good evening welcome to the public hearing for the township of Livingston Zoning Board of adjustment today is January 23rd 2024 if you are 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 without substantial detriment to the zoning plan of the township ship of Livingston you should also be aware that in order to be granted such a variance you will require an affirmative vote of five members of the seven member Board of adjustment other variances require a majority of four members to grant that variance if you're 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 days of notice of 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 Superior Court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of the notice the decision if you do 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 the open public meeting act also known as the Sunshine Law adequate notice of this meeting was provided to The Star Ledger and West Essex Tribune and a copy was also posted on the bullon board of the municipal building in addition to having notice posted notice 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 a microphone so we can make sure your comments or questions are part the record we will now call the RO Miss Khan Mr T here Mr arrti here Mr Kenya here miss kanana here miss marage here Mr Sherman here miss Yuan here Mr Beer here and Miss Khan is here here oh okay Miss Khan will you call the first applicant Please block 4700 Lot 36 Hazelwood Avenue application number 20 23-30 DV Abhishek gangal applicant seeks approval for a new attached garage deck in right side and rear addition in violation of the following sections 17099 C2 front yard setback 40 ft required 26.1 ft proposed existing 13.9 ft variance requested 17099 C3 right side yard setback 10 ft required 6.67 fet proposed 3.33 ft variance requested 17099 C3 left side yard setback 10 ft required 5.75 F feet proposed 4.25 ft variance requested 17099 C3 aggregate side yard 30% required 24.7% proposed 5.3% variance requested habitable floor ratio 30% allowed 39.94 proposed 99.94% variance requested thank you and be before we continue I neglected to mention if you are here for three thirst and drive application 2023 43- V that has been adjourned to February 27th 2024 okay um you want to swear in why don't we let Council identifi okay oh please turn on the mic that's okay okay thank you start over my name again Diana McGovern I'm from the law firm of Gasho and pako I'm representing Mr um gangal in this uh matter resides with his wife and two children at six Hazelwood Avenue and would like to uh present a this application for a he's reduced it I understand he was here in September and he's now back with bu plans um taking the board's suggestions to heart and reducing the habitable floor area ratio and removing a deck uh we still have bulk variances which relate to some preist existing uh a lot of it is caused by the fact that the the lot is undersized it's uh permitted in the zone is 9,375 square ft and the existing property is only 7,140 square feet which is very similar to all the other properties on the Block which also relates to the front yard setback issue that we have um and the sidey yard setback which will be discussed uh tonight I am here with my client abash gangal who is the owner of the property we also have an architect Frank Hall who uh will testify and finally we have Charles paaza our planner um recognize that this is a d4 variant and um board uh if we could now present our Witnesses yes please miss McGovern you should know that there are new members of the board um certain members of those Bo of the board have reviewed both the videos I think it's September 12th and I forget what the October meeting is so and they've take they've confirmed that under oath so they'll be able to participate in the meeting very good thank you because I know we need five affirmative so we have seven voting terrific thank you um yeah my client has to be sworn in I don't yes you want you want to swear in I mean he was SW before although he was sworn before I'll just do it again do you uh swear or affirm that any of the statements and the testimony to give the board this evening will be true accurate and complete I you consider yourself under oath I do abash how long have you lived at six Hazelwood I moved in 2016 and who lives here with you 2016 since seven seven years I'm living on the same house don't have who lives with you there you can sit down and make it easier to yourselves and we'll hear you better thank you who lives with you there uh I live with my family my wife and two kids high school student and middle school students what is the reason that you would like this addition to your home uh the primary reason is that we have very limited space um um like we don't we have only one one bathroom on the second floor which we are sharing across all the family members like my wife my myself my kids and we have elderly aging parents like my parents are in 75 years plus age we we don't have space on neither second floor nor on first floor have only three rooms uh which is shared by one by me and my wife one is for my son one is for my daughter so we need a space to uh you know uh to have sufficient uh space for the family members and my grandparents like my kids grandparents and um you and your wife where do you work do you work from home uh I do 5 days work from home my wife works 3 days from home she goes two days to office and 3 days work from home and is one of the reasons for this uh the addition uh to provide office space dedicated office space to both yourself and to your wife yes and as I understand at that second bedroom on the or the additional bedroom on the second floor would also be used as uh an office at times yes and then you'd finish the basement so your children would actually have some type of recck room area correct right now there is a problem on my first floor if you see the ex uh anyone from the community our offices or anyone comes to visit us the kids or family member has to go to their bedroom we don't have any separate area we can we can you know have a conversations maybe related to office maybe related to personal friend community members or something so everyone is forced to go to their master bedroom so that creates a lot of you know mental and emotional issues and we are not able to invite our community friends our office peoples or or this kind of uh all the schedual things that we are supposed to do in a day-to-day life right thank you I don't know the board may have some questions anybody have any questions I'd like to call the architect actually does does anyone in the public have any questions for this Witness okay now evening I can if you could just state your name your place of business please sure uh my name is Frank Hall h l l architect for the applicant my business address is at 27 Bridge uh Chestnut Street in Ridgewood um Mr Hall how long have you been practicing as an architect I've been licensed in New Jersey since 1992 and could you give the board benefit of your educational background briefly sure I have a bachelor of architecture degree from NJIT 1987 are you a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey I am and my license is in good standing have you previously testified before planning and zoning boards as an expert yes I have numerous times uh couple hundred times I would estimate including having had the pleasure at this board a few years ago I'd move to qualify Mr Hall as an expert architect does anybody on the board have any questions or objections to this I could Mr chairman yes all right and I maybe I didn't hear him is your is your license in good standing yes it is all right and have you reviewed the applicants submissions and you're familiar with them I have right so if the board doesn't have any questions I'll swear please do right well let's qualif the board's going to qualify you as an architect to give testimony in this even this evening all right do you swear or affirm that the statements and testimony you present to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete I do consider yourself under oath thank you thank you Mr Hall are you familiar with the architectural plans for this site yes I am those were last revised September 26 2023 after the board's comments uh at that September yes that is correct would you please describe this site I will um start by bringing up our uh our drawing set um which looks like it's zoomed way in uh oh here we go just okay sure so um the the dwelling at at six Hazelwood Avenue uh the residence of Mr gangell and his family exists as a single family residence property records indicate it was built in roughly 19 30 it's a two-story residence on a lot nominally 50 feet wide by 141 ft deep in the R4 Zone it's a permitted use in the zone as Mr gangell has explained he entered into the process of seeking an expansion of his family home so as to gain the spaces and the flexibility of layout that his family needs to have a contemporary lifestyle for each member of the family I will briefly take us through the uh existing conditions of the house as depicted on sheet A5 if you're following Along on your plans and looking at the uh at the left hand side of the page uh we have the first floor plan at the first floor there's essentially a living room a dining room and a kitchen as well as a full bath which peculiarly is right inside the front door off of what we're calling a foyer there's a deck at the left rear of the house there's a side door leading to the driveway off of the stairs that lead down to the basement among the family's needs as compared to this plan or a bit more generous living space and a place for abash Shak M Mr gangell to work from 5 days a week moving to the right at the center of the of that page at the second floor we have three bedrooms and a bath one of them is nominally the master or principal bedroom but it does not have its own bathroom as Mr gangell explained the on the second floor the the whole family is is sharing the one bathroom needs arising out of this existing plan are additional bedroom space for visitors such as uh the two sets of parents occasionally visiting and additional bathroom capacity both for Resident family and for guests at the exterior is a freestanding Garage in January I probably don't need to detail the less than ideal nature of that Arrangement let me now take you through the proposed plans can I just stop you one second how wide is is the current house the current house I believe is approximately 24 feet wide if I if I recall okay thank you all right and now 44t the current proposed uh addition and what sure this is on sheet A2 zooming in just a bit first of all we're proposing to eliminate the freestanding garage which we'd like to make a part of the dwelling itself for a more modern Arrangement this would be accessed from the aforementioned side door without the trip into the backyard to access the garage behind the garage is a new guest room I seen U seen here uh We've relocated located that first floor bath to a more discret location and one that is convenient to the guest room also a a pantry space uh sort of between the garage and the guest room um to provide a little bit more storage for a relatively modest kitchen um at the second floor the right hand side of the page we've relocated um one of the bedrooms essentially one of the the existing relatively small bedro bedrooms becomes the master bath to provide that additional capacity for the for the bedrooms we're replacing that with one of the bedrooms located over the addition at the second floor of the addition and adding one more so we're going from three bedrooms to four bedrooms at the second floor and gaining um a master bath to provide a little more capacity I'll go now to the zoning table which is on sheet T1 the first sheet of the set and also uh tonight we have brought a revised zoning table clarifying of a few items on the table so I will actually I will open that up as well before you while the board is passing that out um how many vehicles park in the garage and how many vehicles park on the it's a onecar garage with uh comfortably spaced for two additional cars in the driveway so three vehicles storage Jackie we have to mark this is A1 you have a copy we might have more here thank you sorry about that go ahead so if we're if we're all looking at the uh new revised zoning table as compared to the previous one we've noted that there is not in fact a a metric for lot coverage generally referred to as impervious coverage so we've removed that um and any the quantity of impervious coverage in in the township obviously is is controlled somewhat with is is addressed through uh storm water management uh We've we've also um clarified the um building coverage uh which was previously um listed as 30% it's actually a according to your formula it's it's 25 being a lot over 5,000 but less than 44,000 square feet it's um it's 25% minus the product of the area in excess of 5,000 square fet times a factor which I believe is 02135 897 something like that which effectively reduces it by a half a percent so or 6% so we wind up with an effective required um or permitted uh building coverage of 24.5% 20 I'm sorry 20 25.4% 25.4% okay so it's 0 4% more No it's it's actually that actually should say 24.5% that should be 24.5 okay yeah it's actually that it's actually shown in the uh permitted box in the calculations under permitted yeah okay and we have 25.4 so we're we're slightly over on that metric okay um so the with the zoning table details is um essentially we believe the reason that we're that we need to be here this evening um in this Zone the the R4 Zone which obviously was overlaid in the life of this property uh and it contemplates a a larger lot than what exists the required lot area is 9,375 square ft which is supposed to occur in the first 125 ft of the lot which would imply a 75 by 125 minimum lot area so within that first 125 ft with overall actually uh we're a 55 50ft wide lot where the ordinance contemplates a 75t wide lot so that's what really makes this a difficult site for us in terms of the width and generating the sidey yard uh variances and the uh as well as the um coverage metrics uh we have a lot area of 7,140 54 ft again where 9,375 is is required uh 50 by nominally 141 average of 139 143 um our front yard is the front yard is required to be 40 ft although an established front yard setback is permitted uh we do have um a description of the uh or a tabular uh review of the adjacent um setbacks that was added to um our title sheet I believe sorry um sorry little little navigation issue minimize other survey plan is one sheet that we the red color oh okay I'm sorry that's a we have it arranged on a separate uh exhibit survey proposed updated right yes this is this is at any rate we did take measurements of the adjacent properties and uh established that we comport with the um established setback uh the established setback um exception if you will is limited to a no less than 30 feet setback but the only portion of of our of our structure that violates that is the existing portion we're a little bit closer than the the tabular 40 ft um so we're relying upon that um average prevailing setback exception for the little bit of the garage um addition that violates the 40 ft but we're well within the established setback it's only that that small portion um we can see right here the small portion right here that's inside that that 40 ft so I I wouldn't I wouldn't argue that it's uh doesn't really require a variance but I might strongly suggest that it doesn't actually require a variance because again we we comport with the established setback for everything but the existing portion of the house and we're not building on top of that portion or otherwise intensifying or extend extending that portion pardon me if I could interrupt for a second Mr McGovern uh I understand that in order to establish that setback a form needed to be submitted oh I have that here it wasn't submit it now it's Al it's also on this revised um it was on title sheet it's on the rised yeah but the question is whether or not it was submitted to the appropriate official in town to confirm I don't know that this was submitted with this application I do not know can't say I understand what I don't I understand what was submitted initially the question is on the revision whether that was submitted so that the appropriate response could be made by the township official okay no it was not well the the cons the concern is if it hasn't been submitted um The Board needs confirmation from that department that that submission is accurate and complete correct me if I'm wrong Miss right I'm new to this so I want to make sure do we have do we have an aerial view um my my concern is if you present all this testimony and I understand the dynamic and that's missing I don't know how we rehabilitate that if the because the board if it votes is now voting on something that it doesn't have the appropriate qualifications I understand um so our one of our arguments based onard set being set verify that code Department verifies it on their um um I'm going to suggest that I can I have a concern for I'm not looking to stop it but I'm concerned with proceeding without having that element resolved because we might be spending time and your client's money on going in a circle understand I have surely absolutely I got to keep remember we won't won't rely upon that as I need a clarification on that so that what are we I know we're we're arguing now one of the reasons aru that prevailing to the neighborhood um we have aerial photographs that show it um without calculations that the can get the feel of it but in terms of the exact calculations we understand the doesn't have that um so that it's an argument but it's not we're not backing it up necessarily with numbers if we mcover I understand and I appreciate your your your commentary but this is going to require five affirmative votes I understand that if you my experience from when I have brown hair you're always very careful when you need five affirmative votes all right I wouldn't I wouldn't want that item to adversely affect it one way or the other understood um we could continue I think our point is if we had this proof it wouldn't be a variance but now we have to establish it as a variance and we will go forward with it my client is asking for me to continue with the presentation so if we can if you're if you're in you're going I'm going to suggest to you respectfully and you know I do respect you because of your experience and who you are um I'm going to suggest that I understand what your client wants to do but there's a material element of the application that hasn't been confirmed and I don't know what that does down the road all right we understand if we could have a continu in so we could have this confirmed with the building department yes um and then come back at the next I think that's a better idea even though it's not a happy idea I understand okay I and I appreciate that so Council the matter would be continued to the Jack Jackie where can we get get him in and that what date would that be that would be Tuesday February 22 7.m so it's continued to Tuesday February 27 at 7 p.m. without any further need for publication or notice of property thank you thank you you're available thank you sorry sorry about that I'm so sorry it's hard when you come in and you didn't start it from the beginning so it's like I'm understand thank you for okay Miss Khan if you would call the next application block 38 3811 Lot 12 68 ailia Avenue application number 20 23-43 DV John who applicant seeks approval for rear left and side and second floor Edition in deck in violation of the following sections 17099 C2 front yard setback 40 ft required 39.33621 variance requested 17087 l1d front side yard setback 30t 35 ft required 18.4 one proposed 1659 ft variance requested hi there how are you good evening good good evening believe that hang it is after 30 years and no buttons I'm trying um I believe you were sworn in under oath to testify as well at the last meeting all right do you continue to affirm and that any and all statements and testimony to give to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete yes consider yourself still under oath all right yes thank you right have a seat okay be comfortable oops all all right fill us in what's going on since the last time we saw you okay so um let me introduce myself uh my name is Chon Wu and um I'm the architect for Mr H um to represent this um beautiful Edition for uh 68 a media Avenue okay I don't remember were you here last time yes I did okay all right yeah hi this is Jen uh I'm the owner of the uh 68 milia Avenue have been uh living here for like seven years since uh 2017 with my wife and my kids and we plan to bring my parents over here because they're already they're kind of like 80 years old need somebody to take care of so that's why I we need the expansion on the house uh yeah that's it okay I'll proceed well I will I M woo before you start we're just going to confirm again that there are new members of the board and of the new members of the board um the board members have reviewed the vide tape that from the preceding uh hearing and they swore under oath that they did those that are going to vote on it did swear under oath that they did review it so they're qualified to vote on this matter today okay okay yeah thank you Miss thank you um let me see if I can ED okay good evening everyone um my name is Chon Wu the architect for uh 68 Amilia Avenue Livingston um so this uh is a continuation of the public hearing of um that was commenced uh October 24th uh last year is there a way to adjust the volume so that we can hear you oh hello can you hear me no hello sorry we were having difficulty hearing okay hello no hello give me two seconds got check check check hello can you he me okay okay thank you um so good evening everyone my name is Chon Wu the architect for um 68 A milon Avenue in Livingston um so um as I mentioned before this is this is a continuation of the public hearing that was commenced on uh o October 24th last year so um I would like to give a quick um summary of what was discussed last time in the board meeting um so this properties is um actually an existing single family house located in a corner lot um at 68 ailon Avenue and it's a twostory three bedroom existing house and we um the application is um at addition to this uh dwelling and uh we had two variances um they um front F setback and uh FR sa setback and both relate to uh existing non-conforming uh conditions and in last month's meeting there was no issue from the board uh members um of the setback uh but there were two um issues raised um in one is the existing s Topo uh the other one is the uh the height of the building and height of the Attic So tonight uh my focus will be addressing uh addressing these two concerns um so you're are looking at um ZN one um on the screen right now so um so this time we have added a side toppo on the side plan as you can see on the upper left hand side and also um we added a diagram showing um spot elevation at 10 ft intervals on the lower right hand side um and that's um actually we measured um along the existing building footprint so uh as you can see the side uh the current side is relatively flat and it's just like maybe 1 foot about 1 foot above the uh both Amilia Avenue and Virginia Avenue um and we are also um indicating there's no change on the existing to um uh spot elevation of the site so we are not doing any um grading here grading change here um and let me just change the next page so since we spent quite a lot time to talk about the plans uh I'm going to skip this part first and uh go to the elevation page so here um so here we made a few changes and U also on the elevation the front elevation on the upper left um the black line indicates the existing building profile so um right now what we what we did here is uh first of all we actually lowered the attic height uh I think I believe it was 11t uh 10 from last time and right now it's um only 8 ft height um so that actually reduced the building height quite a bit um the new proposed Building height is 32t 2 in um which is uh um less than the 35 ft requirement from the zoning um and you can see it's just a few feet um higher than the existing building and just to remind everyone there's um on the left of the building there's uh not the new construction um it's I think it's quite high it's about this uh the high that we propose here um and also the um so now the ethics just to remind that when the attic is not for Habitat space um that is only for storage and we don't provide any uh stairs to access attic um yeah so that's about the the change for dation I'm happy to take any questions okay thank you is anyone on the board have any questions I do uh one quick question your attic at the center uh is it more like Standing Tall or can you give us the the idea of a height in the center and maybe on the sides if possible um the the height is actually just for Aesthetics uh purpose including if you see the window it's just for decoration and um and we are for the side windows we may actually change to Lou V so it's not um yeah it's not going to be uh much space there it's just it's since it's this a peach roof it's going to be really small space for storage okay thank you you're welcome um can you just repeat how much the height came down yeah so um the height right now is 32t uh 2 in I believe last uh meeting was 34 in okay thank for 34 ft I'm sorry thank you anybody else on the board any questions um you said the height earlier was 11 ft for the attic and now it's 8 11 ft 10 in now it's 8 ft so that's about 4T less than approximately right and but the total height of the the house would it has come down only 2 fet um well I think the second floor I think right now it's 9 feet uh used to be eight so it's just second floor raise a little bit higher but that's um also for the uh ease of use so another thing okay yeah another thing to mention here is uh for the new drawing we actually the Baseline of the height um that 304 ft uh. 83 that number came from um the diagram you saw on the uh first draw the diagram so we use the average of the existing um building so as you can see that's actually lower than the front elevation meaning um the front elevation itself is lower less than 32 ft um 2 in is an average height okay I'm still confused maybe my math is not the strongest suit but uh the the the base elevation changed the base elevation changed one of the floor Heights changed so they brought everything down in the Attic so you lost 2 ft net there was some positives along the way okay I get it yeah it one of the uh on the previous drawings or the previous meeting one of the other things was the window well that you had for the basement M egress window you're going to add that to the elevation drawings I think that's the window W on the basement yeah here right uh this there's going to be a ladder there yeah that's the area here and is the bay window in the front now new compared to the previous drawings oh it's the same we didn't change that yeah anybody else any questions on the board one one more question yes uh there's a tree on the side yard is this the construction the expansion towards that side do you need to bring down the tree for that uh which side there's a tree on uh if if I'm facing the house then it's on the right right there facing the house on the right no yours is on the corner yes so we wouldn't burn that tree cuz it was it was it was okay it's okay yeah yeah I think it's the tree location is here so it's actually we're not affected the tree the tree remains you're showing 6' 6 for the attic to the to the ridge how much standing room is there inside the attic actually let me just show you quick it's 8 ft but interior space is probably 6 feet so that's um yeah 8 ft here is static height right yeah let's say you got okay do we need to count that or second is it going to be storage if my memory serves me correctly the attic is storage it's storage so like even the six Fe is probably just really limited space because uh the roof is pitched yeah can I add something so the reason why we want to have like a little bit higher like a atct is just for uh cosmetic from outside it looks beautiful cuz we looked at all the all the buildings like on our street Even in our town we feel like uh the recently built house with the this kind of what what it's called like a triangle it was a it was beautiful and also my both my me and my wife we love to Door uh two door uh building in the past right with very historical uh View and so that's why we we want kind of like add a kind of like a this kind of like uh triangle and also the window there get it makes it feel much better just cosmetic stuff and as a condition of approval the attic it'll be confirmed that the attic is not going to be occupied or it's not going to be occupied no we we we I think the footage I think is a total 3,200 something right this a is a sufficient for us yeah and and also right from my experience I I don't like third floor cuz I don't like uh I don't like climbing the stairs just be be be clear cuz I at this point at this moment we have the uh what is called split level so you have to climb multiples and um both all three of us who live in this uh building for 3 years for 7 years we all hurt our back we slipping down from the the stair so we don't actually we don't like the stairs is it a walkup attic or a pull pull down attic it's going to be pull down so pull down yeah something like P down yeah similar to what do we have now okay any other questions on the board anybody in public have any questions okay would anybody on the board like to make a statement I'll make a statement um thank you so much much for taking the suggestions of the board and applying them to these plans I think it looks really um it looks great did a nice job changing it and I think the roof height coming down a couple of feet makes a difference so thank you so much for taking the advice of the board um and for making um the necessary changes so thank you thank you anybody else want to make a statement yeah just uh agreed and I think I was satisfied with the setback aspect of this the first time and so it was just a matter of reducing that impact of the height so appreciate it thank you thank you anybody in the public want to make a a comment or statement on this application okay would anybody like to make a motion I'll make a motion M con block 38 3811 L 12 68 ailia Avenue application number 2023 43- V John ho um I make a that we approve this application with the condition that the attic will not be used for um habitable habitable space but I make a motion that we approve it by second second by Mr bani okay Miss Khan votes yes Mr bhani yes Mr arrti yes Miss kanana yes Mr Sherman yes Mr Beer yes motion passes okay thank you okay thank you good even this Con will you call the next application block 2000 lot 114 Melrose it should be Drive application number 2023 53- v72 FW Drive LLC applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family residence in violation of the following sections 17099 C2 front yard setback 40 ft required 35.8 ft proposed existing 4.2 ft varant requested 17087 l1d right front side yard setback 35 ft required 30.7 proposed 4.3 ft variance requested 17099 C4 right rear yard setback 35 ft required 30.1 ft proposed 4.9 ft variance requested welcome back for the record Diana McGovern from the law firm of gash and Pomo um I'm here today on what is currently 72 fellswood drive but we'll we're hoping to make it for Melrose um it's a corner property It's oddly shaped uh it's due to the odd shape and the corner uh situation it's uh created the need for three bulk variances um front yard variance where 40 is required we're proposing 35.8 uh where on the right side 35 ft is required we are proposing 30.3 feet and the rear yard 35 ft is required and we are proposing 30.1 the existing ranch home which is built on a slab is angled in such a way that it doesn't meet any of the setback so this is actually an improvement to What's um uh there and the proposed um new home is uh quite an upgrade uh the current house because of the slab and the situation we' be faced with the worst variances and um the inability to really develop it to something that would be as attractive as this project is I have two witnesses um the owner of the property Camille rikowski and I have Mr Charles alanza who is wearing Three Hats tonight he's our architect he's our engineer and he's our planner so if I could first call Mr wiskowski um the owner hello how are you swear or affirm that any and all statements you give to the board this evening and any testimony will be true after complete yes I do consider yourself thank you Camille when did you purchase 72 FS Wood Drive um in October of 2023 and could you tell the board the condition of the current house yep uh the condition of the current house is I would say below average um it is sitting on a slab um during the purchase of the home we did inspect and found a lot of noticeable cracks within the slab um you know it's been has it shelf life in my opinion so definitely would uh it's it's time to uh you know give a nice uh sort of a rebuild what's this knock down what is the surrounding area comprised of uh it's a comprised of a mixture of existing homes such as this one and certainly that area Melrose felwood Elmwood um have been have a lot a lot of homes that have been uh constructed uh very simil similarly to what we are proposing okay the board may have some questions for you oh I know forgot would you describe in general what is what you're seeking to do with the new home What what it's yeah we're seeking to uh build a new single family home two stories um five bedrooms you know to meet sort of the current Mandate of the Modern Family who is has at least one uh or possibly two PE uh you know uh family members working from home uh probably two of the three kids a little play area nothing extra nothing over the top pretty reasonable we'd like we you know we really want to stay within the habitable floor area and the ratio within within the Zone we didn't want to you know be egregious or anything like that to to maximize or take advantage of that so we really want to stay within as modest as possible thank you that board may have questions anybody the board have any questions anybody in the public have any questions for this witness we going back to you thank you I'm sorry I didn't see you my apologies please step forward so we can hear you if you state your name and address absolutely good evening everybody hi there my name is Edmund ban I'm the next door neighbor to this gentleman over here I live at 70 filwood Drive um I don't know what I'm uh I I came pardon me for a second could you spell your last name for me it's G as in George B as in boy a n i t thank you very much thank you so much and by the way I am an architect I am I'm very much interested in I don't know maybe I came too quickly I wanted to hear more from from him in terms of the presentation before I make my statement but but well at this time we're going to ask questions okay um of him or the the next witness at the end if you want to make a statement then you can make a statement at the end I think that will work for me okay great I appreciate that all right thank you thank you so much okay um you want to use the okay Mr please State you want to yeah if you would do it that way would you please state your name and your place of address of employment uh yes uh my name is Charles banza that's spelled b a l d a n Za and my um business address is 645 uh Westwood Avenue in River uh 645 Suite 20 for Rivervale New Jersey M Mr balanza do you swear or affirm that any in all statements you give to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete I do right would you state your council with your permission would you state your credentials for all those things great thank that you're a professional of yes you could talk about your licenses in each of the areas architecture engineering and planning um I um I have uh I'm a professional engineer in the state of New Jersey J I've had uh my engineering license since 2001 and it's in a good standing um I I am a registered architect in the state of New Jersey since 2014 and my license is a good standing and I have been a professional planner licensed in New Jersey since 2015 and have you appeared before boards throughout the state of New Jersey in each of those capacities as an expert yes can we also have your uh education background yes um I have a degree in a master of architecture from NJIT 2013 that's the that's the professional engineer uh no master of architecture master of architecture and in terms of your engineering degree um I don't not have an engineering degree I uh achieved engineering licensure by virtue of um uh testing and um having the requisite number of um years working as a professional engineer and as a professional at a firm that does professional engineering and as a professional planner uh I achieve I I don't have a uh specific degree in professional planning but I uh by virtue of being an architect I was able to uh pass the test and become a licensed professional planner very well I would suggest Mr chairman that uh be accepted as a as a to prevent to present professional expert testimony in those three matters okay um just does anyone in the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness okay then I agree there uh there being no objection to witness except there expert in architecture engineering and planning thank you okay uh Charlie could you go through the existing conditions yes um and the neighborhood in the area am I controlling the computer or is the yeah okay um let's see here okay so would you see above you is my sheet SP2 which uh is the existing conditions um uh as we said the subject property is 72 felwood Drive um has 10,474 Square ft of area which is greater than the 9,375 Ft that are required in the zone the property is located at the corner of Melrose Drive and felwood drive and uh as Camille described it currently has a one uh a one-story single family home that's built on a slab the existing house as you can see uh from the plan is oriented kind of like they used to do them maybe when it was built back in 1950 as far as we know um where it faces both it faces both streets so they kind of split the difference uh which is not an arrangement that we uh often see uh in you know more modern times um so there's existing right now we have 3,9 uh 295 ft of lot coverage on the site the land slopes from the south so it I don't know if you can see my cursor yeah the land slopes from from the south side to the north side generally speaking there's no known existing storm water facilities on the site and the surface water flows obviously uh in the same direction as as a contour so from south from the south side to the north side uh I'll describe the um proposed use and construction on the site um let me go back here so this is my sheet sp1 um so we're proposing to demolish the house that I just spoke of and we want to build a new twostory single family dwelling uh which of course is a permitted use in the R4 Zone the new home will comply with sidey yard minimum setback required of 10 ft uh we have 11 ft that's over here on this side um the maximum Building height we're going to be under the 35 ft we're going we're proposing uh 34.8 ft uh the habital floor area we comply with that regulation I'm reading off of the zoning chart which I think you can see which is um uh 3,220 Square ft we're allowed to do we're doing 3132 uh the maximum floor AA ratio of 30% we're doing 29.9 and the maximum building coverage ratio of 23.8 3 we're we're we're proposing 18.5 uh as far as the design challenges that we faced on the project um when we began to lay out uh the house on the site where the new home would go we realized um we had a little bit of a dilemma because of it being a corner lot um um as I said with the existing house we realized we didn't want to face the house um towards uh kind of both streets we didn't want to do that angle uh both because of the look and because it um the the shape of the backyard then is is is really not particularly usable um so we also had a dilemma because of if the we strictly app applied the um the current uh Livingston zoning code with the setbacks from both frontages then the building envelope that we were left with was extremely narrow and really impractical to make it work and you can see in my drawing that we have that that red outline shows the building Envelope as um the code would dictate um being on there um so that being the case we we have the three variances which are the bulk variances and they're really all related to the setback issue um because of uh the the required um 40t from from melro so um per 17099 C2 the required front yard setback is 40 feet and we're proposing 35.8 feet um the right side setback is required to be 35 feet and uh we're proposing 30.3 feet and let me point out that these both of these variances I'm going to flip back quickly to the um existing conditions are less than the house that's presently on the site right now has so as you can see the house is only uh 28.7 from Melrose and it's 30 it's 31.1 from um excuse me I knocked myself off the page here um and it's it's 31.1 from Melrose so um what we are proposing is actually um uh a greater setback than the house existing right now has um so then in addition the the final variance that we would be requiring is for the rear the uh the rear side setback uh which we are asking for 30.1 Ft um as you can see if we strictly adhered to that um to that to that uh uh requirement represented by the red line we would end up having an unusually shaped house uh we would would have a smaller house um than um what we are currently proposing and um again a quick reference back to the um existing conditions and it could be seen that the house in that same location is at this exact moment 20.2 feet away from the line so uh again we were going to be arguing that that's a significant Improvement on uh what's there right now well just one second with your engineering hat on the drainage and utility from the current house are you improving it with the new home uh yes um we are because what we are doing is we are going to be I can go to the sp3 which is our uh drainage grading and utility plan and um let me point out several factors on on this sheet for for for um to make that point um we're going to be regrading of course the entire property or except for a few areas up in the corner here so what we're doing is we're regrading it to direct the water and provide a swell so that the water doesn't go onto the neighboring property um down Melrose um we are um we are providing underground uh roof leaders and leader drains that are going to be uh carry the water away from the house and away from where they could discharge on any neighboring properties and as far as utilities go so yes we are um we're going to improve them in the sense of we're going to we're going to uh use utilize the existing utility connections that are at the site and you know put in new new electrical service new uh uh new water lateral new gas lateral Etc um uh as far as that goes okay so then you were going through the plan I'm sorry if I interrupted you no you're to go through the plans I think yeah um as far as the architectural plans uh I'll just State real quickly uh to finish up with the engineering that we have uh provided a uh soil erosion and settlement control plan um uh for our proposed work too um now how do I get to the uh oh I see okay so um I'd like to start by showing if possible can I show the Rend can I show a new exhibit which is a rendering that we prepared yeah I just have to mark it as exhibit A1 sure okay and make sure miss holl gets a copy I'll get a to her oh that's not it um is it oh yeah okay I have it on the flash drive forgive me here for this uh it's difficult when you wear Three Hats I suppose you know have to change your suit in your tie I can't you know it's tough to blame you know the architect part of me wants to blame the engineer and vice versa oh I was wondering what happened to that okay thank you okay so here's the rendering I wanted to to start with that this is the rendering of the um of the new house um and what it's going going to look like um so as you can see it's a it's a um uh we wanted to get like a modern yet classic characteristics that we think um you know in our past experience have been positively received uh such as the Gable roofs traditional style siding as well uh including board and Baton vertical siding on um on a portion of the um uh front facade um we have a standing seam roof uh accents on the smaller roofs we have double hung windows and a covered porch um so um we wanted to design uh something that you know fa you know since it's a corner lot it you can really see it's very visible so we wanted um uh the presence to the street on both streets to be to be attractive and have attractive materials um the home depicted here fits in well with the existing neighborhood context um in that in that um you know there's definitely a mix of one one and a half twostory buildings but mostly there's Gable roofs almost um uh predominantly and uh there's a lot of covered front porches um we're within the height limitation of the zone some of the so just getting back to the materials we were going to do all around the building we were going to do Hardy plank horizontal siding um asphalt roof shingles on the main roof uh uh bar we you know we have this uh somewhat unusual Barrel Vault we wanted to a barrel Vault roof over the front door um I call your attention to the stone accents um which you're going to see on the elevation we also have on the on the side facing felwood um and um you know a carriage style garage door which which fits in nice with the style of the house and uh I'd like to point out that the color scheme shown here in the rendering is uh is um from what I believe uh the applicant is going to do um I've worked with him in the past and this is something that we've um had a lot of success with so uh this is this is pretty true to what uh in real life uh the the color palet uh for the house will be okay so that being said I'm going to go to the plans um and describe uh briefly um the features of the house house um we have a uh habital floor here the first floor is 151 Square ft we have open concept kitchen and family room we have a dining room um with a little bar and we have an office um powder room and a large Pantry there's a mud room in from the garage uh we've found that's a very popular uh feature to have to have a nice mud room coming in and we have the AIS to the rear is from a sliding door with steps down to the patio um and we also have in the rear we have a bedroom with its own full bath and a walk-in closet uh discussing the second floor we have four bedrooms upstairs including the master suite with a laundry room upstairs and um uh a total of three full bath on the second floor uh one of the three secondary uh bedrooms has it it it its own full bath so it's like an on suite and uh the other two remaining bedroom share a bathroom that's accessible from the hall uh and the habitable area of the second floor is 1631 uh Square fet um as I said the uh proposed house is a two-story home and it's 34.8 ft in height which complies with the limits um of the Zone um just briefly as far as the exterior lighting goes we we really just have Lighting on the house you know a porch light uh which I showed on the rendering uh over the front door and um um in addition there going to just be the normal sconces and things um how many cars can park on the site yeah um our proposal accommodates four Park cars between the uh between the in the garage and in the and in the driveway a total of four okay we're putting the planning hat on now uh yes if we're ready for that unless did the board want to stop and ask questions for each subject I don't know which way you want to go okay all right we're gonna go to planning okay um this is an exhibit um I don't think it was submitted with the uh full package but um so if we need to Market an exhibit or whatever the case may be yeah I didn't print that one out I'll get that you okay so exp so that we have it for the record yes um the exhibit is just something we made which is an aerial map which I think came from um Google um then you know and the aerial map is just marked up with the street names and the site highlighted and the other one is the tax map and as usual on most of my uh applications the tax map is it's my the site is right at the intersection of a different sheets so we did a little magic to stitch these sheets together so it's a representation of a tax map um information from the tax map the um composite of three different sheets Mr chairman with your permission the the entries there that are in red or some sort of colored are those made by you those yes they are made by be both on the aerial and on the tax map thank you very much sure okay um I'm going to describe the neighborhood and the area surrounding site um well first of all I mentioned a home as far as tax records go was constructed in 1950 uh which I think many of the homes in the neighborhood uh date from that period in time um so the surrounding neighborhood well beyond um uh the you know the 200 feet around the property it it's all part of the R4 Zone um as we said the neighborhood is composed of predominantly one one and a half two story single family houses and um as you can see the houses uh uh generally the Lots in the neighborhood seem to be about the similar uh size as the subject property um when We examined the master plan as far as it making any reference to the to to this zone or to the to this type of project um indeed it does um I I researched the uh 2018 uh reexamination of the master plan and in section three page 11 it specifically mentions the R4 districts as being quote some of the older residential districts in the township the recommendation of the master plan is quote again that the R4 District setback requirements should be adjusted to better reflect existing conditions in the neighborhood so as to reduce the need for variances and consideration should be given to rezoning so um and that's end quote then so the um the fact is that corner Lots by the fact that they're required to have more stringent setbacks from both streets um ends up creating a as you saw from my architectural engineering testimony um a small and awkwardly shaped building envelope so again just to briefly reiterate the um variances that we're looking for the three bulk variances are for the the front yard the uh right front side and for the rear yard um we received a denial letter um and in addition to pointing out those three variances they asked for two other points uh which we both addressed uh those points uh which is that the if the new home is to face Rose they advise that we will need to apply for a change of address and my understanding is that um that has been applied for and they also mentioned the um exterior basement stairs that we're proposing cannot be covered well um our plan and if you'd like I can go back to it but but our plan does indicate that that exterior staircase uh to the basement is uh not covered and therefore does not need a variance for it to be in a side yard um so I'm going to describe the uh again the uh the the the SE variances and the reasons uh justifying the relief that we're looking for um the required front yard setback in Aro zone is 40 feet and our minimum front yard set back is 35.8 hence the need for a variance however this lot being a corner lot we're forced to reckon with the 35- Ft side street set back as well this unusual circumstance creates a much stricter build building envelope making it difficult to obey the front yard setback um we received an interpretation from the zoning official uh that the Livingston code section 17099 C2 does not apply to Corner Lots um that that provision is that that U the frontage averaging uh of the neighborhood and we were told that the um that that doesn't apply to the corner lot that so that right there tells you that if we were an interior lot we would be able to average uh uh based on 200 feet within of the site and and use that as our you know prevailing setback um so so we were not able to do that and then hence that essentially is the Crux of the matter of why we're here tonight because not being able to do that means that um that that that we have to contend with the 40 foot that the that the Zone calls for to be set back um the need for the remaining variances is is based mainly on the location of the lot and the fact that it's a corner lot not only must we conform at the 40 foot front yard setb measured off a mro drive but we must conform to a 35- foot side street setback measured off of felwood um as I mentioned that makes a much uh stricter uh building envelope that that we've had to contend with so that being said the site itself obviously is very suitable for the project um uh during the engineer and Architectural portion of the testimony you saw the um single family home we're proposing it's it's a very typical single family home there's nothing really particularly special about it and it will function well on the site there is an existing house there now uh single family and uh so the site is appropriate for this um uh when we look at the Zone um and we look at whether other houses in the zone uh have mostly conforming structures um one thing that I noticed too is that uh the house that's exactly across Melrose so at the opposite corner of um felwood and Melrose um is almost a similar situation where it it it faces uh both streets so I think in general the the homes in the neighborhood are conforming but um it's likely that other Corner Lots would not be conforming with the um requirements of the Zone either uh so when we get to the statutary criteria for the granting of these variances um as you all know the applicant will need to demonstrate to the zoning board satisfaction that these variants can be granted in accordance with both the positive and negative criteria established in the MU and uh we're going to attempt to do that um can I just interrupt you what about the shape of the lot would you say that's a yes that's a great point and maybe I should go to the actual uh site plan here because I think that will illustrate it uh the shape of the lot is um is trapezoidal and um again I uh uh if when you when you take that um um lot lines and you and you basically offset the lines into the building envelope you can see how that trapezoidal uh Factor um is a is is really uh something that that that that was difficult for us to contend with um I'd also like to point out one other thing while I have this plan up uh and this was based on obviously the uh existing conditions plans was based on the survey that we had and the surveyor came back with information that said the filed map building setback line um which again I I in my opinion that indicates that at the time that this subdivision was designed presumably back 70 years or so ago um that this line the 30 foot setback line from the property line on both streets was the requirement at the time and uh again it's a little bit of a supposition but um I'm I'm very certain that what must have happened in the um in the ensuing years is that the um the township came up with a a different zoning uh that required a more stricter setback but again it it is interesting that the original House was built with the 30 foot setback and it's it's been there and it's been part of the neighborhood for uh 70 years um so if I may continue to the um to the uh um to the reasons for the uh justifications for the C1 variance which is what we're going to be um attempting to justify here um just to reiterate statutorily what we need to do um we need to um uh the board May Grant a variance to allow a departure from the Reg regulations when there's been a showing of peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties to or exceptional and undue hardship upon the applicant rising out of a the exceptional narrowness shallowness or shape of a specific piece of property uh B by reason of exceptionable topographic conditions or by physical features uniquely affecting a specific piece of property or C by reason of an extraordinary or exceptional situation uniquely affecting a specific piece of property property or to structure is lawfully existing thereon so under a um by reason of exceptional narrowness shallow or shape of a specific piece of property um you can see that the subject property is a corner lot as I keep mentioning has two frontages the unusual trapezoidal shape um you heard me describe when the setbacks from the sides rear and front um are are are are offset and applied to the lot the offset lines leave a small and almost unworkable building envelope and then I'll also use c as a um justification by reason of extraordinary situation uniquely affecting a specific piece of property um the strict application of any uh regulation pursuing to article 8 of the ACT would result in a peculiar and exceptional practical difficulties too or exceptional and do hardship upon the developer such a property uh Etc the the property um was developed with an older original 1950 dwelling which was built on a slab is oriented in unappealing manner towards both streets and is non-conforming as to setbacks um again applying the uh uh zoning uh strictly uh the setback lines um would constitute an an exceptional practical difficulty to the to the objective of building a a modern and um and attractive uh new home home so that being said uh if granted um the proposed project um satisfies the negative criteria also because the the variance the variances can be granted without detriment to the public good in this case the public good can be defined as the potential impact to our neighbors first of all the house will be set back further from the streets than the current house is roof drainage will be put into underground piping and discharged away from neighboring properties and the property will be graded appropriately the neighborhood will benefit from the attractive new architectural design um we're building a new modern home um that's going to be built to the latest building codes and including the new Energy Efficiency standards that apply to all new homes uh we're not proposing to remove any mature trees at this time and um and therefore I conclude that there are no detriments to the public good uh by the approval of this proposal um and as far as the variances being granted um in my opinion there um they the granting of these variants would not impair the intent and purpose of the zoning regulations or a master plan um I mentioned a Master Plan before the goals of the master plan are there's three goals in section two to preserve and enhance the primarily residential character of the community two to maintain and balance uh the balance of residential business and public uses and three to preserve and improve the quality of life well my contention is that this proposal uh furthers all three of those goals and and that's because um uh this is a single family residential Zone we are um proposing a single family building quite simply and um we're going to build a beautiful house for the enjoyment of current and future residents um we do nothing to change the balance of business and residential and other uh uses in the town and um and as far as the third goal we I I feel that we further that too and that we are proving uh the quality of life because we're replacing a uh an older outdated home that has achieved its uh use lifespan uh with a brand new home with new landscaping and and all the features that come with it so therefore it's my professional opinion that this proposed Improvement will advance the goals and recommendations of the master plan and they can be granted without substantially impairing the intent and purposes of the zoning or the master plan thank you okay um does anyone on the board have any questions on any of The Three Hats he's wearing I thank you so much um I just have a couple of questions first of all so it's an oversized lot um and I just want you to know that I appreciate the fact that the footprint of the house is smaller um that the actual proposed house is smaller than the existing footprint of the house so I appreciate that um and it is a corner lot so it does give you more space but I do um like I said I appreciate the fact that the house is smaller but but much taller so with it being taller can you talk a little bit about the attic space it looks to me like it's pretty high and I'm just wondering you can just talk about that a little bit I'm glad you mentioned that too because I realized one sheet that we submitted we didn't talk about but that um yes um we have the attic space and um um it really is a um uh meant to be a uh um we really haven't designed anything it's not meant as any kind of living area or anything how tall is the how tall is the attic um I'm going to give you an answer if hold on I thought I was zooming in here um I can't tell you specifically and if I had my um paper copy of which I have over there I could scale it but it's something it's something in the neighborhood we we have 32 feet from the first floor to the uh to the top of the ridge with and 35 is allowed and the 32 feet would also include obviously down to the grade but that component is 32 and we have um 9 foot and 8 foot ceilings so we have 10 feet plus 19 feet so it it it it's it's more than 10 ft high it's pretty tall for an attic how are there are there stairs that pull down how do you get up there no we no we have no uh we have pull downstairs pull downstairs okay okay I'm going to follow on that too I mean the the top the topographical layout of Melrose goes down right correct I to me this looks like the people who are Downstream if you want to call are going to up and see this very large I mean beautiful house but with a very very large roof that's about a third of the height more than a third of the height I had done a quick measurement and I got 12 fo7 from the attic floor yeah I I have no reason to dispute that yeah I'm sorry I can't provide you with the precise number yeah that that seems excessive to me anybody more comments yeah I absolutely concur that uh I think the the height of the the ceiling and the and the attic space is is excessive uh I also have another question um so just just to wrap yes I concur with my fellow board members on the attic size uh leveraging on the conversation about the the down slope uh I think you mentioned that in your earlier review of the the grading um and the drain it system uh what will be taken uh what steps will be taken to make sure that the properties downhill are not adversely impacted you mentioned some grading of some parts of the lot yes well if you can help us understand that please yeah uh um let me try to explain um what we did was you can see the Contours here these are the proposed Contours and we are cognizant that the that the neighbor here up on Melrose is uh you know downg gradient so what what we um proposed to do was to uh create this Swale we'll create the Swale that'll keep the water and direct it towards towards Melrose rather than directing it um to the adjacent lot and um further helping that again is the I'm sorry about that different than my computer is the fact that we have the um we have the uh roof drains the roof leaders are in underground and then it's going to discharge and um I will point out that the existing Contours and existing dra drainage pattern uh does have quite a bit you can see the they're a little light but we do have these Contours here that um the water currently is Flowing down onto that lot so we're what we're trying to do is intercept a lot of that um we're not trying to just say well the existing uh drainage pattern goes that way so um you know uh so be it what we what we tried to do was make a conscious effort here to uh direct the water into the Swale and away from that uh that lower property so in your professional opinion that should uh not increase any negative impact on the property Downstream correct my professional opinion is if that if if if this grading and drainage plan that that that we have proposed here is implemented and and and done um that there will be less of an impact on the lower gradient property thank you I have another question so the outside stairs going into the basement um I'm just confused a little bit about that that's not something that normally done and the way that I mean the house is beautiful but I think with a finished basement um and then the 12 foot ceilings up up in the attic it seems to me like there could be four floors of habitable floor I'm sorry what did you want to my client is willing to reduce the size of the attic if you'd like down to 8 feet as a stipulation if that um I'd like to hear from the anybody else on the board about that reducing what she said the client willing to reduce the he of the um attic does that satisfy people any any comments I think that that will look better because the house is wonderful it's just the the attic is huge and from y I actually just kind of hearing your comments and looking at it truthfully just from like a visual standpoint I think it does kind of look weird that the attic is a little the the ridge is a little high normally when I like my even my house I like a nice eight foot attic just to kind of match the second floor height so that the at the roof isn't necessarily taller than the height of the second floor that was an oversight that was just I just kind of noticed it when you brought it to my attention so thank you and then maybe just talk so there was there a reason for having the outside stairs into the basement are you that well just you know I found that you know people like to have a walk out many times if they have people outside and in the future if somebody wants to finish a basement put a bathroom in there they want to have an access from the you know if they have a barbecue outside you know do you really want to have all your guests going inside your house with your shoes on so we kind of preemptively designed a walk out so families can utilize that for guests and events and things like that I one more um in addition to the and uh the drainage that has already been asked uh the front front setback is existing non-conforming is it similarly uh the same case with the adjacent properties are we in line with with the adjacent properties yeah so um I did speak with Michelle the zoning officer about potentially using an established setback and that's when we've learned and I spoke with Marty as well that because because of the corner lot it's no it's it is not something that is available to us but we did go out there preemptively and measure the uh three uh lots to the side I have those measurements but they're not they have not been officially uh confirmed by Michelle or any official so we did not submit those but those if you would want the unofficial ones I'm happy to provide those as an approximate we could give you an approximation is that where you're just trying to get an idea of approximation is fine yeah so Charlie I think you have I emailed those to you and texted you those oh um the approximate yeah I just don't have you just want to get an idea of where the other front of the other hous is line up sure yeah so um okay yes a little chilly up here we're like under attack constantly glad I wore my sweater me walk a meat locker up here his nose is running anyone in the audience has hot chocolate will be appreciated okay so we have the approximate um comparable setbacks yep and these were um shot with a uh laser from the Cur curb to the most uh closest point of the dwellings so six Mel rows from the curb to the house is at 45.5 and that includes a 10t right of way so the setback the real setback is 35.5 eight Melrose is at 48 inclusive of that 10 foot right of way so that puts it at 38 and 10 Melrose is at 46 with a 10 foot right of way puts it that 36 thank you you're [Music] welcome any other questions okay I'm just GNA tack on oh go ahead please um just going back to those outside stairs for a second um I know you H you know have the drainage for the site for the down spouts but seeing how the outside stairs can't be covered how are you accounting for any drainage to the out because that definitely looks like it's way lower than the 7 feet correct yeah um let me tell you so so what we are going to do and and we're actually required to do um by the building code is we need to provide a uh Foundation drainage system so any any window or door Wells you know um have to have their own drainage system so what we'll do is we'll have a drain at the bottom of those stairs so any water that does get in there uh rain water or anything that falls in there gets uh basically pumped up and goes into the same pipe as the uh roof as the roof leaders and gets taken away from the um taken away from the side of the foundation and then let me point out too that the so the exterior stairs that wall would be you know slightly higher than grade so it's like surface water can't be directed in into the basement of course we want to prevent that type of thing so uh it'll be designed so that the um you know surface water flow will be directed away from the stairs and from the uh from the building I have a question does the the roof leaders where you going to be underground where are they where are you connecting it to or is they going to pushing it out on the street yeah I'll show you where um we have it um designed um on the grading and utility plan we have the underground roof leaders and they discharge at this location closer to the street and that'll be copied by the taken care of by the engineering department anyway sure if um if the engineering uh review or the building department review required something different we would of course uh we're going to have to comply one way or another so uh great sure um one one comment on the stairs there there is always a background concern that that becomes an apartment so I assume there's no problem with certifying that that will not happen that's not going to be a separate we can put that as part of the resolution put that as a condition please yes um any questions for the three people standing there um from the public I I guess you're talking to me well was it's still a question we can still a couple question okay great come on forward please you want me to absolutely um my good neighbors across the street neigh okay if you please just state your name again for the record sure my name is Edmund and the last name is bit Salin and I'm I'm very much honored to be before you today uh and thank you to the arit apparently you're my amama I went to NGIT just I gr to a before you you have great hair going well uh that's that's another the store anyway um Let me let me start from the proposed uh side plan okay no no stay the what is behind on the right side towards the back I yeah well this is unimproved area and we no no no no no the the uh the L form that you have there that it oh yeah I'm sorry yeah and and I and I think I I'm glad you mentioned it because I think I neglected to mention that that we were proposing a um okay a patio and and that patio is is on the side of the building now because because in front in front of the building is facing Ms correct and the and the um garage entrance is is facing Tel yes okay look um is a very should I say compressed site okay uh is a very difficult site and he's right uh is more of a trasan the the trapeo writer um uh and I admire the efforts that he made uh uh to position the building that really improved uh what is there right now there's no question that that that that that that that is cigh in you know in know works well uh uh the only thing I would say is that uh uh the Russ I hate to interrupt you sure but right now you can ask questions you have an opportunity yeah my what I wanted to say is to my question okay okay please uh my my my question is is why did you change the front from felwood to M oh well I can answer that um the envelope that we could build in was even more constrained um if we tried to face it to uh felwood and um and that's because the um you can see that the that the that the dimension is less and starts to become more constrained um and if you drew if you drew those setback lines um offset from here the 40 feet offset off here and the 35 over here you're also going to be and I forgive me I don't have the topography on I have it on the other plan um you see the Topography is such that then now we're we're we're um going to be fighting against this downhill so we'd be we'd be putting the the house can you imagine like almost like into a slope so um by by facing it to Melrose we were able to a get a better building envelope and B we were able to not disturb the the natural Topography of a lot uh to the same extent if we did it the other way and I'll point out too I mean I know you heard me say it a bunch of times but the house didn't phas either way so it's not like we changed it from felwood to Melrose necessarily despite the mailing address it really faced um you know I mean if you look at it you really can't tell which way did it face this way or did it face that way uh uh and I don't know that the drive way going one way or the other really makes that um makes that uh uh clear either okay I have two more questions um can you go back to that the side plan engineer side plan where you have this s oh the oh yeah the grading plan yeah okay um with what you're showing there uh do you really believe that that water we come around or that what I would be emptying into marrows um yeah I do because um again we made the Swale um We believe We Made It um you know sufficiently uh deep you know by but you can tell by The Contours being like pointed like that we made them sufficiently deep that the water um will flow and again as I as I explained before the um existing drainage pattern is that the water flows onto the neighboring property so um by making less water flow onto the neighboring property we we're we're making the situation uh better right now today if you went out there in a rainstorm the rain would be flowing down there and our swell is going to direct uh a significant amount of the water away and then furthermore we're going to be um putting the water into the pipes from the roof from the entire roof area and we're going to have you know new grass which is going to uh new grass and new Landscaping as opposed to what's there now uh which is so it's going to be in a better condition and serve to uh to uh to reduce any uncontrolled uh storm water flows okay um my last question is that uh since you are facing felwood now which is basically the the address um uh uh with with decide is there a possibility of articulating that facade facing felwood other than what you have oh okay well let me show you what we have and what we tried to do you know we didn't do a rendering um but as you can see let me let me scroll this over to the right right this is the one facing and you know what we are pulling that um uh material the the stone base we're we're we're not just stopping it at the corner on the front of the house so we're bringing that all the way around to side and as I also mentioned in my testimony we're going to be doing a Hardy plank siding and when you look at uh the right side elevation I'll tell you your a brother architect um but I'll humbly say that uh the way we design this is uh that there's architectural interest to the side of the house and it's not just a simple facade or a plain wall or anything like that we have nice windows we have multiple Gable roofs we have this lower roof uh which really breaks up the um uh um breaks up the uh uh uh massing of the house so um my feeling is that uh we're providing a very attractive visual um uh appeal from uh fellswood I don't want to take so much time but um um uh that's my questions uh that if you may allow if I can come back and make you better come back and just just so you rest assur the drainage issue as I as I noted is's a we have a memorandum from engineering and it's it's they talk about it it's always covered so it will be taken care of sure are there other questions I just have one come on up you to state your name Paul Morrison I'm at 69 FW drive across the street and when they actually when they say that it was a rundown old house I knew that house very well it was beautiful but that's besides the point this is going to be very nice I just had one question right now the driveway is on fellswood it's going to be on fellswood and there's a fire hydrant and a drain very close to the current driveway the new one's going to be wider I just want to know if there going to be impact yeah um I'm going to answer that question sir um my drainage and utility plan I believe shows all these improvements we have um the fire hydrant located on our plans and um there's no need for it to be moved or anything like that um and there's an existing um did you ask about the um drainage yeah there's a um there's an inlet out in uh felwood um and then in comparison to the existing you can see where these things are um so the D the existing driveway is very close to that fire hydrant we're actually pulling it a little bit up felwood um and you can you can compare and contrast the uh locations in the two different images okay thank you okay does anybody else have any questions keep on coming hi I'm Virginia mortson I'm at 69 fellswood drive across the street from 71 um I just would like to um we we think it's a beautiful house to look at so for it to be shifted to Melrose we just um ask that you yeah keep in consideration that we would like to have something beautiful to look at in the future um and I was also wondering what that uh like a long um on on on this on the pictory on the slide is that is that a sidewalk that goes from the oh yeah um okay yeah I I I should have described that a little better that's um a sidewalk so it's just like a paer sidewalk that goes from the front yard to the uh excuse me from the front porch to the um to the driveway okay so so because it such a steep slope in front of the house um I was wondering that you're taking that into consideration also yes what we're doing is and you can see the heavier contour lines are where we're uh regrading okay so the heavier contour lines we're regrading and and the um the sidewalk is this is basically going to be pretty flat the area where it is so it's almost like we're building like a like a flat area where the house is going to be you step down you know two or three steps you know from the porch to the sidewalk and um and and and you know the garage entrance is is uh 3 and A2 ft down from the first floor so you know it's a few steps down and uh this slopes I think a little bit down to the driveway and um but it is going to be relatively flat and then and then it it slopes down to Melrose okay thank you anybody else in the public any other questions arise from the board yes please the the porch in the back is it's not going to be covered covered right no the patio no it's just meant to be like an open patio just want okay yeah thank you okay one more um the house next to the this house um on Melrose it's been abandoned for several years so I was wondering you know what kind of consideration you're taking with with this the H this other house that's going to be built up probably you know two stories also is anything anybody aware of that y um so I actually spoke with the there's a for sale sign I think in front of that house I I did speak with the uh agent Samantha she's out of the uh she's out of uh the Short Hills office she said she doesn't know what the Builder's plan is for that I tried to find out in fact I asked her if I could purchase that property as well because I used noticed that it's sort of an eyesore in in the community and I was hoping to alleviate that but there was no appetite to do that either so I did make an effort to reach out to them and quite honestly I'll probably follow up just to see what's going on with that thank you okay I think I think I think we got that um all right um does anybody on the board want to make a comment I'll make one quick one um I think you you heard from two different questions uh when the house turned towards Melrose uh The Neighbors on felwood are trying to get a sense and it's more of a generic question we're not trying to redesign but the sense that the neighbors are expressing is that this is now the side of the house facing towards the home towards the their homes so from your architectural professional architectural view um are there any any improvements or any changes or any that you can highlight and and talk about which will be not like a you know okay garage facing to somebody and couple of questions were there so I'm just curious if is there anything that you are thinking about well let me go back um I mean you heard my um answer to the to the gentleman um as far as adding um I did mention that uh in my testimony that we were going to have um a carriage style garage door um which I think fits even with the character of the house and Camille and I have used on other projects um again um I could reiterate if if if that's the question you're asking me um that I do think we have um an attractive right side elevation um I mean I think all the elevations are pretty nice but um I think in particular let me zoom out a little um you know if you look at I don't want to downplay the left in the rear but if you look at the right side and the front elevation you could see the and this is a 2d drawing um you know I apologize that um I didn't provide a rendering and I think that would have probably answered a lot of questions but as you you can see from the four elevations together there was definitely more uh care given to the ele to the elevations that face the streets um okay thank you okay I just want to make a quick comment that uh I support this application I think it's a very unusually shaped lot and I think he did a good job with working with a tough under tough conditions appreciate the uh two- foot drop down of the roof but you know what else is left to be said I think you know you your testimony was really thorough so thank you thank you and I think uh Mr McGovern I forgot to let you have a closing statement did anybody did you call for public comment I didn't know whether this okay so I'm sorry then public comment or you good listen I I I I will com y please my voice was Lou listen I have to commend the architect I just hope that he can articulate that filwood facade a little bit more uh I I I I strongly believe that that something could be done but I don't want to hold it against your vote please you did a a wonderful job and I'm most commended for that that's all I have to say thank you so much thank you um I just I just want to ask just one quick thing you said you're going to lower the roof can you come up with a number eight8 foot eight it'll be 8 foot from top of it'll be uh 8T to the ridge from the uh attic floor perfect okay please thank you um we're here for SE variances based upon and I won't beat this any longer due to the fact that it's a corner lot and it's a trapezial shaped uh property with the topography we're improving the drainage we're improving the look of the home it's beautiful on both sides of face the street um and I believe we satisfied all of the criteria under the ML and so with that I would request that the board Grant the all the variances thank you thank you okay does anyone want make a motion yes yeah motion to approve Mr uh aanti and second anybody she beat you okay Mr arrti yes Miss Kana yes Miss Khan votes yes Mr bani yes Mr Kenya yes Miss Mirage yes and Mr Beer yes I'll just say we had this two stipulations right the two conditions the OT and us as correct and also I just want to say um miss m so um on the agenda the right rear yard setback it should be 30.3 proposed not 30.1 great thank you so much thank you thank you and this time we're going to take a five minute break we should go find firewood for for refrigerator sure for okay thank you everyone for giving us a few minutes here and sorry this is taking so long would you call the next application please Miss K yes um block 352 lot 28 45 Shadow la Drive application number 20235 4-v Helena fredman applicant seeks approval for a first floor addition an addition over the garage in violation of the following sections 17098 C2 established front yard setback 42.1 ft allowed 40.3 ft proposed 1.8 ft variance requested 17087 cc3 habitable floor ratio 21% allowed 22.5% proposed 1.55% variance requested thank you please Mr chair members of the board Elizabeth Durkin from the Durkin firm on behalf of the applicant Helena Friedman on just a little housekeeping this is first time we're appearing on this application just want to confirm that the application has been deemed complete Miss H yes thank you so thank you so much um this evening this the application that I have before you is just a minor literally 55 square feet addition uh what we're talking about for the relief in front of this sport to a single family home that my client Helen Friedman and her husband and their children reside at um I have two witnesses with me this evening I have our architect and our engineer I don't know if the board would like to qualify them as they each come up or would you like to do them together together okay interested okay so the the the uh first our first witness is going to be the engineer so we can ask him to raise his right hand and then also the second is uh the architect and if you want to both be sworn in and then I can qualify them uh Mr gem if that's good for you great architect engineer architect sorry I gentlem do you do you swear orm that all the testimony to give today in the state make the bo true accurate and complete I do wants to go first with their credentials yep I I will go with the engineer first if that's okay okay um Mr divisio would you be so kind as to state your name for your the record and spell your last name all right that's Anthony deiso last name is D like dog E capital v i z IO and and where are your offices located 14 East Normal Avenue Upper Montclair 07043 and Mr dzo are you a licensed engineer licensed in the state of New Jersey yes I am and for how long have you held your license uh I was licensed for engineering in 2007 and have you been qualified to testify as a professional engineer before other land use boards in the state of New Jersey yes and is your license Cor current as we speak today yes and are you the engineer who prepared the plans that are the subject of this application yes U Mr chairman I stly request that you uh accept the qualifications of Mr divisio as a professional engineer to testify on behalf of this application this evening um can I just ask uh your education education uh bachelor's degrees in civil engineering and land surveying from NJIT uh 2003 and 2009 great does anyone in the board have any questions or objections regarding this Witness and there no objection the wi is accepted as an expert in uh engineering thank you so much and then I'll just qualify our architect uh Mr Sergio savaria would you be so kind as to state your name for the record and spell your last name my name is Sergio J shabaria last name is spelled c h a v is in Victor a r r i a and Mr TR where are your offices located 20 Crest View Drive in Stan Hope New Jersey okay and are you a licensed architect license in the state of New Jersey yes I am and when did you uh uh obtain your license what year in 2003 and what was your undergraduate degree Bachelor of architecture in NGIT class of 1991 okay thank you very much and have you qualified as an architect to testify before other land use boards in the state of New Jersey yes I have okay and are you the architect to prepare the plans that are the subject of this application yes I am okay uh Mr chairman I respectfully request that you accept the qualification Mr tavario to testify an architect this evening on behalf of this application does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness there being no objection the witness is AC accepted as an expert in architecture okay terf thank you so much and we know it's late and you have uh you know we thank you very much for hearing us and we know you have a couple other applications after us so I'll just go as uh as expeditiously as possible um on the application and as I said the property is is already improved the single family home that my client and her family uh reside at the home the the home was constructed in 1955 it's a split level uh it just needs a few little Renovations my client um wants to stay in the home uh loves the home loves the neighborhood loves her property uh loves her Brook uh in the back and uh one of the the difficulties of the home is there's no powder room on the first floor so the renovations this evening we'll have the AR the engineer go on first just to give you the lay of the property uh there are no uh significant issues we did review your engineers report and we'll just go over that and then the architect will come in and just walk you through the proposed plans if that's acceptable to the board great thank you okay U Mr nisio yes all right thank you again for having us uh a to be brief um this uh application was guided primarily by the the building elements so I would defer to the architect on on those matters uh primarily um major scope is we have two Small Bump outs at the front of the building one being a proposed Powder Room another one being an architectural bump out for C and there'll be uh a bedroom at a level over the garage and that will uh not result in any additional footprint uh addition in footprint uh from the front bump outs will be uh 55 square feet um which in our opinion is is di Minimus um lot overall is gradually sloping uh there's no proposed change of grades we're going to meet existing grades all around um there is uh flood Hazard area on the property however that's to the rear of the building no work at all is proposed within the flood Hazard area it all falls without side of the designed flood elevation as prescribed by NJ D's rules as well um I'll go down the uh Engineers comments also for everybody's benefit and just for the reference at the November 28th 2023 report issued by the board's engineer correct Mr Deo correct okay um going down the points in line the first one uh reiterates that the the work is in fact outside of the flood air hazard area that is correct um there are no Municipal easements on the property that is correct as well um the property is not listed in ordinance number 24209 as containing precautionary or prohibitive slopes that is correct as well um impervious coverage uh again we're looking at 55 square feet uh which is diim in my opinion um the municipal code appears to uh apply heavily to uh major developments were well under the threshold of any major development um roof runoff currently discharges on site uh from the leaders um you'll get infiltration into the ground to some degree from that uh the same is proposed for the additional footprint for those bump outs they would tie into the existing gutters as possible discharge to the surface of the lot and you'll you'll get some natural infiltration without any need for any kind of storm water management uh engineer also mentions the lot surface drainage permit shall be amended there is one in place already from some prior work that was approved that will be amended according again we anticipate no storm water structural measures required uh any new pipe discharges are to be shown on the plans uh again we do not anticipate any intent as to U tie into existing gutters and downspouts um and then again I'm sorry the the last point also is the the lot surface drainage permit which needs to be amended with the uh any current work or any additional work as approved tonight and that will be appropriately amended I really don't have much else I mean uh again I thought it was pretty di minimist from a site planning perspective happy to answer any questions anybody on the board any questions anybody the public have any questions for this witness oh okay thank you so much I got to ask that my the architect what okay put your plant up I'll uh first start with the floor plans because that's basically where we're going to discuss most and just forer the existing uh no well we'll just focus on the the additions to the powder room and why why we're proposing this so I'll describe basically what the existing house uh has so it's it's an existing split level two-story house uh detached one family with two detached two-car garage has existing four bedrooms four full baths and a twocc car touched garage so the split level is front to back so at the at the entry level you have basically living space dining space and a and um and the kitchen so as you enter towards the middle of the of the floor plan you would enter and go either go down or up at the rear of the house rear lower level you have a family room a laundry space uh a full bath and a mechanical space the rear upper level has houses the the three bedrooms and two two baths the front upper level which is above the existing kitchen which would be this area directly above that has an additional bedroom and bathroom so currently the the plant has no Powder Room so the proposal is to add a new Powder Room directly off the left side of the existing porch proposed porch on the opposite side of that facing the living uh the the dining room space there's a bump out that basically has some symmetry to to the elevation so I'll go to the elevation now that kind of shows you where the front door is the left side is The Powder Room bump out the right side is the living room uh sorry the dining room bump out so that's the proposal for the powder room and the bump out of the uh dining room space the existing upper level um principal bedroom and bathroom are grossly under sized to today's standards so this bedroom is going to be enlarged by removing the existing bathroom and closet to the left directly above the two-car garage which is this space here directly above this we'll be adding an a level above the two-car garage to house the new um principal bathroom and a a large walk-in closet to the front of the property that's where we're exceeding the the um habitable floor area by a minimal amount the proportions of those spaces are relatively required to be you know properly sized based on the size of this house so in my opinion that's basically the the correct proportion for for the bathroom and the walk-in closet to to bring it up to more modern standards so that that's basically the the the extent of the requirements that we're we're asking for the uh two variances so Mr tavario so it's correct there is no powder room now in the correct correct there is no Powder Room on the on the entry level right now there's there's four full bathrooms so if you have a guest coming to the house they either have to go up to the bedroom level or down to the family room level which is tucked away in the back of the house so it's not really a a practical layout for today's standards and the proposed uh there's two Varian is that the applicant is seeking relief before the sport this evening as you're aware correct the front yard setback that's correct as a result of the the bump out as you said for the proposed Powder Room correct cor it's 1 1.8 ft yes so less than 2 ft correct and then also the uh on the habital floor ratio it's just an increase of a DI minimac Le of 1.55% correct that's correct okay and in reviewing the plans with with the client and looking at um the home as it exists now was there any way that you could eliminate either one of those variance release request being requested not really the the proportion to the the master or the the the principal bathroom and the closet would be too small relative to the size of the of this house and then obviously you've also reviewed the uh this home and also the neighborhood you're aware of the neighborhood direct yes in keeping with the neighborhood the house right now as a as a split level it's low so the original house looks like a ranch and then surrounding houses are almost twice the size of effectively what what they look like so the proposed addition in your opinion would fit in with the character and scheme of the neighborhood it correct it would be more in keeping uh you know we're planning on putting asphalt shingles Hardy plank uh siding and keeping it more you know contextual with the with the surrounding neighboring homes okay thank you very much I have no further questions of this witness anybody on the board have any questions I have question go ahead as I drove the proper as I drove past the property I noticed that the construction on one side of the house is already there the second level has been constructed and the garage of course is what you're asking for so when when you applied for the previous construction was the garage not factored in at that time was that an afterthought no it it was planned but it it could stand on its own the way it is but it's it's grossly under sized to today's standards okay because the other half of the construction the other half of the construction is done right on the right hand side as I'm facing the property correct that's correct yes okay my question is the uh you say you for the the half bath you're going to have a bump out and that's why you're taking the variance is this you trying to make it symmetrical with the bump with the dining room correct so it's on the same it's not like going moving forward or no you can see on the plan they basically align okay making it more symmetrical I'm sorry are you making it more symmetrical basically yes so let me go to the elevation to show you that so in an elevation basically looks looks the same currently the the front porch the the the lower profile of the front front front roof is is constructed so this in this addition if it's approved it would be the second layer of the of the the roof behind the the main porch will be constructed let me ask so phase two is forget this part of the application Phase two is scheduled to be built not scheduled to be built what's the I'm looking at the plans and the whole this this would be phase two if it's approved okay and in the middle you have a triangular window correct and when I drove past it looks totally different that would that's phase one the drawings are are submitted for approval but that has no impact with the variant no no I realized I'm just trying to understand why there's like a whole structure over that is that a high is it high ceiling is it what's it's yeah it's it's an it's a dormer basically an open Dormer right because it goes up about 10 10 feet or so it's about 12 feet so that's so it's directly above this space here in in L of that that brow window let's call it sure it's a it's a larger Dormer we wanted to get the a a larger effect of daylight in there but it doesn't impact any floor area ratio or Building height understood that was that though approved through build through the engineering was that change follow that's changed under per the the the current permit that's under construction it was it was so it's been noted by the engineering you know that yes okay that's that's why I was just concerned because when I drove past I was like it looks a little different or maybe a lot different so I want to make sure there was no issue there okay so I don't want to belabor the point but I do I just I'm I'm confused so when you did the first plan this part of the plan was not part of it so is it an afterthought I mean it's fine if it is but I'm just wondering so the first part was done and you're working on that and it's now there's this so this is the second part that's not part of the first application so is that correct no it's not an afterthought it's that we didn't we wanted to proceed with the construction in parallel with filing an application that would hopefully be approved okay okay I was going to confirm that that's exactly right okay I just wanted to because I was just a little unclear thank you okay because my clients live there they live in the house they've had they moved out during construction You' moved out of the house you're not in there right now right but this is their home that's why what is the building height sorry what what is the height of the building we're under the maximum I believe the the the the largest is 32 slightly over 32 feet came back on I think the air condition are there any other questions from the board any questions from the public all right does anyone want to make a comment Go Go please Miss Durkin um is it possible for the architect to give us uh some comment on the c c variant and as well as the D4 sure I'm going have the architect or the engineer if you're if you're not uhu comfortable or anybody okay yeah so obviously I I can testify to this is that we're asking for the flexible C2 variance and also This falls under the uh a D4 variance for the floor area um ratio and as as both of the experts have testified and we don't mean this in demeaning the relief that we're requesting before the board but in a legal sense this is di Minimus um what was being sought here is 55 Square fet to a single family home in a single family zone so obviously it's a permitted use in the zone the home with this as the architect testified no one's even really going to notice the bump out uh my client lives there with her family as we've stated um they love their neighborhood they love their home they're obviously taking great expense to add an addition you know these additions to their home because their children are getting older now uh they're in college and they would like to have uh you know people over and they need a powder room on the first floor and and so so I said so from a legal standpoint um these are di Minimus and obviously we meet the positive and the negative criteria I mean we don't even need to really review the negative this board is certainly has heard it I know many times but even sitting in the audience tonight I know you've heard of it four or five other times before this one obviously we not the relief we're seeking is not a substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the master plan and zoning ordinances because it's a single family home and a single family Zone and obviously because we're constrainted by there's an existing structure of the single family home that is on this lot and I think my clients have done great uh pain with speaking to their uh engineer and their architect to make the uh the addition as as as small as they possibly can and still be able to get what they would like to for 2024 living standards because I can quite frankly tell you from somebody who does this a lot and I I've had the great pleasure of representing Helen and her husband Moshi for for many years I said seriously you want to go for a variant for 55 square feet but helina loves the home and and you know made it as as as little as intrusive as she possibly could and through your engineering report as I said there's no comments from your engineering report either it's just you know items conditions that we have to do uh in in obtaining any of the building permits so J hopefully that satisfies your your your yeah so so that the testimony presented by the experts the purposes of the municipal land use law would be Advanced by this deviation because it's the Minimus and the benefit from the deviation was substantially outweigh any detriment most definitely huh most definitely that's the testimony that was given to and with to the D4 is it's of no significant impact on the community it's going to be dimin correct zero it's an improvement there's no negative to this application thank you I got to write the resolution Mr J sure I got okay thank you um any comments from the board D any comments from the public okay would someone like to make a motion I'll make the motion so I'll make the motion to approve it this is a good addition and uh you know kind of brings to the evenness in the front so okay second Mr Kenya yes Miss kanana yes Miss KH votes yes Mr bani yes Mr arany yes Miss marage yes and Mr Beer yes thank you so much thank you very much appreciate your time thank you thank you so much the next pleas it keep moving block 296 221 Cafe Drive application number 2023 55- V Gil and and Rachel n applicant seeks approval for a two-story rear addition in deck in violation of the following sections 17087 cc3 habitable floor ratio 21% allowed 24% proposed 3% variance requested okay welcome aboard and you guys are the homeowners yes yes okay hi um Mr Mrs is it sorry I'm Gil this is Rachel there we go Mr and Mrs non do you have a a professional with you to this evening I'll contct us up there okay so are you who are you going to testify or just the architect the architect all right your name please lbert Emer Jr and your address uh 184 South Livingston Avenue Mr Emer uh do you swear or affirm that all the statements and testimony you give to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete yes thank you consider yourself under oath would you be kindly explain your credentials to the board um I am a registered architect of the state of New Jersey um I have a graduated with a bachelor of environmental science from the University of Kansas in 1982 graduated The Bachelor of architecture in 1983 um I'm currently licensed in New Jersey indie Anna and Missouri um a past president of the AIA in New Jersey and I have testified before this board numerous times as well as Summit West Orange Anglewood tck and your license is in good standing correct yes it is Mr chairman does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this uh witness there be no objections the witness is accepted as an expert in architecture all yours okay um I just we were here for one variance uh it's the habitable floor area ratio and uh 21% is allowed we are asking for 24% um so and let me just make this figer so this is the current uh property survey with the addition superimposed onto it um showing the proposed addition is this sort of aqua blue um rectangle and then to the right of that is the new proposed deck so the current property is in the N3 District M can you give a copy of that to Jackie because it's colorized it's A1 we don't have a colorized version I don't think we do sure we do oh oh we do I'm sorry I misplaced it in my file never mind okay I got it sorry sure all right so it's in an R3 Zone and um the existing lot is you know significantly undersized for the Zone that's supposed to be in it's uh 15,000 square feet required this lot is 9,258 it's also you know the lot width is is uh 75.3 versus 100 required and the lot depth is 125 versus the 150 so overall you know it's just much smaller lot than the R3 requires um but we worked you know when we were going through the design um we worked in order to try to minimize any variances um you know and we kept it out of the side street West setback the 25t setback over on the west lawn CU we were looking at one point to do a side Edition so we did all that so really what we ended up with is a 10 foot expansion along the back of the house and the back of the house in that area is the current kitchen and dining room so really what we're doing is we're pushing the house back 10 feet that 10 feet portion is going to be the kitchen um the kitchen and dining room right now is going to become the dining room and then we are also expanding the second floor over the top of that um and with the same thing I mean because it's a current two-b house and we were looking at possibly going to a three-b doing a full bathroom off the uh primary bedroom but you know looking at the constraints we had we said no let's you know let's keep it functional but minimal so what we did is we made the existing Hall bathroom significantly larg it can be divided so somebody could be using the shower the toilet area Clos it off for somebody using the sink to to make it functional for them but to in order to keep the addition to a minimal to to a minimum so that's why we were able to keep you know the you know comply with that even though it's a small lot uh comply with the habitable floor area and just be um slightly over on the floor area ratio um the other thing we we did and as you can see from here is we really located the addition the impact on the site to the center of the site to minimize the impact on the street of West Lawn to minimize the impact on the um to the neighbor to the right who they're very good friends with and um um you know just finished up an addition with them but and also we're only going back 10 ft so we you know we have plenty of rear yard setback uh so that really would you know is not an issue um the addition you know the the house currently is a cape so it's uh one of these smaller houses in the neighbor because most of them are split levels are full twostory houses um so the this addition has really very little impact you know it very much is in keeping with with the character you know we're not doing anything blown out or anything too large um so it's really a nice modest addition but just improving the functionality for them for their day-to-day use I mean having a modern kitchen is just you know very important and then just having a a a slight because it is a cape you know the the master the the primary bedroom has slope ceilings in certain areas so we're able to leviate that on the back side because we wanted to we like the character of the cape we kept the Dormers we kept the front you know the character very much uh what it was and just really took it out the back and extanded the uh existing Dormer out the back so to uh you know and as far as the D4 variants um you know there's really no negative impact I mean it's a minimal expansion it is still you know it's a single family residence it's single family use so it's all in keeping with that there's no you know the again the audition is all really focused within the center of lot and um just you know it helps the uh General character of the neighborhood great thank you uh anyone on the board have any questions the dent dent foot Edition in the back of the house is uh it's a double level Edition so there's something on the main level and then something above it correct correct it's right there's a kitchen on the first level there's an existing bedroom in the cape you know in the slope ceiling on the second level already and we're just extending that bedroom out and that bathroom out so it's that and then the deck these and then the deck there's an existing deck in the area where the kitchen Edition is right now and so we took took it and you know we moved it to the right to keep it behind the house and not try to push it farther into the backyard or farther into the West LA set back great great thank you and just to clarify on the deck that's it's actually less intrusive than the existing one correct by a half a foot right I'll make a comment so I'm familiar with this house in the street and I know it's an undersized lot and I think this this is um I think this is a great addition um it's perfect um keeping with the size of the house and with the size of your lot um I think it's um very thoughtful and um I think you did a great job thank you I I will backtrack anybody in the public have any questions okay any other comments anybody in the public have any comments anybody want to make a motion no I can do it all right right so uh we're not reading the blogs and everything right no just have to say you've gone for it right I think this is a beautiful um nice addition uh I'm quite familiar with the neighborhood this will add and enhance the home uh to the home and thank you for being transparent about the needs uh and I uh motion to approve the application I second it okay Mr bani yes thank you thank you very much I just have to we just have to do the roll I know it's it's exciting I know it's exciting we're just gonna we're just gonna make we're gonna make it we'll make it official okay Mr bani yes Mr Kenya yes Miss con votes yes Mr refreny yes Miss kanana yes Miss marage yes and M Mr Beer yes motion passes congratulations it's beautiful it's beautiful thank you very much thank you very much for your please call the next applicant block 571 lot 22 8 Winwood Road application number 2023 61- V West Hobart LLC applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family residence in violation of the following section 17087 cc3 habitable floor ratio 21% allowed 28.9 2% proposed 7.92% variance requested hi good evening everyone uh my name is Matthew pado I'm from the law firm SS commus and gross and I represent the applicant West Hobart LLC in connection with this application for habital floor area ratio uh the applicant is here tonight proposing to demolish the existing single family home which is essentially a cap cod with a garage and what they're looking to do there is propose a new single family home itself that single family home that they are proposing will trigger the floor area ratio relief however the slot itself is significantly under sized so in drafting the proposed plans you'll see that we are not triggering any other variance relief but for that ratio in addition the floor area itself is significantly under what is permitted within the Zone about a little more than 700 sare ft so that the proposed single family home is consistent with the idea of what the actual bulk measurements should be for the R3 Zone and although this is the R3 Zone you would you you will see that based on the lot size itself it's more of a R4 type of configuration and if that were the case there would be no relief but if that were the case I wouldn't have this job so therefore I'm glad there is that ratio variance so for tonight I'm going to have two uh uh professionals testify our first one will be Jose Cabello he is my architect and the second one will be Nick ravano he is our planner and I also just want to make one quick comment that we are in receipt of the engineering memorandum dated January 11th of 2024 2024 and we agree to fully comply with those conditions thank you Mr V thank you so if I may like just call my first Witness uh yes I do like take to the question yep thank you so much uh Jose can you please provide us your educational credentials absolutely I uh I graduated NGIT with a bachelor's of architecture in 1981 uh I've been licensed since 86 and my license is as good as of today I've appeared in front of this board previously as well as probably about 100% of the boards in Hudson County about 50% of the boards in Bergen County um and across uh you know all across New Jersey from Trenton Newark Patterson Jersey City uh Etc thank you does this board accept them as a qualified expert and architecture does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness there uh can you just repeat your name again for the sure Jose carbo uh last name is C b a r BSM boy a l l o there be no objections the witnesses accepted as expert in architecture appreciate it thank you very much thank you uh Jose are you familiar with the R3 Zone uh yes I am and is the subject property located within the R3 Zone yes it is and did you take a look at the municipality zoning code for the R3 Zone I certainly did and did you take that in consideration when drafting these proposed plans uh yes as a matter of fact I um I'm not the architect of record on this project I'm actually standing in for Mr Jam Marino uh who couldn't be here tonight but I have reviewed the plans I've talked to Mr Jam Marina familiar with the proposal as well as the plans excellent why don't you walk us through what we're proposing here tonight absolutely so what you see on the on the screen is the the site plan for the property uh as you can see it's a it's a smaller site uh and it appears like somebody squeezed the middle of it uh and and created a choke point uh somewhere along the middle of the the uh the property so there exist a uh a single uh family home on the property right now it's a car it's a cape uh it's a very small it actually about 900 square feet um and the proposal that we have here in front of you tonight is the demolition of that um house and a new uh uh single family home uh to be built on the site uh the first um charge was to uh minimize the number of variances that were would be created with a smaller size uh lot as as we have and the architect was successful in creating a building that actually conforms to all the setbacks uh it conforms to all the buls except for one which is a habitable uh floor area uh at that point I correct you habitable floor area ratio but the area itself is 700 fet below you you are correct Mr pada it's the uh the F floor area ratio uh and which is being exceeded by about eight percentage points uh from the 21 uh it's a little uh less than 29 uh% um how however uh the house was designed in order to minimize all the other variances and what you see from the S plan is a house that it's uh deeper that it is wider which is something that doesn't really happen much uh uh in if if the if the Lots were um you know the correct side so the house it's perpendicular to the street uh again maintaining all of the uh the setbacks going to the floor plan you're going to see that the floor plan has been minimized in other words it has been made as small as possible uh you see all of the spaces all of the bedrooms are just adequate spaces there's nothing that is oversized there's nothing that is so uh you know overgrown or overdesigned that U you know creates this variant um on the first floor you're going to see that as soon as you come in there's a there's a forer which is barely 10t wide uh and and it has the stair within it so the space that you're walking in is is barely 7 foot wide uh the garage is less than 400 square F feet it's 19 foot wide by 20 uh so the architect you know try to minimize all the spaces there is a um uh there is a bedroom uh on the first floor and basically that addresses the multi-gen generational use of the uh um of the house um parents you know grandparents visiting uh so on and so forth uh you're also going to see that we have a rather small living room dining room area and and a kitchen that is while it's good size is really not something that it's uh again uh just overdesigned um if you look at the second floor we have four more bedrooms on the second floor uh even the principal bedroom it's it's really not that large uh so uh again all the spaces were trying to be minimized just to cut down the size of the building uh in the basement uh we do have a an office space we do have a play area um and basically that's what the house is it's it's only about 2700 square feet which is short of the 3200 maximum that that can be built in town so again it it was just an exercise in minimizing uh what was being proposed through the board because we understand that the uh habitable FL area ratio uh was being exceeded um as far as the elevations uh again we comply with the height of the building uh all the other the setbacks uh if you look at the upper leftand corner uh of the the drawing you're going to see the front elevation and you can see that that was articulated in such a way uh as to cut down the massing of of the building but if even that elevation is a lot narrower than what would have been if the lot was uh its normal width or the the uh uh permitted width the required width so uh all in all the house was U designed to be as compact as possible just to minimize all the uh uh you know the the area that that we're exceeding the F great thank you I have no further questions for this witness anyone on the board have any questions for this witness anybody in the public oh yep we have one in the public come on up please let us know your name uh good evening board members uh I'm Brad Samson I'm the owner of the house right next to number eight I'm at 10 Windwood road that would be to your left as you look at the house uh as you as you stand near number eight I'm to the left yes okay um my question for the uh the witness here is uh there was a statement made about the January 11th engineering review document and he stated clearly that they were going to meet the specifications of that document could he please give me a hint of how they're going to do that well sure I'd be more than happy to Aline on that uh all the requests that are within that memo and they're very limited essentially they just concentrate on the lot drainage permit application process to make a determination of whether or not the storm water will be accommodated on site and meet the state requirements uh that ordinarily is a building permit perit requirement which is noted in the engineering memorandum and we're going to conform to that and whatever this municipality requests from us in regards to LW drainage we're going to meet because if we don't meet it we're not going to get building permits okay I'll have a comment later thank you okay thank you thank you I have a question uh what's the height of your attic the the height of the attic is 8T inside uh it's 8T clear uh the the one thing about this attic is it doesn't go the wide way it goes the narrow way so if you look at the front elevation let me just get this here th this is basically the attic that we have so at this point this is about 8ot clear from the structure above but if you can see it rapidly uh become smaller so that the portion that is probably within you know 6 feet to 8 feet is probably about just a third of that attic you're welcome um I have one quick question on the height of the overall building 32 ft 36 ft in relation to the buildings between on either side the houses the homes on either side how would you rate that is that caller any any any guesstimation is fine too if you have I I I think we have the planner who will actually talk to that in a little while our planner is going to walk you through those both measurements that and just for clarification it's 32 ft not 36 correct it's 32 ft from the average grade thank you you okay hold on one second sure okay sorry so um I'm just looking at the plan so if the it's 2 feet um there's a two feet from the the grade level to the first floor then you have 9 ft and then another 9 ft so that's 20 ft and you're so it's 32t so that to me seems that the attic would be 12 feet unless I'm missing something with my addition so so you have to hi from the grade and the grade is 2 feet off the first floor so so you have then you have 9 ft and then you have another 9 ft on the second floor so that's 20 ft right then you have the structure which should probably be about a foot foot and a half and then the structure of the roof so you probably eliminate another 3et Fe so 18 20 23 ft and it's 32 so that would be about 9 ft but you do have the structure of the uh attic itself so it's probably about 8 feet okay all right thanks for clearing that up oh you're welcome okay thank you I like to call my next witness my planner uh Nick raviana I do yes my first name is Nicholas with an H last name graviano g r a v is invictor i a n o I'm a planner and partner with graviano and Gillis Architects and planners with a business address of 101 Crawford's Corner Road in home Del New Jersey thank you so much uh Nick can you please walk us through your educational credentials and also all the licenses which you have uh yes I have a bachelor's degree from Ruckers University a master's degree in city and Regional planning from Ruckers University a law degree from the Temple University School law where I received a distinguished class performance in state and local government law La I'm a licensed professional planner in New Jersey I also hold an aicp certifications I've been qualified by over 100 municipalities and 18 different counties including previously by this board now your license for plan is that currently still in good standing uh yes my planning license is good in good standing as well as my aicp certification all right despite the fact that you're also uh licensed architect and you're also an attorney as well you're only performing tonight though as a planner is that correct I'm not a licensed architect partner is but um I my my testimony tonight will be in professional planning thank you do board accept him as a qualified expert in planning does anyone in the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness there being no objections a witness is accepted as an expert in professional planning thank you uh Nick are you familiar with the R3 zoning District yes I am are you also familiar with the municipalities master plan I am and have you had an opportunity to see the site yourself yes I've been to this site on two two separate occasions first time I had the pleasure of being there in that blizzard last week and I was there a little bit earlier today all right why don't you walk us through why it's your professional opinion that we can satisfy the D4 standards uh certainly uh obviously the applicant is before you this evening uh requesting a D4 F variance for a specific piece of property known as block 5701 lot 22 uh that is an undersized and a regularly shaped uh parcel in the R3 District um as you heard in the architecture testimony there was great care in the design of this proposal uh to create a project that meets all the required setback and building coverage requirements uh parking requirements the applicant is also committed to meet all of the uh engineering requirements of the township uh however that undersized lot does trigger the need uh for the F variants I'll keep the uh proofs pretty short it's getting a little late but as you all know uh with the E4 F variance uh variances could be granted in particular cases and special reasons uh that's the positive criteria of the variants now as you know uh the Appel courts in the state of New Jersey have ruled that the D4 variants is more akin to the D3 conditional use variants than the D1 use variants and that this applicant must demonstrate that the proposal could handle uh any uh ills generated by the granting of of the F variants and in this particular case there's certainly no adverse impacts uh from this proposal uh as Mr pada said in his intro uh this is essentially an R4 lot in the R3 Zone it is less than all the requirements of the R4 Zone which has deemed to be appropriate for such development uh by this Township so I certainly do not see a substantial impairment to the Zone plan uh which is the master plan or the zoning ordinance uh in fact this proposal advances objectives of the master plan to uh maintain the stable residential character of the municipality uh as well as to uh create development that is befitting of the neighborhoods uh it's certainly advances purpose of zoning a of the ml a promotion of the general health safety and Welfare uh that's done by eliminating uh the 84 year old house which was constructed in 1940 constructed a new house uh to Modern building codes and standards it certainly advances purpose G to provide sufficient space and appropriate location uh for variety of residential uses to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens and then lastly it's certainly uh by the nicely designed house um advances purpose I desirable visual environment and creative development techniques um there was a previous question by the board how does this relate to the neighboring properties uh the property to the to the right of the home uh which I believe is is uh six Windwood um is a two-story dwelling um it's it's it's orientated in a different direction because that L's a little bit wider so that house is wider this house is more long uh certainly uh this house it you know Co coincides with the development of that house there's no adverse impacts from the height of this structure and and I would like to note that the applicant is not requesting a height variance with this application so I do not see any problems with the height uh just quickly to get this on the record uh there are existing uh nonconforming lot size and lot width conditions that are not being augmented by this application they certainly could Grant be granted under the C1 criteria whereas strict application of the township zoning ordinance would create an undue hardship upon the developer thank you I have no further questions for this witness does anybody on the board have any questions I can make a comment so I think you mentioned at the very beginning that this is really more of like an R4 not really an R3 so the minimum lat area of the R4 is 9375 and you're at 9624 right so and the habitable habitable flow ratio is 30% for an R4 so you're really closer to an R4 and you're asking for um 28.9 2% so you're really closer to like an R4 um yes that is correct great thank thank you trying to help you out that's a great OB yes and that and just to give you by way of background that's what we were thinking when we were designing the proposed Improvement because as you guys already have heard from our testimony this is not an addition this is groundup construction so we do control what that box is actually going to look like so in doing so we want to be consistent with what the R4 zoning was great thank you any other questions from the public or any questions for the public for this Witness okay um any comments sure come on up you'll have to be sworn in to make your your comment though yes um is I'm very sorry I realize it's late for it's okay you want um Buton swear or affirm that the statements you're going to make to the board are true I'm sorry do you swear or affirm that the statements you're going to make to the board this evening are going to be true accurate and complete yes I do thank you you consider yourself under oath thank you um I just wanted to say um oh I'm Brad Samson and I'm at 10 Winwood Road here in Livingston okay I just want to make a a brief statement um I I never heard them say anything about being on the property after it rains heavily so I'm going to make the following statement statement the property at 8 Windwood road is at the bottom of a hill there are known issues with standing water on the property when it rains heavily and the puddles almost reach the rear of the house the water table I believe is very high in the area now I'm not a hydraulic engineer so I don't know about that I worked very hard to keep my basement dry I just want the board to know um found any foundational changes that they plan it sounds like they're going to do that um at number eight will affect might affect my Foundation if water management control is not properly addressed that water has to go somewhere okay um there was something else I want to say but I forgot I'm sorry that's okay um and as as we stated the engineering department will ensure the job is that no additional runoff can go to your house from their development or any direction Mr the thing is I didn't hear anything about underground piping or anything it do that's not part of this testimony that's that's that's why so the the building department will take care of that and they'll have to submit a proper plan it'll have to be approved and prove to the engineering department that there's no additional water to go into your property or the property on the other side okay so that's that's kind of standard but I appre yeah Mr chairman but we appreciate your comments they're very important and we want to hear from everybody all right yeah well this is for the engineering department I give them Kudos because that's what may became here yeah the report the engineering view thank you very much everybody thank you appreciate your comments um do you want to have a close do you need a closing statement or I think you good or no I'll keep it very short and I'll just make a comment and response to his if anything this application is going to actually improve the current storm water issue at the subject site as mentioned before both the engineering memorandum and brought up by the chairman himself uh we are going to be charged with the responsibility of meeting the municipal and also state requirements for storm water management and we will see to it thank you Mr bad thank you uh do I have a motion for anybody I'll make it so it's a it's a brand new house and it's very modest and we'll we'll uh I'll make a motion to approve I second it all right Mr Kenya yes yes Miss Mirage yes Miss con votes yes Mr bani yes Mr arrti yes Miss kanana yes and Mr deer yes motion passes thank you so much everyone thank you take care will you call the final application [Applause] um hi made it block 6001 lot 33 18 Tower Road sh application number 2243 DV Le a Joanie one applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family residence in violation of the following section 17097 C2 front yard setback 60 ft required 42.5 ft proposed 17.5 ft variance requested 17097 C4 rear yard setback 50 ft required 33.5 ft proposed 16.5 ft variance requested 17087 cc2 habitable floor ratio 18% allow 28.1% proposed 10.1% variance requested good evening my name is Steven shepis I'm the applicants attorney may I be seated okay oh uh well let me just give you a brief introduction uh this property is located at 18 Tower Road uh here in the township uh the property is substantially undersized for the Zone it's Zone R2 and it's only about 42% of the minimum uh lot area required 25,000 ft² is required the lot is 10,650 Ft uh your ordinance uh limits the floor area ratio and we're petitioning the board for relief from that requirement based on the undersized nature of the lot lot is also substantially shallow as it relates to lot depth so uh this property as as re other property along this side of the street does not meet the required front yard setback nor the rear yard setback so we're proposing setbacks stter in compliance with the pattern of development that exists uh standing to my right is John babula Mr Baba's licensed architect he's here to provide testimony relative to the proposal so without further Ado I ask you be sworn and place his credentials on the record Mr laula would you uh do you swear or affirm that all the statements and testimony you give to the board this evening will be true accurate and complete would you spell your name please John babula b a u l a an address uh uh 976 taba Road moris Plains New Jersey Mr shus I'll turn that over to you for credentials very good Mr uh babula would you briefly State your credentials as an architect for the I graduated from uh NGIT in 2014 uh I I have a registered architect in New Jersey and I am a good standing I've been licensed an architect since 2015 and I've testified before over a dozen boards between uh Beren Morris and uh Sussex County and this is actually my first time uh seeing you in person I've uh testified before you but it was Zoom okay I think that still counts yep all very good I offer Mr babula as a licensed detect does anyone in the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness okay there be no objections the witness is accepted as an expert and architecture very good turn over you okay very good Mr babula let's talk about the property as it exists today you PR presented plans to the board that have been reviewed and uh it's based upon A current survey is that fair to say yes so why don't you tell us briefly about the existing conditions the size of the property dimensions of the property and the existing cost sure the um the existing property is 85 by uh 25 uh it's uh 10, uh 625 Square F feet which in this Zone it should be 25,000 Square fet so it's an undersized lot for lot area um as we mentioned the existing house here it's uh the does not meet the front yard or the rear yard setbacks um we are pretty much maintaining those setbacks uh uh moving it over a little bit and so we will still need a front yard and a rear yard setback all right so let's walk through that what are the existing setbacks as relate to front yard and rear yard for this property and then maybe if you could tell us the existing front yard setbacks for the adjoining properties on either side so what's required uh front yard is uh 50 ft um the existing house is at 46.4 two and our proposed is going to be 45 for the front yard uh the rear yard is a requirement of also 50 ft uh the existing is 30 3.1 and to the new dwelling it's going to be 37.6 and to the back steps it'll be 33.5 which is both an improvement on the existing and what about the setbacks for the adjoining houses on either uh right or left uh and if you could give us the front yard setbacks and if you can tell us where you received this information um so sorry let me just get this over here to the two properties to the right and left uh they're about about 40 ft uh for the minimum and 44 feet to the front yard setbacks uh which is an average of 42.5 for the front yard setbacks there um I got this information from uh Google Maps uh scaled it off and uh compared it to to our lot and as far as the rear yard setbacks um I do have I believe uh this diagram here which would be a new exhibit okay very good so Mr babul is a fair to say you prepared a handout exhibit for the members of the board for setbacks so why don't we Mark that as exhibit A1 I assume you prepared it or is prepared under your direction Y and if you could briefly just tell us what it is so we can identify it uh again it's a uh description of the lots to the left and to the right of the uh subject property and it shows their front yards and relative uh rear yards as well so we'll call it setback exhibit sure okay very good do you have enough for everybody here yes I believe okay very good so if Mr babula could approach and yes thank you and as you can see with the the diagram there the rear yards just give people a chance to yeah let me see if I have that here and you'll send a copy to miss Hollis sure thank you Mr babul would you email that to uh secretary you have it here on the screen as well uh I do not have it on the screen screen here I can use this it does not have the rear yard setbacks um but from most of them are in in line with our subject property being uh 33 feet to 22 feet for um lot 22 I believe or lot 35 so the existing properties to the right and to the left none of them actually meet the the rear required rear yard setbacks okay so Mr Baba just quickly if you walk us through the front yard setbacks the left and right and then the rear yard setbacks left and right uh so two houses to the left we have a 41.9 front yard setback uh then we have a 40 foot front yard setback we have our subject property which is at 40 uh currently at 46 but it's proposed 45 uh to the right we have 43.4 and two hous to the right we have 44.4 okay so not being a math major but I would assume you're you're further back than any of the houses immediately left to right yes okay and the rear yard setback is it comparable to what's existing in the neighborhood or at least on the side of the street yes okay now I know you've also shown on your plan uh an area map that shows structures like on Beyond us correct uh yes there is here is the area map here with the the this uh darker dot here as our subject property okay so behind us uh is there any residence that's butt up against us or or those buildings located on Route 10 uh those are located on Route 10 and the closest structure is over 200 ft away from uh from our subject house I would note too that uh next to the application is an area map that Mr babula provided uh that does show a 200t radius it's based on the tax map uh and it does show the structure is more than 200 ft away from our rear property line okay so Mr bu let's talk about the house that's proposed okay uh so our proposed dwelling um let's see is a is a new twostory dwelling um here's the front facade here uh we're proposing Hardy Board Siding in the front um with some stone accents on the bottom uh ashphalt shingles for the main part of the roof and some standing metal uh accent roofs in the front over the front door and over the the garage doors there uh we have the the left side elevation again showing some Peaks and some character uh the rear yard here uh again uh we which uh we have a a slotting glass door in the back to a landing that would go to the the yard itself on the left area there we have a one-story area uh set back a little bit and on the right side again some Peaks and some character and some uh new roof lines for the first floor uh when you walk into the first floor you have a foyer with stairs going up to the second floor and down to the basement to the right of that is a uh guest bedroom suite to the left is a dining room as you go to the back of the dwelling uh we have an open concept kitchen and family room with a more formal living room to the right uh in front of the kitchen we have a mud room that transitions you to the two-car garage as as well as a powder room on the second floor uh as you come up the stairs we have a total of four bedrooms with a primary uh bedroom suite uh a laundry room and uh a total of three bathrooms uh yes in a total of three bathrooms all right Mr Baba What's the total uh living uh square footage that would be calcul Cal ated for habitable floor area uh 2,977 okay I don't have anything further Mr babula the AR I'm sorry the planner will address other statutory criteria great uh anybody on the board have any questions for this witness I just have a silly question so on the Z on the zoning table on the plans um required it should be 60 ft but you have 42 2.5 average did I I think I might have missed something or Mr bu why don't you address that uh I think in the uh zoning ordinances it uh says that um you can go with the average in this Zone except that uh nothing should be closer than 50 feet so it is required 60 but I think when there's an average setback and there's an established uh front yard setback uh they you would like 50 feet okay and then the proposed is 45 that's what's on the plan right cor 45 okay because on our agenda it's for um it's 42.5 so we'll change that to 45 yes okay thank you anybody else have any questions any in the anybody in the public I don't think so okay okay our next witness is Nicholas graviano Mr gravano is a licensed professional planner uh Mr gravano provided testimony earlier this evening and since he's previously been accepted as a licensed professional planner by the board I asked that after he' be sworn that we could dispense with the credentials knowing that you've already accepted him this evening I I think we can accepted very good I do I don't think I've done anything wrong in the last 10 minutes okay I'm very good Mr gravano the board is if I could just kindly get a second to put the flash drive in to get the exhibit and I I will give uh I'll give the flash drive to Jackie after I'm done the testimony thank you okay very good Mr graviano in conjunction with this application uh you've prepared an analysis of the zoning and likewise conducted some site inspections and are prepared to provide testimony to the board and the public in support of this application is that fair to say that is correct so why don't you tell us what you looked at and tell us what you found out and what your opinions are certainly uh you know as as with the previous case I I did have a chance to uh view the neighborhood on two separate occasions to get a feel of how the proposal would impact the uh the neighborhood uh the applicant is before you tonight requesting the D4 F variants um as well as pre-existing conditions for the undersized lot uh the proposed front and rear yard setback variances um as Mr shepher and shepis and the architect indicated in their testimony this is a severely undersized lot uh 25,000 ft² is required uh 10,625 sare ft is existing uh and proposed um as you can see uh in the exhibit I guess we we'll call this A2 okay and this is a uh an exhibit prepared by your office an aerial photograph with some uh superimposed information yes this is an aerial uh gathered from Google Maps uh the photographs were taken by myself uh the uh front facade of the subject property is uh copied from the proposed architectural plans what I would like to note in this situation is you'll see the the consistent uh front and rear yard setbacks uh along Tower Road of the dwellings um you'll see that the applicant's existing house as well as the proposed house do follow that established development pattern uh the applicant is actually increasing the rear yard which exists today uh is providing a couple of feet difference as well as the applicant's front yard setback of 45 ft is actually you know approximately 3 feet uh larger than the surrounding neighboring property so in the context of this neighborhood the positioning of the house and the size of the house is certainly in keeping with the established development pattern of the area and that's key because you know as as you know uh with the D4 F variants the analysis must be can the site accommodate uh any ills from the proposed development as well as showing that there's no substantial detriment to the neighborhood Zone plan or zoning ordinance um we did have a chance to analyze the R4 zoning District requirements um as this lot is closer to an R4 lot than it is to an R2 lot the applicant would meet all of the ordinance requirements uh needed for the ur4 Lots um so there's certainly uh no potential negative impacts that could be generated from the development of this property uh the applicant agrees to to conform to all engineering requirements in ter terms of drainage design and the applicant is providing uh more than adequate off street parking for a dwelling of this size um the house is a little bit less than than 300 Square uh 3,000 square fet uh which certainly isn't a monster house by any means it's a pretty midsize dwelling when you look at uh uh housing sizes so it certainly does not uh trigger any of the adverse impacts that were generated by these F variances that were created as well as some of the master plan uh goals and objectives uh to to limit the sizes of the so-called mcmansions um with respect uh to the lot lot size um requested lot size variance of the existing condition that could certainly be granted under the C one criteria where strict application of the township zoning ordinance would create undue hardship upon the applicant uh with respect to the front and rear yard setbacks they could certainly be granted under the C2 criteria uh relating to a specific piece of property uh here you have a drastically undersized lot in the R2 Zone which is more akin to the R4 Zone uh it advances purpos of zoning of the municipal land use law purpose a uh promotion of the public health safety and general welfare uh this is a house that did sit vacant for new numerous years um it's not a house you know upon discussion with the architect that is salable um the previous owners really let the structure deteriorate uh additionally advances purpose G to provide sufficient space and appro appropriate location for a variety of residential uses to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens and then lastly uh it certainly promotes a purpose eye desirable visual environment when you look at the exhibit you know it's certainly a house with similar characteristics of those in the neighborhood with its own distinct flare to create a house which is uh certainly going to be aesthetically pleasing from the street and and add to the streetscape of uh the neighborhood uh with with both the C1 and C2 variant is being requested there's no substantial detriment to the public good or substantial detriment to The Zone planner zoning ordinance now Mr graviano on this exhibit you Pro provided A2 you show some photographs uh those homes are they in close proximity presumably based on the arrows that you show yes uh that's a little cluster of homes on Tower Road all those homes have Tower Road addresses um they have similar characteristics to the homes that the applicants proposing and they're all larger than the homes that the home that the applicant is proposing so you're talking about one house next door and to across the street that is correct all right now you've drawn reference between the subject property and the compatibility of the proposal to what would be analogist to the R4 zone now could you just tell us how we would relate to the um uh potential F percentages as relates to the R4 Zone what's permitted there and what's uh permitted in R zone uh yes um with with respect to the R4 Zone in uh relation to our property uh the R4 R4 Zone requires a 9,375 ft lot whereas the applicant's property is 10,000 10,625 square ft uh the maximum square footage in the R4 zone is 3,220 square F feet as you heard in the architectural testimony the applicant has a little bit less than 3,000 square ft so it's certainly 200 200 square ft less than what would be permitted uh in the R4 Zone uh with respect to to the maximum HF uh the R4 Zone uh permits 30% the applicant is at 28.1% uh the front yard setback for the R4 zone is 40 feet whereas the applicant is proposing 45 feet and then lastly uh the rear yard setback uh in the R4 zone is 35 ft whereas the applicant is proposing 37.6 to the dwelling uh there is a a little bit uh of a of a landing in the back which is you know to the uh code requirement uh so when you look at the R4 standards uh this this house actually is less than all everything that's proposed except for the lot size which is a little bit bigger than what the R4 requires okay now the ordinance seems to link lot area to these percentages is that fair to say that is correct so the fact that we're so substandard and it's a hardship is it fair to say that that's uh satisfies the positive criteria relates to these variances and even the D4 that is correct you know in this context where you have a a lot that's uh close to 14,300 and change smaller than what it has than it has to be to apply that maximum HF of 0.18 when you know when the lot's supposed to be you know 13,000 square feet bigger just you know doesn't make rational planning sense and the fact that the uh ordinance recognizes that the percentages which you described would be compliant in the R4 setting are appro rate um in that zone based on the lot area is it fair to say that based on that it wouldn't be a substantial negative impact to the Zone plan in zoning ORD in other words it's not the typical quote unquote mcmansion as is referenced in the master plan of 2018 that's correct you know I think a house a little bit under 3,000 square ft in this time um is is a pretty modest Siz house as well as when you look at the neighborhood characteristics of house houses in the proximity which are larger and the fact that that the applicant is being consistent with the established front and and rear yard setbacks of the neighborhood as well as meeting the code requirements for the sidey guard setbacks is is certainly a a very rationally planned proposal okay I don't have anything further anybody in the board have any questions for this witness I I want to make a comment um on your zoning table um you have an error with the maximum building coverage calculation because you're missing a pair of um uh parentheses in your calculation so you're going to have 2528 Square ft instead of 2655 you may want to double check and change that ible check that yeah we I think we're still under the building yes that that does not change you know the end result but it's an error on the plan so you want to correct that have a comment I have a comment I think it's a modest uh you know in enhancement in the neighborhood with compared to the old house I assume there's no questions or comments from the public I didn't think so um do you want to have a closing statement I rest on the record okay does anyone want to make a motion I can make a motion yeah with this new house coming on the to 18 Tower Road I with and it's a great enhancement in the neighborhood I approve to move second second okay Mr Kenya yes Mr arrti yes Miss Khan votes yes Mr bani yes Miss kanana yes Miss marage yes and Mr Beer yes okay thank you everyone thank you for staying LK you have a good night thank you for waiting thank you okay well we blew through that quick quick evening we're adjourned