check one two test test good evening welcome to the public hearing for the township of Livingston Zoning Board of adjustment today is Tuesday October 24th 2023 if you are an applicant for a d or a 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 exist and that variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the zoning plan 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 board of adjustment other variances require a majority of four members to grant that variance as you'll see we have five members present this evening if you are an applicant for any variance and your variance is denied by this board you have a right to appeal to the superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 5 days of notice of 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 the superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of the notice of decision if you do file an appeal I ask that you please provide a copy of your complaint to the planning administrator Jackie Hollis pursuant to the requirements of the open public meetings act also known as the Sunshine Law adequate notice of this meeting was provided to The Star Ledger and the West Tribune and a copy was also posted on the bulletin 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 make statements regarding each application at the appropriate time when the time comes if you would like to address the board please come to the front and use the microphone so we can make sure your comments or questions are part of the record we will now call the role Mr nardone here Mr bani here Mr arrti here Mr Beer here miss F here members Resnik hawber and Khan are not present our board attorney our board attorney is also present thank you I would like to start by calling um but to note for the record that Block 17 4 lot 1090 syes Avenue application number 2023358203 next application block 4301 lot 2468 Irving Avenue application number 2023-24 and rear addition in violation of the following sections 17-9 C2 front yard setback 40 feet required 2642 feet proposed 13.58 variance requested 17-9 nc3 right side yard setb 10t required 6.42 proposed 3.58 variance requested 17-9 C3 left side yard setback 10 foot required 6.01 foot proposed 3.99 variance requested 17-9 C3 aggregate side yard 30% required 24.5% proposed 5.5% variance requested and 17-8 7 cc4 habitable floor ratio 30% allowed 45.4% proposed and 15.4% variance requested Mr de olaria no okay we saw I saw Mr dubinet here earlier we'll postpone this and call this at the end of the meeting see if if he's around if either one of them shows okay let's call the next application please miss Madre this is for an extension extension of resolution of approval for Block 66004 Lot 2 6 Redwood Road application number 2022 j- 32- V for jenu uen excuse me applicant is Seeking a one-year extension of the previously approved variance relief and resolution memorialized on on September 29th 2022 Mr when hi please come to the front table yes thank you yeah check check good evening everyone my name is shanen so do you where the testimony you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yeah yes thank you so Mr W please tell us why you're here today uh my application is trying to uh extend my existing resolution for another year uh so I can have more time to be ready for my uh construction and what is the reason you need the extension why you not started the it was majorly because of the uh the increasing on the cost of the labor and the material for for the construction so it's actually uh beyond my initial budget so I was trying to uh you know uh trying to get more money to to be ready for the for the construction that's why I and do you anticipate being able to start in the near future oh yes I think so okay thank you does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness you're asking for a one-year extension is that correct yes that would run from the expiration of the prior resolution and so the resolution was memorialized September 29th 2022 is there anyone that would like to make a motion to approve this request I'll make a motion thank you Mr nardone I'll second yes Mr nardone yes Mr Beer yes Mr bani yes Mr Franti yes Miss F yes thank you motion carries your motion your extension is granted thank you have a good night thank you have a good night M Madre please call the next application this is uh in continuation from July 11th 2023 for variance for Block 3901 Lot 10615 25 Marissa Court application number 20 23-10 DB for David Wilner oh excuse me um applicant seeks approval you sorry applicant seeks approval for pool in violation of the following sections 17096 A8 rear yard area 10% required 11% proposed 1.4% variance requested 17-9 6 A8 rear yard set back 20 ft required 10 ft proposed 10 ft variance requested 17-9 6 A8 left side yard set back 20 ft required 11.9 proposed 8.1 foot variance requested 17-8 7 e1b accessory structures 10 ft required 8.5 proposed 1.5 variant requested Mr rner were you previously uh yes you're still on Ro yes also want earlier those were shorted sorry thank you you require four affirmative votes so you need four out of five if there were a full Board of seven members you would only require four out of the seven so you have to decide do you want to continue under these circumstances tonight uh um yes we'll continue okay okay so please continue uh yeah so uh in continuation from the previous meeting I don't know if I need to go over what we've previously discussed or not but we came back and should I uh you can just talk about what you submitted and what you're proposing yeah more more or less the the big difference in the plans was to move the rear yard uh setback so the request was to make that 10 feet so we did make that 10 feet um we're removing what uh is the fire pit on the plans so that will also increase a year the uh coverage uh for the rear yard so um we we were able to meet what I think the board was looking for the last time we redid the plans to make sure that uh we would satisfy any of those request and we also will the pool farther over one second yeah I got so your name sir uh Gabel richardi you also testified the last hearing yes I was foror so you're still on the road do you understand that yes at the request of some of the members of the board we moved the pool over if you're looking the back of the yard towards the house we move the pool over to the right as requested we um as Mr Wilmer mentioned we move the pool from the back lot back setb farther in towards the house and we changed the uh we taking out the fire pit due to moving the pool the then the pictures we supplied were just to be able to see what's some of the after product would look like and also just to give you a good idea of what the current current yard looks like and um there was questions on the last meeting about the uh vegetation be on the rear yard and so that's where you see a lot of those trees that seem to be going on for a long time to show that there's a lot of natural vegetation already in that rear yard also we included vegetation along the property line which are on the plans along with the solid fence on one side to uh privacy and block neighbors so every we try to meet all the crer that was asked last time thank you does anyone on the board have any question for these Witnesses well I just have to ask what are the photographs with the huge Lake in the background with the that's that's that's to show the after product the that the pool just trying to show what the pool will look like in in the in the end that was the the intention of that there there was a pool that a similar pool going in that we built up at Sparta actually had a 5ot entrance and the spa would be inside the pool because one of the questions that came up last time um as how high the spa was going to be compared to the pool so this is where it roughly is going to be it's going be about eight or nine inches above the coping so that gives you a reference to look at so you're just using that particular pool to demonstrate what yours will look like right it's not actually set on your property yeah okay and the difference is the spa will be inside the interior actually that one is to it'll be the spot will be inside the interior of the pool not on the outside to meet the 10- foot setback for the coping and that would give the pool itself the water at 11 foot set back does anyone on the board have any questions for these Witnesses does anyone in the public have any questions for these Witnesses anyone in the public have any statements they'd like to make about this application would anybody on the board like to make a I appreciate both of you taking the time to apply what the What U feedback the board gave at the meeting over the summer and adjusting your plans to fit better within our ordinances I'll make a motion thank you Mr reer welcome um after reviewing uh your your plans uh as Miss fa said um uh we appreciate everything You' done to move the pool and uh in accordance with our wishes and I recommend that we approve this thank you is there a second second okay second by Mr bhutani Mr Beer yes Mr bhani yes Mr nardone yes Mr fronty yes Miss F yes motion carries thank you thank you very much for your time thank consider thank you Miss Madre will you please call the next application block 4700 lot 306 Hazelwood Avenue application number 20233 DV for abishek gang wall applicant seeks approval for a new attached garage deck and right side and rear addition and violation of the following sections 17-9 C2 front yard setback 40 feet required 26.1 proposed existing 13.9 variants requested 17099 C3 right side yard setback 10 ft required 6.67 ft proposed 3.33 uh feet variance requested 17-9 C3 left side yard setback 10 ft required 5.75 proposed 4.25 variants requested 17-9 nc3 aggregate sidey 30% required 24.7 proposed 5.3% variance requested habitable floor ratio 30% allowed 39.94 per proposed 9.94 variance requested Mr gangell is he outside May went to the wrong town is that his architect maybe can you ask him if that's your if oh wait oh here he come is I think that's him coming that's him coming I see thank you Mr gangell would you we just called your application would you like to to do this now or would you like to go to the end okay so please take a seat yeah you can walk through here and just make sure you turn on the microphone in front when you speak can I use the computer who's this is that the architect who's testifying the architect yes I am Architect by um I'm presenting Den group I I am associate architect working with Den group so I'm not the architect on the record but I I Am project manager designing this he's presenting the AR you're Mr gang wall correct I'm Mr are you going to testify yes all right please raise your right hand you swear the testimony you given this man will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth thank you can put your hand down all right give us your full address sir for the record sixwood Avenue Livingston okay uh is the microphone on Catherine it should be good you have to raise it up a little bit so it's closer to your mouth it's good it's good man you would like to come here or you will speak from sure So based on our previous discussions we have revised the plan uh to keep it simple I will go to the zoning table directly uh based on our previous discussion so we have we have revised our plans uh keeping the design accordingly and uh my situation is still same where I have wherever I'm expanding those are already existing uh variances existing constructions there and uh the lot is small and narrow so we are requesting um uh variance so that we can start and along with that one of the important thing is that my current land coverage uh is around 50% which is getting reduced to 32% right the 39.94 is the lower and so better utilization better effective utilization planning is already considered and we are increasing uh expanding our house with the bare minimum requirement of my two kids and my parents will be staying with us because they are 75 year old now and my wife's parents are also 75 year old so we we have revised every possible uh scenario which we have proposed uh left side uh variance we needed because we are bringing the the existing Dage garage to the front and we are making it 12 ft wide which is Accord according to the code so uh that's why we are we are getting into that left side of the variance front side is already existing 26 my already house is there we are starting even behind the current start of the property the the existing building so we are considering we are giving 10 ft there also where we are starting the wall of the my garage but existing house is having the 26.1 uh the area ahead in front of my house as a front yard so I'm not touching to that so to clarify the the front yard set back is pre-existing non-conforming yep and on and on the left side you're just you're squaring off the back corner of the house continuing the line and due to the shape of your lot yes it you're encroaching a little bit further into the setback is that correct uh can you come again you're you're currently this left side yard setback is 6.18 ft and it's going to be 5.75 ft because of the placement the current placement of your house and the current and your property line yeah right okay so overall in the whole design we are just trying to extending the wall to make it a you know box kind of a structure and and one of the important aspect of the project is demolishing the existing garage which is detached and bringing it front so that our green area in the backyard will also increase because currently the design is not efficient so my backyard is also very small lot of concrete lot of cement structures are there so we are demolishing it and bringing it to the front and on the right side as you said you're only building 12 feet to the wide because that's what's required by our ordinance for a garage yes and so that's the minimum you can build I on that side and that's requiring you to encroach on the side on the right side yard setback and that's how you're at the you need the 4.25 foot variance on the right side yeah okay so taking the feedback from last time uh can you help us understand what are the changes specific changes that were made in the plan about the HF requir should I show the picture maybe quick maybe quick May will be good just to know what what changed so if you see here I have detach garage correct and this is my current existing building so I'm demolishing that DET garage and bringing it front and attaching from somewhere here which is the 10 ft behind the start of the current building so that is one of the important thing that we are doing and then we are we are making a one uh room behind uh this garage and and then two rooms upstairs right I think that was the plan last time right that was the plan last time the difference between last time's presentation and this so last time if you see the room size was little longer like a 12 by 17 if I remember correctly uh and I was looking for a higher variance and this time I have squeezed it based on the feedback and I have revised the all the dimensions of uh uh every possible Corner except the garage thing because that has to be 12 ft so we have not reduced that we are we are keeping the broadness same based on the previous plan also keeping the same garage has to be 12 everything else has been reduced Mr gangal you I believe last time you were seeking a 14 or 15% variance for habitable floor ratio today you're seeking 99.94% 6 6 to 6.5% uh efficiency we have got right and you weren't you I don't believe you were here when I spoke when I gave my opening statement for a habitable floor ratio variance you need five affirmative votes tonight we only have five members present so you have the choice if you want to and you can decide before we take a vote if you want to take have this heard tonight and have us make take a vote tonight or if you would prefer potentially a later date when we may have more members present I would prefer last time also you guys were flexible with me uh if everyone is okay no one is having objections so without vote if you approve that's also good because last time also you gave this options if you want to context and we would like to go for the vote yes that's good any any respected member seeing any issues we tried everything I'm ready to provide the informations but if anyone has any input suggestion feedback that's why he is also here today uh so we can share that what are the challenges what are the our thought process what are the you know uh key key benefits of this project how the design is much more efficient and better compared to last time and wherever we have try to excuse squeeze okay thank you I I even spoke with him if he can squeeze little more but then then again the code code and compliance come that room has cannot be less than this the window has to be this size the door has to be this size so all those important considerations we have taken into the uh discussions and design okay does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness all right so my first question is when I look at the original zoning table that you had I had to you know Zoom it up you remember that you had for the um habitable floor ratio you had 25% as existing now on this revised table you have 26% and you're proposing 39.94 uh last time you're proposing 43 but you increase the existing which makes it look like it's a smaller a smaller number I guess my question is how do how do we go from 25 to 26% existing uh you are talking about habitual floor ratios I'm talking about habitable floor ratio existing is 26% okay now go to now go to the zoning table from the last one last month it was 25% so how did we gain a percent if it's existing give me one second I'm just seeing on my take two seconds so compared to last last plan we are not increasing anything right manour it's not the question yeah you have to answer yeah no I'm just Consulting with you I know we we told you to bring an I asked you to bring an architect right yeah all right so I'm asking where did the extra percent come from from the last meeting if it's existing yeah is it possible that it was a mistake on the original plans could be or the original zoning table or possible that this is or is possible this is incorrect and it should be 25 yeah it's a typo uh we can we can correct it uh uh if uh we can see whichever is that and we can submit the the correct information if it is a typo but right you haven't done you haven't done any additions to the house in between the two meetings okay no we have not done how and I'm gonna ask a question how can I approve something if we don't know what we're approving because we don't have real numbers you're asking me to approve something and you're saying yeah maybe a typo but maybe it's not a typo but you don't know the answer but you want us to approve it how do I approve something if I don't know what it is um see overall take a minute deep breath I got it let me see this thing so that you know K did the same uh architect prepare both plans yes easier he's not the architect you keep pointing to him this you need to put your microphone on and Mr Val we need to swear you yes uh I am we have to swear you in raise your right hand you swear the testimony given this matter would be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I do all right please give us your full name my full name is Mansour M A NS o r last name is aizi a i zi I'm I I I couldn't hear you because you're not speaking into the microphone I didn't hear your last name my last name is aizi a i zi okay and you're an architect I am associate architect I have bachelor degree in um industrial design and master degree in architecture from Boston University and 20 years experience in us and your licenses are still are current I am not licensed architect working with d in group I'm working for them so not well he can't testify as an expert he can testify as a fact witness if he's reviewed the plans what his understanding is if he can explain it answer the question okay and you've reviewed the plans yes and can and can explain them to explain or answer our questions yes I can riew I can answer question about that and about the number change also okay thank you does does anyone on the board have any objections to accepting this witness as a fact Witness okay thank you then we you can proceed okay so um the calculation that we provided previously uh we didn't calculate the a AC unit um coverage inside the calculation before and uh we had the phone conversation with the zoning officer of the town and uh we reviewed again the calculation and that's why we change we update the percentage to put your M 20 26% which is if we because we were adding two pad of the AC unit and then some um you know it was uh actually it was existing AC unit we didn't calculate that and it was some uh concrete pad that we didn't calculate in the in the first original calculation and after conversation with the zoning officer we um update the drawing based on their comments basically you can see those these are the AC unit that he's talking about so I don't know the answer to this off the top of my head is the AC pad count towards square footage I I don't the ratio I'm sorry I was looking something does the does the air conditioner pad count towards the ratio the ratio thank you no it's not not an enclosed structure yeah mechanical structure any any concrete pad or anything that covered the lot consider as a coverage so we we calculate all those area yeah our ordinance though is not a coverage requirement or calculation it's a ratio based on the square footage calculation in accordance with our ordinance the underlying numbers are the same in both the first and the second application the actual fa HF calculates a 25.9% I don't know if that caused the first draftman to drop the nine but yeah the underlying numbers are correct as far as the total floor area as well as the new addition or the proposed final addition Mr none did you have other you said your first question do you have other questions is it satisfactory does anyone else on the board have any questions for this Witness um yeah I'm still just kind of confused as to what's changed um I don't have the prior plans in front of me not sure if you're able to pull up the last one and compare it to this one I mean I know you said the rooms are I guess a smaller size but yeah so yes so we have squeezed the rooms and make it small uh overall uh the plan is same but uh room sizes and every Dimension is reduced so the new addition it wouldn't go as far back into the backyard anymore yes okay so previously if I remember um U we were having like a 22 uh 12 by 17 room now we have reduced to 12x 10 or 12 x 11 which we have given the dimensions okay so except the garage we have reduced all the rooms basically you're also not putting the deck in deck no we have deck is already there and we are not putting deck now we have removed that also okay from the plan that's what we're trying we're trying to get to a list of things that you've changed oh sorry so is also removed yes that is also same right you gave us a set of plans we gave you comments you've come back it just the thing is to list which rooms if you want to show us on your plans if you want to bring it up that might help my fellow board members to understand which rooms You' changed you don't have to give to the exact inch but give us a idea of which rooms changed and how it's smaller I have plans here in my email okay these are these are new ones these are the old so um this is this is the old plan that we are having where we are still having the Gage we are doing the same we are having one room behind the garage on the first floor which we are keeping the same reducing the size uh we have removed the deck which we earlier proposed um and uh uh two rooms we are building on the second floor uh which was proposed earlier also but this time size has been reduced so major changes is size reductions and deck removal we already we did it and thank you for highlighting that I was missing that important Point any there any further questions from the board at this time you're ring reducing the size of the uh proposed house to 2852 square fet is that correct uh I can't read what the previous uh proposal was because my copy is not not very not very well so can you tell us what were you originally proposing for the total floor area the original Total floor area previously was 3078 378 you can read that better no somebody wrote larger iot larer 3,78 Square ft was your first proposal yes thank you original thinking was that we are still under the 3220 So based on all the discussion with the friends and family and the way things are going we were thinking that it will get approved but after discussing with you I got a guidance and then we reduce from 20 3070 to 28 something the number that we have put it does anyone in the public have any questions about this application does anyone would anyone in the public like to make a statement about this application okay would anyone on the board like to make a statement or ask any additional questions I'm still in the air I'm G to be honest with you anyone on the board are we hearing more testimony or you have additional testimony I think from your other witness sure if if if you accept I can present the war and go over all the changes that we did in the drawing sure please go ahead all right so the changes that we provided in in the back of the building we pushed the building approximately about 5 ft back which is this this distance here we have a big longer accurate now and then on the second floor this dot line dash line here and here is the second floor that we pushed it in so we're going to have a lower F ratio in the previous one we had the we were complying with you know 3220 but in the proposed plan we came out out uh down to 20 um I don't have the number in front of me but the 2800 something so that was the changes and we removed the whole de we had here in the previous version we had a large deck here that we removed that that deck and um basically that's that's all the changes that we did to reduce the uh F and lot coverage of the building and by proposing this design basically we are reducing the lot coverage about 15% of the existing condition because we are making driveway shorter and we removing the old garage and bring the garage to the front so the floor layout and plan in the site is going to be more efficient and we are providing we improving the site condition basically so you know I think my issue is so it's an undersized lot significantly for this for this zone for the r for R4 right yeah R4 Zone and the ratio you're requesting is a big ratio you understand that it's a big ratio that you're requesting yeah and that's where I'm hung up on that that's the hardship that the homeowner have because this is a small lot and you know and if you look at uh you know most of the houses they have about 28 2700 of a square foot of living area that's that's the hardship that he has I mean this border has been faced with other houses similar on a narrow narrow Lots not as deep big ratios um but but that's that's the hurdle that I'm having a hard time getting over yes but the anyway this is this is the fact of the site and the design is not that something that if if if we want to reduce the house uh lower than this then basically the homeowner doesn't get the um the program that he's looking like and actually I I suggest him uh to sell this house and buy another house because that is going to save you you know more money than doing this but he's uh like to I understand but I can't look at that that's not that's not in my equation in my equation I'm looking at the size of the house the square footage the property that you have to build on that's where I'm hung up on it to be honest with you yes and we've had we've had these applications that's why we are requesting and we are trying to accommodate all the suggestions in the best possible way at least it should meet my minimum that's what we we remove the the room sizes that you suggested that would anyone else on the board like to make a statement at this time yeah I mean I I'll go um it just doesn't seem like a lot has changed since the last time we heard this one um still feels a little too dense and you know I think one of the other things that came up last time was how this fits in with the neighborhood you know um in my opinion it really it would be imposing on the neighboring property um you know we haven't heard any expert testimony relevant to the statutory criteria of like how you would approve a variance so I'm having a lot of trouble like kind of leaning against this one I spoke with all of my neighbors they are also okay and that's why no one is here also raising the objections uh as a part of the process we share that we discuss with them uh both side of and it's fitting into the schemes not uh inter not interfering any views uh not uh creating any disturbance to them uh so uh it's it's fitting into the theme of the the the street sorry so it's fitting into the theme of the street and uh no one is Raising any objections no one is here they are all okay uh so uh they they they are okay because it is it is already there everything is already there uh except the floor ratio which you're you're talking you're talking about building onto the side and thereby further encroaching on the side and you're right there doesn't seem to be any objetives here but we can't infer yeah it's not uh it's not creating an inference to their view or creating any problem to them I already spoke with them and they are all very happy with that only thing is that they are not here to support me right and they are not here to oppose me also right so it's equally same thing that's why as a resident I would like to yes it is increasing more but it is increasing due to the hardship so requesting uh approv so that I can happily live in the town uh my kids are already in junior year middle school so these are the precious years of my life which I want to live happily and my parents can come they are already 75 year old so you've heard from Mr nardone and Mr fronty um expressing concerns about this application you can hear from other members of the board and again as I mentioned you have to have five affirmative votes so would you like to hear from other members of the board would you like to I would like to see if you are not mean like he has a concern I'm able to understand he has a concern I'm able to understand and I don't want to go for voting again uh but uh if if required then again we will sit on the board wide board will again squee it but my design will be same only thing that I will do will reduce the size up to the lowest possible area and then we'll live whatever way we can live as a you know one of the compartment of the train that's okay what can I do if my laot is small yeah M Mr gang well I think you can draw the conclusion that if you go to a vote at this point your application's going to be denied because you're not going to have the five votes in your favor that that you require and if that happens you cannot come back with a new application unless it's substantially different the board is is indicating you don't really need to make substantial changes but they can proceed with the application as it currently stands these are complicated matters and most people in your position come in here with either an attorney or their architect or both you have neither so you're at a disadvantage because you don't have the expertise to answer the board's questions so I think you have two choices you can ask the board to proceed to a vote and I think you see how that will happen or you can come back again with either your architect who prepared the plans and or an attorney and see if you can get this result so you have to decide now what you want to do and and again there we it seems the board has hung up on the habitable floor ratio issue and that as Mr fr fronty said requires us to have a legal justification for that vote and we need that justification from you and your team legal see um um for architect definitely he is part of the architect team so he has all the informations he can provide you but uh sizes definitely whether I am presenting my legal adviser representing or my architect representing my floor ratio will remain 39 Point some changes and the house sizes is obviously my L land size is not going to change it so legal way like to prove that that okay this house has been approved this case was the approved and then my case also should be approved yes I don't have that kind of things and I think um uh if that is needed we can we don't want to go for the voting okay we will revise it uh and come better prepare and we'll reduce the size again uh if if that is the only case or or we can see the legal consing but it's it's honestly it's unfortunate town is approving 5 500 apartment building whole town is discussing for months and months and months and here we are discussing about 100 ft honestly I will reduce 200 ft 300 ft something and come back with the same plan next month also you you know let me jump in here I've been on this board for a number of years we do everything we can to accommodate every single person that comes before us we're all part of this town we want every person to succeed 100% with every dream you have we are confined by the law and what you've been told last time and this time is that you need to have someone that can give us legal backing to approve things you can't do that I I'm sorry I forget your name sir um unfortunately he can only act as a fact witness not as a legal Witness by law we're trying to work we're not looking to mess you up or anything else everyone's aware of what's being built into Town that's a whole different story we have rules and regulations we have to follow that we swore we would and trying to balance it between our friends our neighbors and the rules and that's what we're trying to do no one's trying to not make you happy um it's unfortunate but that's why Mr nardone last nardone last time said to bring representation that can help you out no we discussed with him also and that's why I got I got it he's trying but he can only be be a fact witness it's not his fault the architect didn't want to come or you couldn't get them or you didn't want to pay it whatever it is we can't you can't give us the arguments that we need to say okay now we can turn the tables okay so let's let's move this let's move this forward so so Mr gangwal the next our November 28th agenda is I believe is full and again um you'd have to make the changes so quickly and get them submitted to the zone department and then to the board that you probably don't have time to do it in that time frame so our next meeting is December 12th it's very close um so we can adjourn this to December 12th November I I'm ready to make the changes and submit it with the holiday there's not enough time for you to make the changes and get them through the process it has to go to the zoning officer and then to and then you know for the denial letter and then back to us and everything you guys suggest you guys are boss all I can say that very disheartening 500 units you can approve it in the town May okay so we can adjourn this to December 12th if you would like is that what you would like I don't have any other options okay or we can we can vote on the application no I I'm okay with 12 because that is the only thing okay again we're trying to to work with you so um we will adjourn this to December 12th 2023 no further notices will be required so what do I need to do for next meeting you need to submit your revised plans to to Miss Jackson the the zoning officer the just the zoning off zoning office who you or no zoning you have to go back to zoning um they need 10 days to review it as you know and we need this 10 days prior to December 12th for the board okay okay so make sure the latest you have it is I would say the 24th well we we can discuss it if if you have any question in November I'm I I will be ready from our side only two weeks later yeah this is the month that if you had to miss a meeting this is it because it's only the next meeting is only two weeks later because of the holidays in December so you're only losing two weeks you're not losing that much now if it was December versus January you got December 10th versus like January 20s something did somebody yeah okay so we will see you December 12th thank you yeah block 4302 lot we're going to take a two-minute recess 20 more seconds okay miss m thank you block 4302 lot 20 32 Irving Avenue application number 20234 1-v Danielle Voss applicant seeks approval for a second floor addition in violation of the following sections 17087 cc4 habitable floor ratio 30% allowed 41.680428 11.68 variant requested 17099 C3 aggregate sidey 30% required 23% proposed 7% variance requested thank you Miss Voss okay just be sure to turn on the microphone and speak into it when you talk okay thank you yes please okay could you raise your right hand you swear to testimony give this matter will be the truth to hold truth and nothing with the truth yes please give us your full name and address my name is Danielle de amini made a name boss um 32 Irving Avenue Livingston New Jersey are you the only witness for tonight I am um I'm not sorry I do have my architect Mark I didn't here yes sorry my name is Mark Marcel I'm the a registered architect I'm the architect on the project mark what was your last name Marcal m a r c as in cat i l l e and can you give us your credentials raise your right hand you SAR to testimony give this man will be the truth to hold truth nothing but the truth yes I do can you give us your credentials please I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey I have a bachelor's of architecture from NGIT I have my own practice in matucha New Jersey I've been practicing since 2007 license is active and insurance is active and I've testified before numerous boards thank you does anyone have any questions or or objections to accepting this witness as an expert in the field of architecture thank you we can accept you as an expert thank you okay so please tell us why you're here um I'm here to request um two variances um regard to our home expans Manon project for uh our home to add wow I'm really Tongue Tied guys sorry hold on one second not used to uh don't be nervous oh yeah easy easy to sa from down here um we are looking to expand our home because we've recently expanded our family we have um my husband's mother living with us and when we bought our house it was perfect for us and two kids and now it's not perfect for us for two kids and a mother-in-law so we are trying to add a nest Suite over existing addition um which requires a variance to the hitable four ratio and our side yard setback a aggregate sidey yard sorry I couldn't see that out of the corner of my eye um so yeah okay does any does anyone on the board have any questions for this Witness does anyone in the public have any questions for this witness okay thank you thank you so you know as Danielle mentioned the proposal is to add essentially a master bedroom suite over an existing rear family room uh so on the rear right hand side of the existing dwelling uh there is a family room which has the existing side setback non-conformities uh the existing house has three bedrooms on the second floor uh again they are you know now a five person family so they'd like to add the fourth bedroom existing house is just under 2,000 square ft we're proposing to increase it to to Just Around 2400 Square ft uh we do need a habitable floor area ratio variance um the requirement as you know is 30% of the lot area our existing lot is significantly under sized it's 5,783 Square ft which would allow a 1735 ft house if conforming um if the lot were the required 9,375 Square ft we could build up to a 3220t house uh we don't feel that proposing a 2400t house is too large for the size of the property considering that the addition is located in the rear of the house it it will not be visible from the public RightWay the front of the house will essentially look the same as it does assuming this addition is approved and constructed uh so we feel that the visual impact on the neighborhood is effectively diminus uh and the existing side setback variance is already there we're not proposing any additional uh impervious coverage essentially we're taking the existing GBL shaped roof over the family room we're going to lift it up a story and then construct a bedroom underneath it so the gutters will be in the same place the runoff will go to the same same place that it does now there'll be no again impervious coverage increase uh so we feel it's it's a modest application uh or really our only other real option was to build over the garage uh which which is outside of the buildable envelope and we already have a small bedroom in that space uh so it didn't seem practical to propose additional variances um and not be able to gain you know an extra bedroom even though that's a small space above the garage so I think that pretty much sums it up appreciate it does anyone have any questions for this witness just so we're clear the addition is going to be directly above the existing first floor correct correct that's it any other questions for this witness does anyone in the public have any questions for the this witness do you have any additional Witnesses or testimony no would anybody in the public like to make a statement about this application would anyone on the board like to make a statement about this application a small clarifying question maybe are there any existing variances uh on the property that you know of the aggregate sidey yard setback well well start of course starting with the lot the lot is under size so that's an existing condition uh the front yard is required to be 40t the existing front yard is 25 ft that's an existing condition uh the left side yard uh on the garage side of the house is is8 Ft that's an existing variance as was mentioned the aggregate sidey yard is an existing variance um and the existing house is non-conforming from the habitable floor area perspective 30% required the existing house is at 34% uh and the building coverage ratio is also an existing variance which we're not proposing to increase or an existing nonconformity and so I think what Mr bhani is asking is the aggregate sidey yard variance is not is pre-existing non-conform and you're not exacerbating that condition at all it's as Mr nardone asked you're just building straight up that's correct and it's the existing house that creates that ex you know that existing add condition uh the addition itself is 12.25 ft from the right side and about 19 ft from the left side the addition itself conforms the existing house does not and the and for habitable floor ratio again as indicated by the zoning table the house the house currently is over the habitable floor ratio that's correct and the addition is exactly how many square feet the addition is 441 square feet which is the same size as the family room right would anyone on the board like to make a statement about this application to me this is a very modest addition to the property and again it seems thoughtfully done to build straight up to not exacerbate any existing conditions except for the um the habitable floor ratio which again you're a severely undersized lot and are already over the habitable floor area area and as your architect testified um the addition is solely in the rear will not be visible from the streetscape so you will not see the habitable FL ratio VAR ordinance is designed to prevent over massing of houses and to make sure that they fit within the neighborhood and and and this addition does not um exacerbate that concern at all in my opinion I'll second that opinion would anybody like to make a motion I guess I'll make a motion um based on the testimony heard um the addition is directly over the existing uh structure and is not exasperating exasperating um any of the variances except for the habal floor area um um but I don't see that as a detriment so I make a motion to approve I'll second thank you second by Mr nardone Mr Beer yes Mr nardone yes Mr bani yes Mr fr frany yes Miss F yes motion carries thank you thank you very much appreciate your time yes thank you all thank you com thank you block block 3811 Lot 12 68 Amelia Avenue application number 20 23-43 DV for Gan Hugh applicant seeks approval for rear left side and second floor Edition and deck in violation of the following sections one 70-99 C2 front yard set back 40 ft required 3933 proposed 67 ft variance requested 17087 l1d front side yard setback 35 ft required 18.4 one proposed 16.59% who is the applicant all right are you going to be sworn in and testify and is anyone else going to testify I'm sorry please put your microphone on when and speak into it when you're talking press the button press the button so it goes green there you go hello hello yes okay let's start with you you're Mr U yes okay please raise your right hand you SAR to testimony given this matter will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes give us your full name and address sir jho uh 68 mil Avenue Livingston and and your name yes hello uh my name is Chon W I'm the architect for this project and can you spell your name please sure q i o n g first name last name is Wu w okay raise your right hand please you swear the testimony you give this manner will be the truth the whole truth nothing but the truth yes I do okay and I can give some education background credential um so I got my uh Bachelor's of architecture from Iowa State University and uh masters of architecture and urban side from Columbia University um and I have been Li since in New Jersey since 2017 and I haven't uh testified uh in this uh um Township before but I have done that in other Township in New Jersey and your license is in good standing it's active yeah it's current and did you prep prepare the plans for this application yes I have the in the thumb drive okay great does anyone have any questions or concerns about this witness then we can accept you as an expert thank you thank you so Mr hope do you want to start or you want your architect to handle I can have my architect you so good good evening everyone and um I'm going to um start with the presentation of the um the house at uh 68 Amilia Avenue um what you're looking at right now let me just start with the side plan sorry large this so um so this is an 16 single family house located in the corner site of a Virginia Avenue and uh ailia uh milia Avenue and um it's in zone 4 R uh um this existing house is partially uh twostory uh with three bedrooms um and a family room uh on the ground level and uh it's a really small house compared to the lot size which I will show you the Zone the zoning table so um so the last size is current plus size is 11,99 square ft and um the existing habitable area is actually 1,618 Square ft uh so this house doesn't really have enough space to support the growing family um of the applicant and uh so we are trying to um propose an addition to this house um to make the three bedroom into six bedrooms and um to reach a habitable area of 3,287 square ft um which is still under the maximum area of the zoning requirement of 300 3,220 Square ft so um so there are two vences we're trying to um request today uh one is the front uh front setback and the other one is from Sac so both are actually relating to existing non-conforming conditions um so for the side plan here let me enlarge this okay so um the side plan um we don't have issue on for the left uh side side back which is um within the zoning requirement and we don't have issue from the rear setback um but the two setback we are trying to request where is that um the setback along Virginia Avenue uh where you can see this gray number 20.3 that's existing um first floor setback and we still keep this foundation and this uh first floor exterior walls so this building setback still remain the same same and there's another number um 18 ft 5 in that's the Dax setback so that's a new addition of the uh deck doesn't really belong to the building structure uh not a uh exterior wall structure so there's another one is the front set back um along ailia Avenue um the Cod requirement is 40 ft and and um the existing house uh the setback is 36.4 ft and we are trying to propose n uh 39t 4 in which is actually better than the existing condition what we are trying to do is we are still trying to hold the existing uh W corner so that's and actually push back um everything like Beyond this point so like we have get I think if you see this uh Front Line the set back line um actually more than half of the front facade is meets the requirement and just um the rest is just slightly over the 40 ft um setb requirement um and then let me see okay so this is our side location the corner side and um later on I'm going to show you some U exhibits of the surrounding house uh one thing to mention is uh number 72 just next two hours is a new construction so um the house actually looks like both area wise and height wise is higher than um a lot higher than our house and a lot larger so what we imagining is after our um addition maybe we're going to be comparable size and uh we actually have a larger U lot as well which I'll will show you later and then um maybe started from the building plan oh sorry okay so basement so there's no existing basement uh for the house and we are trying to create a partial basement um with one bedroom and uh one recreational area um but just keep the existing cross space uh on the right then to the next so here you can see is the um on the left is the first floor plans existing which um you can see at we we try to keep existing Foundation and uh exterior walls for the um existing dining and family room area so it's on the um the right portion and then everything on the left will be demolished and then uh for the new uh plan you will see we uh we Chang the dining area into a living room which will be um f uh the applicant needs better and uh we can also put the family room and dining kitchen space in the back is more private and uh the back space here has a slightly higher uh ceiling plant so we can have some uh some better daylighting over the area and um we have a new deck add it on the back that can be accessed from both uh family room and living room space and uh on the right you can see second floor plans both um existing going to be demolished entirely on the top um and the new um addition on the bottom so um we are going to change the three uh one master bedroom two um other bedrooms into one master bed and uh three other bedrooms the second level um and you can see the um Family space the the roof um on top of that for the new plan so next okay okay so the elevation so existing um house the height is around 28 ft um what we we are proposing now is 34' 2 in uh still under the maximum zoning requirement of uh 35 ft and um so we have first floor second floor and then um will be attic space that's not going to be used as the leing space would just be um storage area and then um when uh garage is going to one car garage changed to two car garages um on the ground level and in terms of material we are going to have a white hearty plank setting uh metal roof and um Asal roof shingles and we think this matches the neighborhood um actually um would look really nice as a corner um house so um on this page you'll see existing um house uh photograph and our proposed um house the new addition from the same angle so just slightly tier and um more usable space and one thing to um another thing to mention is the reason we added that but like actually added the living space on uh kind of the left hand side the left uh left rear side of the house is we actually still respect the exist uh the requirement of the uh front Set uh setback so we try not to um to intrude into that stepback requirement um another thing XB I want to show two things one is the xb8 is um so this is basement but that shows the existing house foundation in red and uh to show how we keep existing um partially existing uh foundation and exterior walls and then we have another exhibit B so yeah sorry this may be loading okay so this is actually um um more existing photos but um this is the new house in um the new uh construction just next two hours um it's a bit hard to see since it's um kind of covered by trees but it's um we think it's probably close to 35 ft tall so when we build our new addition will be probably still maybe less than height of the building on the left or maybe the same similar and then the one on the right um this one maybe one that's we don't have that picture correct oh you don't have this I'm going to send you after the meeting so we need we need to mark that as A1 please okay yeah thank you oh I'm sorry yeah sure okay oh okay so that's A2 the previous page would be A1 okay so can you go back that'll be A2 can you go back to the one right before the other one will be 81 right this one will be A1 well that one we this is the plan but I just added a boundary so that's the only thing yeah so that that needs to be A1 if it's different than what's on file that needs to be marked so that'll be A1 the other one would be A2 correct what sheet is that this is which sheet is that of your this is actually well that's that's actually uh the base plan is the basement so like it's uh zn-1 as the base uh basement plan but added the uh boundary of the existing right foundation okay and then A2 will be the the four pictures right okay so this is really hard to see but I can point you to um basically we superimpose our new um building a little bit sh so like you mind zooming in a little bit just to make it easier for everybody to see thank you thank you that's great okay thank you yeah yeah so it's just slightly bigger and higher yeah and then another information I want to point out is um relate to setback so the existing um front side uh setback we have is uh 20.3 ft and we actually did some research of the two houses um behind us so I think this is um on Cedar Street the one uh let me en large okay so the green one is um 59 C Street and out of the white one here this one is uh 55 CED Street and um the setback the current setback we think it's uh 59 is about 17 ft um setback and 55 it's about 12 F sideb so they're both really close to uh Virginia Avenue so closer than um all building so I think that's all we can we want to show today and um welcome any questions thank you thank as a first question the application is ask asking for a 67 foot front yard variance but I think there seems to be a discrepancy on the zoning table and on there therefore on the denial letter it says that the existing front yard setback is 36.4 feet and the proposed is 39 39 feet 4 in but I think those numbers are transposed or something yeah if on the survey Mr Mr corre on the survey on the existing survey it looks like it's a very tiny encroachment into the front yard setback but then if you look at the front if you look at the proposed first floor plan it looks like the the bay window in the bedroom is over the setback line which might account for the 3 feet not 9 in there's something there's some something something seems to be off we want to make sure if we're giving you the variance that we're giving you the correct variance look like you picked up um the ground level sorry like I'm trying to Zone name so uh there's a bay window so like the bay window is actually above so like if you're if this is where you okay no but but the I guess the qu so on your zoning table is it says that the that the existing front yard setback is 36.4 ft correct which matches the survey which matches the survey survey but your proposed front yard setback is 39 feet 4 in yeah so what you can see is are you taking down the house so that's the the corner here sorry if this is not pointing like where I want but that's a corner of the existing wall but we are taking this wall down and then here the new the new house we actually push that in if you can see maybe I use my finger so this we actually push that in so that's why we gain some um room there and we can for the let me you're saying the front wall of the family room on the existing and is now the you're cutting straight across yeah that's okay stra across and actually push that aim further you demol everything else is being demolished everything on the left I don't think that was clear to myself and maybe one or two others so everything okay that cleared that one okay so that's that that's that question um the in the basement bedroom five has the windows and it appears that there's a well oh yeah that's the well but I don't see that on reflect that the that window those windows reflected on the elevations or the or the well that would have to be yeah yeah we can add that later just clarify the drawing yeah and then do you have a topographical survey with youal don't we don't I'm sorry yeah just to just to confirm the we don't have but it's actually a pretty flat site so there's no big total difference okay and what are your what are or your the applicant's intentions with the attic space Oh the at space is actually let me go back to plan so the ground level the first floor is actually before as you can see there's only um the family room um in front and then dining um but the family room which we think um it can be in the back and then um so basically we want to have a more like welcoming um living room that can have uh have outdoor access but it doesn't have to go through dining area so right now like once you open the door like family room is together with dining and then you can just see through everything but um yeah no I was asking about the attic space Oh the attic space the attic yes the space is for storage only just it's not habitable it's because the roof is actually slow and uh um we are not intending to turn that into living space at all we'll have a put down uh letters which will be added to the Joint the permit drawing lat all yeah yeah I mean it's a very tall attic yeah it is relative tall but like um one thing is we like this yeah first of like all all the roofs they like slope so that space is actually not it's tall like the highest part is it might be tall but like it doesn't the space doesn't appear to be that tall in reality since they all like we only in I'm going to jump in on on this one um this is a corner house um so it get it's it's kind of a little bit if you want to say inyour face we have this side yard setback on was it Virginia I think and you know you're building over which is good that's great um we're not taking that extra space the deck does come a little bit further in but then we have this very high building as you like you're driving into a a wall is what I'm seeing I I know you're under the 342 but the massing comes across as yeah yeah um it comes across as massive to me and I'm seeing this massive eight windows on I mean you're saying you're not going to be using it but I don't know if the next user is going to try to use this it's just a a huge area that's not livable apparently and I'm just kind of wondering if there's anything we can do to tone it down because it's just so big as you you know the house is kind of in the middle of the street maybe you wouldn't see it as much set back further but this is this is right there at the corner and you know drive around town there are some houses that got a little too big on the corner and it's pretty obvious that they're too big on the corner so that's kind of my concern and my getting my handle around this I don't know if you have anything you want to respond to on that well one thing is our law is quite large uh I noticed um by comparing uh with ad Jason blocks um so and the building actually the new construction next to us is like we we are not exceeding exce exceeding the the height limit and we are still trying to make everything like not going too high and uh we actually intentionally um for the Virginia Avenue trying to um have a step uh for the plan so like to actually try to break down the messing so we are we're trying like not to to have long forell on both so we still we think um aelia Avenue is still the main address street so we think that's where we can go a little bit wider but meanwhile in order not to make this too chunky in the corner so we actually um like push this wall back so leave some back space so we are trying to accommodate the um the neighborhood and the corner space in a way I'm just seeing over a third of the house being Ruth it just seems a lot to me I understand what you're saying but I think it doesn't fit as well as other people might think yeah maybe we'll study to um lower the ethic yeah I would I would concur with my fellow board member uh Mr Beer there it's uh so and and on top of the height there the also the lot is slightly elevated I drove by it is slightly elevated compared to like when you make a turn also being a corner lot uh having the side set back and that's another question I have is um there is a 20 foot 20.3 uh front yard we call it because it's a corner lot on the Virginia Avenue side and the propos is also 20.3 so essentially it's the same structure you're correct you're keeping the same wall there um but given that the the lot is higher the building goes that higher it really becomes a massive structure that's the concern I concur with that M yeah we can study to lower the um attic ceiling height we we uh study to lower the attic ceiling height to lower the roof okay height yeah they're going to be making changes to the application I would like to give them any additional feedback at this time does anyone on the board have any other comments or concerns about the plans as articulated not for me I think I'm okay with it so that's really that's really what I had I appreciate your feedback if you're going to redo the plans you should have your architect add the height to the zoning table yeah we'll add that information to zoning table it should be the zoning table not absolutely okay so if you're going to be revising the roof line then we would need you'd need to resubmit the plans to the zoning department okay yeah thank you does anybody in the audience do does anybody in the public have any questions for this application does anyone in the does anyone in the public have any statements they'd like to make about this application okay so as you heard earlier um the next meeting that you would be able to come back to would be December 12th M okay okay so we will adjourn this application to December 12th no further notice will be required okay great thank you very much thank you thank you yes m m will you please recall uh 68 Irving Avenue block 4301 Lot 24 68 Irving Avenue application number 2023 -9- V Fabiano di ala the applicant seeks approval for a second floor and reare addition in violation of the following sections 17-9 nc2 front yard set pack 40 ft required 26.42% yards set back 10 ft required 6.42 proposed 3.58 variants requested 17- 99 C3 left side yard set back 10t required 6.01 proposed 3.99 variant requested 17-9 C3 aggregate side yard 30% required 24.5 proposed 5.5% variance requested 17087 cc4 habitable floor ratio 30% allowed 45.4 propos opposed and 15.4% variance requested thank you Mr Dale aaria okay given that Mr Dale aaria has not um come to this meeting we will dismiss this application without prejudice Miss Madre will you please notify the applicant yes thank you very much this meeting is adjourned