good evening and welcome to the public hearing for the Z Livingston Zoning Board of adjustment today is April 25th 2026 if you're an applicant for a 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 and that variance can be granted a 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 affirmative vote of five members of the seven member Board of adjustment other variance is required a majority of four members to grant that variance if you're an applicant applicant for any variance and your variants is denied by this board you have a right to appeal to the superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 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 has been granted you too May appeal to the superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days and notice a 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 requirement the open public meeting act also known as the Sunshine Law adequate notice of this meeting was provided to The Star Ledger and wests distrib and a copy was also posted on the bullon board and municipal building in addition to having notice posted notice's 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 would like to address the board please come to the front and use the microphone so we can make sure your comments or questions a part of the record we will now call the role Miss Khan Miss is here Mr arrti here Mr Kenya here miss Kana here miss marage here Mr Sherman here miss Yuan here Mr Beer here and Mr jemus our attorney is here and Miss Hollis from the planning board is here thank you Miss KH will you call the first application block 1101 lot 22201 North Livingston Avenue application number 2023 52- V Rodney Brown applicant seeks approval for a 5-ft chain link fence in violation of the following sections 17091 B 2B and 3C front side yard corner lot yard fence four feet allowed 5 feet proposed one foot variance requested thank you welcome back uh before we get started um we have a few new members here and I just want to make sure that everyone has reviewed the previous records if you are new to this case yes yes yes okay so every everyone has reviewed the previous testimony okay take it away if if I could Mr chairman you could just for the record could you please both state your names and spell them please okay thank you Rodney Brown r o d NE y b r o w n Simone Anthony Brown s i m o n e a n t h o n y hyen b r o w n thank you very much do do you both swear or affirm that all the statements and testimony you're going to give to the board today will be true accurate and complete yes yes consider yourselves under oath okay thank you he now take it away sorry so I I believe where where we last uh left off was that we would get a um new survey done which we have done since that time um we uh we had provided copies um to the zoning uh office uh I believe about a week ago um we also uh based on the um uh last recommendations what was that our current fence was in the um right of way so what again based on the the new drawings uh it was recommended I think that we go back at least three feet but based on how our current trees are positioned we we we were actually going to move it back 8 feet to allow for the plantings that would go in front of the uh fence so the fence as its current position on on the photos uh I don't know if everyone has these Okay so where that white where that white L where where the white line is now which is actually where the fence would be moved back to and then plantings plantings the uh plantings that are pictured on the right hand side would actually go in front of the fence and there are three mature trees also which will be in front of the fence as well and those are being left in place right yes and can you describe the plantings uh so we kind of took a look around the neighborhood just to see what is um other people are doing who have such fences Etc and it seems to be that the for Cynthia plant seems to be pretty common for the area so we're thinking that we're putting in a few of those spreading them out accordingly because they do spread out and they grow uh six feet to 9 feet from which what we've been told um so that is the ideal plant that we think might make sense there and so um I did give an example of it here anybody have any questions since I wasn't here the last time um I understand that the you just replaced an old fence that came down at the same spot right existing the the previous fence um there was some damage from our neighbors tree that fell on it and severely damaged it so we just replaced it for exactly what was there um just something bright and new and shiny um but unnc to us we needed to have a permit for that um so we kind of did things in the opposite order um so and we also didn't know that we could not have um chain link fence which was what was existing so that's why we're here to request a variance on that as well as the height so you replaced the whole fence or just a piece of it that came AP the entire we've been in the house for 24 years I would guess that the fence was probably 10 years older right okay thank you and to just you're planning on moving the fence yeah you just pick it up and put it back down and they'll reinstall it um so we only need to move that one side yes correct right so yes we spoke with the fencing company they have agreed to do it at no charge for us to push it back 8 feet okay so so that it is out of the right away and clears those trees Y and you said you're going to put in the fras fras um how many I mean it was um ideally I'm I would assume six I don't think more than six is required because of how dep grows it grows okay we could you'd be okay making that part of the resolution then that six y um anybody any further questions I have one more question so before the tree um hit the fence the fence was already a chain link fence correct it was already a chence yeah I appreciate the thought that you put into the plantings I think it's going to look really nice and I also appreciate the way you've moved uh the fence back eight feet and I think it's going to look really nice that you mitigated the RightWay issue so make a motion to approve this got to ask the public first hold that thought does anyone in public have any questions or comments for this witness anybody in the public want to make a statement anybody else want to make any statements before we I'll just make a quick statement thank you so much because when you came last time in front of the board um the situation arose and we want we just really appreciate you taking the time to do this and moving the fence back even further and accommodating the town so thank you very much for doing this you're welcome I do want want to add that I also commend the the thoughtfulness of choosing the plant that is in the neighborhood so it maintains some kind of uniformity in the neighborhood so it is a beautiful plant but it is also you said you looked around and that was seemed to be a popular plant in your neighborhood so I think that's very thoughtful of you thank you and the only thing that I will add is that I am uh happy that the fence company uh stepped up to to fix the error because they were the ones who installed it and never should have in the first place y yeah and I stress that point to [Laughter] him I have one little comment um I love that plant that you're going to plant to um but I just want to um remind you if it ever goes um out too much into the sidewalk or block your point of view when you go out of a driveway make sure you trim itm for sure y but it's beautiful yeah I think we're ready for a motion a motion to approve a motion to approve second it all right okay Miss Khan votes yes Mr oh I'm sorry um Miss marage yes who made the motion I did who second it Mr Mr Kenya I'm sorry yes okay Miss con votes yes Mr arrti yes Miss cona yes Mr Sherman yes Miss Yan yes and Mr Beer yes motion passes oh thank you so much thank you thank you Miss con if you miss con if you will call the next uh application a lot of pressure let's go come on keep it moving you gave me a deadline Jackie is pretty efficient I think you guys have matching suits you work together a little too much we do I call them the morning calls me you know yeah block 1605 lot 1625 Melrose Drive application number 20 24-7 DV Infinity Holdings 8 LLC applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family dwelling in violation of the following section 17087 cc4 habitable floor ratio 30% allowed 36% proposed 6% variance requested good evening everyone my name is Matthew pada I'm from the law firm SS comment and gross and I stated before I represent the applicant Infinity Holdings 8 LLC the applicant is here tonight seeking D4 variance relief for the hav floor area ratio specifically because the lot itself is actually undiz absent that and the ratio there's no other variances that are being sought out before this board here tonight reason being is that the case all that governs ratio really just comes down to one question can the site accommodate it and the way how you determine if the site can accommodate it is if it triggers any other variances and or detriments to the public good what we can validate right now that it doesn't require any other detriments as far as from a bulk standard as the only relief we're seeking here is ratio but as far as detriments of the public good I will leave that to my planner so with that being said I'd like to introduce my first and only witness that I have here tonight Mr Mike L of Fama who is a licensed surveyor engineer and planner so I'll be qualifying him for all three this I keep forgetting this this evening will be true accurate and complete yes I do 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 mbour New Jersey I've testified before this board on numerous occasions on similar matters and are all your licenses still in good standing yes they are terrific this and Mr pada is are we qualifying Mr Lono as a planner engineer yeah planner engineer yes okay I would suggest Mr chair okay does anyone on the board have any uh questions or objections regarding this witness there being no objections the witness is accepted as expert in as a professional engineer and a professional planner thank you Mr chairman the uh uh what I currently have up on the uh on the screen is the existing survey of the property that shows the location of the property the location of the existing structure uh on the subject property excuse me uh the property itself is 25 Melrose Drive here in Livingston obviously uh block 16005 lot 16 uh it's located on the north side of Melrose Drive approximately 100 feet east of page place um the existing lot has a frontage of approximately 85 ft and is somewhat irregular in shape as it Narrows towards uh towards the rear and has a little angle in the rear line the lot depth is approximately 29 ft uh the property and the entire surrounding area are located in the R4 residential zone of the township um the existing lot has a land area of 8,962 square feet which makes it slightly undersized for the for the Zone uh which requires 9,375 Square ft so it's about 413 Square ft uh below what is normally required uh in the R4 Zone um the property was created as part of a u major subdivision back in the early 1960s known as Crest viiew section five um and the house was built probably sometime in in the uh early to mid 60s it is a single family uh one story uh ranch style home um the project that we are proposing is to um redevelop the property by uh taking down the existing structure and constructing a new two and a half story uh single family home uh obviously on the same property uh providing driveway access directly off of melrose's drive and the property itself and the development itself will be fully compliant uh with the zoning except except for the habitable floor area ratio um if you look at the zoning table that is depicted on the plan you will see that get this over let see if I can blow that up so you can see from the zoning table that is depicted on the plan that the side yard setback is compliant the rear yard setback is compliant front yard meets the average the combined side yard is compliant as well as the building height is at 34.5 ft where 35 is uh permitted and the building coverage is actually below what is allowed you're allowed to have about 2,164 square feet we're at 196 Square ft um the habitable floor area maximum for the zone zone is 3220 and we're at 3217 so the only variance we are seeking is for the habitable floor area ratio which The Zone uh limits you to. 3% and we're at 36 so the extent of the variance um that we are seeking uh is about 528 square fet or 6% 06 uh is the ratio now what's important to understand with a floor area ratio type of variance the question that you have to ask yourself can the property support the additional square footage that's being proposed as part of the application and the way to determine that is to look at the other metrics that govern The Zone and that is the setback requirements the building coverage the height and things of those sorts because those are the true um um ways to determine whether or not this is going to have a negative impact on the adjoining properties now it should we should note that the existing home is non-compliant currently with regard to both sidey yard setback and combine yard setback uh in the R4 Zone you're required to have a minimum of 10 ft for the sidey yard and the combined sidey yard has to be 30% of the lot width the existing structure uh on the uh west side is at 7.99 ft existing and the combined sidey yard is only at 24.8% the new house will actually be compliant will achieve the 10 foot minimum setback will achieve the 30% combin yard coverage that is required for the zone so just by looking at that aspect there's definitely a benefit in granting the variants the um the public the joining property owners are going to reap the benefit of additional light air and open space which is an important element in uh zoning with regard to uh single family homes and the development uh of any new home and new structure um which what what else is also important to bring out is under your existing zoning section 170-8455 single family residential building that does not require a bulk variance May exceed the maximum habitable floor area ratio as long as the maximum habitable floor area of the entire structure is not exceeded and that's exactly what we're doing here is that we are not exceeding the maximum that's allowed the 3220 we're not exceeding that we're at 3217 so that technically if we were just to take the existing house and go vertical we would not need a variance we would not have to come to this board but because we're taking down the house and constructing an entirely new structure we then would need the variance and what's important to consider um as part of the um the overall development and consideration in uh developing property such as this is Aesthetics how does this property work with regard to the neighborhood and work with the Aesthetics these are renderings prepared by our architect who unfortunately couldn't be here this evening but it's important to show that the um Improvement to the property is a is a real benefit to both the neighborhood and to the community when um we look at the issues of is this going to overcrowd the site is this going to have a negative impact um it's not like a standard use variance where we have to demonstrate that the site is particularly suited uh for this this this use is already permitted the question is will that additional square footage uh impact the adjoining properties negatively and the negative criteria required under the Municipal land use law is we have to answer uh the question um would the granting of such a variance substantially substantial uh be a substantial detriment to the public good and will it not substantially impair the intent and purpose uh of the Zone plan in my opinion the answer is no there's no detriment to the public good because the configuration and location of the dwelling ensures no degradation of the quality of air air light open space enjoyed by the neighbors as a matter of fact it's increasing that setback that is currently non-compliant the building coverages and all setbacks and Heights are compliant um with regard to advancing certain elements of the purposes of the of the municipal land use law and the master plan uh in my opinion I believe that this structure this this Improvement to the neighborhood would Advance goal a which is to encourage Municipal action to guide the appropriate use or development of lands in a matter that will promote the public health safety and weal General Welfare by providing a new home containing space and amenities that most home buyers in Livingston require in 2014 I believe we're achieving that new construction and investment in the community has an overall positive impact uh on the neighbors um in my opinion we also promotes uh I which is a desirable visual uh environment through creative development techniques uh the aesthetic improve improvements in my mind are are pretty evident when you look at the architect's rendering when you look at your master plan section two under policies on page six the 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 and in my mind I believe that this application meets that goal of the master plan so in my mind I I can safely say in my professional opinion that this application if it were granted would not have a negative impact on the neighborhood it would not be detrimental to the Zone plan of the township or the master plan and by citing the different sections of the ordinance and the master plan uh I believe we've we've proved our case so um again the the house itself um is going to be a uh five bed six bedroom home it's going to have four bedrooms on the Upper Floor it's going to have a uh guest bedroom on the first level which would also allow for the homeowner to age in place so it gives that homeowner the ability once he ages to be able to live on the main level and we also have a basement in the lower uh excuse me we have a bedroom in the lower level in the basement for possibly an Annie or guest or someone that's visiting so again I believe that the structure we're proposing um is not going to have a negative imp act on the neighborhood especially in light of the fact that we're eliminating two existing non-conforming conditions uh on the property uh Mike just a few questions for you and I believe you just answered one of them just to reiterate this proposed application which will demolish the existing single family home will also eliminate two existing variances on on the site correct that's okay and then hypothetically speaking let's say if we were to keep the existing Improvement and still develop this proposed single family home where we're still seeking gener a a floor area of 3217 and a f of 36% would we require relief from this board no we would not I have no further questions for this witness one one quick thing we have to put that into uh as believe it was Jackie was it submitted or no I I didn't see it I thought it was we don't seem to have it let's ENT is A1 yeah the uh sure code renderings there's four renderings package before and we'll email those tomorrow and those were prepared if I could Mr chairman and those were prepared by the AR the same architect hike Sheen thank you you want to flip through the four of them then so we can see there's there's four in the uh in the exhibit that's the front this is a little bit of a night view with lights on in the house uh then another another one at an angle looking at the front and then looking at the uh the East Side looking uh towards the structure thank you you wanna Mr faada um I want to make sure I understood the testimony if the testimony is that in the R4 Zone District any addition or alteration of an existing single family residential building that does not require a bulk variance May exceed the maximum habitable floor area ratio as long as the maximum habitable floor area of the entire structure is not exceeded yes that is correct uh and ours is 327 I'll get you a copy of ordinance number 27223 that deleted that but what I'm going to suggest Mr is that not withstanding that can't keep everything that you testified it works here for that yes I I think it's clear I just wanted to make sure on the record the elimination of the non-conformities the fact that uh you know the house fits into the I'm not learn very very good about explaining it I just wanted to make sure that we didn't have on the record something that perhaps okay you know changed all right thank you all right does anyone on the board have any questions for the Swit is I have a question uh in the material that we received we only have the existing survey with the existing building um on the like a back left side corner the existing step back is like 7 point something feet so are you saying that it's going to be 10 ft with the new construction with the new construction it will be 10 ft correct okay great thank you mhm I truly appreciate that you are taking uh an existing non-conforming structure and constructing a conforming structure I do appreciate that my question is about the height of the attic the the roof looked rather pointy and Tall what is the height of the attic the height of the attic I'd have to look at the architectural plans let me see if I can bring those up it looks it looks as though he doesn't have the architect doesn't have it actually dimensioned um but let me see if I can do some quick math here looks about 116 yeah you got uh 116 yeah the the floor the attic is indicated at 20 ft and the ridge is at 316 so to the to the Cross members is probably around 10 feet or so probably to the Cross members um but it is a is a narrow area and if you look at the floor plans I don't believe there's any um access to that that space uh like there's no permanent staircase to there uh let me let me look at the um and then obviously there's no plans to put in a staircase either no no there is no plans no it's going remain an attic so there will be no access to the attic is pull downstairs but not actual walk upstairs okay pull down pull down yes okay but not permanent stairs to walk up where you could use it So-Cal as a flat on the attic Bas yeah that's the yeah that's the uh that's the basement so I think as for our calculation it's coming up to 11.6 that seems rather very high for an attic typically I think no that that's to the that's from the floor of the of the uh the attic to the very Ridge of the point of the roof but it's a very uh steep slope on the roof and then you have cross ties that are introduced to support the rafters and those are going to drop down probably you could have in the very center you probably could have eight feet clear yeah that's what I was wondering is there a reason why it's so steep it it gives the house character if you if you flatten that roof it's going to start to look squatty and it really adds to the Aesthetics to keep a a a roof Trimm like that with that kind of a steep slope it really adds to the Aesthetics any other questions from the board any questions from the public for this witness anybody in the public like to make a statement anybody on the board would like to make a statement anybody on the board would like to make a motion I'll make the motion I'll second Mr Kenya Mr Sherman yes Mr Kenya yes Miss Khan votes yes Mr Arron yes Miss kanana Miss marage yes and Mr Beer yes motion passes thank youone for your time you're welcome Take Care thank you it's G you ready block 3100 Lot 4 13 Plymouth Drive application number 202 24-14 DV Le Jon application seeks applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family dwelling in violation of the following section 17087 bb4 habitable floor area 3220 ft allowed 3687 ft proposed 467 sare ft requested good evening for the record my name is stepen shepis nice to see you all again may I be seated please okay very good uh well uh as the uh record was just read into uh into your hearing uh we are seeking only one variance with regard to this application uh unlike the application which you just heard moments ago where you were dealing with a lot that was smaller than the ordinance required our lot happens to be substant Al larger than the R4 minimum requirements uh the lot is approximately 75% larger than what the ordinance requires uh we actually have the largest lot on the Block uh so without further Ado I'm going to ask that the uh project architect be sworn in places credentials on a record and briefly State for the uh board and the public the nature of the relief and justifications for it salute do you swear or affirm that all the statements you're going make to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete including your testimony yes would you please state your name and then my name is uh Jonathan babula bab Ula I am a licensed architect in New Jersey I graduated from NGIT in 2004 I've been practicing archite architecture for the past uh 20 years and my license is in a good standing and current and I've testified before this board and uh about a dozen boards throughout Morris and Sussex and Bergen County very very good I offer Mr babula as a licensed architect thank you does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness there be no objection the witness is accepted as expert in architecture very good Mr babula you prepared plans in conjunction with tonight's hearing is that fair to say yes and I believe your plans are up here on the large screen in the uh viewing public yes okay uh briefly if you could tell us a little bit about the size of the property and then what what's there today and what you're proposing in the way of modifications so the uh property is 13 P the drive in uh Livingston and uh it is a trapezoidal irregular shaped uh lot it is about 88 ft by 130 ft uh but it does get wider towards the back uh it is in the R4 Zone uh the required uh minimum lot area is 9,375 square ft our lot happens to be 16,43 to square ft so uh like Mr Shea said about 75% larger than what is required uh the front yard setback is is required to be 40t we are proposing 44.4 the sidey uh setbacks are 10t required and we are uh proposing 16.9 and 23.2 rear yard required is 35 and our proposed is 58.2 the uh variance that we are seeking is for the maximum habitable floor uh Rao uh maximum habitable floor area which is 3,220 uh we are going to construct a new single family home which is going to to be 3,687 square ft which is about 467 ft over the requirement the uh habitable floor area ratio however is allowed 30% um the existing is 13.1 and our new building will be 22.4% so we're still almost uh 7 and a half% under their ratio uh the required uh Building height is 35 ft we are at 33 and the uh maximum building coverage is last 4,16 and we are at 2,288 Mr Baba can you tell the members of the board in the public what's on the property presently today so today presently is um is a rather outdated uh split level dwelling uh that exists there now uh it is um it had an addition out the back and it is it was built in the 1950s and it's it's kind of just U Been outdated and tired looking Mr babul I have an exhibit I've marked as A1 I'd like you to take a look at A1 I'm going to hand out copies to the board and thank you sir Mr Mula do you recognize what's depicted in the uh four photograph exhibit A1 yes this is the existing dwelling as it exists uh today okay so let's talk about the dwelling as it exists today uh any idea when it was built and the functionality of the structure I think it was built around the 1950s and uh as I said it's a it's a split level dwelling which means um there is about three or four different levels uh three or four different staircases in the house and um according to today's um habits and living area uh Living Spaces it's it's rather outdated and it doesn't function well in today's uh today's society so Mr if I can interrupt you for a second on exhibit A1 can we just describe it it's two pages with four photographs and who took those photos do you know uh I believe uh yes I did the took the and and uh does it accurately depict what's there at the property yes thank you very much that's thank you all Mr bab why don't you show the board and the public what's proposed to replace the building that's shown on exhibit A1 uh so on my uh she a 2.0 this is our proposed uh new two-story uh single family dwelling uh it's a more of a a modern style uh we're proposing uh you know some Hardy Board vertical siding with some stone accents some uh metal roof and a two-car garage on the right the side uh elevation here you can see that there's part of a roof um on the back half because we are stepping in the uh second floor to keep the um floor area ratio as uh low as possible same thing in the rear we do have a rear balcony that does not extend over the first floor so that you know again to keep down that that uh habitable floor area and then uh the last page here we do have um some three-dimensional views of what the house will look like okay now Mr Baba you had prepared an exhibit uh that you and I reviewed earlier about a lot areas in the on the Block is that fair to say yes okay how'd you prepare this thing uh I looked up the uh the tax maps and from the tax maps I uh scaled off and calculated all the uh square footages of the adjoining uh properties okay so may I have that we'll hand it up as exhibit A2 and just as a spoiler alert can you tell the members of the board what your ultimate findings were with regard to the subject property as it relates to the uh surrounding Lots uh so our subject property is actually the largest lot on the Block it is uh 16432 Square ft uh most of the other ones range anywhere from 11,500 to uh 14,000 so they are all um over the um required minimum lot area in this block now I also note that on your plan you show that our property butts up against the uh larger zoned AR uh three district is that fair to say yes so the kind of where the brook is correct across from the brook yep now I had made a comment during our opening statement about our property being 75% larger than the minimum lot area for the zone is that fair to say yes is that accurate yes now could you tell the members of the board uh what percentage above the uh the maximum floor area 467 Square ft represents that's a 14.5% okay so the lot is 75% larger than the minimum but the proposed structure would be 14% larger than the floor area maximum permitted correct so let's talk about the structure why this additional floor area how does that represent some type of uh benefit to the uh neighborhood to the community and further the purposes of zoning uh I think it you know brings the the structure to up today's standards um the four plans are not here but uh from my memory you know we do have a guest bedroom on the first floor behind the two-car garage uh which again you know helps uh people to age in place or they could use it as a home office which many people are doing now postco and the second floor we have four bedrooms uh with the master suite and um we do have a full basement here as well and so again this you know this is what um this is more up to today's standards and I think it really uh enhances uh the block and the neighborhood and it it and it it actually fits on this property as well this property being the size that it is um it the the property can handle this all right Mr babul I have the last exhibit for you exhibit A3 uh you and I discussed this earlier want to take a look at A3 or if you have a copy there then tell us what a A3 purports to be and how it may assist the board in rendering a determination uh sure A3 it's uh it's an aerial photograph of the neighborhood um the subject property 13 Plymouth is to the right and uh you can see the other houses in the neighborhood they're all uh split level dwellings uh what's important to note is about five houses down all the way to the left number five Plymouth um that is a house there that is on um almost as large as a piece of property as our subject property and that house there uh has a floor area of 3600 Square ft as well all right so as everybody's just getting a copy of this we can take a little slower the subject property is all the way over to the right as it's noted 13 Plymouth right correct and all of these houses on our side of the street back up to the Canoe Brook which runs behind us the wooded area behind us yes and then you just mentioned that the house which was a little over 3600 Square ft is the one all the way over to the left at five Plymouth is that fair to say correct so is it fair to say that ours is the largest lot on the the block that you could see here in this Photograph yes okay and it's your testimony that this house that you're proposing would not be out of character with the size of the houses or other houses on the Block no do not believe so okay I don't have anything further from Mr babul Mr shepher shepher just for the record it's four exhibit A3 is four pages two color photographs and then the assessment search and facts and features just so the record clear correct thank you very much thank you does anybody on the board have any questions for this witness I could make just an observation so this is really more of an R3 like typical of an R3 lot correct you know what's interesting is uh we're actually larger than the R3 larger than the R3 between R3 and R2 right so the minimum lot area for an R3 is 15,000 squ ft so you're a little over 16,000 so your habitable flow ratio of 22.4 is sort of in line with what an R3 would be is 21% if we were going to look at it that way correct yes yes even larger because a little larger yeah okay you know it's an interesting thing one time I heard a lawyer mention to the a zoning board says you're the zoning Board of adjustment because sometimes the zoning needs an adjustment and uh in this case it's really true because the lawn area on this property is kind of unique because it is the largest lot and uh we are on the edge of the larger Zone and even there we're larger so uh clearly as Mr babula had stated that this is like a tailor made suit because the property is so large in comparison to what the zoning ordinance uh requires and likewise is larger than the adjoining Zone and I think a lot of it has to do with the fact that we're up against the Canoe Brook probably limited uh development and created larger Lots so it seems to be uh reasonable under the circumstances right okay I have a question can you please show point us um to the where the existing Municipal Eastman is I know in the review we said it it will not be affected but I'm just curious thank you sure on the on the left side here the existing survey these Dash lines are the uh easement that is here and in refence to the new area it's actually on the opposite side because it's upside down so it be to the right side of the property here and we are our structure is 23 feet away from from the property line there and that easement I believe is 5 fet okay thank you it's a storm pipe storm pipe can you can you comment on how this house will fit in with the street I mean obviously you're the biggest lot you looking for a little bit bigger house but some of the lots are smaller and some of the houses are smaller on that street I don't want to see to get you know overwhelmed so what's your opinion there some some of the existing splits that are there they've had additions that have been put on so you know really the only way to add on to a split is to go up above the kitchen so you're kind of stacked up so they look like um a back and forth kind of two-story house so this is a more straight up two-story house but I think it still fits in I have one other question on the renderings of the front elevation or front perspective there's a window kind of like up in the attic area um is I assume we're not planning on going up into the attic no the the attic will just be used for storage with the set of pull down stairs uh that window is really there just for uh decoration just so it's not an empty uh siding okay anybody else any questions anybody in the public have any questions for this witness anybody on the board would like to make a statement I guess I'll just say I think this is a very obvious case of a AIC Varan so I'd like to move to approve it I second it yep Mr areny yes Miss marage yes Miss Khan votes yes Mr Kenya yes Miss kaana yes Mr Sherman yes and Mr Beer yes motion passes okay thank you for your consideration we appreciate it have a pleasant evening thank you T ready withc bring it on block block 6101 lot 2113 vulker Lane application number 20241 12-v Inga and Oriel Cohen applicant seeks approval for pool in violation of the following sections 17096 a8a rear yard pool coverage 10% allowed 15% proposed 5 % variance requested 17096 a8f left side yard setback swimming pool 20 ft required 11 ft proposed 9t variance requested 17-6 a8f right side right side yard setback swimming pool 20 ft required 11 feet proposed 9 fet variance requested Mr Jus do you like to S them in yes would you come I'm sorry could you each say and spell your names please yes uh Inga coren i n g c h n oral coin o r i e l c h n do you do you both Solly swear or affirm that any statements that you make to the board this evening including your testimony will be true accurate and complete yes consider yourselves under oath thank you thank you okay take it away tell us what you got Okay so we applied for the same variance uh 3 years ago we got approved and we did not know it has an exporation date so we hired a contractor we paid the deposit we came to apply for permits and we realized that we have to come again in front of the board so we're asking same for the same thing we got approved it was during Co and back then when we wanted to do it the prices were crazy expensive because everyone in Livingston wanted um backyard pool so now we're able to afford it and uh and like I said it's expired so we asking for exact same thing back then uh we just got the pool approved without the kitchen we're not asking for that it's just to I guess copy whatever was in the prior resolution which we submitted with the uh paperwork as well so there's no change just looking for an extension yes okay does anybody in the board have any comments or question I got a question so the kitchen's out I'm just yes okay just want to make sure okay yeah I'm gon to eat snacks instead does anybody in the public have any questions I'm sorry go I just wanted to ask you so previous U previous application had the kitchen approved as well no it wasn't he just still on the plans we kind of submitted the same thing we had okay perfect yeah I do remember in 20 December there were 10 applications nine for pools for pools yeah nobody wanted to go to the gym pool because of Co okay would anybody like to make a statement would anybody like to make a motion I'll make a motion Mr Kenya yes and Miss kaana yes Miss khanan votes yes Mr fronte yes Miss marage yes Mr Sherman yes and Mr Beer yes motion passes thank you thank you very very much we'll be over in about a month and a half it'll be ready thank you good luck would you like to call the uh last applicant yeah I Best For Last I like that we won't tell the others oh sorry um block 4304 lot 361 Irving Avenue application number 202 24-9 DV Karen sunderam applicant seeks approval for second floor addition in violation of the following sections 17099 C3 sidey yard setback 10 ft required 6.5 ft proposed 3.5 ft variance requested 17097 C4 rear yard setback 35 ft required 34.8 ft proposed point2 variance requested 17099 C4 habitable floor ratio 30% allowed 44.1% proposed 14.1% varant requested thank you Mr J you like to S them in yes thank you Mr chairman would you both please State your names and and spell them please yeah my name is Arjuna suam a rju n a last name suum s n d r a m and I'm Karen sundrum K a r n s u n d r a m do you both swear or affirm that any and old statements you make and testimony give to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete yes I do consider yourselves under oath please thank you thank you okay tell us your story hi um our house is a 61 Irving Avenue it is a lot that is uh f 50 by 104 uh roughly 5200 Square ft um it is in R4 residential district where the standard lot size is 75 by 125 with a minimum lot area of 9,375 square ft um we are seeking a variance um for a rear yard setback a side side yard setback and a habitable floor area ratio um what we're trying to build is a small twostory extension about 9 fo4 in by 14 ft um about 130 ft per floor uh to just expand the kitchen and the uh master bedroom and bathroom and closet space um we have four children so we love the area we've been in Livingston for a long time and it's just you know smaller this is the minimum we could do to kind of make it work for us um as far as the benefit to the uh Neighbors the existing in this area there's an existing small patio and there's a weird basement entrance that's akin to like what you see in the streets of New York City to go into the basement of restaurants so it's really unsightly um we uh further uh the architect has designed it in such a way that is minimally visible from the street in fact we don't think it's visible at all from Irving Avenue uh from the side street heworth it is minimally visible um from the rear um and that's pretty much it we've uh he's designed the uh plan to uh in the extension space to make sure there are no windows uh on the in the extension that are facing the side um neighbor uh for privacy reasons uh for both parties uh and um there are no changes in the height of the building the height of the house or anything else like that and in fact we are in the r for Zone the um uh maximum square footage is 3220 ft I believe and you know even with this extension we are 2300 or so square feet looks like 2296 yeah so Mr if I could um in terms of what you submitted to the board um if my memory serves me correctly or if I calculate right these are eight photographs correct did you take those photographs yes I do do those photographs accurately depict what they what the images are on them property Earth the house um there was a survey prepared by control layouts Greg a Gaffney uh is the surveyor dated April 30th 2021 is that survey accurately depict what's existing at the property yes yeah right and finally um there are site plan documents that were prepared by Robert G emert em architecting with a revision dated August 99 2021 that consists of sheets Z1 to Z4 uh and the control layout survey that we just discussed is in it does that accurately show what you're looking to do yes all right thank you Mr chairman thank you so you are essentially squaring off the house yes so you're are you going any further back no or to the side than what's existing no okay um does anybody on the board have any questions for this I do yes please I see one of the side our setback is not 6.5 it's 6.4 um back the side yard setback existing is 6.4 correct okay and we're going to 6.5 I mean my guess is that is just a um tolerance issue you know the AutoCAD the 0.1 difference um but it's it's essentially squaring the back of the property I we need to mark that off because 6.5 yeah that's a good question if you look in the back it's 6.4 it's not a big difference but it's just correction and the front is 6.5 and the back is 6.4 Jack would I thought the only work that was going to be done was in the front of the yeah it's in the front so there's no work we the rear it's it's only in the rear it's only in the rear it's only in the rear or nothing in the front Okay thank you and um further the one point I I failed to mention was that the um existing uh habitable for a ratio is 39% so it's merely a 5% increase about that does anybody else on the board have any questions I don't know if it's just been a long day but like I'm not really clear like how is the rear setback even triggered if they're just kind of squaring off like I think it exting existing non-conforming okay okay okay so all right they're not really like changing the non-conformity much just no they're just they're squaring it off so okay anybody in the public have any questions that public left um anybody want to make a statement I do um I really appreciate that you um just try to square up the the house and being on a extremely small lot I do see your hardship but I think what you do here um in my opinion is reasonable thank you anybody else any statements uh definitely a great Improvement I think so we go to the neighborhood thank you I'll concur with my fellow board members just squaring it off as nice and not trying to ask for extra as appreciated um anybody want to make a statement U make a motion sorry I'll make a motion to Second who second it Mr shman Sherman thank you congratulations thank you Mr Kenya much less scary than I thought it would be we still gotta vote be careful I know you do need like the gavel [Music] noise do you want to go to the we do have to vote yeah let's vote please we do have to vote so let's okay let's Mo Mr Kenya yes okay Mr Sherman yes Miss Khan votes yes Mr Arron yes Miss kaana yes Miss marage yes Mr Beer yes okay motion passes there you go thank you thank you and that I believe is a wrap there you go all talks about going through 11