good evening welcome to the public hearing for the Livingston zoning Board of adjustment today is February 27th 2024 if you're an applicant for D or use variance you should be aware that such a variance can only be granted after showing that special reasons for the grant of the variance exists that the variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the zoning Board of the township of Livingston you should also be aware that in order to be granted such a variance you will require an affirmative vote of five members of the seven member Board of adjustment other variances require a majority of four members to Grant the variance if you're an applicant for any variance and your variance is denied by this board you have the right to appeal to the superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of notice a decision and that Court May overturn the decision of this board if you're an objector to any type of variance that has been granted you too May appeal to Superior Court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of the not of the notice of decision if you file an appeal I ask that you please provide a copy of your complaint to the planning administrator Jackie Hollis pursuant to the requirements the open public meeting act also known as the Sunshine Law adequate notice of this meeting was provided to The Star Ledger and West Tas Tribune and a copy was also posted on the bulon board of the municipal building in addition to having notice posted notice of this meeting was placed on the Township's website members of the public will have an opportunity to ask questions or to make statements regarding each application at the appropriate time when the time comes if you like to address the board please come to the front and use the microphone so we can ensure your comments or questions are part of the record we will now call the role Miss Khan Miss Khan is here Mr Kenya here miss marage here Mr Sherman here miss Yuan here Mr Beer here and Mr jemus our board attorney is here and Miss Hollis our planning administrator is here tonight miss con can you call the first applicant block 1704 lot 1989 East mclen Avenue application number 20232 V Gary and Darice T Taro applicant seeks approval for a two car Garage in violation of the following section 17087 e1a accessory build accessory Building height 13 feet allowed 18 feet proposed 5 feet variance requested I will be recusing myself from this Miss Khan will take over how how are you good to see you okay um you okay okay Mr Jus would you like to swear them in early are both of you going to testify or is just one all right so then I'm going to ask you both do you swear or affirm that all the statements and testimony you give to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete consider yourselves under oath I'm going to ask the architect provide his name and his and where he's microphone turn that not turning on oh he's oh thank you oh that's better good evening thank you uh Peter Serpico firm name is Serpico architect Westfield New Jersey 121 Boon Avenue b y n t o n Westfield 07090 I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey for uh since 1997 uh graduated New Jersey Institute of Technology 1986 uh practicing since 1987 uh 1997 I'm sorry Mr Serpico you've been uh qualified to give expert testimony as an architect in other jurisdictions or before this board yes I have all right and is your license in good standing yes it is madam chairman respectfully I suggest that Mr Serpico be entitled to present architectural testimony thank you okay thank you thank you who's presenting first you're you're sworn in okay I guess I'll give a general statement of what has happened um should I pull up the pictures on the board sure or just give a general what we're doing whatever you'd like you can pull them up if you want okay just you have a better idea I'm sorry what Mr varar Taro Taro I'm sorry I stand corrected um I know you were sworn in before and you're under oath now um just so you know this application requires five yes votes and there are five members sitting here so just so we're clear that if four members vote Yes and one abstains or votes no you don't succeed okay we're obligated to let you know that all right thank you I'm sorry thank you very much so we presented a plan um I have originally uh a single car garage detached in my yard from the 20s we never really were able to park a car and it it's an old old garage so we would like to have a two-car garage with standable space upstairs so we could put like we can get rid of our shed clean up the yard you know and and put the stuff that's um around in storage and put it upstairs where I could stand um the first plan was our original one on the left that was the N was too big so we dramatically reduced it to the plan on the right um and that's what we're seeking to get that has a front storage um access and that could be a window or you know continue to have the storage and that gives us the ability to park a couple of cars in the um in the garage and I have three drivers now children so we could use a space in the garage to put a couple of vehicles and uh have parking behind it so they could park too um aesthetically we uh oh actually the original garage is within 3 and 1/2 ft of the neighbors property we we're going to move it to conform to uh the 5 foot setback so we wouldn't need a variance for that and bring it away um P would you like to talk about the Aesthetics of it and the pitch no that's the plan for I'm not sure have a side that's okay we have side pictures okay that's okay okay well just little history here I met Gary and his and his wife a few years ago and uh they uh asked me to assist them in the design for a garage I've done uh plenty of work in Livingston by the way and and uh had not been before the board for any zoning variances this is this is the first in many years uh I am aware uh that this uh that Livingston does have uh here we go uh a very much of a rarity for two car uh detached garages most of them are attached and I believe any new construction requires attached garages to the home this property as you could see it's it clearly doesn't condone a attached garage we we looked at that from the start it just didn't work unless you drove through it to get to the backyard so um it just it had no uh it just didn't work on this site so Gary wanted to uh create a two-car garage expand his original onecar garage for what he just mentioned to get some cars in there storage in the attic space and um you know as an architect we we like to go out there and look at look at the property look at the adjacent neighborhood we want to complement what's there so I started with taking his roof lines on his home trying to follow the pitches of of those they were pretty uh uh nice steeper slopes uh his garage basically how we how we did get to this design was the the original the slope you see here is the slope of the original onecar garage we basically just continued it up to obtain the width uh of the two-car garage and it does complement the house fairly well uh I would I went out there several times looked at it from different Vantage points and uh I don't see anything with with this uh as being any type of aesthetic detriment to the neighborhood to to to faroh house uh itself um also what Gary stressed was the attic space the reason why we have an 18 we're proposing the 18t height is for the attic space to become a usable space the tar are you know everyone everyone knows these days uh budgets are increasing for construction they're really we would say out of the water in terms of pricing so the taros are are really putting out some some good money for this for this project and they really they're taking it to heart they really want to do it correctly and and and do it in a fashion that will really service them properly for for now and in the future and and Gary's uh biggest concern is when he does get up into his attic he he asked me to to get as much space as we can for walking with Headroom so with this pitch uh stopping at the 18t Mark uh he's got about six foot I believe we agreed about six six or seven feet if that in width of about a 6' 8 7t ceiling underneath the collar ties that will be there structurally which isn't all that much if we were to reduce the pitch a bit number one the Aesthetics of the building would really uh I would say be a detriment it would just not it would look too squat for the proportions of the width of the building um and uh we kept it at this at this pitch again for two reasons one for the Aesthetics and number two for the uh use of the of the of the attic he he's really using it for storage his house is is fil is pretty much filled I went in and looked at his existing attic it's an older home it's doesn't have all that much headro to begin with his basement is pretty pretty crowded up so he's really looking to really as he ages with his wife ages uh over time they don't want to leave town they really love the property love love Livingston uh so he wants to be able to get up there and sort out boxes and not have to be on his knees at all times um there is a pull down stair nothing permanent there's nothing in the design that uh would denote any type of uh living space Art Space you know it's not he's not looking to make it a uh a workspace 100% storage that's really what he's looking for and he's looking for the comfort the comfort of just being able to walk up that step and for at least six feet in width be able to walk back and forth uh front to back with uh the ease of not having to lean over and be on his knees in a typical addict scenario the other thing I want to just bring up quickly is uh as Gary did say uh he testified that he he had me move the house over uh the garage over to uh eliminate another possible variance he we could have went in saying let's leave it where the old one was non-conforming existing use see if we would probably then need a variance anyway so we moved it in 5T um I think it's situated well on the site and the last point I like to make is when you're looking at this from a distance and if this roof was a little bit lower if it was at 13 ft we're looking you're looking at the bulk of this is looking at shingles that are rising at at a slope this is about an 8 8 and 12 I don't remember what the actual slope was on this one um I don't believe Prof in my professional opinion uh aesthetically there is not much of a difference uh in looking at this roof at 18 ft versus uh at the 13 feet it it's going to appear to be a sloping shingled roof Timberline shingles nice nice shingles he proposes to use uh it's not like a vertical wall that we're we're battling against here it the difference of the 5T it's not looking at a vertical wall versus this angled plane so I just wanted to bring that up so everyone could get a little better feeling of what the difference would be if this thing was any lower and again anything lower would would just be a a pitch that would not be aesthetically pleasing in this uh in the look of the garage that's about it that's what I have thank you thank you any other comments um I think we and and again this is a it's a very RAR siiz lot this is not your typical lot I don't know if I mentioned that I know I mentioned that detached garages are very rare in in Livingston this is uh it's a very uh one in I don't know how many I I could have done a study on that but I didn't um not many Lots this narrow so uh seems like he he you know we situated it in the in the right position the proper setbacks are there and what I would like to do also is maybe clean up the yard and we have a shed back there now maybe get rid of the shed and whatever's in there the kids' bikes and everything and put everything upstairs if I have enough room so that'll clean the yard up and none of the neighbors have a problem with this that you know it's all our backyards together so nobody has a problem with uh us doing this and most of the garage is behind the house so if you look at it from the street all you're really seeing is the onear garage anyway the rest of it is behind my house so I'm the only one that's going to really see most of it okay thank you thank you does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness how is this different than what you presented last time this the plan on the right it's not it's not right it's not different yeah we we was looking at what what we can do to change it but after talking to Pete there's not much lower we can go especially with the roof ties without hitting your head and stuff like that um so it's the same plan as the last time I was here okay I have two questions okay um so from last time um you said the attic access would be the pull down um will that still remain the same yes okay also uh still no pring will go into the house I mean into the the garage no okay the my last one would be um can you please explain to me the the two uh the side door what are the use of them oh that's just like when the cars are in the garage I can get at the stuff in the front of the garage without moving the cars out gotcha thank you so like we can get in there and like take stuff in and out without like that's how I'll get to the attic steps which will be in the front of the cars right through the doors without like why why is it has to be like a two two doors well just just just to make it bigger so I can get stuff in out easier that's all if I put a lawn mower in there and it's wider so I don't hit the doors and stuff Goa thank you does anyone in the public have any questions for this witness okay yes Mr Serpico based upon your testimony and the observations that you made about the Aesthetics and everything else is it your opinion that if the board were to approve this application the municipal law would be Advanced by the deviation from the zoning ordance requirement and that the benefit from the deviation would substantially outweigh any detriment yes 100% a that's all I have a benefit does anyone in the public want to make a statement does anyone on the board want to make a statement um well I was going to ask a question but I'll just make it as a statement um I know know in the last well the last hearing or the hearing before you had also it was also brought up by the board about a deed restriction uh that the garage would never uh become an apartment habitable space are you still willing to yes okay I'll do that I'll also make a statement this is just going to be a strictly for your uh cars the garage itself yes okay it's the car will be on the underneath and storage above it basically we never had car cars in the garage yet we own the house 30 years because the old garage wasn't really big enough for anything so this will be the first time we're able to park in garage with everything getting stolen you know we want to get them in there give enough parking for the kids and stuff like that so we're actually moving the garage back a little so Mr tar so I can understand did you just agree to a condition that you're going to put a deed restriction that the that the garage will not be used for any other purpose that it won't be used as a living space yes it won't be used for living space yes and you understand when you say that you're going to put a deed restriction you're going to prepare a deed is going to be prepared and recorded that says that it can't be with the register of esex County you understand that that that it can't be used to as a living space right like yeah like that means there's no utilities in there or Plumbing or I'm not arguing I just want to make sure that you understand that's a condition of if the board were to move on this that might be a condition of the approval is that correct yes thank you okay I'd like to make a comment um thank you so much for um first of all bringing your architect today tonight to explain to us the um plans and for um um modifying the plans from the first time and for moving the structure over five feet so you would need a second setback we appreciate all that you've done um taking into account the Aesthetics of your house making the garage work with it and um also the way that your driveway is set up that the garages in the back really won't see it from the street and I think that you've done a really nice job um tailoring it for your house so does anybody want to make a motion for this okay um Miss Mirage yes Miss Yuan yes Miss con votes yes Mr Kenya yes Mr Sherman yes congratulations thank you it thank you buddy we did it thank you everyone please call the next application block 4700 Lot 36 Hazelwood Avenue application number 22330 DV abishek gangal applicant seeks approval for a new attached garage deck in right side and we are addition in violation of the following sections 17099 C2 front yard setback 40 ft required 26.1 ft proposed existing 13.9 ft variant requested 17099 C3 right side yard setback 10 ft required 6.67 feet proposed 3.33 ft variance requested 17099 C3 left side yard setback 10t required 5.75 proposed 4.25 ft variance requested 170 d99 C3 aggregate side yard 30% required 24.7% proposed 5.3% variance requested habit of floor ratio 30% allowed 39.94 per proposed 99.94% variance requested welcome back thank you Diana mgn from the law firm of gason Pomo um we're here again uh with respect to six Hazelwood Avenue the application was first heard in September then we came back um last month with a revised plan so that the uh habital habitable floor area ratio was reduced um there became some confusion in terms of a document regarding the average setback what we learned was um because Mr uh gang's property is located so close to the corner it doesn't apply because you need two houses on either side to create that average front yard setback so we will be talking about the front yard setbacks in the neighborhood just in general terms to set the the you know as a comparison but it will not affect any of the variances that uh we had requested um we began the application last month and we heard from Mr gang wall who testified that he would like to remove the existing detached garage that is currently situated at the end of a very long driveway in the rear of his property and build a new attached garage to the house which would lessen impervious coverage and create a large open yard space while adding a secure garage area for his electric vehicle the property is under sized being only 50 ft wide where 75 ftt width is required the property is also somewhat shaped like a trapezoid having a left left side depth of 139 1/2 ft and a right side depth of approximately 14 3.79 ft a number of the variances that are required are directly related to the pre-existing conditions which include the front yard setback uh we have a pre-existing 26.1 feet 40 ft are required um sidey yard setback requires 10 ft we have a pre-existing left side yard of 5.75 ft and on the right side uh we are proposing a 6.67 setback the required AG aggregate sidey yard is 30% or 15 ft and we are proposing 20.7% or 12.42 ft and maximum building coverage ratio is 25% where we are proposing 25.4 finally the proposed addition requires a D4 variance for habitable floor area ratio as the proposed project project exceeds the maximum all out of 30% at 39.94 as I noted earlier Mr gangell has already testified and I I'm assuming all of the board members remember his testimony that he would like to increase the dining room area on the first floor where currently there is a small area for dining add a first floor guest bedroom for his elderly parents under the new addition a finished basement is proposed as recreational space for his two children the current home does not have any usable basement spaces the ceilings are very low upstairs Mr gangell testified that his family all share one bathroom on the second floor so the proposed addition contemplates adding a full bathroom to create a primary suite and adding another bedroom to double as Mr gang wal's office as he works from home 5 days a week the smaller office area or den area on the first floor would be for Miss gangell who works from home just three days a week we left off with our architect Mr Hall who was about to testify about the proposed addition Mr gemus he was uh sworn in to testify I don't know whether uh he has to be reworn I would suggest that I'll just reaffirm his okay testimony would you just state your name and your and spell it please yes my name is Frank Hall h and Mr Hall the credentials that you you understand that you will swear or affirm that whatever statements or testimony you present today will be true accurate and complete yeah and in term terms of your credentials are they the same as when you were qualified previously yes they are nothing's changed your license is still around yes it is thank you and Mr chairman he can proceed please do okay Mr Hall when we were last in front of the board there was some confusion about whether average front yard setback would apply and we've confirmed that due to the closeness of the proximity of the property to the corner we will not be presenting evidence of average front yard setbacks but I would like you to describe the front yard setbacks of the other houses on the street in relation to the applicant's house for purposes of demonstrating whether the house stands out from others and how this addition um will affect the front yard setback uh the existing front yard the setback the front yard setback that's that is referenced in the uh the zoning chart is is an existing front yard setback and it's um substantially similar to the balance of the uh the residences in the neighborhood we we don't have as this McGovern said we don't have two on each side of us but we do have a pattern uh of similarity uh as we go down the street uh this this diagram that was taken from an aerial photograph uh shows at at our property um from taken from the curb line just as a as a having the consistent relationship with the property line down the street uh you'll see 35.7 existing to US 36 neighbor neighborhood neighbor adjacent to US 31 foot4 30 foot 6 so um there are neighbors that have even a smaller front yard set back than us um and that is to our existing it's 26.4 to our um existing front s back the new construction only violates the 40 foot required front yard set back by uh approximately 2 feet to the front ofos garage M McGovern is this document that's up on the board is that part of the application document it was submitted it was submitted to um to Cod okay I'm sorry I just wanted to make sure yes okay thank you this entire first cheet was uh resubmitted okay right now with respect to we're going to go through the layout just to um for the the the addition and what is being what is being added um could you tell us uh what is the size of the first floor bedroom uh the first floor bedroom is approximately 11 by 12 just figure how to get to the next sheet here there we go we have our Tech help coming oh sorry it wouldn't go to the next sheet because there was no next sheet on that file well okay with respect to the first Flor guest bedroom we were asking I was asking you what the size of that bedroom was uh it's the first floor guest bedroom uh I said is um approximately was 11 by 12 is there a minimum size that's considered a bedroom we generally try to um start bedrooms at about 11 by 14 so you can have a a full or a queen size bed bed and have a nightstand on either side of it a little bit of room to get around the bed uh this this bedroom actually at 10 I'm sorry 10 by 12 um sorry know that's um sort of surfing around the drawing here is um 11 by 11 by 12 uh it's about as small as we would would make a bedroom we have ones on the second floor that are 10 x 12 but uh this this is definitely at the the small end of a bedroom before it becomes really impractical especially if as was discussed there there would be occasional guests as in a couple of elderly parents so you need you know at least a full-size bed and some room for for people who uh you know need some room to move around especially as as they get elderly uh so really these these are very con conservative bedroom sizes okay now we're also adding to the dining room area we could go through through that they're showing two rooms is that uh that we we Revisited that actually with our with our client um we have we have a space schol dining and a space schol dining room uh we we clarified that our client was not so much looking looking for an extra room but extra room uh so really what we intend to do is for those two spaces to be combined so for larger holiday Gatherings uh there'll be room for a table that that stretches out Sunday dinners things of that nature whole family can s there and and holidays annual annual holidays and what is the dimension of that dining room the now the that full dining room with that added area that well it's about 11 feet wide okay um and it's a it's about 20 feet long if if you go from the back wall to where the stairs start okay all right um now the study space that's in front of it the the study space how will that at the bottom of the the plan at the front of the first floor uh that that would be used by Mrs gangwal uh who works from home I believe it's three days per week um it's a small space it's really a space for a desk and a chair and maybe a a bookcase or a file cabinet um just you know just adequate for somebody who uh spends a fair amount of time at home but like doesn't have clients coming in or anything would you uh then we'll go up to the second floor and describe the rooms in the bathrooms up there sure at the second floor um oops at the second floor uh we have an addition at the right side of the house and over that addition at the second floor are two bedrooms and a bathroom uh the the additional bathroom is so that um there can be a bathroom for for guests and so that um there's not so much sharing of bathrooms amongst the the family um and the two bedrooms are that his two children can have their own bedroom and one room um with the guest room probably the guest room being on the first floor uh because relatives um some of them are elderly probably they'll they'll be on the first floor and this what's labeled as bedroom number five is really the office or Mr gangell says he does work from home on on a full-time basis and what is the size of that that that room is 10 x 12 and that room when we started was this was made smaller yes as a result previously extended back to um as you can see here over over the top of the um the room below so that this this is where the uh the bedroom is at at the back of the first floor floor and so it was pulled back to be uh just 12T deep and this size of this bedroom um or what dedicated officebedroom um is that an overly large room no that that's even um uh eight or n% smaller than the room that um that I described downstairs and then just briefly the basement I know I'm skipping from the second floor down to the bottom um is there a useful basement in the house now uh based upon height I wouldn't call it a useful basement uh the existing house it's just a very small house to begin with the the footprint of the existing house is small uh but in addition to that the basement is only about 6 foot 5 in tall okay so the new basement area um how will what will that be will that be able to be used well we we would we would step down into that a little bit so to make the ceiling height adequate um um and that would be uh that would be utilized as play space for the for the s for the children in the home why couldn't that space be used as the full-time office space well Mr gangell works from home on a permanent basis um and you know I I think reasonably he would like to have you know see some daylight to be able to look out outside and see some sunshine uh and just to get to that space again going through a basement space that of deficient height you know I think reasonable to expect that you know um you should have U proper habitable space to uh to function in and the garage um is there a space requirement a size a minimum size that a garage can be yes it's this is just at that size a 12T width by 20 foot long the purpose of this garage would it would be attached to the house and also as I understand Mr gangal they have electric cars would this be um available for an electric car charging station in interly uh well sure if if you're if you're charging the car you need some room to move around um and safely operate the uh the the plugging the charger in um and it's you know you need to bring a a pretty heavy power line out to uh the garage if he if he was functioning with his detach garage um and this is just um more more serviceable U more functional um you know you're not you're not crossing the yard in a foot of snow in January you know to the extent that we snow in January snow anymore but yes but it's reasonable to plan for expecting snow sometimes um and every every modern home is built with um with an attached garage um um it's you know it's the expectation of of of modern living um and finally that could you describe the finishes on the exterior of the house sure um there we go this is the front facade uh this represents it's the same uh window um Arrangement and so forth and roof lines on the main existing part of the house and the U the roof lines of the the Edition at the right hand side would mirror that uh this represents an upgrade to the exterior finishes of sort of a Bor and Baton siding which is a kind of a farmhouse look uh with some stone at the at the at the first floor level uh the the rest of the uh the other three elevations of the house uh would be vinyl siding consistent with what's on the house now um with and um the final siding is is a ubiquitous siding but when we handle it with the appropriate trim and so forth casing around windows and corner boards and so forth um we can wind up with a very attractive looking traditional style home is this um addition is this going to add to the lot coverage or um reduce the lot coverage the the overall impervious coverage of the lot will significantly decrease is there anything else that you'd like to add I think the board may have some question I'm happy to take the any thank you anyone in the board have any questions for this witness shman yeah uh well a couple things um first question is I know that there's um you have in the rear of the property um obviously there's a lot of room to the rear setback line is there a reason why the addition wasn't more brought towards the rear of the house as opposed to the side of the house well a main function of the addition was to provide the uh the attached garage and um it would be highly impractical to push new garage to do an attached garage at the back of the house it would basically cut off all the the windows in the back of the house from the backyard it would it would have to be a garage we made a hard left turn into and uh there would be no backyard access from the rest of the house and the other question that I have is also um the addition kind of brings the house very close to number four um right now you have a driveway that slopes towards the street and the property slopes towards number four um the drainage off the house would go flow down the driveway to the street but now eliminating the driveway and put in the addition how are you handling the storm water off that side of the house without imp back to number four um well we we would be of course subject to whatever drainage requirements that the uh engineering department of of uh the township requires uh I mean my understanding working in Livingston is that there's not an impervious coverage requirement but it's addressed by the engineering department at such time as we apply for a permit and um certainly if any uh subsurface drainage was deemed necessary uh but I mean there there is a driveway now from the garage all the way to the front of the property so we're we're really just shortening and actually the driveway is is um is getting um further from from the adjacent property no no that that I get I mean the the the driveway would be in the front but then you now have like right now the water off the rear of the property would just flow down the driveway as it is today but once that driveway is removed and now you're dumping now to the side of the house which now is the the rear of the property has some impervious coverage in it we're eliminating that impervious coverage so we we have a perious backyard now okay okay anyone in the public have any questions for this witness all right anybody on the board want to make a statement anybody in the public want to make a stat but I have you have you want to say more plan oh I'm sorry I I thought that was from last time never never mind no we didn't jump the gun there a little bit that's okay thanks and we have Charles balanza as our planning expert H Mr Bala would you please uh state your name name and spell spell your name please yes uh Charles El baldanza the last name is spelled b a l d a n Za a Mr baldanza do you swear or affirm that any in all statements you make to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete including your testimony I do I will turn over credentials to m m thank you um Mr baldanza could you give your occupation yes I'm um a I'm a a professional planner also a registered architect and a professional engineer in the state of New Jersey I've had my own design firm since uh 2014 I've been a licensed planner in New Jersey since 2015 my license is a good standing obviously I'm focusing on the planner because that's what I was uh engaged to do uh tonight so my license is current and in good standing um I've testified in front of luse sports uh throughout nor mostly the northern half of New Jersey um and been accepted as a as an expert witness um uh in planning in front of those boards in fact you testified in front of this board last month yeah I was here last month I've moved to uh qualify Mr Balden as an expert in planning um does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regard no I we can accept you as an expert in planning thank you all right Charlie um uh what information did you review to prepare your analysis okay well I reviewed the plan submitted by the applicants architect would you just heard Mr Hall uh which was last revised 21624 I saw the 10 523 denial letter from the township zoning official I also reviewed the current Livingston zoning ordinances the 2018 Livingston master plan reexamination and comprehensive revision uh Municipal land use law I also examined the relevant tax maps uh specifically sheets 46 and 47 and I personally visited the site uh in the neighborhood as well could you describe the existing site okay uh yeah the site as you know it's on um uh six Hazelwood properties on the east side of the street between West Northfield Road to the South and Crest Terrace to the north it's in the R4 Zone it's a single family uh residence which is a permitted use in the zone uh the size of the subject property is 71454 square feet 71454 square feet whereas 9,375 square fet is required in the zone which is a 2,234 and 46 square foot uh deficiency um the property is characterized by a 50 foot width and a 139 uh 43 depth uh slightly irregular um slightly uh trapezoidal uh where the and the R4 Zone requires 75 by 125 Lots the home in question was constructed in 1930 according to tax records could you describe the neighborhood and the area surrounding the height the the okay the surrounding neighborhood well beyond the 200t um distance uh from the property they're all part of the r4s Zone the neighborhood is comprised of predominantly one and a half and TW story single family houses many of the neighboring houses including all the adjacent properties on the east side of Hazelwood are also 50 foot wide lots and as such they're deficient in width and area for the zone does the master plan make any reference to this area a proposed type of project yes it does um the the master plan section three page 11 mentions the R4 District as I'll quote the old oldest residential district in the township goes on to state that small lots have led to frequent variance applications from the Zoning Board of adjustment end quote the recommendation of the master plan is that and I'll quote again the R4 District setback requirements should be adjusted to better reflect existing conditions in the neighborhoods so as to reduce the need for variances and consideration should be given to resoning end quote thank you can you take us through the variances for this application sure uh the application was was denied by the zoning officer for front set front yard setback both side yard setbacks aggregate side yards and habitable floor area ratio per uh 17099 C2 the required front yard setback is 40 feet the existing front yard setback is 26.1 feet at the overhang a variance of 13.9 feet is needed for this pre-existing condition per 17099 C3 the required sidey yard setback is 10 fet the proposed right setback is 6.67 feet a variance of 3.3 feet is needed per C3 the required side yard setback is 10 feet their proposed left side setback is 5.75 a variance of 4.25 fet is needed per C3 the required aggregate sidey yard is 15 ft the proposed is 12.42 feet a variance of 2.58 Ft is needed and per cc4 the allowed uh habitable floor area ratio is 30% the proposed is 39.94 per a variance of 99.94% is needed um there may also be a variance needed uh and and requested for maximum building coverage ratio which is um allowed would be 24.5 4% based on that calculation and we're we're providing 25.4% um you explain the front yard variant yeah well as Mr Hall testified the front yard technically does not comply because uh we have a 26.1 feet um uh setback however our addition is almost entirely out of that setback so so the addition will be further back um significantly from that front yard line in fact I think it's almost at the 40 foot um line and therefore um you know it's my contention that that really almost is not in play that that's a preexisting condition can you explain the other Varian yeah okay the need for the the remaining Varian is based on nature of the size and shape of this lot by being deficient in lot width it becomes difficult to comply with the side setbacks by being undersized it becomes difficult to comply with the habitable floor area ratio I should further explain that the habitable floor area ratio only applies to homes in the R4 District if other bulk variances are required that's section 17087 DD therefore the 50ft size of this lot is especially the driving factor of why we are before this board this evening is this site suitable for this project yes absolutely we heard from the architectural testimony how this proposed renovation and expansion of this existing single family home will function on the site and serve the needs of its current occupants what is the statutory criteria for granting of these variances okay we need to demonstrate to this board's satisfaction that these variant can be granted in accordance with both the positive and negative criteria established in the ml can you demonstrate that the requested habitable floor area ratio variance is Justified under the ml yeah um in the case of grubs ver uh slow author the Appel division held that the standards of proof outlined in the in the NJ Supreme Court decision Coventry Square versus Westwood zoning Board of adjustment established among other things the app needs to justify the site can accommodate the problems associated with the proposed higher density than permitted by the ordinance it is the burden of the applicant to show special reasons in order for the board to Grant relief under the subsection the applicant must either show the refusal to allow the project would impose an undue hardship or when a proposed project carries out the purposes of the ml I believe we can show that both of these criteria apply to this project okay let's start with the hardship okay in Rue to the in in regard to the undue hardship the applicant and his architect has provided testimony as to the need to Miz his 1930s era home to Modern standards and layout the lot area is as I said 7140 square feet whereas 9375 are required the lack of square footage of a lot directly leads to the need for the habitable floor area ratio variant as by definition here's the definition of the habitable floor are the ratio is the sum of the habitable area of all floors of buildings and structures on a site um divided by the total area of the site end quote so again there's no available land that the applicant could acquire he he can't acquire any land that would be able to remedy the fact that he doesn't have enough in your opinion can you provide uh how the project carries out the purposes of of the ml okay the following purposes of zoning are Advanced um the purposes of the ml um are Advanced by this okay let's go through a few of them purpose B of the ml is to secure safety from fire flood panic and other natural and man-made disasters okay we heard from the architect The Proposal calls for reduction of the impervious lock coverage from 3442 Square ft to 2 339 Square F feet so that's a reduction of right now we have 48.2% impervious coverage on a site we're going to be going down to 32.7% this reduction of impervious surface will reduce the possibility of uncontrolled storm water flow onto neighboring properties okay purpose C of the ml is to provide adequate light air and open space by providing more exterior use areas at the rear of the dwell ing as the architect testified that we're going to be pulling the house closer to the road and and and removing the uh detached garage in the rear and all that impervious surface in the rear and we're going to be um providing A View From the neighboring properties of a more open backyard and and um therefore we're going to be furthering that um goal of of of the ml uh goal number G is is to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of agricultural residential recreational commercial and Industrial uses and open space both public and private okay this proposal will allow for the site to continue to be used as a single family dwelling permitted in the zone and and and again to to to to provide a home for the uh a modern home equipped for the needs of of its current owners and occupants uh finally purpose eye of the ml is to provide a desirable visil environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design and Arrangement okay the placing of the expanding living space in the sidelines and increasing the habitable floor area ratio as we're asking pered architectural design allows for the house to be modernized in an aesthetically pleasing and practical Manner and simutaneously allows for reduction in ovious lock coverage the the additions and renovation as designed so as not to in um they're designed so as not to in uh you know excuse me they're designed to increase the um the open area to the rear uh the addition of an attached garage will provide a usable means of secure parking and uh a place for um for Mr gangal to uh charge his electric car um and therefore that promotes that um goal of the of the ml describe how the site can ad accommodate the problems associated with the proposed higher density yes um as seen from the testimony of the architect the site can well accommodate the proposed Renovations and expansions we're providing sufficient off street parking including the Cure parking space in the proposed attached garage reducing lot coverage and a home will remain a single family dwelling can we just briefly go through the um bulk variances as justified by uh under the C1 criteria area Okay um well the ml calls for as it it's amended in 1984 calls for and under the C1 um variances can be justified for um peculiar exceptional practical difficulties to or exceptional undue hardship upon the applicant arising out of a the exceptional narrow a shess or shape of a specific piece of property or B by reason of exceptionable topographic conditions physical features uniquely affecting a specific piece of property or C by reason of extraordinary exceptional situation uniquely affecting a specific piece of property so going through um a by reason of exceptional narrowness shallowness or shape of specific piece of property the subject property is only 50 ft wide whereas 75 ft are required in the zone the neighboring properties are fully developed with houses and they're also of inefficient insufficient width therefore there is no possible remedy to that situation the lack of width leads directly to the need for the sidey variances requested the architect testified that we're going to be putting on a a bedroom and a garage well they have to be a certain width so if we're already stuck with the width of the existing house and you put on a garage or you put on a room or obviously that that that's a constraint um if the applicant were to strictly ofhere to that 10- foot side yard and being practical to renovate the house in a modern architecturally satisfactory way as testified to by the architect the result would be a long and narrow house furthermore other variances such as lock coverage would possibly required if that if that were to happen uh I should also point out that the right side minimum setback of 6.67 is only at the front corner of the addition um due to the shape of the property it's actually 8.75 ft at that rear Corner the left side setback of 7 of 5.75 is actually decreased in the sense that the deck was uh even less conforming uh the existing deck that's being removed um I'd also like to point out that if we had the required um uh 9375 squ feet of area our 2852 foot HFA would be at that 30% % Mark okay so um in addition to the to the constraints that we have with the with the shape of the property is that the um the um that slight angle also I could show it on the um you see the the building itself is not parallel with any of the lines you know either the side yard or the front yard which was another constraint so we do have a constraint with the shape so I'm moving to to reason B I hope you can all bear with me on this but we want to go through it all uh by reason of the topographic features and the physical features we mention again that the the lot area is um is 7154 where we need 900 uh 9,375 and the lack of square footage is what is leading to this I'll move to uh reason C by reason of extraordinary situation affecting a specific piece of property or the structur structures lawfully existing thereon the strict application of any regulation would result in an exceptional practical difficulties too or in or undue hardship upon the de on the on the property the property was developed from with an older original 1930 dwelling one that suffers from an in inefficient design as testified by the architect so that's our pre-existing condition we're trying to work with this older house which is obviously outdated the older dwelling lacks many of today's contemporary amend ities which you heard about and is the size that owner you know normally people are going to be looking for in Livingston so the applicant is attempting to do the best they can to modernize this pre-World War II era dwelling can uh this the SE variances also be granted under a C2 criteria yeah so if we look at the C2 reasoning I think we also have a very good case for that if you look at uh the Cal the calman vers uh planning board for Warrant Township 1988 um the Supreme Court found that in the C2 scenario you must have five criteria uh and comply with them uh one is that it's a specific piece of property two the purposes of the ml must be Advanced that's the better zoning alternative three that there's no substantial detriment to the public good uh four that the benefits must outweigh the detriments for the entire proposal and that there's no substantial detriment to the zoning requirements to master plan so I'm going to go through them uh number one the specific property we mentioned this is just applies to this property on uh Hazelwood Avenue the variance will only apply to the unique circumstances existing on this lot as we testified in this application uh number two the better zoning alternative for this specific piece of property a better zoning alternative is provided by this proposal and the purposes of the zoning are Advanced as listed I went through them already on the D variants uh um mlu purposes b c g and I um which I discussed before um reason number three the public good the variance requested can be granted without a detriment to the public good in this case the public good can be defined as the potential impact to our neighbors with the the addition while the addition will be closer to the sidelines then permit in the zone there will be a larger open space in the rear especially since the detached garage and driveway leading to it will be removed the new Arrangement is more compact providing a better architectural Arrangement and organization of the house allowing for this increased space to the rear thus the requested variances will not result in a substantial detriment to the public good reason number four the benefits and detriments well we already started talking about that the lock coverage will be reduced by 1,00 uh um uh 113 Square fet meaning there will be less impious surfaces and as I said reduced risk of uncontrolled storm water flow onto adjacent properties the neighborhood will benefit from the attractive architectural design and therefore I conclude there will be no detriments to the public good by the approval of this proposal finally reason number five there's no substantial detriment to the zoning regulations and master plan I'm going to provide some of the goals stated in the master plan of 2018 to preserve and enhance the primarily residential character of the community to maintain a balance of residential business and public uses and to preserve and improve the quality of life the modernization and Improvement of the Circa 1930 dwelling in the single family residential zone for the benefit and enjoyment of its current and future residence is consistent with all three goals of the master plan as I've also previously stated the 20 18 master plan specifically discussed the R4 districts as having undersized lots that require frequent variance requests due to smaller lots and recommends the bulk requirements of his Zone should be reexamined it can be said that this proposed Improvement will in fact Advance the goals and recommendations of the master plan and therefore can be granted without substantially impairing the intent and purposes of the master plan so In Sum your conclusion okay for the reasons expressed in my testimony it's my professional planning opinion that the D4 variance for habitable floor area ratio and the C1 and C2 bulk variances for front yard setback both side yard setbacks aggregate sidey yard setback and um and uh and building coverage should be granted um as the benefit substantially outweigh any possible detriments thank you board may have questions anyone the board have any questions for this witness I do um so the application has um for the rights um setback it has been reduced from 19 ft to 6.67 Ft the narrowest um uh Point even the widest point you have 8.75 ft have you considered about fire safety or um there are a lot of trees in the backyard of um the applicant uh lot and also the adjacent lot in the future when the tree grow and they need to cut it that how can the trucks be getting to the back aard because right now there's no once the building is constructed there is no uh sufficient width for those type of engineering trucks to go to the backyard and do those perform those tasks yeah I I will say that um we have had the situation before where um you know in general uh I would say a home is not designed for the um you know to have access of that size I mean there are there are um Crane Services and so on and so forth that could be um could uh provide uh that kind of service of um removing trees from the rear yard you mean move the tree from the yard from the front uh front of the house to go all the way to the back of the yard it's a pretty deep yard so um I have never thought about something can go 140 ft you know and and I would also say you know if need be I would think something could be um um I don't know if this is in my purview to discuss but I don't know whether that I've seen it before where trees can be cut down and chopped up into little pieces and carried out you know by smaller Machinery or by by workers so there is there space though next to this area right through the neighbor on the neighbor side I'm sorry if there wasn't emergency on the to the to the side of this there there is space because there's a driveway on the other side yeah let me show the um or maybe it's on here this thing is crazy um um there may be some space ma'am um in the sense that the neighbors driveway you know it's not just 6 feet it's um 6.67 feet it's um you know there there is an open space so in case of onetime emergency I'm sure some accommodation could be made with a a neighboring property owner to to allow a vehicle on a you know as I said on a one-time basis to to go back there there's also if I could recall my client that he's advising he has no large but there is access if need be on the other side of us the other side okay does anyone else have any questions uh yeah a couple um did you visit this site or I did did you observe the other houses on that street between Northfield and crest I did um as a general observation yes observe them um and are you aware that there's towards Crest that there are two other houses that have an attached garage I believe that there's if I'm not mistaken there's three houses on the same side of street that have attached garages and then the remainder of them seem to have detached garages so uh you know as Sim they look like they're Sim were developed at a similar time to the subject house um and are you aware that those are also single height garages that were attached that that are also more towards the front so they don't impact the adjacent neighbors property well um that may be true um I did not observe that in itself but I will observe that that we are except for maybe a de Minimus amount staying back that 40 feet as you can see from the front yard yep okay and I know you brought up the reasoning about that you know the benefit is that you know you now have this open space in the rear yard um to the neighbors but then what about the detriment to The Neighbor Next Door since now you're encroaching on their space by putting the addition on that side and being six foot to the lot line you're now basically it's it's not just that there's a single garage that's there that's one story you know that then you have the open space around it you now have this long twostory house that's all the way up against the side of number four well that's not quite the way I look at it and and I'm basing it on what I heard from the architect too and and the reasons why the home goes there now what we essentially were doing is we're taking this existing garage we didn't talk about how close that is to the property line so there's an existing garage and driveway and if you were on the neighboring property you'd be looking at well the side of a garage now you might say it's a one-story garage but you're looking at driveway pavement garage shed all of this stuff in the back we're taking that out and that's what I meant by we're now the view from really any of our neighbors not to single anyone out the neighbor to the left the neighbor to the right they're looking not just to their backyard but now they're looking out into a beautiful open area as opposed to see in his garage and car parked and and that type of thing and we're pulling this up so now I would say that as a design or and and and I believe that's what what what Mr Hall was saying is that is that by providing that design and pro and providing those um that organization of the lot that's actually a benefit because right next to their driveway well maybe it's not that big a deal that that you're you know your neighbor is right there but in the backyard where where it's more private you you know you have more of a of an expanded Vista back there any other questions from the board does anyone in the public have any questions for this witness okay do you have any more more witnesses no just checking is anyone on the board um want to make a statement sorry anyone on the public I'm sorry make a statement first okay anyone on the board would like to make a statement apparently I feel like this uh looking at the uh picture the diagram here the original one uh are you talking about this one this one yeah all the houses in a row they they're a similar bit and all the sudden this is going to be a little wider all right um I don't know if that's necessarily true because again I won't claim that I measured all the houses on the street or anything like that but if you look at this aerial this is our subject house and the black area is the uh one of the you know proposed Edition there and you know again just an eyeball not scaling anything we definitely have some h Homes on the other end of the street and and I think you mentioned you know the other member here uh talked about the attached garages these look like some homes that were uh modernized and updated maybe in a similar way but they're they're down they're certainly really close to to the subject property and um you know there's certainly some smaller ones but there's some other larger ones I think that are so I do not think that this house will will um will uh uh stand out as as being not fitting into the neighborhood anybody else want to make a statement you know I appreciate um the hardship I really I understand it and I and I really appreciate the limitations of the lot um but I just I do have some concerns about encroachment on that property on the right yeah so just to follow on because you already have one side the it's very narrow right the you have the lowest is 6.16 so now you are encroaching on the bolts the other one other side too right so you you're uh you have 6.67 and 8.75 so that's extremely tight you know it just it feels like you have a big big proper big uh object in the middle of this small property well I you know as an answer to that I will say as we heard from the architectural testimony and and and I tried to highlight in my testimony that the the nature of it is that providing an attached garage like we heard about um how an attached garage is a modern amenity it might not even be permitted if you wanted from from what I heard from the previous application that you that you have a detached garage so in order to add an attached garage to this house I almost don't see how it could happen unless you put it on the side we heard about how if we went further into the backyard we'd be we'd be creating other variances and we'd be pushing the house now into the backyard and we'd have to have the driver go back there anyway and how would we do like a left turn you know we we don't have enough maneuvering room I think was what Frank was saying so if you're going to put on a garage it has to be 12et wide if you're going to put on a room it really needs to be you can't you're not going to build a bedroom less than 12 feet wide so we end up with the dimensions that we have we're kind of forced into it by the fact that if we're going to do an addition on this house at all we're you know now of a sudden they sort of have to be very similar Dimension to what we presented I don't know that there's like a radically different option and it certainly wouldn't be a better option um I'd also like to say I mean I understand the hardship that you're discussing um but on the same token you know it's one thing if the project was adding a garage and trying to put that on the side of the house and I understand that with the setbacks and what would be required in order to fit just the garage um but if that was the case it wouldn't have the encroachment even if you had the garage in the same place where it is now so you have that same 40 foot front setback and it was solely just a garage there wouldn't be a height encroachment I feel on number four there wouldn't be a a huge encroachment for the for the going back so it's even even further back um you know it's it's a long straight back Edition that's on the side of the house that's basically like a giant wall where one window is looking directly into another window um I do know from what I observed number four that that side entrance is the entrance that they use on that house and they also are on the corner which makes every part of their property basically unusable for them to expand they're they're kind of limited also as well so um I just there's ability to be able to it's not like you have you've encreased all the setbacks where the rear you can't go back and you can't go in any other direction but just for the mass of that house to be next to number four I I just think it's a detriment to to that house I want to make a statement and I agree with my fellow um board members um the encroachment of the left and side setback I just felt that um by taking both sides um you know beyond the 10t setback and pushing everything to to the front um it's not going to be um it's going to break the characteristic of the block all the houses are there have the uh DET detached garage in the back and understand your hardship and understand you know the the niess about the attached um uh attached uh garage but I feel that you have the back you know area to to um do that Improvement and I'm sure you know the turning the left turn can be um you have the architect you should have the Turning template to show that if it's really not you know just as a um demonstrate you know to us that putting the garage to the back you know to this back using the back area um you know of the house um is totally infeasible so I that's my statement that I you you wanted us to come back with architectural template to show that they can't put the Garage in the back is that what you were are requesting if it's possible okay um can I just recall the architect and he could describe it yeah why to wait yeah if you could maybe help her out a little bit thank you rather than come back yes thank you hey Frank so you've heard some of the questions as to whether it would be feasible to put an attached garage at the rear of this house that that's correct uh I just want to go to our our floor plans um if if I understand correctly what's what's being suggested is that um is is that we uh instead of adding the garage at the right hand side of the house that we put it at across the back of the house I guess that's what we're saying um what that would really mean is if if we look over here where we have a kitchen and a dining space instead of those facing the backyard or having Windows there would be a garage never done anything like that it's common place to have a garage adjacent to the side of the house but I've never done a house where there's no backyard access because we have a blank wall at the back of the first floor I I understand it seems like there should be some other place to put it but given the already narrow house the question also was though you have can you make a leftand turn into the garage would that be what kind of space is there a turning template that would fit back there well to turn in and be able to back out again um typical two-way Drive aisle is 24 feet right in a parking lot uh parking you know whether there's a single loaded or double loaded aisle for parking uh to pull in and back out of the space again generally that's 24 ft and you know we could probably do it with um you know a little bit less than that but that would mean that the front of the garage would be here at the right hand side of the house to provide any kind of room to turn in to the left and back out again if if that makes sense which would mean that the garage would OCC occupy the entire back wall of the front of the house of of entire back wall of the first floor of the house which would be a a really um unprecedented uh undesirable condition and make the house literally unsalable at any point in the future what about the driveway area to create the the kurn effect to get out of there would that be a larger asphalt area that would be needed well yes that that is also true because we would have to maintain all of that impervious coverage down the side of the house where we've eliminated it add the the the structural addition to the house and then all add all that impervious coverage back again I understand seems logically like it should be a place to put it there but to to have the back of the house have no windows no backyard access I mean like not look out into the yard not have access to a patio or a deck or anything like that uh it just we you know it would be a a real design uh non-starter uh and I I just like to observe U what Mr where Mr baldanza went to the observing that the the master plan actually suggests that the setback should be reduced in the R4 reexamined reexamined reexamined right if they were to be reduced they what would they be reduced to instead of 10 it would be eight or something we if if the were to be reduced we would be pretty close to them thank okay um what well a question don't away you're back um I understand with the rear garage but on the flip side if this was I guess what I was trying to say if this was an application where you still had we coming here with the single car garage where it is without the double height and without the double triple depth of the mass that would be I think a detriment to the neighboring property and instead then add it to the back which then there's no garage in the back you have other rooms or reconfigure the house Ian you can even go wider because you still have the ability to uh you know not obviously not all the way out to the width of the garage um and not require variance but that would be a better alternative without impacting number four just so I understand with with the garage itself going where the garage where it is now but no but just a single story garage not a not no room above it no room behind it no you know single story garage the width of that I understand is needs a variance whatever else but and and not as as opposed to adding the living space adding the living space above adding living space behind that width that's affecting then the neighboring property because otherwise the garage would have been more towards the front of the house and not impacting the side view or anything else out of the neighboring lot in number four and really encroaching on their space it would still be open and then the living space would be towards the rear which also wouldn't be you know that's the other houses on the street are more like that they're more long and they if they have a single car garage it's attached it's towards the front and not impacting the neighboring house still still might be close but they're not not impacting any windows or anything else because it's towards the of the house I I do understand um you know given the angled nature the the the nonparallel nature of the house to the property lines as the further back we go the further from the property line we are by the time we get to the back corner I understand it's long but we're we're at 8.75 ft there uh we're not that far away from desirable head back but then you could also come still to the right I mean you you you don't the garage gar is what is it 12 12T you you obviously could go 8T or what without needing the variant for the sidey yard you still have space to go you just can't go the full 12 for the for anything you do on that side but you it's the 12 foot wide straight back up that makes it that you have very limited space between the neighboring house oh Oh you mean we could go 8 ft and still have room to drive past it no I'm saying no there's still a garage in let's we we really can't redesign the during the testimony here I know we're all trying to solve some problems here um if if if I could jump in I mean obviously we have a difficult lot here a difficult situation we're trying to update this home um personally I don't have a problem with the garage moving up where it is I think it personally I think it's a better position uh but I think I'm hearing from some of the board members that there might just be too much much house in varying amounts above or behind and I I don't know if there's a way we could you know maybe you guys want to talk for a few minutes or something if we could kind of come up with something that's amiable to everybody one of the problems though is I think the testimony was that the garage has to be the width that it is it's the minimum width so um and that's the only based upon that testimony so and then to get an ex another bathroom so that they're not using using one bathroom on that second floor uh it's so it's one extra bedroom that that is the suggestion up there so that's it's it's still in that same line so I'll talk to we can take a break and I can talk to my client or I don't know what whether I can have five minutes or yeah yeah because actually I need a little boyfriend but on testimony but uh what I the bathroom oh okay so look we take a let's take minut a break and you know maybe a setback or something would work I on the record we are back on the record thank you board members um in light of the fact that there's six of you and this is a use fairings and also based upon your comments with respect to that upstairs area um they're working fast and furiously out in the hallway but I don't think that we could come back with something that they have a an idea sort so to speak but I I don't know that the board would accept a reformed description um of of such plans it would be the applicant's request that we carry this through March or April whatever the board can accommodate us and I understand this is the fourth or fourth time this is my second time here we we've we've had the pleasure of representing Mr gangell only since um January when we came in and got to meet him and look at the plans and uh then meet with the planning experts so if we could please have an adjournment to whatever month the board sees fit we would up greatly appr Jackie do we have uh you do we have room um in March maybe I think you'll need a little time to get it together and get it through the the process yeah it would mean that this applicant would need to get revised plans over to the zoning officer for a re-review and then back to me um he needs 10 days in zoning he needs 10 days to get this circulated to the board um it's really up to the board if they want to push this to the March 26th or April 23rd um I'll caution the board though we've never had we've never had this many hearings on on a um an application but I do understand the applicant and and he's trying to get to a positive vote um we'll encourage the um the absent members to watch the recording 100 I can't guarantee that we'll have um a full board but certainly March or April you have a preference or if I if I can we'll have much smaller we'll have less need the planning test from M MCG in order to get on to March meeting you got a a real tight window yeah job to do get it done giving me the yes so that doesn't uh sit well with the board we'll take April it's not a matter of sitting well with the board if I could just you know as an attorney I'm going to tell you that we're already in March we we're virtually at March one I understand and if you got a 20-day window to come back for that I'm going to yeah there the the board just just so I'll let you know the board already has five applications schedule for that the March 26th paren so this would be number six you might want to go to April I I have very age parent I need come back all right m m speak into this microphone I'm I'm okay for March if uh if uh they're saying though if we behind five other applications no I'll I'll take you first yeah okay if that's what you want to do but you I'm going to strongly suggest that you be ready for March if you decide to do March I don't mean to take your thunder please this board's heard it and they've been very patient and they're GNA and they've they've expressed what they think you need to maybe look at that's one heck of a timeline but if you want it March that's what it is but I would suggest to you that in March you're not getting April sure okay yep which March is so the date um for members of the public that this matter is continued to March 26 at 7 p.m. no further notice is required okay thank you very much just so the record is clear we did read notice again for this meeting so the notice is um current thank you so much okay ready to call the next wance block 1508 lot 7 17 Maplewood Drive application number 2023 51- V AI Kumar B boui uh applicant seeks approval for a second story Edition in the rear in violation of the following sections 17099 C3 sidey yard aggregate 20.7 ft required 18.2 ft proposed 2.5 ft variance requested 170 87 cc4 habit floor ratio 30% allowed 38.9% proposed 88.9% variance requested 17087 E1 D4 accessory structure shed rear yard setback 5 ft required 3.5 ft proposed existing 1.5 ft variance requested sidey yard setback 5 ft proposed 4.1 feet proposed existing .9 feet variance requested okay you and Mr B B B I'm sorry yeah hello Mr Bo do you swear or affirm that any and all statements and testimonies give to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete I do please consider yourself under oath yes thank you okay no you have no you by yourself no other um people you okay great so please we can we can be brief un like the last one so we met last in uh December and uh there was some uh um the variance that was requested was twofold one for HFN and one for HFR and it was unlikely that you know I get approval for both the variances so I went back with my architect and redid it and we are now confirming with the HF a the area so we're confirming to the 3220 but we are violation with the uh requesting a variance for HFR by 8.9% and the hardship is because we are an undersized lot so so uh that that's the hardship that and and we are reing for the variances variance just for HFR the other variances in the denal application is um they're existing not confirming so uh we not we're not the addition is not violating any anything that is existing and the addition is only in the in the back which also confirming with the neighbors uh set setback to and uh we're confirming on the back a set re rear setback as well so the only variance that we are requesting right now because of the Edition is the HFR can you describe the changes you made since the last time you were before us sure it's just a square footage uh reduction on the second floor the last time we had uh the similar size of first floor and second floor but second floor is now cut back to to confirm with the uh total square footage of 3,220 and that area is now balcony that is not balcony correct hey does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness does anybody in the public have any questions for this yes please step forward and this this is a question right you can make a statement later just come up to the mic I need to State my name name and yes please yeah my name is p w first name is p p n p NG last name is W WG I mean the neighbor property n Maple so I you know based on the update document I just have a couple of questions because I was also here last time right I noticed the existing first floor and existing second floor number was reduced so I'm not sure you guys have the last time's document if you want have you can take a look Market here no the board the board has those those C so basically the last time the existing first floor is 1498 this time existing first floor is 1470 and the last time the existing second floor is 1344 now it's 1285 so it's like a total reduction about I think 80 some 85 somehow square footage so that's the that's my first question how can this happen right and then the second one is that I I guess as a gentleman just mentioned there's no change in the first floor so if that's the case last time the first floor you know existing the difference between proposed and existing has like 418 square foot difference but this time I see the proposed the first flaw and the existing first FLW difference is only 155 I don't know how you know the numbers doesn't add up especially if you look at the the first flaw you know map which is uh I believe 21 9 in multi 214 in that's clearly is 418 excuse me for a second Mr chairman this is a question period oh yeah yeah right so and I had a hard time he sorry I just needed some explanation it's not appropriate to make comments it's an approprate to ask a question of the witness okay yeah sure yeah so I think you're asking for identif for understanding the calculation for this footage of each floor correct if you could maybe help us out a little bit I'm not sure should I help out because this is the plan approved by the architect and also the zoning and they they are happy with the square footage if they have any questions I think he can refer to the zoning well I I think he he asked a question of how it was calculated you you're presenting the plan so I think it's behooves you to um try to answer his question as best you can so how should I explain it uh I have the I have the existing versus new here yeah my my first question is that I see the existing first floor and second floor square footage are both reduced that is you know I assume first floor is 1470 right now now that's what and and the the garage is 188 which is not included in the habitable Square uh habitable area and uh for uh and with the addition now 1622 on the first floor and 1598 on the second floor combined becomes 3220 you want us you want to go room by room and measure I don't know mean my my first question is just the how can the existing first floor and second floor uh square footage reduce the total by about about 85 but if you cannot answer that's fine my second question is that you know as you just mentioned there's no change for your you know expansion plan on the first floor right so last time you know I have the document here which is uh you know from existing 1498 to 1916 which is a 418 square foot difference but this time it's you know it's existing 1470 and propos the first FLW 1622 which which is only 152 square foot increase that just seems like the number doesn't add up because based on your map there is 21 by 21 which is 48 but how can it only increase 152 that's my second question uh M Mr chairman if I may um the neighbor did come in to the uh zoning office to to question the calculations and the zoning officer did re re-review and contacted the architect and new plans were an updated plan was submitted which the board has I I'm not sure you were able to to see the copy of that but that came in after you your visit to the office yeah but then in that case I think the proposed total square footage will be exceed 30 to20 well it looks like I mean these plans are on the fourth iteration so I'm I'm only speculating but it appears that the existing calculations were redone and they might have been incorrect to begin with which is why you're seeing this discrepancy um and this was as Miss holl says this was reviewed by the uh zoning officer and um he he double checked the numbers so I would think that the numbers on the latest set the February 20th 24 set um is correct so so then What's the total proposed uh square footage as you know from 3220 but then clearly for I mean first floor there's no change right second floor is only reduce about 100 square footage it cannot reduce in last time the total proposed is 3672 if only be Reduce by 100 it should be 35 somehow square footage I just you know basically my question is just like I don't see how the number come down to 30 to 20 we lost we lost almost 300 square feet on the yeah Bally the the proposed I believe the first time the proposed the expansion each floor is about 4 18 or 16 so I see this time the second floor reduced about maybe 100 or 150 I don't know so the total should be reduced from last time 3672 minus I don't know 100 or 150 it will still be in 35 range not like a 3220 that's my question can can can we move forward saying that 3220 is the maximum this house can be and that's the which is the lower confining number which is what we see on the plans irregardless of the previous calculations would that be acceptable and do it make sense to you so you you're saying it might be 35 34 whatever the number is it we're saying 32 it won't be bigger than that so you won't get anything bigger than what you're expecting does that kind of answer your question or satisfactory yeah but but if you you know I I I just today click a link take a look right on the website so I see the I I see the change that's how I get a number I just you know I just check the link today you I understand what you mean you know you you basically say let's assume is 30 to 20 right but I I don't you know if it's 30 to 20 then the second then the second floor need red nearly completely reduced you can re achieve that number that's that's my understanding because the existing is already 20 842 right the the existing total square footage is 2842 so you just byy add 400 that'll be 3240 just just a single floor so how can there even be a second floor okay yeah I understand what you mean I just don't bring it was a good question and um okay um anything else you want to add to no it's certified zoning approved it so I don't have any further it's certified from a certified architect okay who was here last time you you you can make a statement later if you want and stay close I guess anybody else have any questions okay does anybody in the public want to make a statement would you like to make a statement or yeah yes still me P if write a name so I want to make a first statement which is please do you s or affirm that any of those statements you make right now are ACC complete y thank you consider yourself under sure please proceed yeah my uh yeah the first statement I will make is that you know today I just go go through the instant Township link and find the the update document based on what I see you know the the the update design I believe the number doesn't add up and the the total uh proposed square footage should still be around 3500 range rather than the 3 to20 square foot range that's the first one yeah the second one to see that you know as the update uh design right there are like a you know last time there is one window this time it's like three window on the side face to my P especially there are two on the second floor that's really impact my privacy because only like 11 ft to my P and uh around neighborhood I don't see any even new house or proposed change has so many windows if you look at the design has three window feing our side three window on the back side three window on the the other side Bic all all three side all three window is like total nine windows I just I just want to make a statement is that that I don't see you our neighborhood usually for my house we don't really have S window facing both side and also for many of the house in the area I don't see that that's my statement okay thank you yes thank you I want to make a statement um just followed by U Mr W's test uh statement I did a quick calculation of um exhibit v-2 on your proposed first floor FL and the proposed second FL of uh floor plan based on the Shaded area um I did a calculation yes those two shaded area adds up to 722 square feet so that um if we add that 722 on top of your existing um 200 uh and 2842 Square F feet we get 3664 proposed instead of 3220 so I I I would say you probably have some yeah that's probably why the testimony has question for is for for for for any other comments or questions anybody from the public any comments or questions just to make sure besides what we heard already okay um I'm going to make a motion to approve this application with the qualifier that the habital floor area cannot exceed 3220 um and make sure all revised plans go through Jackie so 3220 is the top it can be um and we will and the Flor ratio um is at 88.9% maximum he just has to take here anybody want to second I'll second it thank you okay Mr Beer yes Mr Sherman yes Miss con votes yes Mr Kenya yes Miss marage yes and Miss Yan yes okay okay thank you so much thank you and and thank you for your comment we appreciate that when you ready to call the next application okay see okay no thank you very much block 1901 L 23 3 thirst and drive application number 202 24-2 DV Infinity Holdings 7 LLC applicant seeks approval to instruct the new single family residents in violation of the following sections 17087 cc3 habit of FL ratio 21% required 23.4% proposed 2.4% variance requested good evening Corey Klein from the law firm of ss and gross on behalf of the applicant Infinity 7 I'm sorry Infinity holding 7 LLC um I will make my introduction brief as I'm mindful of the time right now um thank you uh so you heard that we submitted an application for a habitable floor area ratio variance uh the applicant is requesting relief to permit floor a ratio of 23.4% where the code permits a Flor a ratio to a maximum of 21% um we serve notice by certified mail and publish notice for the board's January 23rd meeting and on January 30 23rd the hearing on our application was carried to tonight without forther notice to the public being required uh we would ask the board to acknowledge receipt of proof of publication and service of the notice and that jurisdiction is properly before this board please proceed thank you uh tonight we're presenting um our F our first witness is Mr he Ean of space and Mark LC a licensed New Jersey architect to testify regarding the proposed home from an architectural standpoint we'll have him sworn and qualified hi my name is hike Xian I'm a liced AR if you can speak just a little bit louder my name is hike Xian uh I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey my license is uh current uh I designed this home for three thirst and drive um I'm a graduate of New Jersey Institute of Technology um and um I'm I'm a principal at space on Mark architecture um Mr ex I can have your attention for a second Mr exan do you swear or affirm that any and all statements you make to the board this evening including your testimony will be true accurate and complete I do I'll turn it over to Council on credentials okay thank you um and I'd like to have Mr exen qualified as an expert in the field of architecture and I think you said your licenses are current in good standing yes it is I some they were uh does any board have any questions or objections regarding this witness um there be no objections a witness is accepted as expert in architecture thank you okay thank you now Mr exan is my understanding that um since what was submitted to the board um we have changed the front facade and sort of pushed and pulled the proposed building resulting in a slightly different footprint but we've actually decreased the um the square footage by 15 Square ft so if you can um introduce uh your plans as revised and kind of walk us through that's correct what's being proposed um we're the plans are still more or less the same um we refined it and improved it um as um after we submited the application um it's a single family home um and I'll let our planner and engineer testify to all the variances um and uh planning testimony so I'd like to walk you through the um the house itself um this is the first floor of the home uh it's about 1596 Square ft we walk into a a main open foyer with a a stair Tower uh to our right we have a dining room living room and towards the back we have a family room uh kitchen area and uh we to to towards the back of the garage we have a two-car garage on the right side uh we have a a guest bedroom with an on Street bathroom walk-in closet and over here we also uh tucked in the pentry that can be accessible behind the kitchen through the mudroom um we also have a powder room behind the um um stair tower on the second floor we have total of four bedrooms uh one of them is a primary bedroom um um with two walk-in closets and a primary suite and the other three bedrooms two bedrooms share a hallway bathroom one is that on suite and we have a laundry room um on this floor the bedrooms are decent size for uh for Livingstone standards for this Zone as well um and um and let me take you to the uh and on the base basement level we have a recck room uh we called this room in a bedroom uh just to have the option of having a bedroom but it could also be used as a office as well we put in a full bathroom um for because we added a gym in the basement level and typically um having a full bathroom is beneficial on that level as well a mechanical room and a walk out stairs towards the back um we made uh some changes I'm looking at the do we have the uh do we have the updated ples here okay okay so this is the updated plans so I walk you through the plans that was submitted as you can see they're more or less the same the chain ches are pushing and pulling the um spaces on the first floor so we we gave ourselves a little bit more space on the first floor on the dining room side um and the family room side because um we have a combined dining room and living room and a few more feet is needed for the space and we took it away from upstairs uh but but um shrinking the house from the right pushing the bedroom back a little bit bedroom one so it's 15 by 13 instead of 15 by 15 um so we made some adjustments and overall we reduced the square footage by about 10 ft um so the set so elevations kind of slightly changed uh we have three Gables it's it's a transitional style home uh beautiful and U meets the current uh architectural standards of uh today do you sorry to interrupt U Mr xen do you have color elevations as well yes I'm going to come to that next and here are our renderings for those elevations um as you can see we're proposing board and Bandon siding wood sighting that's beautifully balanced on on the front facade uh we have a stair tower that that'll look beautiful from the corner view over here you can see it um and excuse me can we Mark that as um exhibit A1 yes I don't think we have that yes I think um this entire set of plans can should be marked as exhibit a one to Jackie later yeah they were submitted to Jackie um on Friday and these are the revised architectural plans and it includes the color rendering okay council could you please just explain who prepared the plans and what they depict yes absolutely uh the plans were prepared by Mr exian of space and Mark and they depict the revised architectural floor plans and elevations as well as color renderings of the uh of the proposed home and if you um hike if you could just let us know what the date is on the plan set yes uh and how many pages design revision is February 22nd uh 22nd 2024 there are four pages thank you thank you very much count okay um so you can see the renderings as as I was saying it's a a high-end design that we like to bring to Livingston uh it's going to be a beautiful home it's going to improve the landscape uh the streetscape there um and I believe that'll bring in more development to to the area and to the neighborhood um I I think the the only variance that we are asking is um the fair variance that's uh 2.3 3% I believe over and uh I think it's it's minimal and and and the benefits will greatly outweigh the detriments um and I'll let the planner speak more about how the uh lot and lot can absorb the this the size of home okay before I move on to our uh civil engineer and planer are there any questions from Mr exian from the board any any questions from the public please come forward please state your name and address yeah I'm sorry it's my first time it's okay no problem um my name is Iran and my last name is w w n g my first name is y i r n I'm the next door neighbor um from five thirst and drive um basically uh we have very good relationship with Mr Murray from for the past almost 30 years okay um unfortunately he passed away and um we but but we are also happy that uh the we have new new uh Builder um the only thing I have concern as a it's a question now if you want to make a statement you can make a statement later sorry it's okay no problem your I have a question okay I I wrote it down I'm kind of nervous okay please relax my ma major question is um when you start the demolition on the driveway existing driveway because currently part of my lot is on the driveway on on on the third three th Drive okay it's like a triangle shape it's my lot and I just want to know if you uh you are going to restore my lot with like salt just a simple grph I don't think that the uh the architect is going to be prepared to answer that question but I will um I'll can I'll relay that to my client and um see what we can do I wasn't aware that there was an encroachment oh are so engineer is indicating to me that he can answer the question um we're going to call him to testify next so he'll address that okay and um the next the next concern I have actually um it's beautiful rendering okay I I was I I I was uh study architecture myself so um I have a little background I I saw the uh elevation uh so basically it's extension to the back the so I'm just a little concerned about the the um you know how like uh if you can go back to the elevation okay yeah uh on the right side on the bottom you see there's like um the window all the way on the back those are the addition oh not the garage it's it's the sort of the three window towel oh this uh stair towel okay that's that those are the new extra area that it's been built and and it's pretty tall it's nice I I don't have any objection it's just that that window is facing my backyard I I'm just having little privacy concern that's it uh and if you can just have trees some kind of trees sort of blocking it then I I think I would be okay that's the only concern I have it's uh only these two thing that's okay thank thank they'll address thank you on the way C right um Mr rean does that window in fact face um her backyard or not her backyard her sidey yard I believe because this is this stair Tower is at the front of the H uh house yes so this this is at the front corner of the this is the front corner of the home this is white not this one it's the one uh behind the garage behind the garage right it's not on your beautiful rendering okay yes here yes that side those are the EXT exra Extended space the the bedroom it's new extended okay so behind the garage we have a bedroom and a bathroom and then on the second floor we have window bedroom the window you you didn't draw the window but your elevation has the window uh let's see that did you see this is the side elevation on the garage side there's no window here no go down this is the bathroom the lower one this window I'm kind of confused yes so okay these windows right okay so these windows are the stair Tower window that's on the other side the opposite of Gage okay okay then then we're fine yeah and it's at the front corner of the house and it's facing the front of the property pretty much thank you thank you for clarifying thank you sen is there anyone else I think that's it okay so with that I'd like to call my second and Final witness Mr Mike Lan ofama I we'll have him sworn Mr L ofama do you U swear or affirm that any statement you're going to make to the board this evening including your testimony will be true accurate and complete yes I do sir my name is Michael lonz zaama that's l n Za f ma I'm a licensed professional engineer land surveyor and planner licensed in the state of New Jersey I'm a principal with the firm of Casey and Keller Incorporated 258 Main Street Milbourne New Jersey uh and all my licenses are current uh and I've been before this board on numerous occasions okay does uh anyone on the board have any questions or objections to this goodness just Mr L Council in what capacity will he be testifying um he will be testifying as an expert in the field of engineering and we'll also have him testifying as an expert in the field of planning thank you very much okay uh there be no objections the witness accept as expert in engineering and planning okay thank you uh Mr lonza if you could describe briefly your responsibilities in connection with this project certainly we were charged with the responsibility of preparing the base survey mapping uh of the property uh in which we prepared a boundary and topographic survey that shows the existing site conditions uh of the property and as you can see from uh the boundary and topographic survey that we submitted with the application you could see that the property is located on the south side of thiron drive it's identified as number three thiron drive and it's tax slot 23 and block 1901 uh the property is located approximately 100 feet west of East mclelan Avenue uh it is located in the R3 Zone and that is 100 foot Frontage and 150 foot depth giving us a 15,000 sqare foot lot which is exactly the minimum lot area required for uh the properties in the R3 Zone um the the existing lot was created as part of a subdivision known as Cherry Hill back in 1963 and the house was constructed in the mid 1960s and you can see from the survey map uh on the plan that the house occupies basically the central port portion of the property it is a twostory frame structure uh with four bedrooms um and it has a side entry garage and you can see from the Topography of the site that the house is somewhat elevated onto a bit of a null the project proposal is to uh demolish the existing structure uh see bring that up okay uh to demolish the existing structure and construct a new uh single family two and a half story house uh as hike pointed out uh the structure would need a single variance uh it the property as proposed will meet all of the criteria of the R3 Zone with regard to bulk standards and I just would like to review them uh quick quickly with you because it's very interesting that most of the bulk standards um we meet or exceed in that I mean um we we increase not increase but we um go beyond what is the minimum required for the Zone uh for example the front yard setback is compliant at 52.6 feet uh which is the average for setback for the area the sidey requirement the minimum sidey requirement is 10 ft and our closest sidey yard on the uh east side of the property is 15.9 Ft um the combined side yard requirement under the zone is 30% we're at 44.9% so it is again uh above what is the minimum the rear yard setback is 40 feet we're at 54.5 the building height allowed is 35 we're just under 34 ft at 33.993281 Square fet so it's over 1,000 square fet less than what would be permitted um the habitable floor area um the maximum allowed is a 3520 for the Zone uh and we're at 357 uh so again in compliance with the standards so the only variance that we are seeking is uh a violation of section ratio what we're proposing is 234 which uh violates the the habitable floor area ratio by 357 square feet what's what's interesting to point out um in this application is that the existing structure the width of the existing structure is slightly over 50 feet and the width of the proposed structure is only 53 Fe 6 in so we're only increasing the width of the structure by about 3 and 1/2 ft um even though we're increasing the F we're the bulk of the house is towards the rear so that the streetcape the image of the structure as you see it from the street does not overwhelm the streetcape um and I I think if you look again at uh the elevations that were presented uh I think they're extremely telling uh let me see bring that up so if you take a look at the massing of the house um one of the things that we have to answer when we do a D4 uh type variance such as this dealing with habitable floor area ratio um and what governs this it's not as you would a D1 use variant uh and the medich case would control in this case the Coventry Square versus Westwood Zoning Board of adjustment is the one that would overrule Rule and what that does is it's it it's set up so that you don't have to demonstrate that the site is particularly suited uh for this use because it is a permitted use what you have to do is the applicant must demonstrate that the site can accommodate the problems usually associated with a larger floor area ratio than what is permitted by the ordinance and the usual problems for this type of uh development is overcrowding on the site is number one and the other is the loss of light air and open space to the adjoining property owners um unlike a use variance the standards become how did the architect fit this structure onto the site how did he control the massing how did he articulate the facades the roof lines so and change the materials and deal with fenestration I think when you look at this rendering you can clear clearly see that the architect did an excellent job in dealing with all of those criteria the changes in the roof lines the the use of uh articulation in the front facade softens the appearance of the building and does not make it look overwhelming uh with regard to the overall neighborhood um when we look at um the uh the criteria required the negative criteria for any variant not just the D4 is that no variance can be granted uh without showing that the variance would not uh can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and the zoning ordinance um there's no tment to the public good in my opinion because the configuration and location of the proposed dwelling ensures no degradation in the quality of air light or open space to the adjoining property owners and that's demonstrated by the fact that we're fully compliant with the required setbacks for the sidey yard and combined sidey yard as well as the rear yard and front yard not only are the side yards compliant they exceed the minimum that is required under the ordinance and the fact that the building is fully compliant with regard to coverage and height um I don't see any detriment to the master plan uh or the zoning ordinance um what to demonstrate that what we look at is the purposes of zoning that are outlined in the municipal land use law and under a the encouragement of Municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of lands in a manner that will promote the public health safety morals and general welfare I believe this new home Pro provides for um uh space and amenities that most homeowners in 2024 need or require uh for their property and in this postco age we look for for buildings and homes that can accommodate uh workspace at home as well as aging into the home uh in the community I think the new construction and the investment in the community has an overall positive impact on the neighborhood um I promotes a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design and Arrangements um I think uh the Aesthetics of the structure pretty much speak for themselves and and reinforce that uh contention on our part the application will neither cause a substantial and the word substantial is important here detriment to the public good nor a substantial impairment to the intent and purpose uh of the zoning plan or zoning ordinance uh as a matter of fact the master plan uh in section two under policies on page six states that land use planning will provide for a variety of residential and non-residential uses that will encourage continuation and enhancement of the township as a highly desired high quality Suburban residential community and will not negatively impact upon the Aesthetics of the community um as I said before I think the architect has done an excellent job in meeting that criteria of the master plan so in my opinion again uh I believe this variance could be granted without substantial detriment to the public good or the intent and purpose of your Zone plan I believe the property can easily support um the home as it's currently designed as part of the permit and approval process um we have to go through what's known as a lot grading permit that was indicated in Mr marci's memo to the board uh we will apply for that permit any tree removal permits will be obtained we will have to go through the soil conservation service to get certification and approval of the lock grading plan so um any disturbance of the sites or the adjoining properties would be restored with the proper Landscaping uh and or stabilization of the soil and storm water management would be enhanced by the implication of or the use of uh dry Wells uh for uh mitigation of storm waterer runoff so uh that's pretty much my testimony be happy to answer any questions you might have quick question Mike um did you address the driveway encroachment did I miss that there's um let me go back to the survey um the survey if you look at the survey uh can you see that let me zoom up on that on the front corner of the house you can see that the driveway encroaches on on the neighbor's property on tax lot 22 um as part of the new construction that would all be removed the driveway curb cut will be moved further to the East and that whole area would be restored with new lawn panel and that any any kind of landscaping that might be required in that area would be performed and um I think the question from the uh the neighbor was um once the driveway is going to be removed are we going to um do anything with um property afterwards yes as part of the overall plan there's going to be a landscaping plan that would be developed I me on the the neighbors's property are we doing anything with the neighbor's property once the driveway is removed from yeah we we'll have to restore that area certainly great thank you okay I just have one quick comment Mr Lama some of your numbers you read off were different than in your um your zoning table on two so I that be that was a result from the architect tweaking the plan a little bit all right um thank you does anybody else have any questions this witness anybody in the public I think we're good on questions um I I think I think in terms of the uh councelor in terms of the dynamic with the um driveway and the next door neighbors can we make that a condition of the uh approval that a condition of the approval that will restore the neighbor's property yeah I think that's fine we have we have to do that we're we're encroaching on our property we would be required to do it in any event but but if we want to add it as a condition that's perfectly fine made a friend um okay um does any on the public uh want to make a statement anybody on the board want to make a statement I would just say that uh I appreciate your uh know testimonial and the it's phenomenal and and you considering overall holistic View and making sure everything is going to be taken care of thank you yes absolutely I I'll say something I want to thank you um for really adhering to the setbacks and um presenting a beautiful a beautiful draw a beautiful rendering and um I can't wait to go back and see it when it's all built because it really is beautiful so thank you very much okay uh council do you want to have any closing statement or um no other than to say that you know the relief that we are uh requesting is relatively minor in nature we've actually reduced the habital floor area ratio but you know the relief is still required to to create the um the beautiful uh building that we're proposing and the the um Improvement of the Aesthetics so um you know with that we would uh ask that the board vote in favor of this application great anybody like to make a motion I'll make a motion I'll second it okay okay um Miss Khan votes yes Mr Kenya yes Miss marage yes Mr Sherman yes Miss Yuan yes Mr Beer yes motion passes thank you you're welcome have a good evening thank you and I'll be sticking around because I'm on the the last application you again yeah if you like to call the last uh application please sure say again minor good so I can go home minor subdivision with variances block 1404 Lots 1 and 12 44 and 46 North Ashby Avenue application number 2023 57- msv 44 North Ashby Avenue LLC applicant seeks approval to subdivide the parcel and create proposed lots 1.01 and 12.01 hey good evening Corey Klein again from SS C and gross on behalf of the applicant 44 North ashb AV LLC this is an application for minor subdivision approval bul variances and a floor area ratio in connection with an adjustment of the lot line separating property located at 44 and 46 North ashb Avenue identified as Lots 1 and 12 in Block 1404 on the Livingston Township tax maps this lot line adjustment would add lot area to existing Lot 12 and the applicant further proposes to demolish the existing single family home on Lot 12 and replace it with a new single family home the existing home on lot one is proposed to remain the property is located in the R4 single family zoning District the applicant is seeking uh the variances that I had mentioned uh habital floor area um to uh per uh permit a lot area of 6,250 square ft for each of the two lots as um will be adjusted by the lot line adjustment and to permit building coverage to be greater than what is permitted uh we serve notice by certified mail and published notice of the hearing and submitted proof of publication and service to the board would ask the board to acknowledge receipt and that jurisdiction is properly before this board please proceed thank you U so tonight our first witness is Joe Bachi of eka Associates a licensed professional engineer we testify regarding the site engineering as well as the um the subdivision good afternoon Mr B you swear or affirm that any St make the board this evening and any testimony you present will be true accurate and complete yes sir consider yourself under oath I'll leave Council to hey Mr baj if you could please describe your position with the company and any licenses you hold and briefly provide your education and employment background sure I'm a principal engineer at eka Associates 328 Park AV Scotch blings New Jersey uh 2012 graduate of Ruckers University with the BS in civil engineering been practic iing ever since uh received my license from New Jersey in 2016 been practicing professionally since 2016 uh license is in good standing active Etc okay uh any oops sorry does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness there being no objection the witness is accepted as expert in civil engineering excellent thank you and Mr bot if you could describe your responsibilities in connection with this project project uh yeah we provided the civil engineering uh site plans for this project and developed um the minor subdivision plan that I'll go through and you have reviewed the zoning ordinance of the township of Livingston yes and uh could if you could please uh Orient the board and the public to the property by the surrounding streets and other relevant characteristics yeah I I'll just open up the plans um perfect if you look at the uh zoning excerpt here on the cover sheet of our plans submitted and dated uh November 14th 2023 uh the site as stated it's lot one and two of block 1404 um as shown here that highlight go away uh bound to the north by Hamilton Lane to the South and uh East by Residential Properties and to the west by Ash Avenue you want me to continue going through it or yes please okay um and I'll try to be brief and concise uh so I'm going to jump to the last uh sheet in the set which is the existing um the boundary and toppo Survey get a lay of the land here um so as stated two lots uh we have a proposed subdivision um but we basically have two residential lots here uh one is L-shaped that's lot uh one here to the north um it's as I stated Bound by Hamilton Lane and Ashby um to the West Residential Properties to the south and east um it is L-shaped um our intent is to you know make both these Lots rectangular so you have a front uh you know Frontage of 50 along Ashby 125 along Hamilton and then you have this 50 by 25 um section here that makes it an an L um and then 44 ashb here to the South um this is where we're proposing to demo the building I'll get to that on the on a separate sheet uh but you can see this lot is rectangular again Frontage of 50 fet along Ashby uh and then only 100 here uh to the adjacent property to the north and adjacent to the South and then a 50 foot uh width here in the rear U both sites have a one-story frame dwelling on them various other improvements uh pave driveway on each of them you know shown here to the north here on the south uh various you know patios sheds pavement um pretty you know fits into the what what's existing throughout the neighborhood um I will jump to sheet two to look at the subdivision plan very simple uh we're essentially trying proposing to remove the the L-shaped lot make them both rectangular so they'll both remain with the 50ft frontage on Ashby um 125t deep parallel with Hamilton so this previously you know little little addition to uh to the northern lot will become part of the Southern lot um both 125 by 50 so simple as that um moving to sheet three our site plan um nothing no proposed improvements um on proposed existing lot one proposed lot 1.01 um there's a number of existing variances non-conformities on that lot uh sidey yard front yard they're existing we're not touching that lot aside from moving the lot line um so the actual improvements will occur on proposed lot 1.02 uh as was stated demolish the single story building and um give the outline of the proposed uh single family structure here uh some minor grading on site um I failed to mention this on the survey but the sight's it's relatively flat um you really have high points at the structures with storm water in the existing and the proposed condition just shedding to the streets so it'll shed towards Hamilton um from this side yard uh from this area on the west storm water is going to shed towards uh North Ashby in the rear it does go to an adjacent property but you can see the grading it kind of goes towards this adjacent property to the west or east um and then over to Hamilton slight Improvement uh to that is putting swes on each side um of the proposed dwelling on on lot 1201 uh that'll just help storm water get off this property not um you know not go to adjacent properties to the North or South um and continue to find its way to in the existing uh drainage pattern to H Hamilton and and Ashby uh we're pulling the driveway a little bit off uh the neighbors uh property line it's kind of conflicts ever so slightly here on the south um and is right on their property line otherwise so we're pulling that off we got a nice 10- foot buffer there um side yard setbacks we have 10 foot on each side that's an improvement it it's ex exist nonconformity um front and rear yard conform um Building height conforms um which is is pretty rare on a an undersized lot that you can you can get a nice size home um that can forms with all those bulk standards um I think that that's a nice General overview I don't want to oversell it here but are there any questions for this wit anybody on the board anybody in the public would like to ask a question of this witness oh I guess okay thank you um so so next I'd like to call our architect Mr hi Ean okay well does he remain sworn or should we have him sworn in again yes yes right um okay so like to walk you through the building um you anticipated my question thank you okay please proceed all right just just to add from an architectural point of view uh what we're doing by acquiring this land in the back not only we're improving the planning of the area but if if the lot is shorter you can imagine this house being about 25 ft 23 ft smaller so with an attached garage it it is very difficult to put in uh develop this property and design a home uh that that meets today's standards so it's very rare that we're able to purchase this uh rear section and kind of improve the planning of this area uh with that we still did everything that we could to have a um a good size house everything is still on the the smaller end uh compared to other homes that we have designed in Livingston um we come into a a foyer um and a two two cars car garage to the side um since the property is narrow the house will have to be narrow and long we'll we'll walk through a dining area to the right we have a guest bedroom and a bathroom um this is kind of needed in Livingston in my opinion with uh so many people from different backgrounds having um in-law St over and sometimes you know because of Co life living standards have changed and we now need office space so it could also be used for office um we tucked in The Powder Room uh into right next to the bathroom and you access it through the mudroom as you can see everything is very efficiently designed there are no hallways room rooms are all next to each other uh towards the back we have a family room kitchen area that's only 16 foot deep uh I would say that's on on the smaller end uh typically designed around 18 ft um Dimension and for family and Kitchen in Livingston on the second floor we have um four bedrooms uh a primary Suite with a bathroom and a single walk-in closet and a and a another regular closet and the other bedrooms are on the on the smaller end 11 by 10 um you know 12 by 12 11 by 11 um and this is uh perfect for uh a family with uh three kids um and we also like to put the laundry room on the second floor where you can you know access it uh easily um and do your laundry without going up and down the St stairs the basement level we are proposing a gym a bathroom and the remainder space will be recck room for kids to play or another area uh for the family and of course we have a mechanical room that's behind the garage so that's the overview of the plane um the front elevation is a traditional home we're um proposing Bor and band and siding and um and lab siding um and it it isn't drastically deep we try to break up the side elevation um by putting a gable roof on the side so try to articulate the design um for the neighboring neighbors as well um and with that I'll uh I'll take your questions does the board have questions for this Witness anybody um one question is uh just because the numbers are hard to read here um what's the attic height it looks like it's about 10 feet from the floor to the rdge let me attic is an unfinished attic um about hold on it's 22 sorry 20 feet 10 10 feet from the top of the attic floor to the top of the ridge so about 9 ft um 9 ft to the bottom of the ridge I I I guess my question my question is um I don't know if it's really who I should really ask this to but it is I know you're trying to make this house you know as we quotequotes livable but it's a lot of house on this property um and I'm concerned with the um the ratio we're asking for I understand we're doing our best um reducing reducing the size of the house is either going to um we may have to make the bedrooms even smaller or change the layout and lose some of the features from the house I I understand that I just 15% is I mean it's a I know it's a small lot and I mean our fors already have 30% you know they they're jacked up to right help you out as much as possible but um it just seems like a lot to me I'd like to hear from other members of the board I think I concur with uh Mr Beer okay pretty substantial oh it is a pretty substantial increment on the ratio habitable HF HFR um we've definitely talked about this before and yes I do believe that a 15% um overage over the 30% it's a lot okay and there's probably a way to go back and relook at it and make it just a little bit smaller um so it fits more manageably on the property okay is there any hike do you have um I mean I I don't know how we we we understand the board's not designing the project but but you know knowing that they're looking for for something less is there is there any questions that you have I guess for for the board in terms of you know trying I think we're trying to solicit feedback here um in terms of you know what would be palatable without you know understanding that it is our project it's it's hard to say it's just you know I think I think it's that's a big nut um um so I I don't know there's people in the public here do you anyone make any questions or comments or just listening they're just listening okay taking it all in that's why I just want SE then you one had a thought but um we're trying not to you come up with a a square number or try to rign here so this guess I I I can take a look at again how we can reduce the house house and try to keep um you know the number of bedrooms bathrooms that we need um there are two ways of doing it I can take away obviously there's no other place to take away but I'm going to have to shorten the house uh shrink the bedrooms see if I can make that work but if I cannot do that uh what is your opinion about um using the unfinished attic to um put some of the space is up there but once we finish the attic it becomes part of the F right you kind of yeah you lose something to gain something and you go back where you are the difference is the difference is it just numbers um The Unfinished right now the unfinished attic doesn't count towards the F so I can shrink the house from the back and put the square footage in the attic and shrinks the overall bulk of the house but in terms of the numbers it seems like we're at the same place even though I'm significantly reducing the bulk yeah I guess that that makes a full three-story house though right no it's it's a still an attic it's it's a two and a half story home yeah I guess it goes to the question of is the is the board's concern with just the bulk of of the house because in doing so you know we have have an unfinished addict that doesn't count towards the F but if we had a finished addict and we reduced the uh the house from the back you'd have a a smaller um house even though the F would be reduced slightly if at all right yeah for example we can have a a single story family room kitchen in the back and try to take up the take the space of the master suite and put it in the Attic so we are in a way taking that back section and shrinking it quite a bit and putting that square footage in the Attic the bulk is reduced but in terms of numbers you're you may see I I will try to reduce the F but you may see some somewhere you know it may be close but the bulk will be sign significantly reduced I mean I think I think it's certainly a bulk issue um I just don't guidance on the attic is difficult toh provide um because I don't know if you know some that's some place we want to go really um that's just right so I guess is is the board's concerned that just the the number of the amount of f alone or um would would reducing the size of the uh of the building significantly while while having an F that doesn't it's not reduced much if at all would that um you know would that help or is the concern really the the F number I think the concern is the F number okay um thank you that's what it is I mean it's a small lot you've said it was a small lot a very small lot and to put a house of that size on that lot it's going to be huge the neighbors won't be happy it's going to take it's it's going to be big um so I really think you should go back and look at it again and see how you can cut it a lot okay okay um it's a minor subdivision issue so just yep so can we well I guess um we would like to have the uh the hearing carried I guess um I understand that you guys have a pretty full plate in March already maybe April would be better Jackie how does that look we already have an extra one in March now yeah that w't work well that would give I guess that would give us more time to go back to the drawing board can you can you make the chart a little bit bigger when you come back also I had to use the magnifying glass to see it yeah certainly that's a small size print typically we give you we're old these a larger also yeah if if we were I guess maybe this is a question for Jackie if we were to be able to turn plans around in the next several days is that is that possible so we can get on when the deadline to subm I mean I would think that you guys would if we were going to try to get on for March you guys would want us to get revised plans sooner rather than later like Monday and have it done we better off going for April or all right so just I'll I'll try my best what I'm sorry oh yeah you so all right days so you want to adjourn till March yeah we we'll adjourn to March if there's a problem getting the plans in by Monday you know we'll we'll submit a letter to the board and and and ask to be carried to April but I think our intention would be to come back in March with revised plans have revised Plans by you know uh beginning of next week Monday so um the board and the board's professionals have adequate time to review them yeah the only thing is Mr Klein if I we the board adjourns this on March 26 um on the record you have to give new notices if it's carried to the April maen okay so understood okay okay and I guess we're adjourned okay thank you very much thank you thank you I think that's it right know