uh welcome everybody to the Little Falls Bing board meeting of March 7th 2024 may we please rise and have the flag salute mark would you lead us FL the United States of America to the Reps One Nation God indivisible with liberty and justice for thank you just as a notice the uh Little Falls Board of Education will not be appearing tonight they have withdrawn their application until a later date um Mr brigley adur do you have a comment yes Mr chairman I'll read the statement of public notice this is the little FS Township planning board meeting being conducted on Thursday March 7 2024 the meeting is called to order please take notice that adequate notice of this meeting was provided in accordance with New Jersey statute sanitate 10 colon 4-8 and New Jersey statutes initated 10 colon 4-10 as follows a notice of the meeting was prominently posted on the bulletin board at the municipal building which is located at 225 Main Street Little Falls New Jersey that was done on January 4 2024 a copy of the notice was sent via email to the north Jersey Herald the news on the same day additionally a copy of the notice was filed in the office of the Township Clerk on said date please note that this meeting is being taped therefore we ask you to speak loud and clear into the microphones thank you please call the RO thank you Mr chairman chairman Kilpatrick here Mr Barry is excused correct Mr Barry is excused Mr Rema is excused okay Mr carage here Mr Luke Damiano here Dorothy Cataldo here Mr Mark seber here Mr Michael poses here uh Mr chairman uh for the record mayor James Damiano and councilman Anthony scova are excused tonight because the two applications on the board tonight require D variant relief and under the municipal lus law the mayor and council president are ineligible to sit on those applications so they are excused from tonight's meeting thank you may I have a motion for approval more Dr Ellie Abdi pres Mr aad Mr Dolan here Mr arama you indicated is excused correct thank you uh may I have a motion for the approval of the minutes of February 1 2024 so moved second I'm sorry motion by mey okay motion by darthy catalo okay second by Luke Tami please PLL the board but take your time okay our attorney is doing double duty for our secretary who's unable to attend tonight and he's doing a human job I'm trying burning his uh Mr Kilpatrick yes Mr carage yes Mr Damiano Luke Damiano yes Miss catalo yes Mr seber yes Mr pous yes Dr Abdi yes yes uh Mr Dolan yes thank you the minutes are approved uh there are no resolutions to memorialize we start with our first application was to Zen real estate LLC a continuation from the February hearing we haveed all the testimony on this application we only we requested they give us some renderings of what cutting the uh I guess it's the front of the building back 20 feet and uh that would cut down on the visual effect from the neighbors and they have done so and they are now here to present that this is for use S Mr Mr Greenberg just before you beginning Mr chairman since this is a continuation of the public hearing and this is a d variance uh the applicant is required toir of both five board members seven board members will be voting I had an opportunity to review who is present at our February 1 meeting so I'd just like to go through the names of the board members that will be voting on your application tonight chairman Kilpatrick is one Mr kage is two Mr Damiano Luke Damiano is three Miss catalo is four Mr seber is five Mr poses is six and uh Dr Abdi is alternate one so she will be the seventh voting member everybody else can participate but those are the seven members that will be voting on your application thank you thank you thank you you may begin Stephen Greenberg appearing for the applicants in real estate again this is 75 Harrison Street lot8 block 218 as the chairman has stated we had presented our uh evidence for this and we've agreed to come back and uh change uh modify the application where the 40 foot addition would not start till 20 feet uh back from the uh property line so I have with me the architect who would show the new plans if I may uh yes anaser Al yes got that okay sir please raise your right hand the you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to get before this board is going to be the truth the whole truth or nothing but the truth yes sir please tell us your name and please spell your first name and last name for the record alar first name is n a SS i r and the last name is spell a l m k h t a r thank you sir sure sure you a licensed architect in state of New Jersey yes I have a licensed par licens state of New Jersey and have you appeared before boards disine as to architecture yes including this book credentials are accepted continue okay so you've had an opportunity to uh drawing for this application yes that's correct and can you explain it to the board uh sure so if I any explain it on the renderings that are on the screen um the the three structures that are all the way to the front that from the white color those are the residential drawing units and we are providing the Evergreens and I think they were reflected on the engineering plant to provide some buffering between the dwelling units and the structure also I'm sorry if you go back to that slide again I wanted to go over the tight update so the front the further portion to the front will be 3 fo5 and then we set the the building 20 foot to the back and then we go up to 10 ft as opposed to the 40 ft that was presented before now we have 30 ft set back those 20 ft and then we go up then so those are the major updates for the structure but we actually have the drawings and all the elevations and all that updated if you want over them I think we're good with what we have we just looking for a visual uh cutting down on the impact visual impact for neighor neighbor excuse me um who are your neighbors and it looks appears as if the can we can we get a view James of the setback um all right there was another one There He Go all right so that's a 20 foot setback that height would be at 30 ft and uh the remainder of the warehouse will be at 40 fet all right any questions the board I have a quick question will anything else be going on the roof such as air conditioning units or anything in addition to the flat roof that we see in the pictures um at this point we might have some roof in it but it would be screen I would you screen them you got to move them to the middle and put up some type of barrier first we need if we can do it on site would be better because it's easily accessible but if we have to we can put it on the roof and provide sufficient screen okay would it be on the 30 foot high portion of the roof or the 40 foot high portion of the RO we can place it either we do on the 40 foot side I think so on the ground would be the best but if you can't because there is a flooding sitation yeah preferably on the ground because it's usually accessible for service or what have you but there's no space you put it on all right yeah the board would prefer to say it it can be raised but uh on the ground again we're trying to cut down the visual visual impact as much as we can in a couple of the images you show a couple of uh different uh I guess designs on the side of the building is that something that will be done or is that just to show us what could be done is that something that the applicant will be doing top portion would be metal finally and then we would paint the lower portion which is black we want to give it gray color light gr I just saying in I guess I don't know what number images these are but seven eight nine something in there there's different designs on the side yeah the prev one the one eventually we will ask you to put up something that from the ball field looks like a stadium but that's for another day is this going to be the angle that we see from The Ref Center yes yeah okay yes we have a picture with the we have that but we also have screening theal pict yeah I'm looking for screening at this point Mr chairman this is a bifurcated application so they're going to come back for Cy so anything very very good we shall move on take this what we were so the question is agreeable to the 20 foot setback and the 40ft height Beyond any questions to the board is that the only thing that we're voting on is the or is it also all the other variances that are no it just well it's it's the it's variances but we deferred the setback variance for parking spaces against the property L and that's deferred until they return for Cy okay so it's the use um there's a sidey setback variance a maximum building coverage variance and there two existing non-conformities for Frontage and a buffer to h a residential area there exist right they were going closer to the DPW Yard that's not for tonight the side right the side yard yep that's not on for tonight no which which one is not there's the variances that you're seeking tonight as I understand it there's sidey guard setback where 20 feet is required and 10 feet is proposed correct maximum building coverage where 40% is permitted 43.9% is proposed right and then you have two existing non-conformities minimum Frontage where 150 ft is required and you have less than that in the buffer the residential where 40t is required and 11.3 feet is existed and the minum yard for 10 ft is required 8.2 is existing non-conforming existing non-conforming condition the planner has outlined variances in her report okay but the the variance for the setback um for parking oh from the residential Zone that's been deferred okay any other questions from the board I have a concern um um damana raised um a question about what you are going to put on a roof if you're going to put anything on the roof and my concern is if you putting on anything on the roof is there going to be any inspection later on because I'm I'm thinking of the safety of what's going to go on a roof and if the um the roof is actually can hold it is there an inspection or do you know what's going in the on on on the roof or what are your circumstances I I think we spoke the mechanic here I may just so with mechanical engineering we're going to put it on the roof we're going to need to put it up on the roof but uh it would be only accessible to the uh technicians basically uh and building code requires you if it's less than 5T from the edge of the RO we have to provide some to that but would be set in and it would be screened so in terms of safety there's no issue right as far as building code concern right I'm concerned about the safety of the people that are in the building oh is it going to collapse or is it is it going to hold whatever it's going yeah structurally we will hold it and we will def the structure as required um we just heard testimony that we would place it on the ground the air conditioning units and now you're saying that someone is saying that we'll put it on the roof um want to withdraw one or I didn't the before but don't is mechanical engineer here no we asked him okay so so we have to correct the test Mr Greenberg can you correct the testimony yes the uh the HVAC system will be obtained sorry I can't hear you oh hello can you hear the V system will be on the roof and it will be screened appropriately uh and the structure will be made so it can surely withstand it that's uh any necessary uh qualifications they would meet heard the building Cod very well I think it was also stated that it's not an option there is a requirement for it to be uh screen screened yes uh if it's on the roof 5 fet I believe you said okay yes sir chairman you can we can add a condition if it's approved that the nature and extent of any screening would be subject to the review and approval of our planner to make sure the screening is appropriate that's an excellent excellent suggestion I volunteered s you might have to repeat I'm not quite sure you C that chairman yes I I have a uh question the image that we're seeing here is from the residents uh in Jackson Park the the homes on in Jackson Park I'm assuming it's from their prop from the property line is that correct close to the property line okay um there you go uh now this sight line I I'm assuming is it is as if I were standing at the property line looking at the building and this is has one of the trees that would be planted there so in reality it would be buffered from the residential area sure but but from the property line as I'm looking at the building approximately yeah okay um I I I believe the at least my intention of wanting to see that the the the the setback of the taller portion of the roof was to eliminate the view of the 40 foot part of the roof and in this illustration it's showing the roof as being visible so from a I guess from a just from a a viewing angle it still appears to be above 30t and I think the intention or at my intention of wanting to see the setback was so you can't see the 40 foot section of roof um is this drawing just a an error or is it truly to scale it's an artist rendering so I mean you will probably be seeing it but definitely the effect it's very it's not like one child 4ot high wall and is step back so it's still but it still appears over 30 ft corre be visible point but it reduced how much further back did you have to go so you could see it don't if you go back no no no no how much further back would the re the recess of the 44p I cannot say at this point we have to throw the Ang and really give the order do that precise Mr chairman did we say 20 feet originally in the yes that was that was the board suggestion by Vice chairman Barry okay I don't think the visual impact uh well this is kind this is what I expected it's not going to disappear further you go up but it really is set back so it's effective not one highall could we get more plantings in the property one there you go that's the Bei um I'd like to I'd like to add something uh Mr chair [Music] me she wants to add something go ahead no Sam the planner oh I'm sorry go ahead um so I just wanted to point out to the board that the current building line is at 89 ft from the property line um there'll be plantings and then this would be further set back 20 ft so from the residential uh houses it would be h a total of 109 ft so you know when you get it visually it may be seen it may not be seen I I don't know but I'm saying that it's set more than 100 ft from the property line that that 40 foot um high wall it's also a drop walk is it not I'm sorry it's lower in other words from the building to the houses is rather straight line and it goes low it is though if you look at my review page eight um actually have taken a photograph from the property line that's at the corner of Harrison Street and um you know proxim to most proximate uh so it's that um house on lot n and if you see that you'll see there's a um there's a drop so you know it's 40 foot from grade but it's really at a lower height than uh the houses so I purposely took that picture to give you guys a perspective any other questions or discussions of the board member I have a motion to open up the meeting to the public motion second all those in favor I all those opposed meeting is now open to the public anyone wishing to address the board and the Architects for the applicant please approach no one coming forward the meeting is closed to the public uh do you have anything else to add no you're no do the board members have any questions any discussion may I have a motion chairman so this is for uh it's a bifurcated application as I indicated so they need the D6 variance for the building height for the 40 foot portion of the roof the 30 foot portion as proposed that's permitted in the zone and then the variances are set forth in our Board plannner review report minimum sidey setback 20 feet required 10 feet uh proposed minimum Frontage 150 feet is required existing non-conformity was less than 150 feet uh the D6 variant for the building height at 40 feet maximum building coverage 40% where 43.9 I mean 40% is required 43.9% is proposed and there's the existing non-conformity of a buffer to the residential uh area and it's that needs to be 40 feet and it's 11.3 feet I would also like to add two contingencies one that the parking lot be re repaved and two that the trailers parked close to the homes be removed I'm sorry Mr J you said Barking Lot paid and what was the second there are trailers backing up to the property line of the neighbors okay so we would like them move you have a nice clean side yard now so chairman in terms of Paving the parking lot again they're coming back for site plan do you want to address well we decided we would make the offering now so if they would have time to plan okay it's okay either way Mr chairman what about the idling of the trucks near the houses in the entrance I'm sorry what the idling of the trucks yeah that's that would be in front of uh well at any rate and James can I ask you to hop in here that's governed by state law okay 15 minutes they an idle if it's uh below 25° and uh 3 minutes if it's not below uh at the last meeting I offered to pass out the uh email address and the phone numbers for the hotlines both County and state but that's not part of our application they also agre they also agreed at the last meeting for the uh the exit to be closed off with with the fire access yes that was that's also part of terminating that for any you know delivery traffic correct that was part of the fire department's uh letter and that's already been agreed to they've indicated that at site plan they they've told us that they're that they agree to everything in the fire department's letter and that would all be addressed the time of site yes okay if there's no further discussion may I have a motion Please Mr brigle what's the process if there is no motion well you're the chairman you can make a motion if you want somebody's got to make a motion very well I don't have to give cause or reason you don't okay I will make a motion to approve this application may I have a second you can vote no you don't have to vote Yes I need a second motion we can't proceed we'll be here all night on Mr devil second please pull the board a yes can you explain the yes and no the motion is to approve the application if you support that motion you will vote Yes Dr Ry yes Mr pous no Mr seber no Miss talo no Mr carage no so the motion to approve did not obtain the affirmative vote of five board members so the application denied very well I thank you for your time and efforts next application is Roger and Wendy mcneel good evening Mr chair members of the board entering my appearance on behalf of Roger and Wendy mcneel John bettery 3 University Plaza sweet 207 hackin sack New Jersey nice to see everyone so um we have an application tonight for a D1 variance and when this was brought to my attention by the architect here this evening I said you're wrong this is in an r1b Zone I know this sound like the back of my hand there's no way that this is a B1 zone why in the world would this be in a B1 Zone lo and behold he was right I was wrong uh and I still can't figure out why it was put in a B1 Zone uh the only thing I can offer anecdotally is when maybe years ago when shoppr was located where the Walgreens is and where uh 163 East Main when that was built maybe there was an intention by the town to have some more commercial development and more parking and larger Lots um because I can't quite figure it out you can understand like the mills in indust industrial Zone tulip Gardens and tulip Meadows is actually still in an industrial Zone but they were used at one point for some industry so um whatever the case is this site and the uh what would it be the northern portion of Hudson Street so you go when you go up Hudson Street half of the Street's in a residential Zone half of the street is in a uh B1 business Z so it is something that I think it sounds to me like the town is looking at but in any event we're going to talk about the fact that we do have a D1 variance here this evening and uh in addition to that we have some C1 variances some standard variances in an effort to um to construct the home that's going to be constructed here so um by way of background this home was built in the U mid 1920s it was um really built as a bungalow along with a lot of the homes there with the pekman river across the street the home has been in the mcneel family for many many years it was the childhood home of Mr mcneel and their daughter Roger Wendy's daughter Meredith who's here with her husband ju uh they currently occupy the home and it's their intention to make this their permanent home and to build a brand new home for them and for their family into the future um you know we've had a lot of time planning this guy in particular has spent a lot of time with with the uh the owners and the applicants in terms of coming up with the right property and the right home for this property rather and I just want to commend James D Maria for a moment because um he really cares and he gave a lot of input into this and uh gave some really you know very important suggestions with respect to building this home so they're about to construct a new home and there have been a lot of questions in the uh the report of Mr kobar's and the planner as to is this an addition is it a new home and it is it is a new home the the the foundation is being maintained and the original Plants emitted to the town was for a home that had a full basement this home is located in the AE zone of the pekman river flood zone and Mr de Mario has a lot of experience in this area uh made suggestions that the basement be filled in that flood vents be put in that the home be elevated to be outside of the base blood elevation and we have an exhibit that we're going to present tonight uh to you and that the Architects going to testify to making all of those recommendations and it's only to be lots of money spent on a brand new home and to build it in the flood zone just didn't make any sense so the home will be elevated there will not be a basement there will be floods uh events and we're going to speak about um we're going to speak about all of that so with that said I'd like to introduce the plans um and actually we picked up some nice architectural elevations as a result of that we GNA mark this as exhibit A1 and I okay so our first witness tonight is Jeffrey Schleck and he's going to testify in the area of architecture okay War we swear from the testimony you're about to give before this board it's going to be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth tell us your name by last name givs your address it's Jeff Schleck J FF last name is schle s c l e c HT do not or okay thank you Jeff you would give the board the benefit of your professional educational experience sure um I've maintained my licensure in state of New Jersey for 30 some OD years um provide testimony in front of board such as yourself uh many times are accepted thank you okay Jeff uh I think probably here you want to point out I'd like you to give an overview of the plans and these plans are different from the plans that were submitted so if you could give an overview of the uh elevations and the floor plans that also speak to to how the house is going to be constructed with respect to the pl on loation so just m um so what Mr veter handed out is exhibit A1 correct okay so why don't you just identify for the record what A1 is or you either one so so the the distinction of exib that was provided um comparison to what was previously submitted uh is the um determination to uh fill in the basement and uh take all of that use and relocate it as far as the overall project planning uh the overall size of the house that I'm going to describe is exactly the same otherwise Mr V does this affect any of the variances yeah okay and then uh the only other uh variation from the previous plan is the addition of a fence for the yard area that uh continues up the north side of the property uh up to the uh main uh proposed addition of the house which is within the setback return to the house and then a portion of fence that on Hudson Street that sort of connects the uh the existing residence to the existing garage to could provide complete enclosure of the the AR fure and the reason that this was shown is that there may be a variance that would have been caused by having offence and sparing the applicant can come back if they choose to to have the fence the fence in the yard we U like the request out of the board this okay it's I guess my confusion is say we're picking up plans we haven't sorry yeah exact the elevations so just carefully explain expl the difference between what we have seen and what you proposing okay yes yeah I think because the plans right now that are before you are what they're intending to construct based upon the changes with the flood zone I think it'd be helpful to go through all four elevations and the floor plans and the flood so the uh can you hear me if I stand over so the existing residence um is represented by outline of the basement come PR is approximately 700 Square ft uh for they currently used as two bedroom two small bedrooms the bathroom uh they have a kitchen and then a living SP um the proposed addition is to uh as was mentioned to uh demolish the existing uh main portion of the building the framing and roof and walls maintain the foundation we will be in the basement okay to uh accommodate better accommodate the uh flood pars will be required by DP and the addition will be a 4 foot addition to the north continue towards the front of the house extend out about 10 feet and then uh continue towards Hudson by about 17 and a half feet uh that will allow us to construct uh two and a half story residents on top of that Foundation uh we will have uh two Dormers uh on that upper level just so that we can accommodate the space displaced by the basement so Mr chairman the Dormers just to answer this question the Dormers are new so losing the storage space in the basement the applicants had asked the architect to come up with some additional uh ideas for storage and came up with the Dormers not causing a height variance still within the code although I believe our code in Little Falls if the property's in flood zone does allow for a third floor I I believe that but we're not asking for that so it's a two half what is the height of the building the height of the building will be 34 feet 6 in perfect thank you yeah um chairman may I make a comment sure um I believe the uh um San had uh made some comments in her notes um regarding and the only reason I'm bringing this up is because we're talking about sidey yard and and rear setbacks and uh she did address the situation where Hudson Street tends to be the preferred uh front yard uh versus Cedar Grove Road because of the because of the yeah exactly the lot line right or the uh the distance on the front Frontage um are we should we address that first or I plan on addressing the planning testimony um after he's done and then we will uh we will address that we did uh notice with the side and front yard setbacks oh I just because you guys were calling it out so I just yep but want to be clear that all that will adjust once we address it I guess continue uh so the construction will be uh we'll be raising up the foundation two feet to accommodate the elevation and doing wood frame for wood wood frame construction uh um platform construction for the main residents to accommodate um downstairs uh k kitchen uh eating kitchen area a dinet area and a living space as well as powder room and laundry we will have a stair going upstairs to accommodate three bedrooms and two baths and then the stair up to the attic uh the exterior uh finishes we'll be doing horizontal signing siding uh actual single roof and we will also be constructing a small porch at the front long see to grow that'll return on Hudson to what is currently the uh the front entrance uh and then we will also be maintaining the rear entrance but putting a covered stoop off of the the drive that we'll have faces we'll have uh rest Windows all the bedrooms will have their compliant uh you know erress windows for required by code and the open porch will be will be covered um and will be suitable for sit on what will be the square footage when it's completed it's approximately 2,000 square feet just over 2,000 square feet so we're going from up to 2000 a small lot very impressive you originally had a Pantry on the first floor and now it's called laundry is that just a mistake on no you did convert that in the again as far as the revision for the basement we're going to have toate the abilities that laundry so we're working with that on the technical side as far as specific types of water the uh it will curent plan for Forest air system so Beed in thetic portion of thetic from portion of thetic the used to Mr Po just brings up a good point though everything that's currently so there are um utilities that service the house in the basement uh some of them are not all that old but you know in an effort to make this flood compliant that's all being there will be nothing in that Coss space just flood vents so that you know God forbid there's a flood that gets to that level it passes through the house in accordance with the you explain how flood vents work how well it's it's a say it's a trap door but it's a it's a Louver instead of air to go through it's uh it's it's generally closed but the pressure of water water the hydrostatic pressure opens up those Vents and allows water to flow through so the concept is that you don't have that volume to be obstructed uh any water that's migrating throughout the other area if it gets to that level you know the nice thing about um you know this particular area as opposed to elevating a home in the Pake river is it's very discreet they're only they're less than a foot you know the the distinction between the base flood we're supposed to elevate the home two feet above the base flood elevation under the new regulations and we're less than one foot um you know where the base flood elevation is now and where the living floor is the basement was really the biggest problem that we had and if you uh just to to get a visual on the home the home at 221 Wilmore uh next to the old historic house on Lindley Road that home was built to flood standards and you can't even tell it doesn't look like an elevated home it has flood vents they're very discreet so just to give the board a feeling of what you'll look at here this is going to look like any other Colonial home on that street and I I compliment The Architects I think the the elevations of this home look very similar to a lot of the older homes on Cedar Grove Road and the one that the board approved the addition on on the corner of Charles Street which is a nice addition to this area is there a way to get to the basement once these once it's built is there a door it's C cross Spas it's a c cross one of the things that uh I'll be working with the contractor on is exactly that for Access because we will be maintaining existing Services coming into the property uh and having to migrate those and repipe those up to and they will be physically filling it in the basement will be filled in up to with with what soil or concrete both both both you have to you're not going to fill it all up with concrete we're going to put you know engineered fill okay up to it and then have a concrete slab small rat slab on the bot slab convention but essentially creating F so one of the comments Mr kobar was um public water I missed what you said one of the comments one of the comments of Mr cob as a board engineer was about the connection to public water sanitary sewer and Gas and Electric utilities that they were not shown on the plans I just wanted you to address that because they are pre-existing they are they are existing uh we have um they all come out towards the the front out to seated road so our addition obviously will have to accommodate is there a drainage p sh to pit on the properly uh we did not I did not there seems to be a pipe going into the ground a white pipe looks appears to be going into the [Music] ground just V yeah can we swear in rather uh if you'd like to I think I think what it is is just you know simple water retention for the basement the the basement again unfortunately the basement was recently waterproofed so I think that's okay so we we don't have any plans or discussion for eventual drainage or do we so the home will be properly drained there'll be gutters and leaders but there's nothing on the plane yeah I don't think there's I don't think we're proposing a drywell if that's what we would like fific yeah no there's there's no drywell proposed I don't think that um based upon the runoff it's going to the reason for my question was I wondered if the pipe went to a dryw already existing no it does not okay so you're GNA have to come back to our engineer with that yeah I mean in that case there was a su pump you know that was pumping that will that condition will be gone now there's not going to be a big there be a brawl space now that would allow for water to pass through it I'm interested in surrounding areas so I guess it just goes on the road yeah I don't think this will um make things any better or won't make things any worse okay fair enough any other questions for the architect um I just want to confirm that the elevation of your first Flor is going to be high enough based on blood elevation I think we're fine on the height no information sh on the plan that will need to be determined permit sure so we don't have um we don't have an engineer um with us if this evening we do have a Consulting engineer that will help on the project and then can coordinate with you you know with respect to the final uh plans and the uh what I would assume would be a permit by rule here in terms of U getting the approval a flood whatever theye yeah and the applicant will comply with whatever it is we need to comply with with respect to building in the blood Zone then we C do we have a copy of the survey yet one was provided uh and I submitted one digitally one yes George Anderson prepared an updated recent survey back in November is there anything else on the Eng report let's see so with respect that we have the survey we spoke about we will comply with the special flood Hazard area ordinance um with the DP and the township the plan the utilities are shown on the plan or will be shown on the eventual plans we accept the waiver of the traffic impact environmental impact community community impact I think that's it Mr chairman uh I'd like to ask our did you address the planers report yeah yeah I'll address the uh the planning later yes okay any was any is his testimony complete I have no further questions to the architect any questions to the architect from the planning board uh the air conditioning unit you did say the heating unit would be in the uh they will have air conditioning so we will have a condenser unit that would be located at the rear of the property there's already one on site look like an air conditioning cont yeah okay still can't joh John John I forgot wheny I still can't figure out the white part never mind um may I have a motion to open up the meeting to the public second second second all those in favor all those opposed most me meting is open to the public anyone wishing to address the testimony of the architect please come forward uh sir did you wish to address the testimony of the architect no one coming forward I close the meetings to the public um continue okay thank you Mr select okay so I would like to um to address the planner's report and uh a little bit of a Bizarro response here because I I'm supposed to be making arguments as to uh why we are seeking a deviation from what the permitted zone is allowing the permitted Zone allows lots of things this neighborhood so I'm gonna attempt I'm going to attempt to do this and I I think um you know it I'm sorry you can keep it Brie okay well I do want to you know I do want to address this on the record and Mr Bor is nodding that I should do this so the the justification for the D1 variants is to show that you know would the applicant suffer undue hardship if you know compelled to use the property for what the permitted use is so the permitted use could be a deli could be a store could be an office that requires parking um the applicants nor the neighbors would not want that in fact this would cause a substantial detriment to the area to the township if we actually permitted a B1 use so I think you know for th for those reasons I think the justification for the D1 variant here is that every other property that is located here whether it's on Hudson Street or on Cedar bro Road in this uh lsap L-shaped section of this particular Zone there 99 % single they 100% single family or two family very few two families my knowledge there are no two families on Hudson there are some two families located in that Zone on um Cedar Grove Road but um every property is residential so it would be an anomaly to allow something that even though it is permitted it's essentially in my opinion this is something that was left over from a long time ago and I don't think was ever focused on that um I think it was a surprise to everyone that this was in a B1 Zone but be that as it may I think the use here which is conforming with the majority of this area which is r1b is Justified in that it's currently used as a single family home we're not proposing a two or a three or four family home we're proposing to keep it as a single family home uh with respect to the the C1 variant is and now I'll address Mr brage so be because the property the orientation of the is on theer Gro Road and um however the lot width on Hudson is a lot longer so if we look at either you're either going to treat the back of this property which we really consider the sidey yard then if you consider the front to be Hudson then we need a rear yard vending so we would request that as well um we believe that the orientation of the home which it has been for almost a 100 years has been Cedar Grove Road and that the front is Cedar Grove Road the rear is in the back and The sidey Yards one on Hudson and one on the south side or the north side of the property but going through the the planners report and the justifications for that we have an existing foundation and the foundation Roger's family built a New Foundation that property didn't have a foundation didn't have a basement and Roger's father put in a New Foundation back in the 60s it's in very good shape and it would be economic waste to have to have applicants destroyed that they're already filling it in but to take that out and move it was pretty you know extreme cost so that's the reason the house is maintaining the situation and being situated where it is you know with respect to the variances the C variances so we have um setback variances here so we look at um you know the planner has asked us to justify the variances either is it a C1 or C2 so C1 simply is you know can we justify it based upon the hardship of the existing lot itself and I think the answer to that is yes I think we have elements of C1 and C2 here so with respect to C1 we have a pre-existing lot it's more than or about 100 years old the house has been situated where it is it would be hardship to have them it's already a hardship to have to fill in the basement but it' be further hardship to have them take out the whole foundation and keeping it where it is it exists well where it is right now and the addition is going to further complement that but if we don't buy the C1 argument the C2 balancing argument to show that the benefits of this project as a whole substantially outweigh any detriment and there are um you know several points that I'll look through so the mlul give you various purposes that we could look to when justifying the variants in this case um one of the ones that comes right out at me is purpose e to secure saf from fire flood or any other natural or man-made disasters so right there this has huge improvements because there's nothing more there's nothing more important than public safety so this is going to elevate the house eliminate the basement eliminate the problems that we've seen with homes in this town where basements have been compromised look at joonie struther house um that had the foundation cracked so where that was an extreme situation but Public Safety is you know far and you know foremost the most important thing here and in addition to that we have purpose a the promotion of the general welfare because the H this house and the Home Improvement will add value and quality to not only this property but the general area right now it's it is a a small home this is going to have a lot of architectural improvements there's really some very nice features having a front porch having a brand new home in your neighborhood is a positive and then purpose ey is really almost the subset of that the promotion of a desirable visual environment with high quality attractive architecture additional uh features including the Landscaping redoing of uh all of the entire facade of the home and a brand new home in this uh neighborhood and keeping with the character of the neighborhood adding a front p a front porch and other features of the home I think make for the purpose ey the promotion of a desirable visual environment very important here and justify the variant based upon C2 so for those reasons I think that the D1 variance is Justified and the C variances are justified in my opinion under C1 and certainly if you don't buy the C1 definitely under C2 uh I believe we've answered all of the um questions of the professionals and um we will have our professionals coordinate with Mr calars with respect to the final construction drawings and look to file any permits that we need to file with njd we already have a county application that will be filed this week uh hopefully tomorrow with respect to um either a letter of no interest from the county there there are no curb cuts on the road but it is on a county road I believe Mr Posas I have a question on front yard you have a question on the front yard they brought up no I think that was Mr Gage did yeah so yeah did you have a question I did I think I uh we address the you know depending on how you look at the house you know we we'll ask for a rear yard stepb as well so this way we're covered for that if someone were to view the home as having Frontage on Hudson it would create a deficiency in the B1 Zone you need 30 feet and we have 10 point something 47 I think you've covered it all okay I have a question for our planner um at one point you used the r1p standard for just to um put put it in perspective um the even standards are what apply so basically just trying to understand if it is overing the but um so just that given an understanding um that you know the F may be higher but it's still well within the building coverage limit so I was thinking more in terms of you know uh it being in the flood way if there is any um anything that we need to be concerned about then it Bally uh based on that second portion the C 25% so really not much that all right thank you very much ordinance requir than okay U I am actually gonna introduce this Mr MC handed this to me this is a physical Sign Sealed copy of the surveyed by George Anderson dated November 7th 2023 for the file does it match the drawing on this yes it does Mr mcneel is that no he handed it to me Mr Anderson know you can't hear me EXC he's good though you guys are passing notes out of school thank you so um in summary we have a we have a single family home that's existing proposing a beautiful new single family home that will now be compliant with uh blood standards whereas the current home does not comply with the current flood standards and most importantly we provide a beautiful new home for meridith and one um you know to start their lives and to build their family there so for those reasons I hope the board sees fit to approve the app and I thank you um a question any discussion about the curbing on Hudson Street I think any thoughts about the curving there's uh there's some very limited amount of curbing on Hudson Street um it would look so nice with both we've heard that that may be one of the streets coming up to be redone by the township I don't know if that's accurate or not um there's a there's only about 10 feet on this property that actually has any curb left I know my question is would you consider curving it the so we did discuss that the applic the applicants are hoping not to have to do that um at this time this they've had considerable cost overruns with respect to having to make this to take the suggestions and make the house um flood ready and getting rid of the uh getting rid of the basement and taking out the uh proof the flood proofing that they did previously moving all the utilities yes or no the answer is they would prefer not to have to be obligated to do that with the hopes that it's on the list of the town and it will get done like some of the other streets that we've seen well they're going PA are you saying they make herbs I don't know I mean usually when a it's a municipal Street Hudson um so when that um when that my knowledge that happened once going down Jacobus no there there's lots of new streets I think doing clarent Street right now and uh there several new streets in that case I would simply suggest cleaning it up as well as you can that is agreeable um the uh the exist exting detached garage that is going to remain right yes um that's used for parking uh the garage I believe there there's a parking space next to it that will remain and I don't I'm not sure if it's used for storage or parking but yeah so they're they're not changing yeah they're not changing the use that will stay the same you have fence kind of like going against the shed and the shed looks like it's creeping over the property line does he intend to move the shed back into the property line so the fence can continue yeah if there is an encro I wasn't aware there was an encroachment that's why I asked the survey was was the same on this draw yeah the um the site plan was taken off of the survey prepared by George Anderson so that's a good suggestion if there's an encroachment it should be yeah I just don't want to put the fence up no absolutely just creates problems with neighbors sure yeah it's easy to just nope good suggestion any other comments suggestions questions of the board members I'm going to open up the meeting to the public in case there's any questions for our planner Mr veteran may I have a motion to open up the meetings to the public take a motion second need a second second all those in favor I I those opposed we are open the meeting is open up to the public for questions of Mr V no one coming forward the uh meeting is closed to the public okay any other discussion comments questions of the board members may I have a motion I'm not going to make another motion once's enough they making your work tonight Mr chairman yes yes yes uh chairman I'll make a motion to approve this application I don't know how we do this but whatever they want whatever they're proposing um well before we do that then why don't I ask our attorney as I should have before to qualify the uh various so the primary variance is for a D1 use variance uh to permit the construction and alteration of an existing single family home within the B1 Zone where it's not permitted uh there existing non-conformities in regard to minimum lot area where 5,000 square feet is required 3,390 square feet is the existing size of the lot minimum lot width we're 50 F feet is required and 38 feet is existing again existing non-conforming uh minimum front yard setback uh where a setback of 10 feet is required 1.35 feet is uh is proposed minimum Rail Yard setback 30 feet is required 10.47 feet is proposed I would also point out that typically uh Mr veter has done a very good job in explaining the C variances and the reasons why in his opinion the board has the legal authority to Grant those variances in addition to that when you have a d variance a D1 variance which is a use is not permitted in the zone one of the things the court or the law looks at is U the bulk standards in that zone are not addressed for a single family house they're addressed for more commercial uses so the law permits if you grant the D1 variance because the proofs are higher that the C variances are also subsumed within the granting of the D1 variance but as I said Mr vet also went through the proofs asked to both and if uh if this uh res if this application is approved by the board resolution would reflect both that the applicant is satisfied the proofs for C variants and also that they are subsumed within the granting of the D1 variance so those are the variances we just heard about the shed encroachment that will be eliminated and the applicant would also uh comply with all relevant terms and conditions in both the board planers review report and Mr kobar's review report thank you it also asks us is for this this property and some surrounding properties are looking to be rezoned to uh r1b in the future we won't have this issue again all right so make a motion to approve all by Mr Deo please PLL the board Mr pous yes Mr carage yes Mr Siver yes Mr Damian yes Miss catalo yes Dr AB yes chairman katrick chairman votes yes declares this application approved unless you have other people to call we have everybody variant I qu thank you very much he's testing me tonight uh all right quickly rur is there any old business there any new business may I have a motion for adjournment so moved this group does not like to make motions adjournment oh you made I dthy can