Courier News and the Star Ledger and file with the clerk in the township of Bridgewater and posted in the municipal bulletin board Please be aware of the zoning board adjustment policy for public hearings no new applications will be heard after 9:30 p.m. and no new testimony will be taken after 10: if you're able please rise for the salute to the flag Al to flag of the United States of America to the Republic for which it stands Nation indivisible good evening Roger good to have you back can have a roll call please here I here yeah here here here here [Music] here [Music] here here okay thank you very much at this point I'm going to open up the meeting to members of the public that would like to speak on any land use matter that is not on our agenda this evening seeing none I'm going to close that portion we have no resolutions for approval tonight and Rich if you could take us through an update on the timing of I have belly CX Tower Starbucks and 1200 route22 land investors those are all being carried on the agenda um without further notice with the exception of CX towers that will be with new notice and it's um really unclear if they'll be continuing on July 23rd as we show on here but whenever that date is it will be on notice all right and with that we're going to move on to uh land use applications uh first up we have uh 273 Hancock Avenue hi Mr ouman good evening good evening uh for the record Michael Osterman appearing on behalf of the applicants Andrew and Mary Pac uh Mr Mrs Pac owned certain property located at 273 hanok Avenue and identified as block 115 Lot 25 on the Township's tax maps the applicants have applied for a floor area ratio variants to allow the construction of an addition to their existing home on the subject property that addition will include a first floor bedroom with a handicapped bathroom as well well as an enlarged handicap accessible kitchen uh the proposed addition to the applicant's home uh what has become necessary because Mrs BAC has been diagnosed with a medical condition um that will require her to have a first floor bedroom bathroom and kitchen with handicap access in the applicant's existing home all of the bedrooms currently are on the second floor and none are on the first floor and none of the bedrooms have handicap access um the existing home is 2,966 Ft including the basement uh the lot area of the subject property uh is 19,8 70 square ft and the existing floor area ratio is 0.149 uh under the ordinance the maximum permitted f is 0.16 with the addition proposed by by the applicants uh the floor area ratio would increase to 0.179 which will necessitate a variance the way I'd like to proceed this evening is to call three Witnesses uh first I'd like to call Mr Andrew sack the applicant um regarding the need for this addition and he's going to testify regarding issues that have come up in the uh review reports second I'd like to call Mr Eric treow the applicants architect who prepared the plans that are before you this evening and finally I'd like to call Miss Elizabeth mcmanis a professional planner who will address the proofs for the required variants if I may I'd like to call my first witness one housekeeping let's just check jurisdiction and notice real quick the um applicant did submit their notices in proper form certified mail to each of the home owners in 200 feet and on June 12th so we have Juris great and you want to swear everybody in okay if all the witnesses on up all just Raise Your Right hands please you swear that the testimony you will give to this Bo mcus thank you any no I think you're you're good hi I'm Andy pack uh a little history but you know what I oh okay he was doing great though are you and your wife Mary the owners of the subject property for this application located at 273 hanock Avenue yes we are and we need microphones certainly sorry um how long have you owned that property uh October will be 40 years and have you and your wife lived in that house the entire time that you've owned it yes we have okay how many bedrooms are in that house there are four bedrooms two of which we're presently using one for me and my wife and one for my daughter are any of those existing bedrooms located on the first floor or are all of them on the second floor all of them on the second floor and that includes your master bedroom I assume is that correct correct would you please explain to us why you're proposing an addition to your house at this time okay uh back in 2019 my wife was initially diagnosed with uh a deter uh degenerative neur neurological disorder but she was functional and she didn't need assistance so moving the clock up current time she is now in need of assistance doing quite a quite a bit of of uh uh move movement disorder and uh getting up to the second floor for bathing or for sleeping is starting to become a real challenge afraid of any fall risk so uh uh she recently went to a neurological uh specialist uh associated with movement disorders and the neural neurologist identified her on a scale of one to five as four uh in terms of clinical disability five meaning she will require a wheelchair so obviously with that background uh we're uh asking for this this variance in terms of allowing a bath a handicap bathroom a bedroom that's large enough to uh equip uh the bed as well as some physical the therapy uh devices or a table and also enlarge our kitchen for Access so your consideration and approval would be greatly appreciated now Mr Pak did you hire an architect to design the proposed improvements to your home yes I did Eric uh who's sitting and will be giving testimony in the joint engineering and planning memo that we received from the township pertaining to this application the engineer has said that the applicant should provide details related to the existing storm water drainage and the location of where the storm water runoff is presently directed um I'd like to discuss that with you sure first of all did you install an above ground pool in in your backyard in the late 1990s yes and did you regrade your backyard a bit to accommodate that pool there was dirt removed out of it to place the pool there so yes okay and when was that pool removed uh the pool was removed following Hurricane Sandy where a huge white pine squished the pool so we had to have the tree cut that tree removed the pool removed and obviously we then uh regraded the land so that it fit naturally uh back to its appearance and and that was uh in 2012 was the hurricane so I would venture to say 2013 that uh pool was removed and after the pool was removed and the regrading was done did you begin to notice a ponding problem in your backyard when you got a lot of rain uh I really don't know what particular event caused it but ponding was a problem uh after that time uh that uh I let go for a couple years and when finally I decided to put up a fence in in my yard I said well I might as well try to address that as well with our landscaper that we hired at the time and did you eventually have a discussion with the township engineering department about the uh situation the drainage situation in your backyard uh yes when uh I applied for the fence it's a 6- foot privacy fence at the back of my my art uh I don't know the the lady I was talking to but I mentioned some of the other activities that I was asking the landscaper to do and that was to regate the back of the yard in terms of having having the fence uh somewhat of a straight line uh also address pooling or or ponding is the term going on and also uh they would be doing Hydro uh seating after the event and also there were some uh invasive weeds that I have in the far right hand corner of my backyard they're called Japanese knotweed hopefully you guys don't have it but I actually asked them to dig a three-foot trench along the back of the yard so that it stops any of the root system from coming in from my neighbors because I tried to REM remove a lot of the root system so there were there was a couple items uh being addressed by the landscaper it's a long story short sorry right and but when I applied when when I applied I mentioned that that's right the person for the application of the fence and they wanted uh me to consult with an engineer called chip Mills uh in terms of the ponding and make sure uh he's in agreement with how the landscaper was uh going to handle it so there was a lot of back and forth conversation and and we finally agreed on the approach chip was I do have a manhole cover in the back of my yard that he was addressing uh possibly taking off the closed manhole cover and put a slotted one there but I told them that it's it's a little the water line is a little bit below the manhole and my uh uh landscaper was proposing putting catch basins uh in ground maybe a foot two foot underground with a 12 X1 12 catch Basin installed and that would drain uh underground to I also have a head wall uh for the storm system on the back right hand of my land and that would drain into the inlet of the head wall and it seems to have done the trick so I want to show you a map and uh yes that was the existing survey at the time when I had applied uh when I had uh applied for the fence permit chip you do and um we're g to have I have copies for everyone and we'll get it marked in a moment I just have a few questions about it before we we mark it um so that map is based on a survey of your property and and and um you provided that to your landscaper is that correct uh well I provided it to the as part of the application permit and obviously chip Mills uh had access to it yes right so you you submitted it to the town yes yes so you gave them um that survey and did the uh Township add information and and give it back to you with the blue line shown on there yes the the uniqueness of of the lot is my neighbor has uh well we have a a storm system uh that comes from the street through his e uh easement there's a storm system and there's a manhole cover on his lot and it crosses over diagonally at the back of my yard to the sewer system under the easement that's housed uh at the back back of my yard so he he drew the blue line I don't know if people are seeing it well they will in a moment okay um on this on this uh survey right and um you had mentioned a head wall uh and drainage Inlet I think there's a head wall with a drainage Inlet is that shown on the survey yes it is and a very far back right okay um and um does that Inlet from the head wall flow into the storm drainage pipes that run under the back of your property yes okay um now your landscaper proposed a solution to the ponding problem and what was that in install as I had mentioned two catch basins uh that would take take in the water and he he dug a Pipe 4in PVC pipe that that went to the head wall and drained into that Inlet the the swall or swell that that exists there so that that water is running underground and adding to the storm system and is that shown on that plan yes I tried to identify it uh a little bit uh below the uh blue line that uh chip identified as two squares and a little red line go into the head wall and you added that I added that myself this weekend yes and and that is a copy of the map showing all of those things that is correct I'd like to see if we could get that marked and I pass out copy for the record I've just marked that onepage plan or sheet uh A1 and uh dated at 62524 uh who would who should hold on to this should I hold on to it or would the board like it sure I make it's that's all thank okay with regard Mr Bak to the um uh drainage uh inlets and pipe that you just mentioned were those discussed with the township engineer with Mr wasn't T engine I'm sorry Mr Mills who was the manager of the engineering department at the tant at the time yes I did I did share with him the landscaper uh description of what he was doing and then after some back and fall back and forth about uh possibly using the manhole opening for for the water runoff he did eventually agree that that would be the best solution for the catch Basin and after those two catch basins and that drainage pipe were installed did that solve the P the ponding problem that you had I have not seen it since so yes it did I'm happy okay um so essentially tell me if this is correct all the storm water runoff on your property or in your backyard at least runs to those drainage basins and uh into the pipe and then Into the Storm sewer yes is that correct and will that be the case with this addition my my assuming my assum my assumption is yes okay um now if this application is approved will the applicant agree to obtain an individual lot grading permit prior to the issuance of a construction permit um as requ requested in item four on page seven of seven of the joint engineering and planning yes memo okay um one more question on this topic with respect to the storm water that was ponding in your backyard and that now drains into the two catch bases that you installed does or did any of that storm water run onto the property and impact any of your neighbors in other words run on to the neighboring properties and impact any of the neighbors no the back of my yard somewhat has like a little Valley there a little lip at the top and it comes down and then the backyard runs this so it's it's all catching here un unless that run that pond was was suffering some substantial rain it wouldn't go into the back of my neighbors or or the sides for for that I think this one one neighbor on my side I think they had a pool installed and I think they're they uh when they ever they back wash their pool their water comes to my lot and it drains now and then on the other side he has no problems with any kind of water okay so it's all contained uh I have no further questions for this witness questions see none uh members of the public that would like to question Mr sack on his testimony right see none thank you sir I oh I'm sorry sorry sorry um the the catch BAS you're describing are they shown on the survey as outlets in the middle of the the property they're the they're the I don't can you see the red behind below the blue line it's like where it says 10443 okay there's two there's two little boxes there that's the the catch basins that you installed I had them in school those are the two catch basins they're approximately seven or eight feet apart okay uh the line there is the mid 52 feet is the mid mid part of the the yard okay and the catch Basin is like 8 ft in and then the second catch Basin is another seven or eight feet in and then the line underground goes to the head wall okay do you know on your survey what the the outlets are in the middle of the property uh when you say the outlet it's marked as Outlets oh uh I'm assuming again that's this is what Chip gave me that back easement uh runs uh several house houses down and I think that's where the sewer system just keeps on running several houses down so that's what I think the notation of outlets several houses South May maybe it's emptying down down that way okay um has the the manhole ever overflown or anything during like a large storm event large rain event not not to my knowledge okay yeah I I I'll just share one comment that chip chip was in agreement with this approach his only comment was if ever we should have such a deluge that it overruns sewer system he just said that PVC pipe that has our catch bass and that may start flowing the other way but but that would be like in my mind the Aldon with rain it sounds like the like the storm easement the pipe underneath there is working it's working well all right that's all I have thank you all right thank you okay thank you Mr PK I'd like to call Mr Eric trepal is that working it's sound activated so you got to give it another try you can sit down that one Mr treow uh good evening could you please summarize for the board your professional qualifications yes I'm a New Jersey licensed architect I've been licensed uh in state for uh 24 years I've had my own business uh for the last uh 21 years I'm licensed in New Jersey uh Pennsylvania and Connecticut thank you LIC Cent new excuse me LIC Cent In new J do I have it with me oh yes absolutely you're spelling of your last name uh t r e p k Au [Music] U I'd like to ask that Mr trepal be accepted as an expert in the field of architecture accept thank you sure um Mr treow were you retained by the applicants in connection with uh this project yes I was and did you design the proposed improvements to the applicants home that are shown on the plans that have been submitted to the board yes I did would you please walk us through those plans and describe the proposed improvements absolutely just for the record the the boards that you're holding are just the plans that have been submitted to the board mounted these These are the uh plans that have been submitted yes they're just mounted on a board um basically um good evening my name is Eric trepco I'm a New Jersey licensed architect I designed this project and I'm before you this evening to request permission to build uh a one-story addition to the rear of this home um the purpose of the addition is to create accessible living space for my client's spouse as you heard she has a degenerative uh disease that is making it U difficult for her to navigate the house um as it is now uh the bedrooms and the bathing facilities are on the second floor and stairs are uh ni uh difficult to navigate um so she's not in a wheelchair as of yet but we're planning this project for the future um so I've designed this project uh to be uh wheel wheelchair accessible and that uh starts at access to the house um right now access would be uh through the front door which is up several steps um and steps are difficult right right right now so we've uh designed a uh sidewalk that wraps around the side of the house and goes to the rear uh That Sidewalk connects to a new proposed ramp the ramp will connect from the sidewalk up to a new uh deck the deck would be used for accessible living space and also to um access to house in the rear um on sheet A1 is the layout of the floor plan and uh you basically uh access um the ramp up to uh the deck and the deck would be set at the same level as the first floor so it would be really easy to roll into into the house through uh rear uh sliding glass doors um once you'd enter the house uh we're proposing a slightly larger kitchen uh the kitchen has been designed for wheelchair access and also to open into the rear of the house creating a a a open uh floor floor plan in the rear to make uh flow good and uh ease of navigation uh but the bulk of the project was to create uh first floor accessible uh bedroom and bathroom facilities so that is this area of of the addition um basically you'd access um a hallway space off of the kitchen and from there you'd be able to access uh the rear bedroom uh the bathroom and uh closet space uh the bathroom um and uh the bedroom have all been designed for uh wheel whe wheelchair maneuverability so there's some room around the bed and around exercise equipment and that uh extra space Also leads into the bathroom where that's designed uh for handicap accessibility for turning radius within the space and easy access to the toilet the sink and uh the shower which has been designed as a Rollin type shower so so as part of this project um my client and I discussed um you know many different options to uh to get the space that they need uh while working within the parameters of the existing or the allowable zoning um so I've designed the project to meet the setbacks it it meets the sidey yard and the rear yard setback it it meets uh uh the lock coverage it's well under the max maimum lock coverage but the issue with this property is uh with the floor area ratio so as it is now uh we have a slightly undersized lot uh the lot as it is now it's 19,8 70 square ft where the minimum is 20,000 so we're we're starting out uh less than what's required and uh my flary ratio calculation is on sheet T1 where the first floor area is uh 1,64 the second floor area is 1,3 and the basement is 69 U sorry 899 for a total of 2,966 square ft that's the existing home correct that's the existing home exactly and that when that's divided by the lot area which is 19,8 70 uh we get a floor area ratio of 0.149 so that's the existing conditions as it is now um and in this Zone the maximum floor area ratio allowed is16 so to figure out the maximum floor area allowed on this property you would multiply the lot area times6 and you would get 3 3,179 Square ft that subtracted by our existing floor area of 2,966 we' get a remaining uh 2133 Square ft that we could work within without exceeding the maximum so uh my client and I soon realized that 23 Square ft is not enough space to get the area uh that he needs needs um so uh you know 213 Square ft we could maybe add a bedroom or we can add the bathroom or maybe extend the kitchen but we certainly can't do all three uh within that area so we are asking permission to build an addition that is 606 Square ft so um that added to our existing uh 20 uh 2,966 ft gives us a total area of 3,572 Square ft and that uh divided by our lot area gives us a floor area ratio of 0.179 and that works out to be 393 s ft over the maximum so a little bit less than 400 square ft uh we're adding uh we're asking permission to build um so as I as I said uh the project conforms to to the sidey yards and the rear yard setback it conforms to the lot area and the addition is is really tucked away in the back of this house uh very little of it will be visible from the street there's only a small piece that that kind of extends out past the one corner uh so you're really not going to see uh much at all from uh the street um I've designed this uh to look like uh this where um I I tried to design this project uh to to match and to blend in with the existing house it's there it's a kind of a typical Colonial House and I took a design cues um for this Edition off of the existing house as far as like roof roof lines and windows and things like that but uh basically the rear Edition would be this would be the bedroom area this is the kit kitchen extension with the sliding door uh uh for Access uh there's the windows at the kitchen sink and from the opposing sides uh the left side has uh the ramp and the staircase and the deck this is the bedroom and this is the kitchen extension and then from the opposing side uh this bump out is for the bathroom and this extension is uh part of the bedroom so I I tried to uh to work with the house and make it blend in and uh be as it as it should should be there um and um one other feature I I uh I dropped the roof lines down below the level of the existing uh second floor windows and um and this house will have matching siding it'll have matching Roofing so it's all uh supposed to kind of blend together um um lastly um lighting exterior lighting we're really proposing very minimal lighting there there'll be a a wallmounted light fixture to each side of the sliding glass door um and then we're also proposing some low voltage lighting around the perimeter of the deck and on the ramp uh just to highlight uh the edges and those uh those low voltage lights will be pointed down um so uh I guess in conclusion I try to uh design this project um as uh Compact and as minimal as possible while uh getting uh the space that my client uh needs for his spouse to make her life uh easier and better thank you um just a few followup questions did you receive and review a copy of the joint engineering and planning report dated June 19th that we receiv received for this application and um i' I'd like to ask you about just a few follow-up items from that report um in the engineering section of Part D on page five of seven on that report the report asks that a note be added to the plans to clarify that this is a minor development for storm waterer management um is that that's that's very easy to do sure okay sure um item F3 of the report asks about whether an existing shed can be moved is there an existing shed on this property not that I'm a aare of no um I believe the shed is on the neighbor's property um all right on page six of seven engineering item number one asks if trees are proposed to be removed as part of this project can you address that um there's a there's a small tree in the middle of the property that we're trying to preserve we're not uh proposing taking any any trees down okay and and lastly miscellaneous comment number three on page 7 of7 references the Township's required construction mitigation measures if this application is approved would the applicant agree to comply with those required mitigation measures yes correct no further questions questions I please Mr Z men at present when you go go into the house to get into the kitchen area are there any steps that are no no the the will be at the same level as the first floor so it'll be a continuous flush uh connection so uh if you didn't have that uh big walkway going around into the deck correct uh the person uh can still go into the house and still go into the kitchen and the bedroom that will be added in yes yeah the deck is part of the access to the rear of the house and it's also going to be used for outdoor living space so the long uh deck that walkway that is going up into the deck yeah yeah there's a there's a there's a sidewalk that'll wrap around the house that'll lead to a ramp and the ramp goes up to the deck and the deck aligns with the first floor okay okay that's all I have thanks thank you profession um I have one question um and this is just more about the the calculation of the F the basement you noted on the plans and in your testimony is 899 square feet um is that area completely finished or is part part of it unfinished it's it's all storage space that's un un unfinished oh um well in that case they wasn't turn on the plans um our Orin really doesn't capture unfinished space um I don't know if you calculated based on the ceiling height ceiling height ceiling height which captured it um generally we don't really and this is born interest of the board's edification too we generally don't include unfinished spaces I didn't think they needed to be here they might you probably don't I mean we can do it for their testimonies on but there was yeah there was no plans no floor plans for each of the different levels just the floor that you were propos the the first floor that you were proposing to change um and um I apologize that didn't come up sooner um but this is an opaque Rule and and this has happened for years and it's not very clear and some some cases it's very clear this happens to be one of them where when I first read it I wondered if they need to be here as well I assumed and I probably shouldn't have done that I assumed that because they included the square footage for the basement that it was probably all a finished space based on how the ordinance reads f is challenging in residential zones because of that because there are areas of basement that are used but not finished you know and so um I don't I'll let you take the charge or Mr all take the charge on how we should proceed I'd like to finish this up and you know I I I think we can move this on I mean your your architecture testimony I mean you should write a book on how to testify in front of zoning boards perfect I mean it's not a question that we had um why don't we get your next witness up and take quick deliberations and and yeah and thank you and the only thing I'll say is while the basement isn't finished now if the variance is granted it could be Grant it could be finished either by this applicant or by a future owner with that I agree with that I think that if you seek the just to be conservative um in the case that the basement is partially finished or whatever move forward seek the Varian approval before the board and to be conservative we can make sure that the fact that it is opaque and if you do finish as said a portion of it it kind of does trigger that but what's finished and it's a very opaque term I mean we've had this problem in the past and it's probably something that we're doing master plan revisions maybe we should take a a peek at looking at it yeah and and and codify that and make it make it clear so with that it's your case but I'd like to kind of move this on and we get to deliberations and you can kind of get the we have one witness left M mcmanis and the last time she was here we we had to skip her because you didn't need to hear from her I don't want her to get a complex so it would be nice if she could we have one board member question yeah um the unfinished basement so there's no HVAC heat or air conditioning in that space correct is there any HVAC or uh uh heating or air conditioning in the basement yes there is yes there is there is okay I'm good thank you good evening folks if you could please summarize for the board your professional qualifications sure I'm a licensed planner in New Jersey as well as uh I hold my aicp been practicing land use since 2001 uh my licenses are both in good standing um I am a principal at Kyla mcmanis Associates and uh throughout my work in New Jersey for more than 20 years I spent a lot of time doing Municipal board representation but I've also testified in uh approximately 50 municipalities including Bridgewater a handful of times uh other places include uh let's see raron Township es scataway Trenton lill Clinton Township and uh couple dozen other communities I would ask that the would accept her as an expert in the field of luse planning thank you um M mcis were you retained by the applicants to analyze the planning justifications for this variance yes and uh are you familiar with the subject property and have have you been to the the neighborhood yes okay and before you go into your planning analysis do you have any exhibits that you would like to present to the board I do I have an aerial photograph okay so maybe we can have that marked I guess that would be A2 A2 okay and we'll pass that out uh for the record um exhibit A2 um dated 62524 is a 2024 aerial photo and tax parcel base map um prepared by Colin mcmanis Associates okay M meis would you please share with us your planning analysis for this application sure I'd be happy to uh we're here for uh two reasons uh technically I do want to highlight the fact that we do have a a minimum lot area variance we're under the lot area just uh just a little bit we are in the R20 District which has a minimum lot area of 20,000 Square ft our existing and the proposed lot area is 19,8 70 square F feet so about 130 square ft shy um that of course is a a longtime existing condition and we are also here of course for an F variance uh which I am happy about in a sense uh since I did some prep work so uh I thought I would focus on the F variance I think for obvious reasons and while this is a use variance of course this is not the typical use variance with uh the typical positive and negative criteria that you see for prohibited uses instead the F criteria has uh has some different requirements associated with it as a result of case law that's happened and the the principal question for boards to consider and for folks like me to testify to is whether or not the property can accommodate the additional floor area that's associated with the F variants can can the impacts of the F or the excess floor area be accommodated on the property and then of course the the second part of that criteria or that analysis is is whether there's any uh substantial detriment to the Zone plan or of course to the public good to the neighboring area and so uh I do think that this property on Hancock Avenue can can easily accommodate the increased flow area of about 393 Square fet that's the area that we're over on the maximum F and just for context that 393 Square fet it's about the size of two parking spaces just to to put that in your mind and but beyond the the area calculation I think that the home and the property and this neighborhood really can accommodate the increased floor area and I say that for a handful of reasons the first thing I think that the board can consider is the fact that the front of the home is not going to change and so we're fundamentally not altering the character of that of this home and how it's going to fit within the neighborhood and more specifically our addition is almost entirely behind IND the or to the rear of the home there's only about 3 and 1/2 ft that's going to extend uh towards the northern side property line and a little bit less than that maybe around 2 feet that are is going to extend beyond the the chimney on that property and so in terms of visibility from Hancock Avenue it's going to have very limited visibility but in addition to that and if you take a look at the aerial photograph that's been distributed you can start to get a sense as as to just how many trees are located on this site and the trees provide further screening of the addition as you as you travel North or South as motorists go or pedestrians uh go along H Hancock Avenue and so as folks are traveling towards the South their view of the rear yard is very much going to be screened by these existing trees I don't want to suggest that it's going to be invisible but I do think it's going to screen and it's really going to filter and somewhat block The View uh for motor motorists as well as for for neighbors and the same thing will occur for folks traveling from the south going north although there are less trees but I do want to note that the addition is closer to the northern side property line than the southern side property line and so I think what that means is significantly less visibility along Hancock for uh those across the street and on either side along Hancock um in add addition to the trees and the the fact that the addition is at the rear of the home we also have a privacy fence around the rear yard and that will further block the view of the Neighbors in particular because we have a single story Edition at the rear rather than a two-story Edition and of course the trees in the backyard which we just had testimony on uh will remain and those two will provide some screening of the addition in particular from uh neighbors to the rear the other thing I want to highlight about the application and the way that the property can accommodate the variants is the fact that the only variance that is triggered by the addition is the F often times when uh when applicants require F variances it's not just the F it's setbacks and coverage Etc but here it is just the F we meet all of the setback requirements in fact our front yard setback is not going to change and we we have a little bit of excess on both the North and the South uh side yards I think about 2 feet to the north and about 9 feet to the South and then of course the rear yard where our addition is is going we uh we have about 72 feet to the rear property line whereas the setback is only 50 feet and so we have we're very easily able to stay within those setbacks I also want to note that we don't need a lot coverage variants in fact we're proposing a lot coverage of 21.1% instead of or not instead of but uh and you can compare that to the 25% that is permitted in the district and then last in terms of bulk standards our building height right now is 27 feet and the maximum permitted in the district is 35 ft and that will not change and so this is not it's not a story of of a building getting bigger in all ways it's just simply extending out the back and the front will largely remain unchanged um in terms of the neighborhood and how this addition is going to fit within the neighborhood in addition to having very limited visibility the other thing I wanted to highlight is the fact that this is not a neighborhood that is uh developed with cookie cutter homes uh many of the homes yes they have uh a colonial architecture but there is diversity in there and you can start to get a sense uh with the aerial with you can see the varying roof lines varying roof colors but one of the configurations that is pretty consistent throughout the neighborhood is that they have single story attached garages and that is one of the the defining features in terms of the building mass that you see in this neighborhood and that too will not change as a result of this application additionally uh as is the case with a lot of f variances uh boards and and folks like myself should think about the additional activity from the property but here there's no additional activity this is not even intended to accommodate a growing family instead it's really just intended to accommodate the existing residents at the property and and to help them do so uh to help them really age in place we also uh I also want to highlight uh the purpose of F and so in particular for residential areas the purpose is to ensure that the building mass does not exceed that which is appropriate where setbacks and lot coverage and maybe Building height alone can't properly regulate the appropriate building size or ensure that new construction is appropriate in terms of its size and building mass and to make sure that a new home is not out of character with the surrounding homes but here despite the fact that we do need that variance I don't think that we're in conflict with the purpose and I say that again because our uh our addition is at the rear it's it's only a single story we're maintaining or uh exceeding the uh the minimum setbacks were within the minimum setbacks uh and then again we have uh significant vegetation on the property that's going to help soften the views of the site both from the rear uh the rear neighbors the side neighbors and for those along Hancock Avenue and so for those reasons I think that the addition can easily be accommodated on the property but in addition to that I also took a look at the Township's master plan to determine if there was any language that was particularly appropriate or would provide some guidance and I don't see language in your current master plan that addresses this specific issue or building sizes in this specific residential district but what I do see is a land use objective that I think is relevant it's uh it is to preserve and enhance the residential character of the township by protecting established neighborhoods addressing quality of life is issues promoting A diversity of housing choices uh and then going on to talk about infill housing which is not applicable here but the important language that I see there is preserving and enhancing the residential character of neighborhoods and promoting diversity of housing choices and I think that's exactly what we're doing here we have an addition that is not going to disturb or disrupt that existing residential character and while it's not a new housing type it is in a way preserving housing choices one of the things that uh at least that I hear a lot in the news about the desire of folks to be able to age in place and to remain in their existing single family homes and this is a great example of that in terms of Master Plan language about this District itself there's some general language about accommodating single family homes on midsize Lots at a medium density and that this district is generally located within older and wellestablished neighborhood hoods again I don't think our application is in conflict with that and so uh as I look at this application I don't see substantial detriment to the Zone plan I don't see substantial detriment to the public good as a res as a result of the location of the addition the trees Etc and so overall we're really here to talk to you and to propose a building addition that's 393 Square ft over the maximum f which again is about two parking spaces in size and that additional is addition is going to have very limited visibility due to its location due to the trees we're not triggering other deviations again we're well within the lot coverage as well as the building height and the setbacks and frankly I think the end result is going to be uh a more modern home that can accommodate one of the Township's long-term residents uh and helping them to to age in place no further questions board questions board professions I have no no questions and that was well stated by Miss mcmanis thank you uh members of the public questions for M mcmanis on her planning testimony all right seen none back to you well thank you very much uh we have no further Witnesses uh for the reasons stated by m mcmanis we think there's ample evidence to allow the board to find that special reasons exist to justify the requested F variants and that there's ample evidence to find that the the negative criteria have been met as well um for those reasons we respectfully request that the board approve this application thank you thank you you want to take us through any stipulations well they've stipulated to the conditions that are in theud [Music] yep and Mr Usman anything you didn't hit on we're going to assume you do agree with in this joint planning and yeah we had we we did not have any problems with that perfect I'm and with that and with those stipulations we're going to open up deliberations I'm going to send it down to Mr ccat your thoughts please um my thoughts um seems pretty simple I'm sorry you're in a position to have to build this addition um but um I have no reason to not support it thank you Mr gasy yeah I I have not a single issue with this application the only issue I have is that you had to come before this board in the first place in order to remain in your home I think the applicant and all of your experts did a great and expeditious job of outlining the application I'm strongly in favor of the application I he said you did a great job on the application and uh I'm all for it uh as you heard Mr asman you always do a great job thank you for bringing really Top Flight top shelf people to our board uh you save us time um you reflect on our Township very well and I do appreciate that and with that said I just want to put on the record very clearly on the F the d4 variant to the site can certainly accommodate any problems associated with this application there's certainly no substantial detriment I wish the applicant had a better reason to be here I wish your your family the best of health and the best of times going forward um and certainly there's no substantial impairment or the intents intent or purpose of our Township's master plan so thanks again sir uh Mrs Amin this a simple application simple one variance only so there's not too much of uh it's kind of there's no complication here so I'm in favor of approving the app thank you Mr swey I don't think I've got anything to add I think everything was well said and I'm also in favor of approving the app Mr yeah uh first off on a human level I'm sorry to hear of your wife's conditions progression um get with the emphasis that the Ada placed on public structures having accessibility I think it'd be pretty silly to deny um reasonable accommodation in your own home so I'm definitely strongly in favor thank you with that open up to the board it sounds like the board's will is towards approval do we have a motion approve Mr Wy Mr bonjourno as the second if we could call a roll call vote please yes yes yes yes yes yes yes all right thank you very much good luck Mr sa thank you thank you Mr Al all right we have one more tonight good evening we have 10:15 Northshore Drive hi there hello good evening chairman members of the board my name is Eileen Welsh I'm the owner of property located at block 607 lot 3 also before we get too far I'm going to swear you in first you have anyone else that's testifying do you somly swear that I do I do sure Eileen Welsh w lsh uh so I um am the owner of property located at block 607 lot 3 also known as 1015 Northshore Drive my property is located in the R20 residential district I am here before you because I'm seeking relief for setback variances I have a sidey yard setback requesting of 11.4 4 ft on the north side of my residence and a 17.8 ft on the south side where 20 ft is required in the R20 Zone and then because of that a combined sidey yard set back 29.2 feet where 50 ft is required and this is associated with a deck so not the residence but the deck that's attached to the house I'd like to begin by first explaining um the deck improvements that I'm about to talk about are already constructed can we wait one second can we just check the jurisic to make sure proper notice has been served in this case yes so the applicant did present a proof of mailing on June 1st and publication in the newspaper on June 14th in proper form so the board does have uh jurisdiction all right great thank you sorry interrupt sure thank you B um so again I'd like to first begin by saying I am here because um the deck improvements have already been constructed um so when I reference prior versus EX existing uh existing actually means the deck with the addition what I'm seeking relief for today just for clarity um by way of background the prior deck was older um it sits above a floor so the entrance to our house sits above the garage so when you look at the house you see the garage the deck is above it um so it's pretty elevated and for a while we were sitting on there family of six having dinner it felt wobbly so I said let's knock it down and rebuild it so we hired a contractor who came out we asked to rebuild same size same location um we signed a contract with him he said he was responsible for all the approvals um at that point it was only building permits right because we're building within the same footprint same size that we exist we had existing um in connection with the permits the contractor then filed our existing survey so that causes some confusion because our EX existing survey was much older and it depicted a portion of the deck on the north side of the house which actually was no longer there um the prior owners had removed it because of disrepair but it did still have prior deck Ledger boards and um footings intact everything else on the survey was accurate with regard to the existing conditions including the front deck which was to be replaced exactly where it is during construction the contractor recommended that the deck St stairs on the south side of the house be revised to project outward reason being is because there was a conflict between the stairwell and the roof gutters so our house is an A-frame so when you walked up the deck to walk the front door is not a typical front door it's not like I said the um deck was on the front of the house above the garage garage door is shut people don't walk through your garage door to enter your house so they walk around the house so the entrance to the door was actually the front entrance was on the side that you had to walk up a slight of uh a deck stairs to get to so we had understood that uh so okay so they had they had he had recommended taking the existing deck which was on that side of the house and bumping it out a bit so that the staircase was outside of the deck as opposed to inverted which if you looked at the house you would never know that there was a set of stairs there so he went ahead and did that and then upon final inspection by the building department disapproved because the plans did not match what was on file so this is why I'm here before the board um seeking relief for these um setback variances so as pre as previously indicated and outline in your Prof professional review letters um this is a simple variance application requiring sidey setbacks as well as the combined sidey setback variance as requested by the professional's report I'd like to now provide testimony in support of the variances um as well as the necessary plan proofs strict application of the 20t uh sidey yard setback does not allow for reasonable functionality of the deck and efficient access to the residents the property consists as I discussed as an A-frame house where the main level sits above on the second floor with the garage underneath Additionally the main main entrance of the house is on the South Side so entrance need to walk along the side of the house and then up a flight of stairs to what serves as our front door since this is an A-frame house the roof extends all the way down to the deck so when you walk up the deck the the um the roof extends all the way down and goes below the deck the um when you walk up so if I'm walking up the deck the the roof will land here and it's extended about an arms length out so cuts into the the the portion of the deck under the prior configuration of the deck the stairs leading up to the main entrance were inverted into the deck so often times people pulling into the driveway would look at the house and not know where to walk into there's no front entrance the garage door is shut so they would walk to the left of the house where there was no deck no door there walk around or back around and then up the steps to the side of the deck there um additionally when you walked up the steps you had to stay to the far left otherwise you would hit your head on the gutters unless you looked up before you went up and saw that the gutter overhang was going to be protruding about halfway over under the new deck configuration the stairway is now readily visible under the front of the house from the front of the house so when you pull into the driveway you can see there's a set of stairs that lead up to the house um it's located away from the side where the roof and the gutters interfere with access the result is a much safer more efficient and aesthetically pleasing design additionally uh the deck on the north of the of the property provides a more symmetrical layout so when under the prior condition the deck wrapped around only to the right with the a frame right here where now it would be symmetrical so was more aesthetical Improvement to the overall house which is consistent to the original construction actually of the house granting the requested variances to permit the deck encroachment would not result in any detrimental in material detriment to the surrounding properties in neighborhood and would provide an aesthetic and functional Improvement additionally if you look at the aerial in the tax map on page two of the professionals report you'll see that this is a through lot where my neighbors are located on either side of me are further set back from the house I did meet with both of them I got um both of them to provide letters which are included in your packet where they supported the application the variant EXC me those are the neighbors to the left and right of you fact thank you yep first let tell the board can't accept lettery discuss plan and application with your neighbors I did no correct thank you um lastly I have reviewed the joint professionals report and I agree to comply with all the conditions or requirements and satisfy all them as part as resolution compliance all right I have a question sure so Sunset lake is an interesting part of bridge water it's very unique yes it was designed I think originally to be kind of a City Escape MH um for you know summertime residents of New York City I there's a homeowners association involved here there is there's a board aware of your situation SL building yes I sit on the board oh that's good to know yes so your construction has that triggered any review by them do they have any comment on this but they are aware of it they are aware of it they've received a copy of my notice it's part of the notice requirements are on the 200 foot list and I've discussed it with them and they have no objection and you're on the actual board so you're elected I am yes and your term is one year uh it's two years and I think I just started my second term thank you very much other board questions board professionals this is a unique case where we're looking at something that's already constructed which is good because you get to see how it was done but it's interesting and how you're you know considering it um however I think that um Miss W did a wonderful job testifying on her own behalf um and I think the pictures um the before and after pictures do tell you know a bit of a story um it sounds like it's not just aesthetic it's its function as well um for the home and it is an interesting property as well and that it's through and that it's an A-frame home um but I think you know visually um it looks better and it's also unique in that the other neighbors I think they have a Northshore address but they actually have closer Frontage along Lake View on the other side so um there's really no impact as far as the sidey guard setbacks that have been encroached upon because the neighbors are the setbacks are so offset um from each from each of the adjacent neighbors so um I have no further further comments and I think she did a wonderful job what I I have a question and I may have missed it I if I wasn't maybe hearing properly how did this start in the first place if you didn't have was to replace the deck exactly the way it was and then um the contractor had said well you've got conflict going on here and you know you just all of a sudden they're making all these great suggestions you're like of course yes so the conflict on the right side was due to the staircase and he noticed it we always felt it but we lived with it as the prior owners did for many years when you walk up the steps um the roof overhangs and it takes away about half of the staircase so for instance when we move Mo there we had to get a fridge and had we and we purposely ordered it after the deck was done so we can get it into the house because otherwise there's no way to just the there's too much narrowness with the entrance um where was the entrance initially so it's still the same so when you look at the house it's to the right you walk around and you walk up the deck steps now the deck steps are sticking out of the deck area the this the deck where they were inverted before so you would have to walk into the deck and walk up the stairs so you're I don't know if I'm explaining it well enough so it was widened on the if you're looking at the house it was widened on the right hand side for this correct was it widened on the left- hand side for the left- hand side did not exist it existed at some point but it was demolished uh there were certain P portions that were still there but probably wouldn't have helped us uh so that's why I need a variance on that side as well and there's no entrance over there that's more of just um um to give more uh better traffic flow to the house so there's a staircase that goes down the back of that rather than so the only way to get into the house is up the right hand steps and then you're kind of locked in but then you could still continue around to the backyard on the left side just like an easier flow of traffic okay thank you just a comment so you basically modified a difficult situation yes that's my interpretation exactly and not to put blame on your contractor but your contract you were under the assumption your contractor filed permits which he did the with the township was working under those permits yes and made field changes and you were the under the assumption he had refiled new permit I was surprised when he said that it was approved and it was fine to go and which is why we have an inspection process and our inspector did a very good job in picking this up it's very you know for just a deck they did a great job um but unfortunately for you your contractor didn't do their job and so that's I think you know the position you're in now right I always you know like to make teachable moments you know being a dad sometimes and a lot of people do listen to our streams what could you have done differently that way have prevented this because I mean you had a post $66,000 in escrow and you add and order a new survey you had to sit with usar and and these gentlemen here are with you they're they're being wellbe they are we talked about it at length and um they even said if they asked for public uh comment they will come up and we can swear them in if they they want to testify um to there's there's rules and a code in place for a reason and you can't always rely on you know just anyone you should do your own due diligence so don't always listen to your contractor maybe take walk to our land use Office talk with our Township professionals which are at a window they're open to the public so it's just I've established a great relationship with Nancy who is amazing yes Nancy Keeps Us running yes is but that would be my advice for residents out there looking to do construction stop in you pay taxes these people are here you pay for them or resource sometimes it's better timing than others but you know usually she tries to really bend over backwards for residents to make them kind of you know decode what a contractor says and it it can be complicated we're all busy we have families and it's I feel bad for you that go through this you did a great job um I'm going to open it up to members of the public that would like to speak for or against or question your testimony you provided tonight I think those guys are with you so we're going to close that portion um Rich any instructions before we deliberate no I just want to point out there's three variances there's two side yards one on each side one's at 11.4 ft the other 17.8 ft or 20 ft otherwise required and the combined side yard is 29.2 or 50 is required the property is under sized quite a bit it's 2,76 ,000 Reed yeah I had the wrong R it's an R20 quick clarification appliation say R50 yeah that's going to be a condition right we going you're going to have to resubmit that I will I think my memo included something to that effect you did um and so that's just like a housekeeping matter when you come in for resolution compliance the plans will be updated to show a zoning table not to put through through more work but you know the zoning tables done in my memo so you're professional can y resubmit with that um and it is R20 Zone Rich so some of the variants that are listed on um the application are actually less than what they show up in that table because the R50 Zone has more owner regulations on the R2 and we're good no we're good all right we're going to open up the liberations unless you have anything further nothing further okay thank you start with you Jim yeah I just want to make a actually a funny comment uh I've been on the board probably over a little over 10 years now and many people I know because I'm on other boards also know I'm on the zoning board and they often come up and ask me a question do I need a permit do I have to do this and that and I said you know what I'm not even going to offer an opinion we have a zoning office go down if you want you can say that you spoke to me go see Roger Nancy or anybody down there that gladly work with you and this is like I said you started and then found out differently people say even the simple as the things I said I'm not going to answer it I said there's a we have you can call or go go down they'll help you um but I have no problem it look looks fine what you did I'm all for it so thank you I'm in agreement with Jim uh certainly there's no detriment to the public good here uh there's no impairment to the intent or purpose of the of the Zone um I wish you a lot of luck and move it on down Mrs Amin your thoughts I agree with all the previous comments and I'm in favor of approving thank you Mr Sweeny I'm in favor of the application thank you sir G I'm also in favor all right we have here Mr bour I'm in favor of the applicant mrki as am I I'm in favor I don't see the neighbors here to object so I will support it board has a will to approve look for a motion move Mr rley Mr bonjourno is the second and Roger if we could just call that yes yes Miss yes yes yes Mr C yes all right good luck thank you you great job good night thank you good night gentlemen all right with that uh we have our next meeting on my calendar I have it is July 9th let's just double check with Roger July 9th our next meeting Roger okay the last name the residential resal application it's the only one we have on right now okay all right great then um unless there's any other board business we're going to we're going to adjourn and our next meeting is going to be July 9th in this room 700 p.m. and that was Mr widley Mr bonjo is the second have a great Fourth of July everyone and thanks for your help tonight you haven't been to wasn't too bad that was easy yeah yeah there were easy the co