed impervious coverage would be proposed lot coverage would be so by the time she gets to the point where she finishes her testimony she knows what the coverage would be increased okay I will have those numbers in short orders do we know where those headlights are now going to be aiming they're going to be shooting over to their neighbor's house now right that they're parking in there they're pulling in at night time is that going to be is there is the house right next door yes this is what I would like an opportunity I mean is there any barrier there is there a fence is what's going on along the southern property line which if you're standing on the road is the left-hand property line there is a fence over there okay but uh as far as you know how far the cars are away from the fence there will be some lights F over be we would certainly uh uh be more than willing to install some type of uh permanent year round vegetative buffer that could effectively screen headlights that are only four feet high that should not be would would not could not would not be an issue there seems to be more than sufficient space where that would be located there's a large tree there but there seems to be a sufficient open space there to allow for a Vegeta Buffet I think the neighbors gonna when you excuse me I will I will take Tom Colin's position here and say please wait until you're called upon you've been through multiple hearings before with the for and you know the process so please be patient we will open it up to the public um ask the board anything more for this how much width do you really need to for K turn I'm sorry the you need to do a a three-point ker what we usually use is the depth of a parking space which is 20 feet and how wide is the driveway the driveway is at that point it's 20 feet wide uh by the house where the stairs kind of neck it down it's about 14 feet wide in front of that by the front porch it widens up to 20 and then it tapers down where it's mostly 16 feet from the front of the house to the road so by just adding four feet of width on the lawn side you could accomplish a k turn in front of the house you could but I think Mr Ferrar is recommending that it'd be somewhat deeper than that to actually be able to pull I'm just talking about minimally minim you could if you got to the 20 ft you could pull up the K turn yes what we usually like to use for a rule of someb when you're talking about pulling a k turn in a driveway is a typical aisle width in a parking lot which is 24 feet wide 2 park now you're making it 8 feet wi so that's and that's that's a parking space with so is pushing it you would have cars parking in the front yard that way okay yeah but the garage doesn't look like it's even usable are people parking in the garage yeah it looks like the cars are just picture I see the car is par down front doesn't look like it's even a garage has two windows in the front is it a usable garage yeah SL just so we can it is it's actually both way they're like bypass St old style oh so you have to get out pull it slide pull it I doubt it's even going to be used it's probably going to just you think you're you're using the ground the people that were living there before I it's going to block off the other two they they had cars parked up by the garage they put two cars up there and the driveway is very large and the lower you know towards the street like by the house they had two cars like there like you know what I mean so they didn't have to bother with moving cars around to get out separate F that's here when you look two twoes living here yeah thank you um Mr M when something you said before about you have adult daughters and you wanted to find a place with an apartment is that because you want to live downstairs and have your adult daughter live upstairs well that's an idea you know when we downside you know we our late 50s now kids are getting older and you know live in Cranford currently and you know it's a much home we bedrooms so at some point we thought maybe we move out here but you know one of our daughters working out HS well now so we thought on this right away okay but that's not the the present plan was not for you and your to reside there my business is in Lyon still pretty far so I still work so this is going to be more of investment property yeah and it's currently empty now right yeah there's people on first floor okay okay thank you anyone else from the board in the interim I did calculate those numbers okay um the existing coverage at 36.4% is 4548 if you add the 400 square feet you end up at 4948 which is 39.6% okay I can't help but think about the fact that on when the um I me you have to wait I'm sorry hello San you don't have to wait no it's Kathy Kathy Kathy sorry go ahead K you know when we really spent a long time on this master plan and writing this vn2 Zone as different from the other VN zones and this vn2 Zone was really written to keep it very very historical you know without apartments and that's the reason why Apartments were not allowed on that street and I think that as we listen to the testimony and as we listen to before we make a decision we have to think about why did we write the master plan the way we wrote the master plan you know what what was being envisioned although I feel very saddened by the situation that we're in tonight because something did didn't go right I don't know whether or not we really want to change our zoning because some somebody didn't do something right I I think we need to think about that as we're listening to everybody's testimony anybody else on the board open it up in public questions of Mr Smith for our engineer m rovic this is now the time that the public has been asked to speak if you have a question thank you so much I really appreciate it so I just want question sorry questions of Mr Smith Mr rovi um why don't we sweare you in because just in case you make a state it's hard to ask just questions so please raise your right hand okay please swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God yes and please state your name and address and spell your last name Kelly rakovic R A kovic 121 Somerville Road thank you now Kelly now is a time for questions there'll be another time after all the witnesses for Testimony so if you can ask questions of this witness that now that would be good okay so I just wanted to thank everybody um for your support and also we've always had good relations with our neighbor including the current owner and renters and neighbors um but our concern is just like what you're talking about like when we bought our house we like Kelly I don't I don't mean to be rude but uh that that is not a question so and we just have okay so okay focus questions Mr Smith okay so you thank you so here's my question will there will there be changes that our family and the value of our home and our safety have to be worried about meaning will there be more increased risk for floodwaters because after the last time they did some remodeling over there with the outside in exterior we've been getting more water in our yard number one number two my second question is one at a time so Mr Smith I it was a little open-ended but I believe you're in charge you have to answer that question I believe the question was and I'm sorry if I if I misunderstood uh will we be increasing runoff to your property um may I ask which property you are are you on are you to if you're standing on Route 202 facing this property are you to the left to the right so we're to the left and just to clarify we're this single family home to the left if you're facing the home that were discussing and the other one that you were talking about is to the right so we're a single family home to the left if you're facing the um property of discussion okay my answer to your question is in accordance with the storm water management requirements of the town of of the uh I'm sorry the township of Bedminster we would not be required to do storm water mitigation for the DI Minimus net increase of 400 square fet U that being said yes a small amount of impervious coverage added could have the potential to add a small amount of runoff towards your property but having dug many many times for septics in this area the existing impervious coverage in this area there is a clay cap above shale in the land that we're talking about here there is a lot of runoff generated the difference between the clay soils that you have here and any pavement that we would have put on top of it would be very very small because most of the runoff runs off anyway already can I be honest so when Gary moved out and they redid the current property next to us as we've been discussing we we' been experiencing much more water in our yard which has been causing much more water that we never had in our basement to this degree and um so that's a concern and also the concern which we don't that I mean you know that's one concern but the other concern is if we're talking about changing parking places and who's and all that stuff our kids play outside like and we move to this neighborhood so we all had front yards without like Pavement in the front of the property and if anyone would put pavement Kelly Kelly this is not a question either so say you your testimony for after all the witnesses because that's the appropriate time for this is this for this type of a group of sentences so uh you have a question for Mr Smith please uh okay so okay so here's how I'll here's how I'll pose it as a question I know are is the driveway gonna be changed because if it would negatively be changed for us we need to know that so is the driveway going to be negatively changed is is anything else going to be NE question so he'll try to answer your question I think he's already explained it on direct but he'll explain it again our our our proposal tonight was no changes to the site work what we were discussing Mr Ferrero and I was moving a couple of parking spaces behind the house to enable cars to turn around so we're not talking about adding any p pavement to the front yard we're talking about adding a couple of parking spaces behind the patio at the rear of the house okay thank you for clarifying that yes ma'am and are there any other changes that could possibly affect our property Our lives our safety that's what I'm wondering we are not proposing any other changes than what if the board were to look favorably and were to ask us to require to add those two parking spaces those would be the only changes we would be making to the plan and the parking spaces would be additionally to where the parking spaces are now it wouldn't change the view of the backyard the view of like the um historic district it would just be widening widening their current parking spots we would be adding two parking spots behind the the patio at the rear of the house behind the patio at the rear of the house okay so my concern is that patio is very close to our deck and our and our house so would these two parking spots be near their own personal garage because if it's starting to get closer to our deck and our privacy that's an issue they're not going to be on your lot they're going to be directly behind the existing house patio between the patio and the garage okay so I'm just wondering thank you for listening if these extra parking spots tell do you have another question yes where exactly are these parking spots going to be they're going to be directly behind the existing dwelling between the patio and the detached garage okay so on that side of the house not on the side of the house behind the house okay thank you thank you very much I just wondered and and we've always had a good relationship with everyone there and thank you for everyone's help we just want to make sure you know that whatever is happening we're all on you know supporting each other and being on the same page thank you T for your questions okay any else in the public we have another one please come your name your address next to you guys absolutely St Greg Kenya 132 Somerville Road I'm direct GRE please raise your right hand do you swear for him to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God so help me God and and please spell your last name k a n i oh can I grab this one cool and Greg what was that address again I'm at 132 Somerville Road directly across the street from the subject property thank you I get the headlights um don't back out yeah the funny thing is is that Somerville Road and 202 this is uh are these questions for you or is this of is is to ask me question I'm sitting down no questions for okay thank I'm for everything okay okay so we'll close it to the public we don't say anyone else and you have another witness yes I do Allison Copco please Alison please raise your right hand do you swear from to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God and please state your name and address and spell your last name CSCO k o p I'm a senior planner at J calwell and Associates the address is 145 Spring Street in Newton New Jersey thank you Al and I although I recognize and accept your qualifications I don't think you testify before this board is that correct that's correct so some summary at least of your qualifications are in order please sure uh I received my master's degree in city and Regional planning from Ruckers University in 2019 I've been working at J cwon Associates since then and I've been accepted as a expert in planning in front of boards including Mountain Lakes Denville Still Water up in Sussex County um East Orange and Mount Olive thank you the board will recognize accept your qualifications as a professional planner please go ahead go ahead Alison tell us tell us what you want to say sure uh so as you're aware uh the applicant is before you this evening seeking uh relief for a D1 uh use VAR to continue the use of a two family dwelling in the VN um two uh restricted Village neighborhood Zone where the use is not permitted um so the municipal land use law as we heard a summary of briefly earlier um it provides statutory positive and negative criteria um that applicants need to demonstrate when seeking variance relief uh the ml uh it permits the zoning board to Grant a D1 use variance in particular cases and for special reasons um and also without any substantial detriment to the public good or any substantial impair impairment to the uh Township's uh Zone plan and zoning ordinance so with regard to those special reasons um or the so-called positive criteria uh these can be demonstrated by this project um by effectuating I found at least three different purposes of zoning that are outlined within section three of the municipal land use law the first of those being purpose a to encourage Municipal action to guide appropriate uh uses of lands and a manner that promotes the public safety uh public health safety morals and general welfare uh the second is purpose e to promote the appropriate population densities that contribute to the well-being of the neighborhood and the community uh and finally purpose G to provide sufficient space and appropriate um locations to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens uh so uh as mentioned previously uh there are no exterior changes proposed uh besides those that would improve the circulation on the property um the structure as it currently stands and as it's proposed uh is in keeping with the neighborhood's appearance uh with the look of a single family home in terms of uh oh sorry so the site is H particularly suited to the use considering that it's um able to adequately utilize this existing structure um and it also Services the General Welfare by uh diversifying the Township's housing stock in terms of the negative criteria uh applicants have to demonstrate that the proposed uh variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without any impairment to the township Zone plan and zoning ordinance in terms of the public good um while two family dwellings are not permitted in the vn2 vill restricted Village neighborhood Zone the exist existing use of is in keeping with the character of the surrounding neighborhood as I mentioned it's a similar lot size and there's no um improvements uh proposed to the building um see um again any modifications would be for uh the benefit of the circulation um to from and within the site uh the use also provides for additional rental housing within an existing structure so no new development um with sufficient parking and uh minimal impacts on adjacent properties uh that the applicant uh would be willing to uh mitigate with screening and anything recommended by the board uh in so with regard to substantial detriment to the Zone plan or zoning ordinance um so I did review the uh master plan goals and objectives uh in the context of this project um and I found that there are four specific goals of the master plan um especially in terms of land use and housing that are Advanced by this project the first being uh to maintain conserve and enhance the special character of the countryside and historic Villages which have made Bedminster Township an attractive place for many generations and manage future development to preserve the rural character again no side improvements are proposed um the second goal that I founded is Advanced by this project is to protect maintain and enhance Bedminster unique sense of place which includes diverse res residential neighborhoods next is to establish development densities and intensities at levels which do not exceed the planning capacity of the natural environment and current infrastructure and finally uh the last goal that I found that the project advances is is to maintain a reasonable diversity of housing to serve households of all ages and sizes within a reasonable commuting distance of places of employment so the omission of the two family dwelling as a permitted use in the vm2 zone uh it can be reconciled with the length of time that the use has been in existence without any um apparent uh incidents uh in combination with the advancement of numerous Township master plan goals and objectives uh with these considerations in mind uh the D1 use variance relief being requested Ed uh can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without uh substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and Zoning Orland that concludes my test any questions standing no we'll open up to public we're going to open up to the public for questions of this witness so Frank this is where I was asking the question before so when we go through this why don't why don't oh you want to let's do questions directed here but Frank had some guidance in his letter so I want to just follow through with Frank's Guidance with respect to I I just want to close out the cross-examination of this Witness by the public just for ease of before we go to public I wanted to ask you a question okay right that's that's I I I guess I had too too long of a pregnant pause talk rich is the question for this witness the question is for this witness but I want to clarify the the nature of the proofs that you are recommending proofs that I've described that are needed are the proofs that she just addressed okay so so I'm go where I'm going with the area the area is it doesn't mean that you have to adopt what she stated she has tried to address his comment of his report okay so we didn't one of the things one of the things that we did not talk about is the hardship that this may present they're not they're not they this okay it's not a hardship no request there is no there is no there was no if we deny this application let me put it my own way and then you can tell me that I'm wrong okay I'm how about we do that all right we can tell you in your WR first okay I don't even know if I got it out of my mouth yet stop telling you all right so the applicant will suffer no it doesn't matter maybe it doesn't okay how do you know the applicant will suffer you don't know that I mean you do you want to ask your own question I'm trying to ask a question here would be helpful to me go ahead ask question I'm not here to be questioned no ask the question so if there's no measurement for if our focus is totally on the negative criteria it's not no it's not on she had to demonstrate their good burden is to demonstrate that there are there's no detriment to the to the Zone plan number one one is the positive criteria which means that she's got to demonstrate that in this particular case there are special reasons that justify the granting of the variants and she's offered three purposes of the municipal land use l which are typically where we go to find those special reasons whether you believe they are sufficient to to carry the day you have to evaluate them but she made a linkage between those statutory references and the proof she has toate and then the second part as you said Richard I'm sorry you've been waiting for this answer for a while there are also an enhanced Bur appr with regard to the negative criteria and that includes consideration as to whether or not in the course of having the master plan reexamined over time why if there were a reason to change that part of the ordinance why has it gone unchanged until now why why don't we permit that and one of the most challenging things of this about this application ordinarily in 1987 somebody says you're not allowed to do that and 19 by 1988 something's been done about it it's either been enforced one way or corrected by an application to the board or something so it's a little challenging to hear that we're how many years but but to Kathy's point we have specific goals with respect to the preservation of uh right and when the vn2 Zone was crafted in part because we didn't want to provide the same level of commercial opportunity as it as it by right development opportunity that you get in the village neighborhood Zone which was intended to be more intensive we also wanted to permit beneficial economic uses that would allow someone to retain the existing streetcape so keep those buildings pretty much at the size and shape that they were in but allow them to be used for something that might make money rather than the complaint we heard where you're living on a state highway it's getting busier all the time that sort of thing so so so my position then separate from my question then my position then is that we have we're not changing any of that all that is remaining in place exactly the way it was configured perhaps in 1987 uh I don't know what changes have been made since that point but there's been no change we already have I know we're not talking about presidents here but we already have two family in the neighborhood so we haven't changed the street scape beyond the questioning I I think you did a great job I'm in support of this application really yeah really tell us all right we were gonna open it up to this witness to the public so does anyone have a question for the plan for the plan and and now is that the last witness Tony yes okay so now it can be questions of this last witness and testimony or comments and and then it will be over except for closing by Mr sparo if he wants one okay do you see anyone J um are there any are there any people in the public who including the gentleman who waited before who would like to either ask questions of this witness or gives testimony about the application and please please come forward sir you're right here you asked you were trying to before um you don't have to ask questions you can just testify if you'd like to good job um so again Greg Kenya I live across the street from the subject property um listening to the full application and um being in the neighborhood for quite some time living in Far Hills and in Bedminster I've personally always recognized the home to be a two family home um we talk about a lot of lot coverage and things like that in regards to cars pulling and out so when I'm obser when I have observed the property from across the street um and multiple families living in it there's never been any issue with people pulling out of the property or backing out on to 202 um Believe It or Not 202 is actually a pretty quiet road with the exception of people coming into school and leaving school uh at 9 o' you'll see me out there at the picnic table okay um nonetheless in the front the driveway is so wide I know that you can't really tell on the plan here but you make a k turn within the driveway itself I mean your bumper goes over the lawn a little bit but your tires never leave the driveway you can pull in if you wanted to do that um I've never seen any cars parked on you know I wouldn't want to have Camaros up on blocks in front of my house you know when I live in Bedminster as well and that's not not What's Happening Here we do have properties on the street that do have parking in front of the homes uh multiple homes across the street have cars parked in front of them driveways paved gravel driveways we have dog care facilities we have businesses that our cars are in front of the buildings but this property does not have that the cars are tucked on the North side over by the stairwell going up to the second floor and car gets parked right by the covered porch and two cars going back uh they've always been able to pass each other on the gravel drive I've never seen any issue um the property next door is also a two family home they actually have a narrower driveway there's a small Garage in back but uh they also manage going back and forth we also have uh Apartments down the street on the uh above the U office planning I don't know the name of the business used to be blue buly not the two dental offices have Apartments over them too yeah they have Apartments I mean this is I think one of the biggest things that you touched on in your testimony um is that nothing is changing here Mr and Mrs mise they've actually improved the property and made it better without changing the aesthetic of what it looks like if you would drive by this property you wouldn't know it looks exactly the same nothing has changed nothing has changed for 40 years remember uh the past is the past doesn't matter what you guys decide here today but even if a letter was set in 1987 it's probably been used like that since 1957 okay I mean so um without standing on a soap box or anything I am in support I am a neighbor I'm in in the community I don't believe this is going to have any detriment and it's only positive what's happening as long as it's back out yeah listen it doesn't matter it like listen it doesn't back out full out listen I burn out you know I go out sideways we go all different ways on but thank you for your time and I appreciate it good luck with your decision thank you for com hey can question it's okay I wanted to support what Greg was saying please say your name Kelly rakovic 121 Somerville road please go ahead Kelly I want to support what Greg is saying I feel like next door and you know if it's still maintaining everything it's been maintaining we're totally in support of it um you know like we feel like whatever is best in terms of keeping the charm of Bedminster but also knowing it's a two family house but our only concern is that we just want to maintain our safety as far as our children and where the driveways would be but also the water runoff that we talked about and all those kinds of things but with that all being you know understood we're in support of it because we feel like you know they've been good neighbors they're still maintaining the charm but we just wanted to say how we feel about it thank you thank you K can I ask zuzan a question they've mentioned that they are other two family homes up and down are they approved two family homes Suzanna do you know um so I would not feel comfortable answering that because honestly unless a permit comes in I don't really go and research each property um to find out so there could be some that have prior approvals or you know pre-existing non-conforming but I wouldn't be able to just give you an accurate answer um I might be able to help you there Tim two of the apartments are on top of both of the dental offices that I know almost assly went through site plans to convert them from homes to dental offices so there's precedent that we have allowed this yes okay in those situations it's commercial use medical use apartment on top no prior variance or approval is precedential for purposes of zoning variance cases the law has no bar consider other cases as precedential um it's good to know all the facts so you have anything further um closing statement the only thing I'll uh I'll suggest I'm not going to address the uh the variance issue I think the board has had the benefit of expert testimony has the benefit Mr Bish's report U and uh maybe most importantly the comments of the only two neighbors that uh showed up and both expressed uh their opinions in favor of the application I would I would just ask if after hearing the calculation of the numbers Mr Ferraro would be comfortable if the board is to act favorably upon the application to work with our engineer to come up with a design to uh add a curn or parking area behind the patio uh we would also defer to Mr Ferrero if he felt that some storm water improvements were necessary because of the nominal amount of uh pavement that's being added and also a landscape buffer we would defer to his discretion on whether he felt that was necessary I don't pull I know if you're comfortable with taking responsibility if the board's willing to give it to you're you're stretching their faith I'm stretch their faith in me oh I don't think so I don't think so thank you okay I think um so if the the board's ready make a statement deliberation time if the board's ready uh you want want to talk about it at all do you want to anybody have any comments like to make I'd like to make a statement or comment um most of the time when we're looking at variances we try to be very cautious and try to project what the future would be like at that location or with the changes that are being made in this situation we have we know exactly what the situation is was and probably will continue to be so there's really no change and um I'm okay with no change right now perfect Luke yeah I think while while Kathy's point is well taken that we always look at these in the context of what zone it's in now I I don't see this as being an issue where we're going to wind up with an apartment building on this lot it's a it looks like a single family home it's been a two family two unit apartments for some number of years already I don't think it's detrimental to the to the town and I think the planner made the case that it meets all the criteria need to anyone else anyone else have anything they like to comment no it might be appropriate to make the finding as Tom said because of the tabular r aspect of this you're you're basically accepting not just that it's okay because it's already here but it's okay because of some of the purposes that the planner said were Advanced by this including further diversification of the housing stock which would be occurring if you were approving this in a building that already existed even though it's been there for years and years so there are I I I think you just don't want it to sound like you just decided since it's not hurting anything it's okay and not that it's precedential in any way in the future but for your own purposes you know so you're going to make a finding I believe that the planner adequately addressed the proofs that will required trans the to right the right way yeah that Frank said it well you you remember that bichi case is applicable as the applicant has said and their witness has acknowledged and that means that if you grant the use variance in a zone that does not permit the use for a use that is of this type A use that is not allowed in the zone that you are required to make a finding that the enhanced burden of proof has been met and that you can re reconcile the fact that uh although there have been inquiries and considerations of changing the zoning in this Zone there have been no changes in the Zone by the township Committee in the P bn2 Zone and that uh this use to family is just not permitted whereas single family is permitted and whereas apartments are not even allowed uh in the bn2 zone which is different than the VN zone so what in order to make an affirmative approval or grant grant of an approval here you need to find that the affirmative criteria met and they did not TR try to demonstrate hardship which is not exactly a criteria a special reason for us experience there is one other type that's like a hardship it's called inutility for the Zone purposes they did not try to move make that proof they are merely trying to say to you that it meets a special reasons because they it is particularly suitable for the proposed use for a two family house and that they contend they meet the negative criteria and that medich standard so I'll craft a motion for you it sounded like without the additional parking if I understood it correctly and we'll see if you get five out of seven eligible members to vote in favor of this if it does not it's if it gets only four it's denied if it gets less than four it's denied and denial denial would be so right now unless you direct me otherwise the moving party directs me otherwise I'm going to propose a motion motion to uh approve a use variance with the variance plan as proposed but without any additional Paving or parking and no changes to the site um is there such a motion Tom what happens to the to the parking how do we get that implemented if you would like I I thought I understood you to and to be saying no changes so if the moving party would like to require the two parking spaces behind the uh patio as stated by Mr Ferrero and the Landscaping along the southern boundary uh and no other changes that's is Lou that that your motion Lou well yes if the if the goal is to just accomplish the k- turn why do we need two parts it's it's not just for the kurn it's also so you don't get cars railroaded into the garage where you've got a car that would be just for convenience though but but it's it's a big inconvenience if you're if you're in the in the car and need to leave the house at six o'clock in the morning and your and your wife is sound asleep no worse than it is today I mean even adding one spot would improve the circumstance I I I I understand it motion to approve with the changes with landcaping to be reviewed and approved by Mr barrero and we have second from Anna and roll call vote of the eligible seven members Mr travalini hi Mr Orana hi Mr gini hi Mr Leonard hi Mr odelius no Mr Walter no Mr first I vote here I don't think he does I'm so sorry chair got you I'm sorry okay Kathy oh Kath she's also I'm not doing Ste muted well do you have wait a minute seven four five six seven yeah I car number seven so so far we had four yeses two Nos and car you're a yes so five yeses so the use Vari does carry with the conditions you all very much appreciate it thank you and good luck thank you good luck thank you thank you thank you you're welcome I'll open up to board anybody Tom did you put this in our diddy bag I'm sorry what did you put this in our diddy bag that came from Frank suppos to have been attached to my memo to show you where those special purposes special Reas and purposes of the land LA and when she read it she told you about a e and G so if you look at those letters those were the things that you said you agree that she demonstrated that they okay yeah this is nice to have this this is good thanks question for you Tom about this though this is called the municipal land use law but then down in item D it talks about all these um other beneficiaries of the municipal land use law including the state I would think the municipality takes precedent over the state because it's called a municipal land use law is that not the case I really don't know what you're looking at so I got the municipal law is the state's um generosity to the municipality actually give them the perception that they have power yes that's what the municipal land ju will is they're pretending you have until they take it away until that's exactly right till they take it away and get ready for the next one A4 probably is getting released from committee today probably would' be a disaster for every municipality in the state except the uh so all right have a motion toj motion to second okay okay everybody good night C good night Gracie oh wow