meeting order meeting is being held in accordance with the sunshine laws of the state of New Jersey chapter 45 by mayor and Council and planning board for official notices notice of this meeting was posted on the buau bulleon board and the buau website for that purpose uh roll call Suzanne here here here here here we over Quorum everybody rise for the flag salute please I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liberty and justice for all okay before we get to our case load this evening we have a couple items of administrative business first is the approval of the minutes of our June 20th 20124 meeting uh has everybody had a chance to review the minutes that was here any comments or questions on the minutes seeing none I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes I'll make a motion to approve second uh all in favor I I any opposed abstentions Chris and Jen abstain uh going on three resolutions from last month's cases uh case number 24-4 d3p that's Gregory bosong 411 2 Avenue block 15 lot 16 and that was uh St Aran es for an driveway expansion a ramp and a deck to the single family dwelling uh is everybody who voted affirmatively had a chance to review the resolution any questions or comments regarding the resolution seeing none entertain a motion to approve so move we have a motion in a second any questions on the motion seeing none roll call Suzanne yes yes yes yes motion passes next resolution case number 24-6 d2p Benjamin and Athena uden 23 first AV block 5 Lot 10 C variance relief with respect to a two-story addition to the back of their single family dwelling um has everybody had a chance to review the resolution any questions or comments seeing none entertain a motion to approve I make motion to approve second a roll call on a second yes yes yes motion passes uh last resolution case number F 245-250 to 503 Station Avenue and that's a block 25 lot 16 and 17.01 and that was site plan approval for uh conformance to the approved Redevelopment plan for that project can I ask a question about that one absolutely I know we brought up the sight line um try for the driveway which is included we we also brought one up for Station Avenue eastbound is that to be included in that or not I don't recall because it's a signalized traffic intersection I believe that was a testimony at the hearing that's correct any other questions or comments on that one seeing none entertain a motion to approve the resolution make a motion to approve I'll second it roll call Suzanne yes yes yes motion passes um before we open up our uh new case this evening uh we'll open it for public comment for anybody that wants to speak on something that's not related to any specific case that's on this evening uh come forward we'll have our solicor swear you in you can say what you want to say seeing none close that portion of the meeting new business we have four applications this evening uh first one is case number 24-6 d1p that's John and Susan Frank at 510 4 Avenue lock 35 lot six and this is for an enclosed deck uh Franks are here come forward we'll have our solicitor forur in this one oh that's being pushed AO oh I want to make one and I'm sorry I don't mean to interrupt you I want to make one announcement that uh case number 24 you can stay there I'll be done in one second case number 247-3342 3 uh they were scheduled to be heard this evening they're going to be pushed into to our August agenda so if you're here to comment or get information on that matter that won't be heard until our uh next meeting which I guess is August 15 I think it's the 15th yeah I think so okay third Thursday in August they do have to notice that's like I think they didn't notice correctly okay so they will be noticed they didn't get their notice in on time so they'll be here next month okay without further Ado we'll have our uh solicitor swear the frankson and Steve at our engineer Steve engineer and planner Steve is here yeah you raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to provide is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes yes thank you okay do you want to tell us a little bit about your project yeah sure hi so um we rebuilt the house uh probably 15 2008 in 2008 and in order to build onto the house the existing structure in 2008 um we also needed the similar variants um the sidey yard setback on the is surveyed as being shorter than the allowed 10 feet right so it's only coming in just about 9 feet uh so we want to now further build off of the the kitchen that's along the back of the house and we want to extend along the same same lines just so that we can use the same openings and the same flow of of the structure so you're you're saying you're not going any uh closer to the side property line you're just extending it's already exactly y just extending straight out um is the deck going to have uh it's going to be slat so it'll be pervious uh no we want to build it as a three Season room so oh it's gonna be a three Season room I'm sorry okay so we'll have drainage gutters and you know proper water flow Mr chairman if I may refer the board into the applicants and with the applicants permission our July 10th 2024 review the application is for a 250q foot Edition um and a three season uh uh room which in essence is a screen porch yeah right but a three Season room uh but they that doesn't limit them they'll only be using it as a three Season room the addition is the addition if they want it to be a Four Season room that that is still part of your application materials the relief that's being sought here is only for um the new relief is for the sidey yard uh individual uh 8.85 on the sidew of the building the proposed addition 10 foot is required in the R2 Zone and the side yard aggregate 25 uh feet is required and they're uh approximately 22 feet and I'd like to leave it at 22 feet uh based on some scaling of the plan uh there are many existing add conditions of of that are non-conformity minimum lot size uh is 10,000 square uh existing 10,000 sare ft required in the zone is 12,000 uh minimum lot width 60 foot as required in the zone 50 foot is existing and we also have uh and should be noted for the record um their out U the accessory uh out building the side yard setback is 3.7 feet or 5 ft is required but the new relief that they're asking for this evening is just for the sidey yard on the side where they're going the proposed addition and for right now for this purpose uh um we're going to call the addition not only the extension but also the three Season room uh for the one side guard and for the side guard aggregate they are conforming for uh blck coverage U where 30% is permitted and they're calculated at 25% so there's no no concern there also I'd like to um know for the record that uh it does not appear that this will result in more than 500 sare ft of land disturbance or grading plant will not be required the only recommendations we have is any down spouts be directed away from Jason properties and the installation of a silt fence and if you have any questions what that is a silt fence is that fabric fence with the post that you see on construction sites so when you're digging up the yard and everything else any soil goes against the fence it doesn't go into adjacent Properties or into the public are you agreeable to both of those conditions yes did you get approved this evening okay and you feel that uh the reason you can't comply with the side yard setback except that it's a consistent condition pretty much is that your lot is uh undersized for the Zone yeah correct okay so anybody else Steve do you have anything else brother anybody have any questions for Steve anybody have any questions applicant I have one question so you part of this application is you're G to you're going to dig up the concrete strips for your driveway and you're going to put a solid driveway down they're already that's already done that's already done it's already completed that was completed um a couple years ago oh what okay all right never mind then thank you yes questions oh yeah absolutely go ahead um so as Jeff um mentioned it sounds like that the lot is under size which is posing a hardship for the applicant to you know be in conformance with the ordinance is that correct yes would you say that um do you feel like maybe that some of the neighbor have similar additions and similar preseason rooms absolutely yeah our house is not the biggest one on the street so would you say that um this addition wouldn't pose any um negative impact to the zoning plan or the master plan um because as you said there are neighboring properties with similar additions yeah I mean we're just following along with the the way everyone else has also added all into their houses it's no different really and this addition wouldn't be taller than the house you really wouldn't see it from the front you wouldn't see it from from the front yeah any other questions or comments from the board seeing none we'll open this to the public if anybody would like to come forward and speak on this application uh come forward we'll have the solicitor s in and we'll take your comments or questions seeing none we'll close public comment um bring it back to the board for possible action so looks like we're looking at a c variance yeah I would say that um it sounds like from the testimony um from the applicants that a C1 hardship um would apply here because they have um various pre-existing non-conforming conditions especially with the lot being under sized um that that represents a hardship to the applicant and that considering they are just building back and um extending for I guess the variance that they already have yes um and you won't be able to see it from the front there's going to be no impact um to the zoning um ordinance or the master plan so I think C1 is appropriate here anybody like to make a motion to Grant the requested relief uh I'll I'll make a motion to um Grant the the application uh in conformance with uh Steve's recommendations for silt fence and uh and rainwater Direction um this is for a side yard aggregate of 8.85 Ft where 10 is required agre and an aggregate sidey yard of 22 feet or 25 feet is required anybody want to second the motion roll call any question on the motion I'm sorry roll call Suzanne yes Mr yes yes yes motion pass uh you're approved I'm going to give I'm going to give this explanation once because it's a little bit lengthy this goes for any case that could potentially be approved this evening they're all three are the same uh nature so next month we'll do a resolution or hopefully next month if we meet we'll do a resolution that memorializes the decision that was made here this evening then after that the notice of that decision gets published in the newspaper somebody could could potentially or technically appeal the decision 45 days after the notice that public or after that not after that notice is published in the newspaper so you proceed at your own risk if you want to take construction permits and start your project within that until that appeal period expires given that nobody here was here to object this evening that's probably unlikely but I do like to sure give everybody that uh information that that goes for any like any case like yours okay absolutely so just so you're aware of that and I'm going to ask the solicitor on the resolution if it can specifically include the testimony that I provided regarding no limitation as to it only being three seasons because the I believe the board voted on it as being an addition I just want to make sure there's no I think that's good I just make sure that's noted in the resolution to cover to cover them okay thanks for coming in thank you congratulations thanks [Music] next case this evening is uh case number 24-7 onep and that's Jared and Katherine carry at uh 122 West High Street blck 77 lot four and they're seeking uh C variance relief for uh single family home additions we'll have the solicitors where you in [Music] sure okayy when you're all settled if you raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to provide is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes yes yes thank you right do you want to tell us a little bit about your project good evening I'm J this is my wife Kate um we're here asking for a bulk variance at our property so we can put a one-story kitchen Edition on to replace our existing deck uh we've been living in town for nine years we love the town our kids are in the schools we just need more space the kitchen addition will fit in with the neighborhood and will not be an eyesore uh it will be in the rear of our property we've reviewed Mr Box's letter and have confirmed with the architect that the additional will be more than 10 feet from either property line um and we agree with Mr Box's recommendations for rain barrels and a silt fence there's no problem there uh and the height one of the um where is it one of the review comments um from Mr Bach was he needed the height of the existing garage and that is 11 feet 8 Ines at the Apex um we thank you for your time and consideration can you repeat that height 11 feet 8 in so it looks like it complies with the complies with the ordinance for out buildings for as maximum height which is 16 I guess looks like in the R2 Steve Steve do you want to so it's less than 16 ft so if I may with the applicant permission and the board uh board chairs permission refer the board to our July 11 2024 review as the applicant indicated uh they're proposing to construct a 232 square foot on story addition to their existing dwelling um uh the as noted on page 205 of our review uh the minimum lot size required in the zone uh that the property is located is 12,000 ft the RP Zone the existing U uh lot area is 7500 Square fet uh lot width is an existing 50ft lot uh in terms of width and 60 foot as required in the zone uh maximum lot coverage is 30% as a maximum permitted excessing is 32% they're increasing as part of their application an additional 3% for 30 5% that is why we have a recommendation of uh rain barrels in terms to offset mitigate and provide some relief as to the additional impervious coverage but in our opinion it does not rise to the level where we would recommend an one-site infiltration um system um also we note several um uh existing non-conformances which are included in our letter and then we have confirmed by the applicant testimony that the garage is less than6 uh 16 ft uh so that's in compliance but uh we do also note the existing non-conformance of the garage side so the only new relief that is being asked for seing is for the maximum and perious cover maximum lot coverage uh which is U 35 being proposed 30 30 is required under the Zone but I would ask this Sol listener note the existing nonconformities uh on the property so going forward you would at least have a record or investing that those existing nonconform conformities exist as of this hearing right thanks Steve does anybody have any questions or is that it Steve I'm sorry that is it you're you guys said you're good with his recommendations with the rain barrel and the so fence and everything else in his letter okay yeah is any any questions for Steve any questions for the applicant continue the same question so similar to the last applicant um this would you say that the reason that you are requesting the variance is that you have many pre-existing non-conforming conditions yes we have a large garage that was there before we bought the house and that takes up a lot of space and as well as um things like the lot size all the sideart setbacks right um would you say that the that you're proposing are similar to other additions that are in the neighborhood Very Yes um and based on that would you say that the relief you're requesting would have any impact to the um borrow ordinance or the zoning ordinance or the master plan no thank you thanks it is also noted I know Mr deak is going to bring this sub they they do have a garage in the rear um and they do have uh driveway that extends all the way to the rear of the property with rear parking which is something that is one of the goals and objectives to have all parking not be uh from the building face forward but have it building face to the rear so that's additional imp factor in terms of the impervious coverage relief thanks Ste um any else from the board open this uh meeting to or open this hearing to the public anybody that would like to come come forward and speak on this application come forward you have a question or comment we'll have hold on we'll have our solicitor swear in sir come forward so the microphone can pick you up you don't mind stand stand right there is fine Steve likes company sir can you say your name and address for the record Brendon Butler 509 guy Drive had and Heights okay raise your right hand you swear or affirm the thison you're about to provide is the truth of all truth and nothing but the truth yes thank you all right um my family we are currently experiencing a substantial amount of flooding on our property um we are objecting to this bulk variance um because of the risk it it poses on making our situation worse and affecting the well-being of our family thank you thank you Mr Butler Steve you want to you want to talk about what were require what would be required should they be approved as far as uh mitigating storm potential storm water runoff as a result of the the U I would like and so under our ordinance and under the D storm regulations this is not considered a major development uh there are no requirements of our ordinance or by any other statute or other regulatory agency to require stormw improvements to be installed as part of this application the recommendation that we provided was to mitigate uh an exceedence of our ordinance U so and that's the applicant has voluntarily agreed to our professional recommendation to add the rain barrels to mitigate the offset of the additional 3% of impious coverage but there is nothing that would require any on sighten infiltration or any storm water systems I think that's where you're they're mitigating the the the additional impervious is being mitigated by the installation of rain and then also I I think it's appropriate to bring up if this was 30 % of a 12,000 squ foot lot it's a different case it's a different case so this is 3% of 7500 not 3% of a 12,000 220 square feet the percent yeah so the percentag is uh this is in terms of what is being proposed as an exceedance in terms of generation of storm water in my professional opinion would be considered negligible okay thanks Steve sir I'm sorry where's your property relation to this property uh we are behind them behind them yes so and so the grade the grade of their property kind of leans towards yeah I'm not going to get into that any else under litigation Barrow fine thank you thank you anything further Mr B uh that's it thank you okay thank you anybody else like to speak on this application seeing none close public participation Elena um so similar to the last application and based on the testimony of the applicants um it seems like this application qualify for a C1 hardship variance um due to the pre-existing um non-conforming conditions especially regarding their lot size um which is a, 1500 square feet um more than half of what is required um also the lot width um the side yard setbacks and the garage size um which was there when the applicants uh purchased the property I believe you said yeah um so they also have that garage in the rear of the property with a driveway going back to it which is desirable um of the master plan and the addition is similar to other um additions in some of the neighboring properties um so the testimony was that it will not um have a negative impact on the zoning ordinance or the master plan anybody make like to make a motion to approve or disapprove the application can can I just add something the rear of our property is very dry there's it's dead um dead grass it's there's no saturation of water anywhere behind our garage it's dying so um I will make a motion to approve the application because of the uh the hardships of the uh the property lot size and with the recommendations of the blck letter that that that has been agreed to through the uh water bar water barrels and the silk fence see anything else that's my motion anybody like to Second it I'll second roll call Suzanne yes yes I I'll vote Yes because I believe that uh the addition of the rain barrels to offset the additional impervious coverage is a substantial factor that there shouldn't be a negligible impact by result by the result of the addition so positive impact of anything [Music] really yes yes motion passes uh same caveat I had about the appeal period for for your project might want to heed that but uh so projects approved see Suzanne when you're ready to move forward thanks thanks for coming in third and final case this evening uh that would be case number 24-7 d2p at Saron 1547 Cedar Avenue block 110 Lot 12 that's for a deck I understand hi good morning or afternoon evening I'm Sarah this is Justin our architect and my husband Dave have you all is everybody going to give testimony we'll have you all all sworn in our solicitor yes you raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that testimony you're about to provide is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes yes and can we um qualify the yeah the can you uh go through your qualifications is I don't think you've been before this this board before no I haven't not had my name is Justin Coleman I'm an architect um I work primarily in Pennsylvania and New Jersey uh with a few projects in California um this is my first project in this neighborhood although I did grow up in in just a few neighborhoods over so um register architect yes I'm I'm a registered architect um member of the AIA and um I'm I'm registered in all three of those jurisdictions that certainly New Jersey right yes yes sir we certainly recognize your expertise in the field architecture as it pertains to this application then receip um so we're here because we have a variance application were we sworn in oh you were already sworn in you were sworn in I think yeah good sorry it's okay we got you at the beginning of the meeting Abby it's fine so we are um proposing to build a a small Edition in the back of our house one story Edition with a deck and the variance is for the deck because we're looking to be approximately 24 inches two feet on the side of our yard which is considered a front yard because our um properties a corner property to Devon and Cedar and so the addition is being built for my parents who are ill and when they visit they need a place to stay and we've had two kids in the last couple years the deck is to just have some outdoor living space and um with the way that we've proposed it currently with the plan we're looking to minimize structural um like a lot of structural Improvement so we're looking to use existing doorways existing um not looking to change a lot of the existing structure and we also want to be careful not to impede on our neighbors who are on the opposite side of Devon Avenue or the I guess our Cedar Cedar Avenue thank you our butt up Neighbors so we're looking to keep behind our house within line of our house um which would require Our Deck to be two feet over the I guess um front yard Justin prepared a statement he's probably better toing 20 feet where 25 is required correct and there's some there's a lot coverage uh lot coverag is going from 30 to 35 and then there's some other existing non-conformities you look look like it's really close on the front yard for seeder existing but it's a tenth of a foot off there Steve maybe does anybody have any questions for the zones or do you want to may I add just a few things um absolutely so um so as Sarah mentioned uh the the addition there's kind of we we noticed that basically a logical place where the addition would uh you know key into the existing building um that's a that's a um supporting wall in the back so we're just trying without reframing the back wall we want to just have The Passage through from the existing to the new uh in its current location that kind of suggests a location for where the the the wall of the addition would be um because it would have to be between that exterior door and the um and the existing bay window to the side um and so so that that's like a logical place to put the addition and then the deck of course to make to make it usable needs to be sub substantially wide to get chairs and tables and and some stairs down from the deck to the to the yard um I don't I'm not sure if you have um these images that we were submitted as part of our application um we did some renderings and provided them to the planning committee is that they're labeled Z1 Z2 and Z3 do it they're in a Dropbox so they weren't they weren't public they weren't they wer application package I believe okay okay happy to submit them if they're needed to just pass around we have those labeled since not maybe not everybody had them oh they are labed in the application they're part of the application oh those okay yeah I have those and I just want to add just from hearing tonight if there are rain barrels lining whatever that may be to help um with the rainfall and just ensuring that we have a proper plan in place that wasn't proposed to us but we're happy to talk about that we can talk about that fur with the applicant's permission and the chair's permission I'll refer the board to our July 11th 2024 review uh the applicant has indicated is proposing the 480 sare foot building addition and 470 17 foot deck I believe I heard testimony that the setback to the deck will be 20 feet uh 22 feet 22 feet and we scale it so that's at 22 ft so the relief that's being sought is the front yard setback for the deck at 22 ft correct and then also the maximum lock coverage of 35% where 30% is um in the required in the zone we did specifically indicate in our review and hopefully and wece of our review we did um and really is uh based on our recommendations and our opinions that's what you have me here for uh so this this level 450 square feet work and a grading plan will be required for this this we are recom recommending an infiltration system that would just store the difference between what you're allowed to have which is 30% and what you're asking for the relief for which is the 5% but only for the water quality storm and the water quality storm is uh the storm that occurs uh uh less than every two years so it's the lowest frequency storm um everybody hears about what years yeah so it's not 100 year storm it's not a 50-year storm it's actually uh less than a two-year storm but that would mitigate and that would uh be a little bit more than what rain barrels are um I ask your your professional contact me we can give them some good examples of how this was accomplished by other applicants that might be most of the time and this for the board knows already but for the applicant typically these are prefabricated um um plastic systems that could be just burned in the back backyard and you take your rain leaders to it and there's a calculation that is uh uh available by the D but we can share examples of it of how you would calculate the volumes here because based on the square footage is and the 5% I believe that would be an appropriate mitigating factor for the Varian variance that's being proposed is that something that's acceptable to the out um yes however I wanted to make one statement um I believe so we we submitted an original site plan that had a larger deck on it um and so we believe that somehow um the numbers got corrupted between the time you got you've got the numbers and and what we submitted so our calculation actually shows 31.7% not 35 so I'm not sure if that makes any difference however based upon that yes yes are you sure yes and it's in it's in I have the calculation in unfortunately we don't have those calculations okay um so how are we going to handle the variance that's if the if the applicant wants to amend their application and only seek and I caution the applicant to make sure based on the application materials that we have I have a suggestion I I would suggest that you might want to consider getting it approved at the 35 that Mr Bach calculated and then we could potentially place a condition that you have to put a a infiltration system into his satisfaction to address whatever the deter the final determined amount is between what's actually installed and the 30% so if it goes in at 33% say then you you're responsible to put an underground infiltration system in that that would account for 3% 33 versus 30 where because if if you if you go for 31 and at the end of the day it's over 31 you're going to be right back here asking for the variance again sure that makes sense I guess if it if we were to go in at 35 get this approved agreed to that but if it ends up being 31 or 32 I'm hearing rain barrels and I'm I'm worried that the infiltration system is expensive I don't know anything about that yet before we agree to it I just want to make sure we're not agreeing to something that's we would want you to work it out with Steve's office however let me let me take a moment if I may okay um and I'm going to ask the applicant to share of course again I don't so this is different than what I have as part of the application materials I don't have this that was my fear yeah yes so this is not part of any of the application materials I would say this it's the applicant's application if if the applicant is comfortable I was just making a suggestion I I agree Mr chairman if the applicant is comfortable with a 30 1.7% lot coverage um then my recommendation in terms of mitigating Factor would be the rain barrels versus the infiltration system because that brings us down to 1.7% over the allowable are you comfortable with your application being approved at I'm comfortable but I think it's up to the Z family they're relying on you sir yes yeah so I mean I guess just it's based on the drawings is it yes Ian I mean that's th those are the drawings that's the that's the number um I I'm I I really appreciate the Chairman's suggestion of maybe making it 35 and then being having the opportunity to dial it back upon your recommendation it's it's I mean I we could do would we be able to do a resolution that way that if if if it in fact was 32 or less then it would be a rain barrel situation ver I would suggest this um that the applicant is seeking up to 35% of impri covery if it is 31.7% as verified by Revis application materials then rain barrels uh would be acceptable to the applicant uh if it is over 31.7% then it would have to store the difference of the water quality storm between whatever that percentage up to 35 uh uh uh in a system acceptable to the board engineer and a grading plan will be required because it's going to be disturbing more than 500 square feet and at the time that you would do these calculations and demonstrate that would be a time of compliance in gring claim review so I think if the board is acceptable to that I think you've got the best of both worlds you know are you comfortable can you explain the grading plan to me well a grading plan so a grading plan is required for any disturbance within the town uh of over 500 square fet that will require a topographic Sur survey uh with your outbounds on it and demonstrating what the existing grades are and what your proposed grades are and that is for the purpose of demonstrating that your grading will have no negative impact on adjacent properties understood that is that is a requirement uh of the burrow and and cannot be really separate to the range that's really separate to the to the runoff yeah you're going to have to do but and and I did want to speak to that point U respectfully um I did a calculation on the the land disturbance and we need 65 lineal feet of um of spread footings an additional 3x3 footing in the center for the addition and then we need approximately six perer footings at about two two square feet each the additional impervious counts is dist is dist okay so and and then the other thing I want the structures themselves are disturbance it okay understood um and then the other thing and and I didn't know if this was going to have an impact or not so that's so forgive me uh the other issue I wanted to bring up is that there's an existing patio and we're just pulling that out and putting basically an addition of deck on top of that's dist building on top of the existing patio and leave them in place that's something we can consider but the calculations that you're providing would be great for an impervious coverage but disturbance is there's I'm an architect as well besides an engineer there's no way you're going to build an addition and not deserve the ground all the way in the footprint the addition so that's what we talk about when we call disturbance not land coverage but disturbance so I based on based on the proposed addition itself being 500 square feet and let alone the deck they're going to be disturbing more than 500 square feet s of gring plan will be required and that's not that's that is not something I would even consider the board even attempting to have weight we don't no I wouldn't feel comfortable we we don't for any other oblations in this manner so that's a roll the D I'm sorry that's the rule of the J that's the sure the ordinance understood yeah okay I guess so just so I can recap so I understand this if it is we're going to seek for 35% um lock coverage lock coverage thank you if we um have over 30 1.7 we would be for we would be asked to be putting in the fil filtration system yes if it's 31.7 what we're measuring it would be rain barrels yes is that correct my understanding that would be and then we have to get a grading plan regardless unfortunately that is that's the r I'm not fighting I mean it is we're just looking to get just looking to get this done so it's always difficult Steve kind just ask a question real quick sure the infiltration system that you speaking of is it as simple as those those uh ABS yes things you buy at Home Depot that you have The Knockout holes yes you dig a hole you drop them in and you can you can put two or three of them in a row exactly okay I was going to do that in my backyard myself it's coups so like there's not this like it's not a concrete Vault no it's it's not major construction it's a homeowner weekend project sorry buddy what this is and you heard probably from sitting in the audience in the previous hearings you have to provide some sort of benefit some sort of mitigating factors well you don't have to but it's absolutely beneficial to the board when they're making their deliberations and determination U so the rain barrels and or the infiltration system is a mitigating factor for the variance saw understood okay I mean that thank you for that clarification that helps a lot and that's acceptable to me if that is what is being required to move forward can we Mark um the plan as a new exhibit since it wasn't part of the application process I I'm not I'm not sure what happened we we submitted this when we submitted our various application so um I'm not sure well then it should be submitted to the board engineer it will be submitted as part of compliance I'm I'm a little reticent to have an exhibit that has not been reviewed At All by our office as part of the record yeah so we're going to rely if I if I get ask rely on the applicate and the applicate professional testimony regarding the percentages and what they should be able to any any you guys have anything else that is any other questions or comments from the board I might have a few L okay um so could you speak a little more about the hardship um if there is a hardship that you if you would qualify for the C1 uh variance and the other option is a C2 variance um which means that your um application advances the purposes of Municipal land use law so I if I may yeah go ahead uh one thing I just want to if I haven't already pointed out the board but this is a corner property that has two law frontages a law Frontage on Devon and a laot frontage on Cedar Avenue so they have two front yards uh that are required and the one relief that they're asking for specifically on this corner lot is the front yard bar really it's also important to note that we already approved the fence um um in this back property that is just off just off of it's just off of Deon Aben six foot fence this is when we were on Zoom yes thank you I didn't know if you remembered me from this no I remember I I I used to live in that house I know that's was just telling I'm sorry I used to live in that property the house was torn down torn down I just told him actually I remember that Dean yeah I built I put I planted that tree that's in the front we won't cut it down please don't I watch it every time I walk by I look at it it Backes is it I just trimmed it back it looks beautiful still in good shape um so question before you is the hardship the hardship I think goe I I mean having being a corner property is a hardship is definitely a hardship where that's our side guard we we have plenty of room on the other side but we don't want to go into our neighbor area and that they have their porch deck area and we that would be ours and we'd be staring at each other if that was if that was a sidey yard as it practically acts then this would comply with side yard correct for the Zone I see you'd have over 30 almost 35t aggregate 32 feet well you said 20 yeah 35 feet Aggregate and more than 12 on both sides so yes in 2020 when we got that fence we had different plants and then my parents felt ill and we need them to be able to stay for extended periods of time so now it's an addition versus a pool but that was why we had the fence plan years ago plus kids we have two young kids that are under four years old so Devon Avenue is not the best location we've seen over the years for two young kids to be out back um would you also say that this addition is in line with similar properties in the neighborhood and the same character um wouldn't change the character of the neighborhood it would not so no no negative impact to the zoning ordinance or the master plan correct thank you I'm sorry if I forgot what is what what's going to be in the addition so it's going to be a Murphy bed a Murphy bed a Murphy bed for my parents and then just a couch and um all one surface they won't be living there it's not to house them it's just so when they come they live far away they can stay for more than a night I have three bedrooms and I have two kids now so there's nowhere for them to stay and uh the basement's not really an option for them with their health so it is for them and then a deck just so we could still have a backyard usage dinners it'd be a playroom playroom family room we could put a table there on holidays the M yeah multi-purpose room and a pull out couch in essence Murphy bed Murphy oh you're actually building the Murphy bed hopefully if we can afford it after the grading plan but yes that is the plan is I don't know if the board is where what a Murphy bed is oh yeah yeah the one that folds up into the wall one actually it's like right out like that kind of come down from the ceiling something yeah I may end up being a couch just somewhere for them to sleep is really the goal but I don't know where we'll end up with a bed it will be something any further Elena that's anybody else uh open the hearing to the public anybody that would like to come forward and speak on this application do so now and uh we'll have our solicitors s in uh John grer 1540 Cedar any to raise your right hand do you swear affirm that the testimony you're about to provide is the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth I do thank you uh so we live right across the street wom been supported the application all the relief requested seems like everyone's worked everything out so just giving a thumbs up from a neighbor thanks and we also have we're we're on a corner too across the street so we understand all the hardships we heard your too you were in for offense too weren't you okay not too long ago okay we remember everything lot of institutional knowledge up here thanks for coming out again Mr gringer thank you John very much and I should mention um John our back neighbor and uh Don and Pat have seen the plants and they just because we wanted to be good neighbors before we even got to this stage and before we they got their certified letter they've seen the plants they understand what's happening they understand the implication and um VAR in support to at least our faces and they didn't come to imagine they probably would have come if they had a problem right yes they were aware they were presented the plans we're all friendly and our quitter good okay anybody else from the public seeing none close public participation bring it back i' like to add for the solicit include is the existing nonconformance of the front yard at setback and Cedar at 24.9 FT 25 versus 25 required just to note it again we all the of the as of night heing and you said it is the 24.9 yes yeah that one's not being touched y it's not being changed but it helps in the future y I always record the pre-existing for me thank you so our plan plans as submitted would be approved if we follow along with the gradient and have this measured properly just so I can understand there's no change to the plan I can't say that because I you have a plan that I don't have you have a plan that I don't have so but You' be vested in if the relief is granted you'd be vested in that up to 35% based on those condition points okay thank you um So based on the test of the applicants provide provided um it sounds like the C1 is also appropriate for this application um based on the fact that the property is um on the corner and has two front yards um it creates some hardship for them um the applicant did agree to um that they are seeking up to the 35% for the lot coverage um if it is 31.7% or less then the rain barrel will be acceptable if it's over the 31.7% % um they would have to have an infiltration system that would store the difference of the amount up to the 35% um which will be acceptable to the board engineer they will be required to subit the grading plan um they need to demonstrate compliance with um the letter and submit the plan um to the board engineer and based on the addition being similar to neighboring properties um and also based on that mitigation they um the application won't cause any impact to the zone of ordinance or the master plan anybody like to make a motion to approve or disapprove the application at this point system under anybody else like to second that motion I'll second Suzanne or any questions on the uh sorry seeing none roll call Suzanne yes yes yes motion passes projects approved heard the spiel about the appeal period earlier that'll apply to yours too but thank you seeing that you only had one neighbor and he was in support that's highly unlikely that'd be a pretty crappy thing to do Mr G I mean I can't emphasize that this whole issue with with water runoff is over you see there's another applicant who was talking about litigation so it's very important to us and I understand recently yeah we don't want to be bad neighbors just looking to make it feasible financially but that makes sense I understand that there was a lawsuit in a neighboring municipality that resulted in a in a multi-million dollar settlement wow to uh some affected homeowners so we're especially sensitive to that at this point try trying to protect the burrow in any way we can that makes sense stuff like that we'll do whatever it requires to it seems like a lot but it's sort of a hot button thing right now as a big thank you very much thanks for coming in great thank you very much okay thank you in myice so you spoke can help with some those examples so you're going to be 31% we can assist and try to give you some rection for the verion that was part of it infiltration I don't know if it was them well thank you very much I don't know if they didn't do anything but yeah the rates will go up there probably U any other business this evening Suzanne correspondents I just you guys do we're going to be okay I didn't know if you had anything to say thanks for coming out it's nice to have fans who's your favorite board member you don't have to answer that you can tell me later good night nothing else Suzanne okay okay and we already did the review for Den right anybody have anything uh further they want to discuss entertain a motion to adjourn a second somebody made a motion all in favor I all right we're adjourned good work everybody if I'm working I may I didn't realize it was the 15th but I may be here next month