so that our recording secretary can properly processed minutes applicants and professionals please fill out the sheet on the table when you've completed your testimony please call the role okay so we had several people asked to be excused this evening Cheryl Bey Joel Reese Gary Rosenthal vasim verdas Michael Dy Kunal laia uh Richard Canik here Allan Rich here Robert Shephard here Faraz Khan here uh chairman Thomas here uh no minutes resolutions the first resolution the only people who can vote is Allan Rich Faraz Khan and chairman Thomas okay Vena taswar and paga zba 22 0024 need a motion motion to approve I'll second it Alan Rich yes arz Khan yes Robert Thomas yes anad Caterers only can have uh Richard procanik Robert Shepard and Robert Thomas vote all right this is zba 2313 need a motion to approve I move we approve second second Richard procanik yes Robert Shephard yes and chairman Thomas yes mlim Foundation zba 2317 that's Richard procanik can vote Allan rich Robert Shephard Robert Thomas need a motion and a second I move the we approve the uh the resolution I'll second Richard pranic yes Allan Rich yes Robert Shephard yes and chairman Thomas yes moving on to the hearings there'll be uh a little bit of uh a couple of changes no we have Cedar Hill remember I sent it out and it's on the new agenda so Cedar Hill Holdings can be Richard pranic Allan Rich Faraz Khan that's all that can vote and that would be zba 2319 I can't do anything so neither can I motion to approve okay and forz or Allen somebody has to Second it I'll second Richard Panic yes Allan Rich yes farzon yes okay now you can move on okay hearings ECG New Jersey zba 23014 the use variance the applicant seeks to operate A600 square foot place of worship in one of the tenant spaces at 1165 Route 27 summer set block 8801 lot 43 in the Z Zone GB carried to March 21st with no further notification needed uh we're going to have a little bit of a uh change in the order starting the uh hearings with uh Thomas house and then moving over to Arland dugga Gada and then finishing up with Caron kwami and I apologize ahead of time if I'm mispronouncing names but uh Thomas House CBA 2321 variants in which the applicants requesting to construct an addition to the home at 23 triplet Road Somerset block 396 lot 34 in the R20 Zone uh first type was say we need to swear you in hello yes take it on go yes I do can Thomas House h u SS okay just for the the record where briefly describe what you want to do and okay wait wait you have to keep the microphone close to your mouth the whole time pretend you're a rock star okay I'll try that'll work okay so I could just read the statement into the whatever you we'll fill in the blanks if we need to we just need to okay my name is Tom house and I'm here with my wife Mary we reside at 23 tripet road we are asking the board to approve three variances for an addition that we would like to construct on the rear of our house the three variances we are asking for are the rear yard setback the building coverage and the lot coverage I have been a resident of Franklin Township for more than 58 years spending more than 50 of those years on triplet Road I grew up in my parents house at 20 triplet Road and soon after my wife and I got married we purchased the house at 23 Tri Road I recently retired and would like to make some improvements to our house for our retirement years the addition we are proposing would be a sun room and a workout room the addition is one story and measured 16 fet by 26 feet the roof line on the proposed Edition is one story and will be 13 13 feet 6 in which which is half the existing roof line we have a number of trees and and bushes on our property that will help screen the addition chiper road is part of the levit development which was constructed in the early 1960s the Lots in this development are under siiz and do not meet the current requirements for for the R20 Zone there isn't any land available that we could purchase to increase our lot and make it conforming part of our hardship is complying with the R20 requirements is that our lot is only 120 ft deep between the front yard back set and existing house this does not allow a rear addition without obtaining a variance a number of properties in the development have constructed similar additions to the rear of the properties tripet Road has 26 houses on it and eight of those have built rear additions we believe the proposed addition is similar to those additions and will not only increase the value of our property but the neighborhood in general we ask that the board approve this request thank you okay then any board response we oh go ahead I'm sorry tell us uh how um uh how much of a difference in the lot coverage will there be in other words you're you're asking for a variance dealing with uh lot coverage well how much will you be you what are you allowed now 25% 30% uh why don't I address that um so uh the impervious coverage uh and again that's the coverage the percentage of the property that's covered by buildings plus uh driveways other hard surfaces in that zone is 25% um and with this they would be at 26. 88 um and then lot coverage which is the percentage of the property covered by buildings um the max is 15 and with this they would be at 20.5 okay and wasn't there a third variance requested oh oh yeah that's the rear yard so the rear yard requirement is 50 uh and they're proposing 31 okay and I uh I guess I could collaborate the fact that there there have been u a number of issues with properties in levit to these having problems meeting standards like this is there anybody who needs any more information or has another question we open to the public anyone have anything to say or ask then we'll close anybody want to offer a motion just a quick question first do your neighbors have any of them said anything at all no nothing I've talked to a number of okay I move the reg Grant Thomas house uh the C variances uh needed for him to construct the addition uh to his home at 23 triplet Road Somerset block 396 lock 34 in the zone R20 need a second I'll second then okay Richard procanik yes Allan Rich yes Robert Shephard yes Faraz con yes chairman Thomas yes good luck with your project thank you uh next as I mentioned we're going to switch the order slightly Aron du zba 20 45 see variants in which the applicant seeking permits to construct the single family detached home 6 Hans vogi Drive Franklin Park loock 20.02 Lot 50 in the CP Zone and uh we'll have swear you in first and get some basic information raise your right hand uh do you swear to tell the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth they do can you uh just repeat your name and spell your last name for the record please my name is Arun uh last name d o d d a g h a t t a thank you could you give us just a quick summary of why we're here first of all good evening and uh you know thank you for giving me this opportunity to come and present uh uh my application in front of the board today uh really appreciate that uh we are building a new house uh uh in uh uh you know Hans waji Road and uh kind of uh my wife is pure vegetarian and me and the kids are kind of you know mix of vegetarian and non-vegetarian right so because of this religious belief I mean she wants it to be separated from the main kitchen and then when we kind of uh building this house it's a great opportunity to kind of build it in a way that kind of satisfy both of our needs right so the kitchen is uh right next door to the uh the Main Kitchen it's not uh any far away or anything like that and kind I think the uh the the single I Believe by definition of a single family home uh it's required that a single kitchen be there so that's the reason I'm asking for a variance that we can add this additional area where we can make it as make it as a secondary kitchen uh as a non-vegetarian kitchen so thank you for considering okay and I I can't find it in the paperwork now here but there's some mention was really realy firm with this this this is a house that you are building for you yes so this is my building the HSR realt firm is what the uh uh the uh legal uh entity is from LLC perspective that's what the attorney and the tax accountant advis that build it that way just we're possibly our biggest concern is that everybody down the road from now on and on further down the road realize this is a one family house not meant to be a two family house which two kitchens are often associated with this doesn't seem to be constructed so that that would be uh likely to happen but can you affirm that that's the case that's true I think the house is owned by uh you know me and my wife uh for our um kind of Resident kind of a where we want to stay the probably the rest of our life I guess right so uh uh you know I assure you that uh this is for you know built only for our uh you know accommodate my wife's uh you know religious beliefs where she's a vegetarian that is the main reason we are asking for for this so uh you know I can assure you that uh there's no other uh there is no other reasoning other than that okay other questions Mr chairman could I I I think we um staff did do a report um but I think there was a uh a glitch on our end that um you didn't get it um we do make a statement so I I think I think for the purpose frankly of the record for this situation and honestly for you I want us to publ Lish something and and differentiate this situation from other applications where where that we get all the time where people want to get second kitchens um because I think this application is different um well first of all again the the definition of a single family dwelling a building which is not attached to any other dwelling by any means and designed for occupancy exclusively by one family and containing no more than one kitchen facility so I mean that's the or so that's why when when was proposed staff couldn't approve it it's kind of black and white can't have a second kitchen um so that's why they're before the board uh but this is the comment that we made in our report as indicated above the township ordinance prohibits a second kitchen within a dwelling the purpose of this restriction is to prohibit the creation of illegal second dwellings within homes in single family zoning districts thus Township staff consistently denies applications for construction of new homes or house editions where second kitchens or kitchen Nets are proposed this is particularly denied in basements or separate Suites where the provision of a second Kitchen in combination with full bath facilities would make such a space very conducive to conversion into a second unit for example by adding a keylock entry knob on a door or Walling off a door/ entryway due to the layout of the proposed house proposed house staff is not concerned that the provision of the second kitchen would result in the creation of a second dwelling the second kitchen is proposed in the main living area of the house and in proximity to the main kitchen and dining room the second kitchen is not proposed in a sec in a separate area of the house for example a basement or a separate Suite um in conjunction with sleeping and bath facilities conducive to unit conversion due to the despite the staff's lack of concern the ordinance specifically prohibits a second kitchen thus relief can only be be granted by the board uh and then we provided a um kind of a colorized rendering of of the floor plan that was submitted with the Main Kitchen outlined in Orange and the second kitchen um outlined in green which again basically shows it in in the middle of the main living area of the house next to the dining room there's no full baths and it it's not B based on the layout of this proposed home um it's not conducive at all to a conversion into a second unit so I'm sorry we didn't get that that's some of your finest work that all that supports what you're asking for that's thank you any any other comments or anything we open to the public is there anyone who wants to make a comment if not we'll close and entertain a motion I move that we Grant Arun doat um the a variance to allow for the construction of a kitchenet uh in addition to an existing uh kitchen uh in his in the house in which he he is constructing uh this house this variance will allowing this under the terms of this variance the applicant and owner uh will not in the future advertise this house for sale or rent as a two family house uh the um we are granting uh this uh variance uh because it is not the typical situation of a single family house having to wanting to have two separate kitchens to allow it to operate as a two family house this is not the case here this is a house designed as a single family house with two kitchens one smaller uh to allow for the family to um uh permit uh the family to allow uh one part of the family to have strictly vegetarian uh kitchen pretty well covers it is there a second I'll second Richard pranic yes Allan Rich yes Robert Shephard yes farz Khan yes and chairman Thomas yes good luck also with your project thank you so much thank you guys next it's uh again I apologize ahead of time if I mispronounce car carikan kwami zba 24 o4 a c variance in which the applicant seeks a variance from the maximum permitted impervious coverage limitation five Summerfield Drive Somerset block 11.06 slot 3 In the r10b Zone okay we swear sir can you raise your right hand do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes I do can you please restate your name and spell your last name for the record please pleas kti K Swami last name is k u p p u s w a m y for thank you okay can you give us a brief summary can I put the put the microphone closer to your M okay thank you good evening honorable committee I would like to say a few words regarding us building the the pario in our backyard we are first time home buyers and we bought the house during the bought the house during the home inspection the inspector recommended repairing and replacing the tech and leveling the backyard since it was not usable due to steep slope the previous owner said that he would repair it after after the closing was completed we trusted him and he said he has paid the contractor to fix the deck which uh the contractor failed to show up once we moved in so we decided to redo the deck thinking that we don't need Township approval for since it was resurfacing deck which is our mistake which we should have definitely check to the township and while doing the deck the contractor also said that he could fix the slope in the backyard since the slope was very Steep and it was hard to maintain even we could not even do our lawn properly so the the contractor convinced us to that he will build a a patio because of the slope however we were we are not aware of of this impervious coverage which is again a mistake from our side we are really sorry for our mistake we have spent a lot of money doing this we should have definitely taken the advice from the township before we did anything um so I would you know I would request you like please advise us on how to rectify our mistake we are actually law Bing citizens and we go by the township rules and guidance and also like you know the reason one of the main reason for doing this uh patio was um um my my wife my wife actually you know she spends majority of the time in the backyard and she's she's a big plant low lower and she love she thinks that the plants are like a babies and uh you know it would be easy for us to have a patio where she could SP you know spend during spring and summer with her plants that was the only reason and uh again I'll apologize for the mistakes what we did and we would definitely request you guys we request you you all to you know advise us on what how to proceed on this okay which part uh you have a a raised deck right yeah we have we have which part did the contractor do the patio with the pavers and the raiseed deck yeah yeah he did the the P the yeah he did the raise deck and the patio the patio is the one where uh it was on the the slope okay what's what's bordering your property in the back you said your property slopes down quite a bit it's it slopes down to actually um I think there's a easement land I guess uh and it goes to the creek like so even with last couple of days it's been raining heavily this this uh season and you know we don't see any any water uh it all goes to the the creek you know it doesn't stagnate anywhere and it is not affecting any of the neighboring properties also okay any other any board questions yeah I'm just a little unclear as to the facts um there was there was a there was a there was a deck a raised deck previously correct yeah that's right and you said that the contractor just resurfaced that deck or did he rebuild the new deck no he yeah he resurface the deck because he what resurface the drag okay because it looks much bigger on the survey than it does on the aerial photograph it looks like it looks much smaller I can I can show you the inspection report which I have can I show the report and this doesn't this doesn't this doesn't show how big the I'm looking at Google pretty accurate as of but I mean there's a much smaller deck on there than is shown on here so he did he they didn't rebuild the deck entirely no like H he he actually took out all the um he took out all the uh top layer okay and uh just the top planks yeah top planks and and even the footings also and did did he make the deck bigger yeah he put two time you know we had only one one place where we had the uh stairs so he had to put another we requested for another place to have a stairs so so he did make the big the deck bigger yeah okay and what's when you bought the house what was under the deck the surface what was under the deck it it was a hard hard surface like you know hard gravel was gravel yeah what's under the deck now again like we we didn't concrete anything did anything change with the surface under the deck surface under the deck we didn't change anything only on the side like you know where you you have the footing where you have the staircase so we have a patio on that okay asking I'm trying to get a sense of what I was there yesterday even this looks more than 43% I was there yesterday and what is under the uh the raised uh deck is cement there's a it's a cement surface there that they're storing uh some summer um uh Furniture but it's not it's not gravel under that under that but deck but what I'm hearing is that he's saying it's gravel it's gravel actually I don't have the picture of with me but I can definitely you know I was there I was there today earlier today and and I saw I saw Furniture underneath that raised deck sitting on uh mint I I'm just telling you what I saw okay no actually we know I don't know if you have any pictures and the main reason I'm asking is that again I'm just I'm eyeballing the size of the house my understanding is that there's a that underneath the deck is some type of hard surface and then you have the P patios to either side and to the rear the combination of those things look like more than 44% to me but I don't know on the when the surveyor says 43.7 I'm not sure what he's basing that on or if it's actually higher well the the paver part was definitely added new correct that's right and it's not just it's not it's not loose papers it's papers that are cemented to an underlying layer of cement correct no actually it is just a um I don't have the pictures of that know it was just a okay so on the on the lower deck uh there's gravel underneath the pavers yes okay I didn't go stand on the deck so I guess that could be true that doesn't that that means it's still it's still impervious right and I I my understanding from what I heard from staff and then I guess you went today is that underneath the deck it's a hard surface right dirt underneath it wouldn't count but if it's gr if it's if it's if it's concrete it it's concrete you need to be put saying things into the microphone here to be sworn in now see what you're showing me what you're showing me is the what you're showing me is the is the patio patio you're not showing me what's the underneath the deck underneath the wood deck wood deck okay that's that's ctitious surface there was not prepared for that you know time so I'll do the math here on the fly but actually looking at the calculations from impervious they are they are including the deck um which again suggests again normally we don't include raised decks because they usually they have dirt underneath and the water can go through and so we don't count it but my understanding is again that there's a hard surface underneath and then you know the P patio is almost 1,000 square F feet by itself um we do mention the fact that they by our um storm water ordinance they're going to have to do some hire an engineer and do some typ type of analysis for a storm water system like a dryw or whatever happens whatever is appropriate for that site and that's not something that that's not a ordinance that the that the board could wave that's just an ordinance requirement so have we determined that it's more than a th000 square feet I I I mean the P the patio P the patio itself is they're saying is 944 ft um and again my understanding is that the the surface underneath the deck is new as well which we put it well over again I don't think that part honestly doesn't have to be determined tonight um the applicant needs to get permits which they they didn't get so even if so if the board does approve it tonight they still have to get all the necessary construction and Zoning permits so that'll get reviewed as part of that process which would if it goes over the thousand feet then would automatically require the follow up with the engineer and the storm water yes they they would have to do that right did you did you take any kind of steps in back of the P patio toward the rear of the property to possibly eliminate or slow down any of the rainfall I mean if you you say in the application that's basically too steep to use so I imagine even if we don't necessarily see it right now there's there's got to be drainage going there right so one recommendation was to plant trees yes and actually we plant you know plant some trees out there and also in the in the patio what the what the the contractor has done is he put some pipes so that water can also you know go in also like from the underneath the deck so can always go you know see through where does the water go then it'll go into the back you know the creek what we have but that's the thing we're concerned about is that the water is is not going to be captured within your yard it's going to be off into the Gully and then off into into other people's space what what we're trying to do is we're trying to control the water so that it stays on your property so so Mark what what do we do here what's the it's I think we have to figure out if we're okay with the variance in general to have have the uh entire facility and then my understanding it correctly you're saying that on getting building permits it'll be determined he needs what kind of water management he would need to do that or does that have to be made a condition no that you actually don't need to make that a condition it'll be it'll be required or it won't be depending on the change of whatever the exact incre increase was in impervious coverage it was over a thousand then it'll be it'll it'll be required are you may you may or may not find that as um maybe a mitigating Factor but I don't know if it's you know if if if you feel that if if by that being imposed as a requirement maybe that mitigates the variance in some way but I don't think you can impose it or address it as a condition see I I I look at this and I um I when I was there I noticed that the property next door to you at number seven had almost The Identical uh setup that you do that has the the uh the raised patio deck everybody now I'll just make a note that the people in the audience that are part of this applicant are all shaking their head yes and I I'm concerned that allowing the um this patio to continue to exist is is going to encourage other people to do this um I I don't know whether that's a something that's an appropriate consideration or not but I'm um it's just to to walk back there and to see this one house in which they've covered so much of the ground with um with impervious coverage and see right next door they've done the same thing um um I'm I'm troubled by that Mark um I wanted to point out something I don't know if this was discussed but we do have a memo from Tara Kenyon from environmental and I you know and so she mentions here that the impervious coverage was m calculated by the landowners hired professional and so the numbers that we see here is that what's miscalculated is it less is it more so we don't even know what it is don't know yes so that that's a concern too like or because we're around I think it's 43.7 right now that's what it mentions requirements 35% that may that's a critical item yeah I don't know what the EC I'm reading it out out loud myself the EC understands that the impervious coverage was miscalculated by the land owners's hired professional I I don't know which professional she's referring to I don't know if that was the contractor or if that was these plans I honestly don't know there's a u wire fence in the back what is that for oh that's the we had the garden out there you had a garden okay um you know you're you're at the max on everything you can't put up a shed I'm going you know actually know temporary you know you you can't take off put up a a driveway a sidewalk I mean without a permit but you're at the max on everything I I I I this is I'm guessing that that um the environmental commission got it from this that the in the application it says the the owner mistakenly relied on the landscaper to verify SL coordinate maximum allow allowable impervious coverage for masonry P patio installation that's would be my guess um I don't think they would necessarily look at and opine on these calculations there you said before if I'm not mistaken there actually is no one who lives behind you right right I'm not sure what to do yet uh yeah there there are people that live behind them but the their property goes down uh into a what I would call a gully and then there is a PE a piece of and he used the right word it's like easement territory so there's it's not like the properties are that there's a contiguous uh property but if you go a little further and you look up across on the other side of the Gully is another property actually several of the properties cuz you know they're all pretty close together there well his property basically is bordered by an easeman that's right it is apparent too that know you your fence is in into the easement on the rear there could just just for the board's understanding there there could be homes built we have had proposals to develop that property um for single family homes so it's not like it's preserved I know that term easement is being thrown about but it's not like a preserved property that's going that may necessarily stay that way forever it is zon like it's zoned basically the same as this neighborhood um I believe that the person sitting in the audience by himself may be the one who is the owner or the resident of the property that can be seen now I don't know whether we want to hear from him he's a member of the public I don't know if we want to hear from him now or maintain our usual pattern here I think in this case there's obviously we're the only people in interested in this for the most part maybe wise if you have something that you can add to this maybe you could come up to the mic and get sworn in and we'll still open to the public I think this is more under gathering information on the application sir if you can raise your right hand do you swear the testimony that you're about to give is the truth and the whole truth yes can you please state your name and spell your last name for the record please uh my name is bavin Patel p a t l thank you guys yeah so uh I actually own the property that's adjacent to five summer uh Somerville summer Summerfield Drive and so there's the number of houses that all their water kind of drains onto our property which is not an easement on that property line so there is kind of like a sale and all the water collects there um and we've been working with Mark um and we are proposing to um build single family homes there which eventually we will we will get to you guys but we're working with Mark now and we'll have an application coming through um and like you said uh Mr Robert that there is seven Summerfield Drive which built a very extravagant uh patio just like they had whether they got permits or not I don't know um but you know since it's done and I guess the money was spent and it's kind of looking the similar I think that if uh they are required to add some sort of storm water management system to contain that water um as the as a neighbor we would be in agreement with that so we would we would be happy with that if you guys would grant that because it it's similar to the next store property you know they don't even have any drainage but if they were adding it it would benefit us and I guess that's all I'd like to say okay thank you y thank you guys that was helpful yeah I didn't want to do we have what we need to act on this looking at me yeah I mean not really sure how to answer that um I mean I think c1c2 um not really sure what they've addressed um I mean I I don't know if if you feel perhaps a hardship argument I but the hardship argument is I'm not certain they put in the proofs that are necessary to prove that other than the fact that they're asking for forgiveness is really the only hardship can I chime in so I I recall like there was another case this is maybe a year or so to 2023 and if you if you recall where this guy was uh basically like I think it was like $188,000 the guy didn't even finish the work and he took the money and and you know they had given cash to this person and this I think it was in a similar neighborhood and you know so it's not Mr Shephard said something about you know people coming back or neighbors you know maybe taking oh this is okay or you know others have done it so that's okay so so we've seen something like this um and and we did talk about it and we just did discuss it wasn't acceptable as it was presented just because the the you know the money that they had spent and somebody had taken the money from this guy and it was a poor case you know in terms of what had happened but at the same time I think we made them reduce and and really look into it uh it wasn't acceptable uh because you know like the next door neighbor would come back and say we and and we've heard like you know we they have similar decks or bigger decks and it may not be the same percent so are we going to be looking at this you know wholesale but that's that's my concern yeah in that case I forget I yeah I do remember that Cas that was the guy who paved his front yard yeah and that was the in that case that was the board's main concern um was the extent in the front yard um and also we had him remove a piece of the P of the uh patio in the backyard too yeah and um I think in that case you you basically sent them sent him away and asked him to come up with proposal to bring it closer to compliance um and he came back with a proposal which you eventually um and my understanding is that it has been removed after the fact so consistent with what the board ultimately approved but here we're not actually even sure what the impervious coverage is well I I think I I think I'm now pretty sure that it is to 43.7 um you know you know and then when you look at I mean if the board is inclined to go down that same Avenue um you know I you know perhaps the question to the applicant is is is there any part of the additional impervious that would be easy or less onerous for them to remove you know for example I thinking out loud I wonder if the surface under the deck um if that's only being used for storage and and not a patios presumably like you know the patios are probably more for their active recreational use perhaps the removal of the concrete under the deck might get it to a place that's more acceptable might might also possibly bring them underneath that th000 square foot thing which is going to cost them a lot of money they're going to have to hire an engineer to design a storm water system and then they'll have to put it in their on their site it's going to cost them a lot of money the the paper pad already built yes I was just thinking maybe in a perious paper how did you end up here yeah you know this is my mistake I know as as I mentioned like you know we never knew all this regulations no no I understand that but that still doesn't explain to me how how you went did you go to the town and ask him to do something or did they no what happened I think it was a violation it was a VI we didn't know like we thought it's just ref resurfacing and putting a patio we knew that you know we need to get approval on that I'm very honest on that like you know we never knew all this and that's why I'm I'm in front of Bo you know actually a mistake from our side like you know you on how we cany the mistake what we did in fact you know after building this and after coming knowing all this issues popped up from last uh September he don't even want to go to the backyard now to be honest with you like we have we don't even use that patio we feel you know it's I don't know why we did this and we feel guilty and also don't want to use it like you know I don't know whatever the board decides also like you know we would definitely go asper the board requirement but is actually uh hard on us also like we spend so much money by foolishly listening to a contractor who Lally misled us which again it's you know we should not blame the contractor because I should have you know thought you know we should have consulted the township and in fact when I when I came here they were they very nice like you know they told me this is what has happened like you know so fix it up and on top of it um now I get a letter this morning uh from uh Township taxes that my taxes has gone up by $1,000 like you know or doing the whatever then the backyard I don't know like you know how go with all these things so again like you another personal thing is single person who earns kids go to college work for a nonprofit organization in my organization like you know we we help students to get good education that what I'm I'm in night with them like working for a good cause also you don't want to violate anything I'm just speaking my mind I'm sorry that's okay that's okay well I think there's maybe a couple possible ways to head on this you go over if you're if it's over a th square feet it's going to cost you a lot more money so maybe you want to think if there's any part of it you can do without you know if there's a way you can get rid of the concrete underneath the deck and get the measurement under a th000 square feet for impervious coverage saves you a lot of a lot of work and money and maybe reduce the size of the P patio to it I don't think it would take much to to pull up pavers to reduce the size of that to get to your thousand because you don't want to you don't want to do a dryw okay I think can can Mark is it possible for him to work with the zoning office to come up with some sort of a plan here uh that's basically what we did with the last one right was basically I but I would not want to impose upon you and without asking first well that's that's kind of you uh but that's basically I I basically met out with that homeowner um at their site um and basically had that conversation which you know the board kind of gave us in that situation kind of gave us a general direction of what you wanted to see um and then based on that met with that applicant in the field basically kind of helped him draw up a plan to present back to the board um thinking that that was again kind of thinking I think this is what the board is going to like and you'll prob maybe this will work and it ended up um again being acceptable to the board at the end of the day so perhaps we could do the same thing here you're willing to have a uh get into a dialogue with Mr Healey and work out a plan to make this work as then we can defer taking action on it until you uh have something in place um the other thing that's minor in light of all this is I if I were you I would take the fence and move it back so it's entirely on your property if they're going to build other houses in the area that's only going to be a potential problem in the future it's not that's not affecting your I don't think that's not not affecting your impervious coverage but when new people start getting surveys and start building things happen U there you want to offer a selection of time maybe he could come and meet with you and yeah I mean we can meet um as soon as they want um oh I'm sorry we we were looking at meeting date sorry I got a little crossed up so what was the question there time or a selection of times that he could meet with you and put together something I'll um I'll send him an email I I I we'll figure something out we'll get together some you know perhaps sometime next week and and get started in the meantime we'll uh carry this to a future date you have some time to act on what you want to do and decide what you want to do it's not doesn't have to I don't think you need to do it on this for the moment here tonight and you'll get some good advice so uh as far as future meetings um board's going to be pretty busy in April um so I think there's really two dates um one would be if if if we could um make progress quickly we could come back in two weeks March 21st um or um May 2nd um okay we're talking right now about a plan right yeah so that I would think that could be two weeks no why don't we do this why don't we why don't we schedule it for March 21st um if for some reason we you know can't get her act together and turn it around that quickly then we'll just put it on the agenda and carry to a future date all right so you can you meet with them before then so you can get something together and maybe we can bring it back March 21st and I have only one constraint on the March 21st because traveling on work out of country so and be back only on the April 15th okay all right well that that basically settles it then so um really going to have to be May 2nd then okay good okay then this will be carried until May 2nd I don't think we need to notice five the public do well I don't think you opened it to the public as can I just say one thing Mark when you're sitting down wait wait we have yeah I got some one little Point here when you're sitting down with this with the applicant can you just double check the setbacks um the the requirements in the table don't match what's on the plans which kind of I guess brings into the question is the impervious even calculated correctly we'll do thanks okay we we will back up a moment open officially to the public if there's anyone who wants to make a comment or ask a question it has to be on this this not the planning board okay okay then we'll close to the public and we will look for you May 2nd and you'll meet in the meantime and we'll see what we can get put together all right thank you very much sir thank you all thank you any other business is there a motion to I move to ajour I'll second I'm assuming all is in favor