this is still going to be the same Access Link correct we' I'm not here I'll back um okay so all right wait wait wait hold on a second here so this is just make sure that okay before you sign [Music] off sign no no surve license okay thank you very much okay bye bye to the open meeting please not the following all Vernard bur planning board meetings will be held in person in the meeting Hall on the second floor the princial municipal building at 166 mber Road meetings will be live streamed on YouTube with no opportunity for public comment if you're on YouTube members of the public wishing to offer comments or ask questions will be required to attend meetings in person YouTube live stream access for all meetings is youtube.com [Music] bbcream this link will be also be available on the agenda of each meeting which is posted on the burough website which is www berville b.org and on the burough Hall public bulleting board at least 48 Hours PR to meetings notice of these changes has also been emailed to the Burnell news and The Courier News by posting a copy on the bureau website and by filing a copy with the municipal clerk all on January 16 2024 it's the intention of the board not to continue any matter past 11: p.m. at any regular or special meeting of the board unless the motion is passed by the members then present to extend to a later specified cut off time and SS will be announced at the opening of each meeting in addition board does intend to begin a new hearing after 10 p.m. nor begin testimony testimony of a new witness after 10:30 p.m. any hearing conducted by the board is it quasi judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision the quum appropriate to judicial hearing must be maintained at all times roll call Mr Demarco is absent Miss Gardner here miss Geller Miss Geller is actually she's not on yet but she's going to participate on live stream but she understands she will not be voting this evening Mr Graham here Mr harwit here Mr McQueen is absent Mr sof here Mr Walden here and Mr zazarino yeah you have a quum Mr chairman thank you uh next item is meeting minutes first minutes are December 14th I'll you go for yeah I I um I looked at the minutes on the December 14th and the January 11th I've um talked to to uh pleas by phone made some minor adjustments and clarifications and other than that it seems fine to me on the minutes of the meeting of January 11th we you list to Detention of the professionals can you give me a page um page three shouldn't the names of the professionist be there that was one of the yes that was one of the things that we discussed it because it was a continuation from the prior meeting I had in my head that it was ongoing but now it absolutely needs to be identified okay good thank you so on the 14th page three and I just want to see what people remember in the middle of the page says the leaders will be located in the southern facade of the townhouse building so this is um 114 Claremont and the southern facade would be next to the driveway correct that's where we'd expect the utility okay great just wanted it was a little that was all I had for the 14th for the 11th uh the only interesting thing was on page five you stated that Mr simma left left the meeting and then he's doing all these extra activities after that so clearly I didn't leave he didn't leave um oh Mr Sim I've exited the zoom remote platform yes you're absolutely and I did did you you were just is that just extraneous like cuz I might have got up and walk around the room wait a minute was that was it I left the meeting at that point oh you have WR board member oh yeah you know what instead of saying Mr simoff exited it should say Mr Harin ex there we go thank you that's the 11 right after approval of the bylaws and before approval of the bills it's the middle of the page right here yeah oh so I had the wrong board member as well that explains a lot okay it was a great skill um on page seven it talks about on-site parking this was for the um moris Town affordable housing I think and it it says the on-site parking requirement is 46 off Street spaces and 48 are provided which is a reduction of two parking spaces did that mean they originally proposed 50 spaces I think it's true that's true it is true okay just wanted to double check yes and they that was to accommodate the trash comp Factor yeah yeah it's consistent it's just okay um applican has worked in good faith with the buau to coordinate providing access to and parking for the public Trail did they does anyone remember them actually providing parking for the trail access for sure but access okay we'll remove parking sorry that would be resolution the yeah maybe just follow up I I I don't remember them providing parking they could have discussed parking but I don't remember it them Prov in parking I thought that parking was going to be it could have been parallel parking on 22 on 202 think so no parment whatever in the right away I think it's posted no stopping probably I I I don't think it's resolved that's I think it's something that the buau has to decide what they're going to do especially park car across the street I thought they provided parking on on the south side and then they were able to walk through on their their sidewalk that was right next to the building but the south side is said property the South Side you mean the West Side the 202 right yes but isn't that a separate yeah that's not building I'm pretty sure no they did not provide parking okay but you check you should check the resolution and see if the resolution addresses it yeah okay okay great perfect um that was all I had so great great job oh thank you sorry a motion okay a motion vot y move the minutes of the meeting of December 14th and January 11th 20 December 14 2023 and January 11 2024 be accepted Mr with you you're not eligible to vote on the minutes okay so let's just do one at a time so do we have a second on the December 14th thank you uh all in FA no voice it's all in favor just a voice right all in favor uh any opposed abstain all right that carries uh I'll move the minutes of J 11 second all seconds all in favor I any opposed okay great that uh Communications NJ do sent us a note about work they're doing in bar Hills really right it's down doing stuff now too there water man going in there yeah putting the new hydrant in and connecting to the existing down the street okay there's a lot going on there so but it's just letting us know that there'll be traffic on through to okay um got done with that uh business of visitors not related to the agenda there's anybody here that wants to talk about something that's not on the agenda this is the first time you get you get to do that just identify yourself and come on down if you want to say anything no nothing good that's easy um old business uh we don't have old business uh new business we have two items the first is reviewing kind of a late breaking thing but reviewing an ordinance uh 2024 1995 um and in essence what this ordinance does is it allows the T the burrow to charge a fee for using burrow professional uh engineer services to um the planning board as and in supplementing or complementing our own professional engineering service with through CL um my only comment was it's it's got a hardcoded number value in it but that can be challenged in this to buy any any other comments on this um there's one comment that we probably want to be cautious about ensuring that whatever that the buau engineer is doing is very uh contained and and does not we don't want to be accused of any uh impropriety um you know regarding the application um it shouldn't happen but we we don't want them making uh really making judgment calls we want them Gathering data and providing information to our engineer yeah I would say that our Cas is usually know small single family Med board to sh in cases where an applicant might need to put a drywall in right that gets reviewed at the time um that they before the board but sometimes you know things change yes they have to move the dryw his brown want to have to redesign that system I think so field think in engineer hand it's a good example so anyway also for T do you have a you have a conflict the third party or an intermediary or something no if Bob has a conflict oh oh oh I see okay and the borrow engineer can be the the secondary okay coverage okay any uh I didn't see any typos in it but any other comment um this is just a consistency review right correct no we have a motion you're John it's a consistent he your opinion on this oh sure um this is where the statutory language is important it's not inconsistent because it's a broader standard and clearly this is not inconsistent because it's an administrative okay so it doesn't cause any conflict or any other issues with any planning [Music] documents it's not like you covering from that not covering okay gotta keep keep all right any motion Mo or I'll move the uh consistency with you not inconsistent consistencies we find the proposal not inconsistent with the plan yeah just like what M has written down okay okay a second second mat told me uh roll call take some credit Miss Gardner yes Mr Graham yes Mr Harwood yes Mr simov yes Mr Balon yes and Mr zazarino yes motion par thank you the next piece of new business it's I was here but is paying the bills um this one was a shocker because it's very large yeah um most it attributable appears to the um M AR Road mbrook mine Brook well both right mind BR and M that and burnard so it's there were three applications all um overseen essentially by RPM as the applicant and um so there was quite a bit of U representation and um for them as well as engineering work uh that had to be done for them and we try to get them accomplished quickly so you see a pretty condensed set of activities um for this spelling [Music] one any other comments on the bills or on motion I'll move to pay the bills totaling $ 23,812fanslike I'll second roll call Miss Garder I'm Sorry Miss yes Miss Garder yes Mr Graham yes Mr Hartz yes Mr simoff yes Mr Walden yes and Mr Z yes the motion cares okay so we're up to the main event which are the public hearings and the first hearing we have is Angela paletta and Adam is wi uh and this to do with U free properties and lot line adustment so you can introduce yourself what let me confirm for purposes of the record I did review their notice atav publication and service they were good evening my name is BR dandro I'm with the perm of dandro dandro and Baskin Ridge I represent Angela cetta and her husband Adam zg um this they are the cazetta and zgs own block 35 l 9 which is 99 C Drive Extension the other properties that this application relates to is blocks 46 lot 3 which is eight Spruce Drive owned by the canberg and lot 35 lot 901 12 Spruce Drive owned by uh John sour and carile albino uh I believe everybody's present here tonight um the uh I only represent uh cetta and Zig but the other property owners have consented to this application um this application uh basically a lot line adjustment seeking to revise the lot lines from a 198 7 subdivision the 1987 subdivision involved uh a rather oversized lot um that had un shape and most notably did not have any Frontage it did front on semi Drive Extension which is an old right of way um but over time um a dispute arose between the neighbors as to the various rights each property had in the way the right away the ability to maintain it and what so sort of restrictions applied to that and um the dispute escalated pretty high almost to the point to the brink of litigation that might involve all the parties in the town but we have reached an agreement to resolve the dispute and basically this lot line adjustment is that agreement that uh we feel we resolve all the issues between the neighbors so are you saying I think you're saying this that the subdivision the original was permitted for the the extension lot because of the right of way that existed in other words normally you can't have a loot that doesn't have Frontage so is that what enabled yes I mean basically why they did not call CI Drive Extension the road they enabled that to provide access uh and granted variances um most of the Varian resulting from that subdivision were the result of lack of fontage right um and the board you know approved that on both a hardship and a um I see to that the benefits outweigh the detriment analysis which they be cited in the um resolution approving it and the board did not insist on a private Drive agreement or anything like that was so when it was granted what was that considered just what was it considered orig so I did include two resolutions in the application on this um they basically said it's not a road um but uh it's a a right away that's provided they deemed real access to the property um one of the main things that this lot line adjustment is accomplishing is investing ownership in the property that's actually going to use the road right away currently lot nine uh would access the right of way but did not own it it was owned by um lot three the canberg lot all right and that's part of what the dispute is as to what rights lot n had to maintain that road to put graveled down so that when it got wet or snowy that it remained accessible um what we're now going to accomplish is transfer title to the right away to um the cetta lot um and that will relieve the other lots of any liability associated with the right of way and so 901 which is not 901 does not need access to the RightWay at all so n it needs minimal access because it's on its own technically both Lots 9 and 901 are technically LED right what's going to accomplish with this is not only transferring ownership of the right of way but making two distinct entryways on Spruce Place one for lot n and one for lot 901 there's currently an entry or a driveway cut for 901 that is shared okay and part of the agreement to resolve this dispute was to create two separate uh and distinct driveways with a little buffer between the two of them and that's what what the plans show so that's the right hand driveway going in that's part of the but that's 901 and as you go into the property the left hand driveway is going to be part of n lot nine correct correct so okay you know the lot line does result in some variances basically they're repetitive of many of the variances that were approved in the initial subdivision and in many cases these are improvements as to the overall condition and a decrease into the non-conformities and there's no issue with lot size and the Zone all the lots are remaining of conforming size okay great and there was some land swaps in order to accomplish that okay gotcha all right are there any drainage issues drainage easements not that I'm aware of it says there's a drainage EAS there right way yeah so there is a drainage uh yeah yes you're right and and just for for clarity this what we'll call right of away it's 99 CI Drive Extension there's a bit of a history in terms of what the deed documents say the parties are not seeking to revise that in any way or Grant any other rights or or take away rights with what those documents reveal just to um adjust the lot line amongst themselves okay and not best any other rights than anybody else other than what they're granting to each other be and you'll just record this as a lot line adjustment not as an easement it's going to be um an adjustment still have the right of way to testify we should swear in any of your it's a formality but that's what I would suggest you have why don't you she wasn't going to be our first one but she we can swear in yeah why do we Mr ald too sure all right if everybody could stand and raise their right hand our Consultants raise their right hand as well do all SAR affirm that any testimony you give in front of this board will be the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes yes great the intend the parties are going to exchange Deeds conveying the land back and forth disrupted you continue sorry presentation I think that's pretty much it from my introduction uh before we go to the witnesses other than we do need a waiver um for showing natural and man-made drainage features on the application a waiver from complete we should deal with that to establish jurisdiction on top notices completeness is something that needs to be done at the it's it's a minor item because it's a lot you're recommending I I'm fine yes otherwise the application is substantially complete everything else is okay so I would I would have the board make a motion to be the application complete at this time and then turn it over to their Witnesses right agreed agre we need a motion yeah you should motion I'll move we being the all in favor all in favor I anyos okay all right got that one uh at this point we would like to have Christopher Alders T yeah your first you said right so okay I'll just put this up here anybody can see it Bo can I don't know the audience can qualified as a engineer survey Sur just get the name and business location LIC Christopher ald I'm a licensed land surveyor with the firm of yville and alri been a licensed land surveyor in New Jersey since 1988 um been a partner with the firm of villa and a since 1997 and you must have testified before this I have but I can't remember the last time been a while so all right we accept yes so I guess I'll just give a a brief little summary of what the lot line adjustment looks like so these are the existing three lots this is lot line say it kind of as opposed to these just say the left hand side n here the existing lot n the C this is the existing 901 the easterly lot is existing 901 okay and I guess the lot has Frontage on Spruce Place right and that's light lot what lot three 47 lock 47 okay this is the only one of the three locks that has Road front that lot three is the only one that has Frontage so the two rear Lots lot n and lot 901 Cherry single driveway cut off of Spruce Place goes kind of directly into lot 901 off of that driveway cup then is a rather short leftand turn to a gravel road gravel drive that then has access to lot nine correct okay so I guess the dispute or the agreement among the owners are to the ownership of that RightWay or that should say that access driveway so the new lot is all of that drive that you just described contained in lot 901 or is some of that over the lot three um it wanders across the property line it does cross the property it does it it it ERS along the property line but okay the majority of it does exist on lot three on three okay W until it makes the turn and goes up to the house onot the new not but the new property line is pretty much going to follow the existing rabit driveway pretty close EXA very close so follow the edge of the driveway meaning the new property line the new property line closer to the street so that the or there's a new gravel driveway when you say Street you mean the RightWay or the no the real street okay it's not the driveway is not being changed at all driveway is remaining exactly where it is L and the lot lines were crafted to okay so you just said that most of the driveway is until it gets to lot n most of the driveway is on lot three that's what you're telling as it exist as it exists and if you change the lot line it will all be in the ownership of lot n all in lot nine which means the lot line is seeding square footage from lot three at least in that area from lot three to lot nine correct okay I'm a little confused you say it's it's all on mostly on lock three it's all on lock three today n now have that leg leg off of it is that what is that not the driveway the right away for the driveway is all mostly unlock tree right well and that show is that shown as a 13t wide Stone Drive yeah so it's like a St to go out he say it's all going to be on lot n it's going to become part of lot n no lot n is being expanded to include fo sh like here right all right correct but it doesn't coincide with the 15t drainage e it does not H 15t wide drainage even just so you know there is no evidence of it there are no visible structures in it it's it's there if there's something underground I I it's not it's not apparent that there is something there a 15t wide dra drain eement that is located entirely on the existing lot three okay which probably is going to change a little bit but let's see okay gotta so then what we're proposing then is this would be the new configuration of lot three would hard to explain but so lot three would give up Frontage at at its most easterly portion of okay okay of um Spruce Place the first 9 of that would be accessed and become part of lot 901 not 90 901 yeah no no no no said 90 ft about 90 ft they would have about 90 ft of Frontage correct okay shap piece yeah maybe you could point out the little tail on that why it's 90 ft so if you look at the configuration of lot three now it comes all the way to here right and it has Frontage all the way to there correct so and that total Frontage is how long the entire Frontage yeah have to add up the number perspective the entire front along Spruce is pretty substantial must be like 500 ft 304 304 that's more than that it's 250 250 ask okay all right actually so then the frontage on lot for lot 901 would begin all the way here and come a Spruce Place to here which would be approximately 90 right the property line for lot n lot n would be in this here and it only had well it has be adj to it but would have enough room for a drive basically to get access to the new but not the required 50 ft of Frontage that's required in the fville ordinance and that's 35 ft correct that would be then a new driveway cut at that location right and then the driveway would come off and so 125 ft of Frontage is being given up by lot that is correct okay so then that would be the exist or the proposed lot nine one lot nine would have 35 ft of Frontage and run through this little whatever you want to call it quter whatever through here and it would follow the existing driveway and then up into going and all that Corridor that you just described is now going to be part of lot nine that's correct none of it is lot three and none of it on lot 901 that is correct okay and then when we did that it made the area of lot three non-conforming so we then proposed that this lot line here be adjusted so that all three lots stay conforming as far as area I okay shap conform they're not exactly the same but they all are conform for area are they they're the same as what they were no before no they're they're different SI slightly different sizes yes but okay and a building Circle I your building Circle still they do um I I did check today and obviously N9 and 91 are very obvious but yes you can fit7 foot diameter circle in the proposed lot are you proposing any fencing or anything in that kind of no rear section is just open who maintains it a spike a lock three Spike on the back is that area wooded right now this area here yeah the lot that's going to be added to lot correct yes and it's on the um west side of the driveway basically for lot nine yes the driveway is sort of above itself and there' be de restrictions which would prevent that right that R we being paid yes understand it that's an agreement amongst the owners correct the proposed agreement amongst the owners actually the town because of the drain easement the town doesn't want to P right doesn't want it P okay okay want need to remain a gravel driveway there other de restriction that speed I think yes yes that's kind of odd a gravel dve driveway is not considered perious considered impervious it's impervious so especially you know 13 ft wide so if they will agree to being gravel in that's fine the town it could have been paid so I I I don't know anything that says it can be paid corre that just I'll represent that was a material term of the settlement agreement among the part is at it State gra okay it's just that long astion as long as they say no it's be PID they're all agreeing that's fine just long they aware that gravel driveways tend to meander a little bit more P well the gravel tends to move around anyway each time you lay it down so other question uh the utilities to the uh house on um lot N9 how do they get back to the property the electric and C Drive Extension okay the on utility PO on and it's an overhead drop to the uh building yes is gas natural gas already running to these no there's no gas okay what else did you want to say that we interrupted um so the the variances there are some variances invol variances are there is insufficient Frontage on supposed lot N9 but okay it's insufficient but before there was none so we're sort of making that condition but what was the frontage in the in the scy lot extension right away that that it's not really Frontage to them it's um it's just an easement and they really do not have Frontage but was a 50ft wide easement well that's what enabled that lot to be created that 50 foot easement that's otherwise it would have been rejected and the subdivision would not have been allowed it's not a my property is not part of the subdivision my property was there from 1940 oh the original L was Lot nine and then they allowed the subdivision of 901 which makes sense1 to occur and it's not a 50 foot right away I think it's only a 15t right away that's on the maps yeah it's 50 on the other part of the EXT shouldn't relive SS of the past but okay that probably shouldn't have been allowed that's right so Chris what you saying is on the front edge for lot n required is 50 ft um currently there's zero and what we're proposing now is 35.2 Ft that's correct right so and the drive width that you just because it's part of the same concept the drive width that the curve cut that you're proposing in that 35 foot Frontage is what how wide is the the gravel I guess drive going to be at that point I would say it's about 20 ft it is 20 ft which we well that's the opening at the curve line it's going to narrow down taper down to the well I mean related to the 35 seet that's so they're going to have a 20 foot cut but we would have asked for at least 18 anyway right yeah I mean to make that turn in oh that's the other problem okay not would would we consider ping the first certain distance so that the gravel doesn't get on to Spruce blades well the gravel wouldn't get on to Spruce blades because of the pitch the pitch is down from Spruce plates onto the driveway so oh okay unless came up in the wheels or the tires gravel wouldn't SP onto sc's place you could require that within the right okay it's going to be interesting you should think about how you're going to maintain that gravel driveway if it's pitched like that I I agree it's you're not likely to see a lot of stone on Spruce but you're going to have to somehow keep graveling if that were to be paved that would require the consent of the other property owners is not consistent the current agreement I don't know what their position on that would be something to think about six or seven political RightWay would require a new agreement excuse me if you paid the six s fet of the space right between curine and it would require an amend to our mean right it's it's comeing practice in the p right or something you know Pap something so it's kind of outside of the agreement is what you're saying it's in a way it's a special place next to you end stopping as you're pulling out you start up and the [Music] gravel the to the Road Lot 901 yeah 901 ACC to lot 901 the first 91 is paid is the access to lot 901 so I'm sorry so there already is an element that's paid is that in the curve in the existing curve cut that will become part of lot 901 is but you're saying no Paving for any of the curve cut for lot 9 new access I think that's a function of the agreement between the owners yeah that's probably going to be a difficult thing to manage if it's pitched like you're saying oh don't worry this it's pitched into the into the lot well how do you keep gravel on the pitch you can't well so lot owner nine needs to think about that whether they're going to anticipate that they're they're going to need to pave that most likely or put pavers in you know attractive pavers or something it's not going to be able to survive it's pure gravel is that something your clients would consider I think something that needs further discussion amongst the other property owners so it's can I can I ask a question sure thanks are you asking a question of the witness or are you going to give a statement to the board no I'm asking you a question okay you you want to allow Mr chairman yeah yes his name say his name John sour I own lot 901 um are we are we just talking about like a six foot apron into the new driveway I think so I mean you have to be the site you know best what's on the site but you're clearly adjusting it because I think it sounds like your new drive right is kind of where the existing one was sounds like that and we're you're kind of Shifting over lot 's Drive no yeah I understand you know it's been everything you know we were we were blocking them from Paving new driveway C because we we're on a lower plane right and we don't want it to we already get flooding we don't want it to flood further um so six feet if we're talking something like that of papers of papers I suppose that's fine I I need to check with my wife and is that the way I understand it so currently lot nine accesses Spruce across a portion of the pave driveway right that the pave driveway is ours EX for that driveway lot n and lot 901 share a current road cut correct the road and the road cut at least the front of the road Cuts page right correct they come in on a on a gravel road to your drive and your drive is got Paving they don't come well we don't they haven't been coming in that way for years helicopter this is since the dispute arose there's explain but the SC Drive goes in the opposite direction a long way too uh and since the dispute has arisen the cetta have been using the opposite direction which has its complications and greater difficulties oh kind of like traces at the back of the property for l n it goes off the side of lot n in the back of um um oh that you said that wasn't being used used for two years I not maintained because it hasn't been used for 50 years well that's the whole thing that yeah allowed a lot to be alow a lot created so you have been using that the past two years it hadn't been used up until two years ago okay all right well that's Town property some of it belongs to um Neighbors on Locust and some is T okay and that was part of the dispute and that's why it's not currently being used because es high levels and trying to keep the piece till this is resolved okay so technically that's what they should have been using anyway for two years more than two years that's what you should have been using as access now you have this other method which is interesting and it's great that you're all talking and you're going to try to allow a a more beneficial arrangement for lot nine uh instead of having to use the the one on the extension okay that's great that's all right uh anyway how how much RightWay is there on uh Spruce this tracks back to the question about it's a 50 the M okay it looks like it's about a 30 foot wide Road and a 50 foot RightWay 10 on either side so papers in the towns right away is okay I guess I would be a maximum of 10t I guess it's for you guys to figure out we can pass it without the answer okay it's just we're just trying to make sure everyone's going to be happy after it's done so we can we can address it as proposed if you need to uh if someone wants us to be more explicit the stipulation we can also do that well I mean I think you would be you would be either asking them to stipulate to condition on the papers in the right of way as a condition of approval or you wouldn't so it's up to the applicant to either explain that they're proceeding to a vote tonight as proposed or whether they're willing to offer that stipulation I I think the kazas are okay with papers in the right way correct and it's a question with the other applicants yeah it's a a it's an 801 question I think they could maybe take five minutes to convene and Talk Amongst each other if if the chairman would prer that whatever I I think we're fine with it as long as you know it's no more than say 6 to 10 PT yeah okay within the right away so you can create a stipulation correct you would do right that right that would be a condition of approval that the board would condition any favorable outcome of this application with the applicant or responsible party to install uh pavers for the 10 ft or so within the they be allowed to we're not commanding them to right no I think we have to I would I would recommend that it be paid I think it's setting a bad precedent putting papers in the WR it's done all the time might done without permission the choice well that's I guess the point yeah it's up to you it's one thing to stipulate that it would be allowed it's another thing to stipulate that it must be done right that's the board's I'll the condition however you let's get some feedback from B because this road is is curve Spruce Run is is curv I don't see a problem Paving it with assall or with the papers there's a problem with papers on a road that's not current they tend to get K up by plows so that's really know prefer to the board I don't see it either way they're both going to keep the gravel from getting kicked onto the road which isain or removed from the driveway that's most likely what's going to happen that's I just would point out that there are notes on the plan that are looks like there are settlement notes that may or may not be conditions of the board I think board need to go through those so for example must remain gravel that board condition or that should be take an office plan and let them have their own well the stipulation could override that statement and the key is you so I guess my point is that the board might not want to impose a condition that this driveway can never be paid right 5 10 years from now new Property Owners I don't know oh the entire driver that's that's what it says on this plan not just the sir okay I mean that might be something that the board doesn't want to make if you wish that's hard to get removed well there was casual statement about the theoretical the drainage yeah but they this is just my opinion they could make their own re okay does the board it's just a question does the board want to keep that as a condition of this approval right that grael you has to I don't if we take it out then it's just the discussion of the right and if sometime down the road they find that this driveway is moving all over the place the snow you know then they have an agreement between the two laot owners and they they pay it they've come they've come in with a settlement among the three land owners with five basically proposed stipulations that they've all agreed to okay that agreement between them is enforcable regardless of what the board does so if the board looks at this and say says I don't I don't think it's necessary that we need to condition the approval the gravel the widening the uh 10 m hour speed limit that those don't have to be conditions the agreement remains enforcable amongst the parties so the board says that's not appropriate we're not going to make those conditions that's fine and I can represent that if the board does not make these does not want to include these conditions the parties are going to privately incorporate them into their documents we make them if they ever wanted to change by agreement they would have to go back to the board they could just if assuming parties could agree they they could resolve them amongst themselves but that's what the part's prepared to do I think the only thing that we talked about right here which we'd want to override in the agreement and stipulate to is that the skirt you know that right at the the street that that 6 to 10 foot section whatever can in fact be paid and probably your agreement says no to that right now so yeah it would not have that carved out in it but I think the parties are agree that exception that's gonna be a condition yeah well subject to them to it but yes okay to 10 but it's but what do you want to say I would say can we make it 6 to8 so there's no chance we go right that's the difference just make it up to eight okay up up to eight up to eight need Z eight it's six oh like they could put a one in one foot piece of Pap open so you want a minimum size piece of [Music] Pap but anyway you were going through I I think the list of going through the we can just run through the list of variances there you go so um let's see so we did the lot Frontage for lot n um next is the driveway setback for lot n Chris if you could explain that it's required 10 existing is zero and proposed is zero so this is not anything that's being exacerbated it just is what it is corre par agre that the in the ordinance you need to have the driveway no closer than 10 ft property right parties have agreed that they don't want to do that they've agreed that the property lines need to follow the driveway closely and they don't want they don't want to exchange the extra 10 Fe so would be be that the driveway needs to stay on the property uh within the property Pointes that would be the expectation of the applicants correct correct so they're going to have separate and distinct entrances for lot line and 91 and the entrance will be contained within their own property the key is unlike today you're driveway can't lot n your driveway can't go on lot 3's or lot 901's property that's correct that has to stay on all's new property everybody will access to their own property yeah but it'll stay there it won't WIP you know Shi their driveway is going to stay on their property correct okay and the neighbors will tell them if it doesn't then they'll be back here are you going to put any markers in the Sur the survey I mean I got a gigantic driveway that that forever and and it's got all these different survey points are you going to Mark in any way while you have the surveyor I guess are you going to Mark in anyway what your property lines look like any kind of a marker just curious you're in the midst of monuments you mean you're putting M somewhere there are none along the proposed driveway now no it's not the property lines don't exist so there wouldn't be any markers it helps to just have even one you know like like on either side of lot 's new properties that contains the driveway at one point on your survey your new survey to have a marker place is really helpful I I do plan to do that because I need to make sure that the um curb cut the company I'm hiring for the curb cut knows put in the and then and the other issue is when you plow yeah you should for the plow guys yeah plow guys then certainly ask you to put the stakes up you know if you get a just a thought nothing that's all we're just trying to all right Chris the next next variance next variance for lot n is the um providing a access to Street shall be at at least 50 ft wide from Carter yeah we under the agreement of the three owners we can't make we can't meet 30 or 50 ft they're only they're only willing to allow them 35 and this gets back to is the driveway you're using for the last two years is that a 50 foot wide no no this is another pre-existing this is the corridor so it's not 50 it's 13 so the quor is has to be 50 yes and it's only 13 and that's again that's a stipulation of the agreement between the owners similar but two separate right two different okay and lot 901 has the same looking for is maybe it does no that one doesn't have that um and then last we normally request on a flag lot we normally request 50 foot access fundage no matter how you get it right and you can yes you can you can have a l you know on a mountain and you somewhere you got 50 foot access to a load that's all I was looking at before we move off of that point but since you have 50 ft for a lot High one your Corridor is not again I I'm only I'm only showing what I was told to show again if it's a variance it's it's a variance and it's less than 50 ft possibly but again it's more than what was there origin you're saying 901 doesn't have that so they have the frontage they meet the frontage requir because that c whatever you call that narrow inches it in it's technically not 50t a scale on it oh I've listed it in I'll report and would that mean that lot n's new driveway would have to be further to the left somehow well to make the quarter what what right now they don't have access C they're going to get about a 40 foot yeah I think it's I think it's is it 35 ft on the plants that were propos talking 9 talking 901 that's 91 90 ft you said well the frontage is 90 ft but because of this area right here it's not a this is the corter it's not 50 ft right that's your point technical but they should and they should ask for the variance how do emergency vehicle access the uh [Music] that would have to be the applicants I have never been there we we've had fire trucks come in to our property no problem before we had a carbon did they come the back way or did they come how did they get there to 901 I mean it's it's pretty wide it might not be 50 oh yeah 901 but why not for fire truck and what about to nine today in the last few years hone how would a fire truck today access it they would have to go down the extension the extension sure extension is only 13 ft well you know technically for a fire truck to get through but I think um previously I think there was a um the fire department I think did do a driveby uh to see because you go down Spruce the culdesac and and come into the property in a in an easier angle here whatever if the fire department was okay that's my understanding see or anything like that but that's what iOS doesn't really change driveway just kind of gives them a new one formally okay it's just changing the property on own stuff that already exists right it's still there the way you're accessing it today you're not proposing eliminating the access you wouldn't use it but you're not proposing eliminating it no okay and then chryst asked for lot nine um there's a shed that's an existing shed just sheding back that is non-conforming now it's not being changed not there is no this application does not affect the shed at all so the same lot line correct the same lot line was that shed when this when I guess 901 was separated from n no it had nothing to do with that subdivision didn't exist when 901 was created so they must have allowed it obvious it does show on the existing or the subdivision plan from believe it was 19870 so 1987 said was there next moving on to lot 901 variances um it requires a maximum lot coverage variance correct 901 where uh it says required it does it is it does require an impervious coverage but we are making it better than it was so it it it is we got a total coverage [Music] 149 propos 13679 these people and required is less than 11,958 so that condition is is being improved the non-conformity is being reduced and how is that happening that you're reducing sorry if I was distracted because they're they're picking up lot area from the driveway entrance oh okay percentages you're not changing anything about the driveway you're not changing anything about your impervious no just that they're picking up lot area and next lot 901 needs a driveway setback variance where how much was it what's the what's the overage on the approv uh about 2000 sare feet which is on a basis of okay you're 2,000 over your limit which was the limit is 11,958 and you're 14 the existing is 14 249 so it's being reduced significantly 1700 now wait a minute you said that the reduction was a percentage so you're actually going to reduce some of the impervious the actual square footage of the imperious for lot 901 okay and you're reducing it how I'm just missing the proposed is 13,000 can you show on that [Music] 9 like yeah the driveway is coming off a lot 901 so even though almost all of it's on lock three today some of it's on 901 and that's being mitigated essentially that's correct and that's where the reduction essentially is the square footage fress that was your last one you think oh that sorry you're going through for 901 is that your just going through the bar of 901 so moving on to the next one is the driveway setback the 10 FTS required the existing is zero and proposed is zero so there's going to be no change to that right Chris that's correct uh setback from your whatever the right hand side I guess the easterly property it's zero now and normally it's supposed to be 10 ft away from that easly property line for 901 and you're requesting the existing condition be carried it's staying right where it is okay and then next slot 901 needs a variance um for the corridor um which is required 50 feet and what's being proposed is 35 ft that's there is now none and we're proposing 35 so then next on 901 um this isn't really a variance I think it was a note I think the engineering comments about the setback um which [Music] um yeah I guess in the resolution which I didn't have when iar the map that that the setback required on lot 901 would be 100 ft um we show it as A5 fo yard setback but the existing dwelling OS dwelling would still be 106 so if that's a stipulation we want to put on there we can certainly change the setb back to 100 instead of 75 and the lot would still be conformed would be no so you're still in compliance with the old condition that was in the prior resolution correct so yeah if you're not if you don't need to Le from it then that's it well they're not they over oh it is something theoretically you could right so the lot line is changing yes so um if you require you're going to require to maintain a 100 foot setback I think that setback line is going to move closer to the house so well they have it at 106 it at 75 this board put a condition on it make that set back 100 it says 106 says 106 it is 106 now so even if we made it 100 it was still be okay so you're so they were allowed to have 75 by the prior whatever not they allow they were required to have 100 yeah yeah that that's what they're supposed to have but the prior agreement pering them have is there going to be a new condition to require 100 foot setback from the proposed law yes so we can no we can we can add that as that they need to stipulate that the as you say the new setback will be 100 ft and that would override any prior agreement on a setback being smaller than that basically all we're doing that is continuing the condition in the old resolution even though the lot changing so I can was the old resolution 100 ft how 75 75 is the standard that's sh plan but the old resolution required 100 and that's what I said I didn't have the resolution show what required in so we'll re we'll reaffirm that they'll stipulate to it that it's no big deal it's already there that's what they're living by we're going to have them culate to it being at 100 ft Y and no no sweat that's okay I mean sounds like that's okay you've got 100 ft today that's that's your lot and the one I mean if it's going to be conforming then Tony it's 9 106 something yeah 1069 106.9 it's it's more than conforming it's just that the prior resolution said you're going to be more than conforming you're going to be 100 ft right and you are6 right and all we're all we're suggesting is that that 100 foot requ requirement be Contin and carried forward yeah that's fine as long as okay then the spirit of the whole team whatever okay so that's it as to all the variances that we require for 901 or all of the for the entire application lot three lot three does not require any vares correct not that I'm aware of um there were um some engineering comments just as to your table um that they wanted Revis Yes we made several revisions and now and then we miss the number so we can correct absolutely will correct any discrepancies or inconsistencies in the zon table to be front and um just just we want to be sure we're okay with it so lot nine and you have it on your plan there's a setback stated that it's 87 a half feet from the new front lot line which is the one that just got spiky carved out right and I want to be sure that lot nine did not have a 100 foot requirement as part of the existing agreement that house was existing I think it's a prior subdivision so and the good news is it's more than 75 anyway right that it's from the front front lot line that Dimension it's a setback from the front lot line yeah it's an angle so it's technically not back to C D maybe you know someone perversely looking at it but the it sounds like everything's okay so to 901 100 foot only 100 foot was only 901 there was none and and the new I mean if they taken that spiking Spike and put it up closer to the nine property n house we'd be sitting there saying wait a minute your front yard setback is not good enough but they did they only put the spike up far enough where however one might interpret the front yard setback for the house that's 87t which was more than 75 which is what applies to this s right so you're covered okay that that was it then for that so any what's next is the planner had wanted some testimony as to the hardship requirements as to shape uh a lot so Chris you just describe it's a lot having unique shapes I can't testify I'm not a planner but doesn't appear to me like there's any negative effect to the neighborhood or anything we not nothing's being changed other than one cut being added but again I can't testify out of final I'm not one but doesn't appear to me like there's any negative criteria to the neighborhood if I could I think that um the re that they requesting is best encapsulated under the C2 standard the benefits uh of granting this outweigh any detriments I don't see any negative impacts by virtue of the fact that nothing much is changing it's providing it's minimizing a on 911 uh and resolving internal issues that you know plan is supposed to promote Harmony that's what they're trying to do and there's very little uh impact associated with the lot lines really nothing's changing other than lot lines we can't see but there are positive planning points in terms of getting that skirt paid so that box is not going to kick up and those types of things fall under the better better planning alternative analysis that's required in C2 and supp and are there any conditions of the original subdivision that have to carry through to [Music] this that's to the extent that this was this was already filed you know you would think if there are ongoing conditions yes they need to be carried over um well that's what I'm asking this was implemented so I I'm not seeing the only thing the resolution only had two conditions and we addressed the extra 25 foot that the board at that time required nothing else in the old resolution from my view is Rel okay well that was usually when I look at that former resolutions I I try to identify the things that I would put rep for example PRI these prior conditions are still valid over no like payment with a a wagon of hay or kind of stuff and when I get into situations where there are conditions that I think are ongoing I ask that those resolutions be filed so that there's public noce that they're ongoing and that's not well that's that's basically what I was asking yeah it's it's a good question okay um does anyone from the public have questions for this witness okay come on down and ask for stand on the X Out name Sir John Bon 36 Locust Drive my property BS the town's portion of the right of way see any extension sir you spell your last name please e r t o n r my question is does this all these variances this agreement does this create now a 10 Spruce Place is that what explain to you it will remain as 99 see Drive Extension my main concern is what is the what is the result of this uh the right of way that goes across the locus property and the town properties what is going to happen to that and in doing this does it create a throughway from Spruce all the way to sen which we have fought hard against Way Beyond my so okay so theoretically someone could uh get off Spruce go around this private driveway uh up almost to the house and turn left onto extension be trespass it is private property be trespass it could be no trespassing very the right away is only in favor the right away is not public right the right away in favor of the property right which right away the parties are not seeking to Grant the public any additional rights by virtue of this lot line adjustment there is a right away there that's on filed maps and the parties have disputed what that means among themselves um changing anything who does right away is it a public right away or is it a right away benefited properly I can address this the the the only way that the public gains access and becomes a public road is if the buau accepts dedication of it this is a private driveway just because a right of way may exist on a filed map does not in any way entitle the public to use it if if the public were to go on this private be TransPass it would be the same thing just because there's a right away on a file map there there's it would be the same thing someone turned down your drive Mr chairman yeah it would be the same they get lost and I think if you look at the road cut for what nine the right away really uh not barely goes into the road cut so it's barely cre it's not really creating any public access this would be private just is this is private property that's the point private property remains private property and yeah you know I'd like the right that right away to go away but quite honestly that would be great if it could well go up that way and you still need to have the property owner the nine property owner can put a barrier between their property and the right away that's on the public lands that does not have to be a through okay common you know like people put barriers up there and certainly the drive off of spruce is absolutely private public not sh gas but we're not allowed on that we've noted in our application that there's no intent to create any additional public rights here this is a private agreement amongst the three Property Owners right okay nonetheless the property owner has their own rights so unilaterally they can apply yeah I mean I just want see cars trucks or anything else going grael and spikes there's enough ruts in it right now Bob who says that it couldn't be improved flat out it's flattened out then people start to use it when they start to okay that's itks any other questions this all right uh and we're done with our question we can always ask them again because you have your next wit right I I don't really think we have anybody unless the board has any questions or concerns or wants to hear further testimony well then if we're not going to have another witness then we can now open it well we can discuss on but we can we can open to the public we can open it up for comments on the application so doesn't have be a question just be a comment and if so you've got to come down and be swor so any anyone want to make a comment about this application good evening board no you're Luke pontier of the law firm D Pitney I'm here on behalf of the other two property owners that were not the applicants but are are part of the application this evening I just want to thank the board for their time this evening and iterate that the other two Property Owners did sign on to the application they're supportive of this application um and we hope that you will vote permanently tonight uh this would be a great resolution to a dispute on a good use of of planning tools as Mr Zabo said um to to provide Harmony to this so thanks again for your time any other public comment same U you can summarize so um I guess just to focus on on the C2 flexible variants as the planner is suggesting obviously we're we feel like we're improving the prior plan which the board has already approved we're minimizing the nonconformities um we're resolving a a a major dispute um and clearly the benefits of granting this application outweigh the detriments um and for those reasons we we hope the board will approve this application thank you any comments from our professionals no pieces I'm satisfy okay any comments from the board okay I'll take a motion uh for why don't you describe the resolution sure it's a minor subdivision application that they've uh lot line adjustment um there's a few variances that have been indicated as they affect Lots 9 and 9.01 um the only conditions that I have other than you know compliance with our professionals reports I have the pavement 68 ft into the new driveway uh continuation of the 100 foot setback requirement and the prior resolution um and with that really that the uh the relief that they seek is is all pursuant to the C2 that versus detriment criteria as Mr zated I don't I don't really think this is a hardship application what they presented to the board is that they think this is a better planning alternative than it exists on the site now notes on the on sheet three and let the property owners make that fair agreement and not the yeah I think other than the PVE the pavement for the 6 to8 feet uh all of those remain subject to their private agreement which shouldn't be uh part of the plan set memorialized in our docents on sheets one and okay uh entertain a motion I'll move to approve approve second okay thank you and a roll call Miss gner yes Mr gr yes Mr harwit yes Mr Simo yes Mr Walden yes Mr zazar yes there you go thanks thank you very much [Music] marri very all right next item is justs of theing for next 28 right agenda okay and it's for tows and just reviewing the facts that AR Bernville is carried until next meeting which is March 28th correct and then on on the are the new documents that the are produced at the last couple ures are they online there were the exhibits yes so the new exhibits no when so the January exhibits are online so the ones they presented are you loaded them up yeah the new the new Doc well I'm having a real problem printing SC they don't have did you get the they were supposed to they don't have um rised civil drawings online I don't know you have the Architects you have turning template exes I know Steve is had conversations with their attorney by getting we need to emphasize that I'm not going to go through another meeting without them having documents available online and the latest would you be able to to exactly what you think is missing because everything that they've given me is is my understanding is they're mailing the hard copies are G two weeks ago you should understand oh how much we can talk but Steve has told me that the they are working on divisions right well they need to get their stuff together so they're kind of in between revisions and what was subit they if they were they they were to plot out these last PL now they would be incomplete what they're trying to do and they would be different than what they correct but they could at least does the 10 days apply to the hard copies too or we're very anxious to do an updated report the 10day rule um doesn't necessarily apply to Revis plants now a lot of boards their bylaws put that in there or I I've had a board require sub mitt 3 weeks in advance professional review and if you don't get them in 3 weeks ago you're automatically carried if that happens three times you're dismissed so they put on notice early on uh that they've got to get it but for us no such thing I don't you don't cover that necessarily in your bylaws um the initial obviously has to be on file the initial application because of the public hearing but after that it gets a little loose now what happens is that applicant even though you have it in your bylaw you can you have you submit two three weeks in a of 10 days nothing prevents an app bringing in an exhibit that day but they're put on notice that you know that may be riew youan we can't we can't rule on it you know so at H but but they should submit plans and the exhibits so that Bob and I can review them they understand that um and so yeah we're kind of in flux B I guess based on the number of hearings they getting the message that there's some revisions they need to consider we're waiting for those and we just found that out the other day it's just to Denise's question I think as of tomorrow morning or whenever you're know what do you still need and will she'll see or through St whatever they'll let them know they got to get them there and submit no there an example I asked him for a copy of the do the do permit is part of in the hearing the last hearing that should be the next day they said it was filed they say they're working on it no they said they filed it I don't think so well no you don't think it's filed you KN doub in I think we can't get too far into this um because of the nature of the process right just to know Bob needs stuff we need stuff we don't have it yet and it's in the context of scheduling them and carrying them and if there's a problem with I I would say at this juncture we we sort of have we know where the issue is let it be worked out offline and not as part of a COR public meeting without the applicant so I'll go to Steve tomorrow I'll explain that the board had expressed concerns about the timing and we'll go from there that like to present stuff which they're entitled to do pres it's like come on guys this is a really the problem here you know and I'm I'm generalizing I'm not focusing on what I noticed a lot in in my career is that applicants bring exhibits to to to they should be bringing exhibits to enhance the submitt yes you know for rendering you know of a building so you can see it in color it enhances the submitt what what I often see happening and I'm not saying this but is they're using the exhibits as part of as to make revising things that they submitted but they should be submitting is in support of what they've submitted and they're making changes on the Fly it's not unique to this happens a lot it's human nature yeah and and and I try to you know professionally professionals try to and you say hey if you could just do this put the Shrubbery there you know we we encourage them and then they want to help and they want to come back and and say C here the shes here but that's different that's yeah I just picked something if they do something that if an applicant doesn't you want them to do it well this is different the key is you need to review it General but in general in general I think that the if there are plan revisions they should not be submitted as an exit on the day oh on the concept of the revised and Final in general if an applicant makes a plan revision that could have an impact on parking correct load right should be shouldn't be 30 days before the board get revised whatever it's collaboration all right so anyway we have for this application which is scheduled we have a recommendation that you'll get back to Denise after will put your mail tomorrow let her know look you need to be able to perform your duties and write a report okay um equinet do do we need to have any an executive meeting on equinet or there was a question I think we got it extended but has there been any Communications from them uh on equinet they said that he has not heard anything about a resubmittal or anything like that um I'll leave that for him to address with the board when he's here in in two there's in other words there's for anything and I think we have a time of decision extension through the end of the month is that ACC yeah okay right just the end the end of March that that's all yeah now are they the bo they're not sched no what's the cut off if they if they wanted to be on the agenda for the 28 for some reason when's the deadline for them to Saturday they would have had to notice 10 days prior and at this juncture with getting the notice in the paper I don't know that they so it's reoti it's not carried with no notice right have to re notice right they have to re notice have to re notice so the ship is sail we need just to get them on I what what my recommendation would be is is depending on what your meeting looks like in two weeks it's full Denise Denise tries to uh either secure a further extension or if they're unwilling to Grant it but they're not applying to the board they're not submitting revised plans what you would do in two weeks is to submit the application without prejudice would it be wouldn't it be does it the land require actual Deni there's some legal room there on how the resolution so you guys can kind of prepared yeah the reality of what has to be done with different scenarios denial without preice withoute dismissal the same as lawyers are the ones that worry about the work I always say dismissal with not that's that's the incentive to give the extension okay so we handle this cor you're gonna Denise you're going to or you and Steve are GNA talk about what may need to be sent to the applicant equinet equinet yeah the 18 the notice has to go in the paper on the 18 lat this and that's the reality and impossible but it's important that we go the measure to say look 's you know time's passing and we're asking right so they wouldn't have noticed though because they would have had to ask me if they know if they could get on that agenda I don't think they have we just don't know what the next step is you're going to figure out what could happen out to them secure a further extension that way we don't even have to worry about what we could just keep it simple and ask for a further extension and if they say they say don't want then that's it's a nice way rather than being denial or dismissal anything by now how would they expect to be heard exactly I mean I don't know I don't know what the intent of either so how many extensions as many then I mean it depends on the board some boards say we we our preference or our our policy if it's memorialized in your bylaws is you know you have a certain amount of time to come up with revised plans I I have some boards where applications penned for three four five years there should be finality but we're not but because of this who's got the ball we're not in Builder Remedy or anything like that on this right I mean okay well just saying know I think that the request for an extension should be to the end of May based on our agenda projected schedule there so I didn't you know just double check on our official calendar if they agree to Monday obviously so maybe it doesn't office has not heard anything yet no no let's not we have no if St heard he would have let me know and I would you know I mean unless there was something like just today or so that's just that's yeah time's passing you know Memorial doesn't affect our schedule right because there are three Mondays in may we have to look at the recreational plan at some point where Thursday sorry that it we have a final document with the revisions and an explanation of the revisions we should schedule it for public heing and adopt it at this point or the board forgive me the board should review with the changes and move forward with an okay so it just needs to be scheduled uh I think that they should probably have their or someone here you know present it because it's not our plan it was done by Rec commission and then you know have the public adverti for public hear and it's sustainability plan you nice to do that I well you you add that I I inquired I haven't received a response back to my inquiry to our proposal maybe the B on proposal it's fine I don't know but the administrator has going come back to me I'll send out another email the board is interested in an answer what would you like I did um we also maybe it's the same thing but we should be touching base with the office of emergency management and looking at the climate change St yeah think I think all right anything else no good meeting thank you tires aren SL