##VIDEO ID:OT317H7HKQ8## the August 2024 monthly meeting of the ofs board of adjustment meeting August 26 2024 um the legal notice required in accordance with the open public meetings act has been satisfied in a statement certifying the same will be executed please all join me United States of America to stand indice all yes Mr Traen yes Mr Williams here M Simmons here Mr benois here Mr goldber here Mr here Mr Hansen here and Sano here thank you first um order business for this evening consideration for the approval of minutes of the April 29th 2024 meeting so move to accept second second thank Mr all in favor [Music] same you were absent yes okay thank you U First agenda item for this evening under public hearings is ba 13-23 SL Acquisitions LLC who is here seeking a continuation meeting seeking also a special meeting chairman good evening to the record Joshua F appearing from the law com grow is that on thank you so Mr chairman uh members of the board we we previously um were before the board um we had agreed that we would work with Miss Santiago on picking a potential special meeting date I believe we've reached that date the application was subsequently carried to this meeting just for scheduling purposes and to announce that special meeting date so we could just confirm for the record I'd appreciate that Sonia we have a date yes Mr rer we do have uh Monday September the 9th for a special meeting for the SL application great so Monday September 9th in this room same location 7 P.M correct yeah and just for members of the public so the um slock application which is ba1 1423 will be heard on September 9th in this room starting at 7M there'll be no further notices from the applicant okay thank you Mr Good Luck thank you yeah let's jump to uh saep housekeeping announcement ba924 34 West Handover Avenue um application for John Saxon will not be heard this evening so um that will be continued to another date um yes that will be September 2 September 23rd 2024 so if there's anyone here in the public who is here for that application just want to give you notice that that will not be heard tonight and and that will be with new notice that is correct yeah notice September 23rd with new notice thank you um first uh applicant up on the agenda this evening is Donna and Ed l ba-7 - 24 7 mil Road applicant is proposing construction of a one-story Edition over existing open porch Mr chair members of the board Rich wner ly savaji and Cohen on behalf of the applicant Ed um I bill burn with me who is our architect and planner Prov testimony regarding the proposed construction as well as uh criteria and facts support of the C Varian relief what we need the property is looking at the R7 Zone as the chair stated we are constructing closing the construct a one story Edition there are existing nonconforming setbacks to the structure we're going to propose constructing the addition where the deck currently is located um but we do need some bar Rel for that project uh as I said Mr burn my only witness I can now going would you stand please rise your right hand you solemnly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you that yes or well no let's I know it's been a while he's been before the board before but just briefly if you give us your uh professional background please and all your licenses the pro which are are current and good standing of state of New Jersey all right Phil if you wouldn't mind he going over the the proposed project the board and MERS public here today use that microphone right or yes either or okay I'll take this wir is it on the light's on I think it's on so uh what is being proposed by the Leo is to create a main level a first floor uh bedroom and bathroom to accommodate them as they age they are um they've owned this home for many many years since the early 1980s and the house as it exists today is um was built in the 1940s it includes um three bedrooms all of which are on the second floor um accessible by stairway the main level consists of living room dining room kitchen not an overly large house but but a nice home in original condition very well kept so um their goal was to create a bedroom suite for themselves with a first floor bathroom expansion to allow them to stay here age in place which is a common term today and certainly um creating a situation that will allow them to stay in their home that they they've enjoyed for so many years we've submitted um construction drawings reflecting the work that's being proposed but for the benefit of tonight's meeting I created a presentation plan colorized version of those very same plans so I'm assuming we would Mark that Mark that A1 please and if you would put today's date on it and then just um tell us the title of it please so this would be a presentation plan with colored elevations and a floor plan representing the identical conditions that were proposed on the um submitted plans and that's one page it's it's a single sheet correct so what what we see here on the bottom left is the main level plan and the dark-shaded walls represent the proposed addition which essentially Falls within the foot of of an existing wood deck there was a deck that was added to the property um under Mr Leo's uh Mrs Leo's um ownership it back in 1986 I believe it it was done with full permits and uh and so our proposal essentially creates this bedroom Edition a top that existing deck and we've got um a bedroom of a modest size it's about 12 X4 we've got a corter that connects to the remaining portion of the deck that we're going to keep in place and we do also expand that first floor bathroom that would allow um easier access there's a bathroom there now that just includes a sink and a toilet but what we're proposing is to add a a shower and a little bit more floor space just to make accessibility a little bit more comfortable um with the exception of that work there's really no other changes to the existing house um what we see here on the top of the sheet is the right side elevation this would be the elevation viewed from their neighbor and the house currently stops about out here with a first floor porch That's enclosed and really what we're proposing is to add 16t 11 in to that wall so it's not going any closer to the property line we're just extending it further toward the back again above that footprint of the current deck what we also see on the bottom right is the rear elevation so this would be the The View if we were to look at the back of the house and you can see here the width of the addition Blends in nicely it's um 15 ft 10 in from to end and it would have a shallow pitched gable roof that would clear the windows on the second floor so we're not impacting any of those upstairs bedrooms from a site standpoint based on the survey that was submitted um the proposed addition again Falls above that existing deck so we're essentially taking the current line of the house which is approximately six feet from the property line building the addition to top that deck and extending it within that footprint so uh what we're here for tonight is a side yard setback variants um the requirement would be greater than six feet I believe it's 10 and what we're proposing is a continuation of the pre-existing non-conforming setback so on that point we're not approaching further towards the side just running we running deeper towards the rear yard that that is correct yeah so so what's there today um as far as that side of the house is concerned would be matched and we would just extend that for further back so we're not increasing or decreasing that Dimension we're just increasing the height of that current deck obviously um in all other counts I believe we're in compliance um we've got a five- foot setback on the left side which again is a pre-existing non-conforming condition we're not changing that and at the time that that addition was proposed and and constructed and approved completed several years ago it it must have met current zoning at that time at that five point 5.9 foot Dimension um we're okay on coverages and I don't think there's any other um you know zoning concerns here other than like I said the fact that we're in violation of that sidey setback preexisting set back that we're keeping with we're extending the length of the house towards the that's correct we are not creating a a nonconforming rear set that's correct we the house currently complies with a rear yard setback I think obviously what we're proposing is quite a bit um further forward than the deepest part of the of the uh structure today but again I think in both cases we're in compliance the reard setback requirement is 25 feet I don't have that dimensioned here um but we're probably 50 feet or better to the rear yard well well within that setback requirement um so from a standpoint from a zoning standpoint I think what we're really requesting here is relief under the C1 hardship guideline because again the location of the existing house the pre-approved deck that exists today today sort of um indicates that that line has already been established we are increasing the height of of the structure it's still a on story Edition we're still about 12 or 13 feet but we believe based on the fact that you know the size and width of this lot is um and the location of the house is really um what's driving this variance and again we would consider that to be a hardship um I think there's also some reason to say that we could um classify this as a C2 variant because I think you know there's a lot of um a lot of our practice these days is spent helping families um create similar situations like this whether it be multigenerational housing which is a a large percentage of our business today or um you know creating situations where people can age in place they aren't forced to go into a nursing home or get seek other type of care they can stay in a neighborhood they can stay in a home that they're familiar with I I think there's a lot of benefits to that just from a community standpoint these these folks have lived here for a very very long time they take beautiful care of their home and I think it creates some real you know solid neighborhood ties and so I think from you know looking at the negative versus the positive criteria I think the negative um you know impact of this addition is minimal I think it's not really going to be visible I'm not certain people would even understand or know what was done because it Blends so seamlessly and again the positive criteria I think you know is substantial any questions Mr from the board professionals just want uh I didn't see a review letter now he basically framed that exactly what I said um the house was built in 1940 predates our zoning ordinance so you basically have to accept what's there right now and they're not making it a a worse situation they're they're maintaining uh their sidey yard setbacks and their um combined sidey yard setbacks so there's two variances side yard and combined sidey yard and the expansion of non-conformity and expans yeah front yard is fine rear yard is fine uh it's just the side yards Mr chairman I just have a couple questions sure just for my own visual fabrication on the top drawing there on the right you have two double doors I don't see those double doors on the pl not seeing that the double doors that you see here are in the background and those go to this um storage area that was was added to the house as part of this garage Edition so those two doors the it does so this is this is really you know well in the background and not part of what we're doing today yeah so I know it's a little bit tricky to visualize that same thing with the bottom one that's not the kitchen door that's the door to the house correct the door that we see here on this bottom elevation is a essentially the door that comes into the back yeah yeah thank you're welcome any other members questions yes Mr chair um I just want to make sure so there's an existing basement in this um residence there's no plan to extend the basement to go underneath that that's correct what we're proposing will be constructed on a crawl space so we have access for plumbing and things of that nature but there's no reason or plans to create a basement space under there okay okay and is there any Landscaping that is being proposed around and into the rear of the property currently the Le have a very nice Garden to the back I believe it's their vegetable garden they have some raised beds and things like that that's going to be retained and there are some Foundation plantings on the side of the house and I'm I'm certain we would either retain what was there what was next to the Decker we would look to enhance that she has some beautiful gardens and I'm sure she'll do do nice things here as well thank you very much and and Mr chair no one foresees any drainage issues so what Happ I wouldn't anticipate you know much change here the deck that she has now has a um you know partially impervious surface obviously Dex drain but I I wouldn't anticipate any issues here thank you m Mr chairman um you have a uh a deck out back so is the plan to put this where the deck is and not encroach in the backyard any anymore that that's correct cor um based on the new survey that we got and the field measurements that we prepared the line at the back of the addition and the side of the addition fall exactly in line with the present deck that was the goal here so now is there any plan to add on a deck because if you have a deck now and you're using it and then you take it away so so the deck currently extends along this side line across the back and it continues on over to this area here they currently have a a hot tub in this area that's not been used much and so their their plan is to remove that and rebuild this deck in this infill area so it's going to be about 11 or 12 foot wide by about 20 foot deep and they feel that that would be sufficient for their purposes to have a deck and to do you know they're grilling and they're entertaining out there so we will still have a deck as part of the finished product okay all right thank you well any other questions from the board Mr Hansen do you have any other questions concer no straight forward at this point of the meeting I'll open up the public portion for anyone that's in attendance have questions for this witness seeing none hearing none close public portion and that be open for public comments um so anyone here in the public have any comments in General on the application they'd like to come forward and present hearing none and see none I will close the public portion a motion to me in my mind Community home owner community in general I will second that I I agree I think um being very mindful of using the current footprint of the property um makes this um a really easy decision for us and U so I second the motion well yeah make the motion thank you thank you roll call M Simmons yes Mr Williams yes Mr Ben yes Mr Kramer sorry Mr track yes Mr yes okay we'll have a resolution at the next meeting thank [Applause] you next applicant up on the agenda is schnor and Melle Lon ba-10 24 58 Lake Valley Road proposing reconstruction of fire damage all right good evening Mr chairman members of the board Jason suel from theol from the prime and to Val attorney for the applicant um this application's uh somewhat interesting um from a from a Lan's perspective I think um the application is the result of my my client home um being destroyed by a fire about um two years ago um since then they've been renting elsewhere within the municipality um dealing obviously with insurance claims how to redo their house but also many members of the family including the children were in the home when the fire took place out fortunately the children actually acted well beyond their years and alerted uh the fire department got out of there but um it's been obviously a little very traumatic for the for the for the family so we're back here now um and the property is located in the OSG open space zone so what makes it interesting is that the the two lots that um the utility plant that's behind this property are Zone 3 Acre zoning um this property of itself is 19,000 and chain square feet 3 acres is 130,000 square feet so to build anything on this property based on the setbacks in the lot size would require a variance you really even if you were starting from scratch and we weren't reutilized izing portions of the existing structure um to to build something you would require um a variance here so we do need several setback variances what I think is interesting though from a um I'll call it an intensity perspective is that despite not complying with the with the um setbacks because of the zoning issue we are compliant with the building coverage and the lock coverage so in this Zone you're only allowed to have 10% lot coverage maximum whereas we're proposing 99.6% um and from an pervious perspective you're allowed 25% we're at 22.9% so despite the setback variances all the coverages are being um complied with which I think um is a positive and what you'll hear from our planner is that the surrounding properties the my client's property in one other lot were put in the OSG Zone but the other properties around it which are in R15 and R20 zones or r25 zones my client's proposal would actually comply with those requirements so from a you know a complimentary aspect or compatibility aspect with a neighborhood we believe it complies um so we have two witnesses that we plan on calling Mr chairman our architect and our professional planner so unless there's any other questions for me be happy to call our architect first okay s yeah would you just uh raise your right hand please yeah either microphone is fine okay do you somly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so hope you got and state your name please spell your last name yep Frank Troya t r o i a um my address business address is 267 pasak Road Township of Washington um I can State my credentials for you if you'd like please so I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey in good standon um I've been a project architect at this firm for the better of 10 years now um I've prepared and designed and sat on applications for many uh single family homes throughout the state of New Jersey I sit on a planning board myself in Wayne New Jersey um so I'm very familiar with these sort of applic and and this type of uh architectural design would the board accept uh him as an expert in the field of architecture great thank you very much so Frank just I know I gave a little bit of an opening but if you could just give an overview of existing conditions the location of the property and also some of the Practical difficulties with the zoning that um encumbers the site of course um so I am not a licensed engineer I I do not plan on doing engineer in testimony today unfortunately our civil engineer was not able to make it so I do have a site plan up here and I'm just going to be going over General Zone and site stuff um I'll try to answer any questions as they pertain to and what you're showing on your easel is what we have in our package right that's correct it's the plot plan one of one that's in your packet yes so um located here is our property you can see on the Northern side is Lake Road and on the western side we have Lake Valley Road and that is the road that the house fronts on um in the center here is predominantly where the existing structure sits today our additions are identified by these shaded areas here with the deck that's hatched in as well so that's the proposed additions on as far as the footprint goes um our proposed addition for the um half story is located centralized on this building footprint the current lot um you know there isn't a lot boundary line that exceeds 150 that is the largest lot line and that's located here along the southern line that um AB buts up to the U Municipal Water Treatment Facility um so with the size of the property as um Arney mentioned it is an unbuildable lot if I were to take the offsets of that um ra 130 Zone and take 100 feet from the front side or the two frontages and the rear you know I I would essentially be creating a um non-buildable area like the setbacks don't even allow for any sort of buildable area on this slot so just the when you say it's not buildable you mean within the confines of the of the current setback requirements correct yeah the the not buildable within the confines of the setback requirements of the R8 130 Zone um you know so our additions um as I pointed out are shaded in Gray here they are predominantly towards the rear of the lot we tried keeping it towards the rear south portion of the lot to try and keep it as far away from the road as possible to try and respect the setbacks as much as possible when designing this we we did use the closest Zone to this size property that we just felt was um uh acceptable and that was the ra15 zone and and we did kind of design around those parameters of the setbacks and we do comply with them all while understanding we were maintaining the existing footprint of this house and trying to work with the existing home as much as we could um another sorry you said ra15 ra correct yeah because I believe that's 15,000 feet minimum lot size the next one was 25 which is 20 5,000 so we're 19 and we were closer to ra15 and Frank just to reiterate some of the things I mentioned just on the record despite those setback variances that we need the application does comply with building coverage and impervious coverage correct for sure and yes I was going to mention that as well um and those are really the only improvements that we're we're talking about making on this lot we're not asking to regrade the lot substantially uh we're not asking to create this um you know large impervious area um where maintaining the existing garages we're maintaining the existing driveway uh the only thing we are redoing um as a part of this proposed development is because of the new front covered porch we are installing new steps and a new walkway to lead to the driveway but very similar in nature to what was already existing there um beforehand so um you know aside from that the only other site improvements we're we're suggesting to make is just um Shifting the fences all to be compliant with the Zone in ordinances but aside from that we are not proposing much um disturbance to the current property as it stands today uh the proposed addition the footprint itself is um 400 square feet or 399 that was limited by um the D because we are in a flood zone um so as I get into the plans I'll just explain we did Elevate the the addition slightly only about a foot and a half above where a current um basement or ground floor level is to comply with that flood zone um and Frank that was going to lead to my next question the application complies with the building height requirement uh yes yes we we do comply with the building height requirement for the municipality okay oh you want to go into the proposed uh sure architectural so uh yeah I'll get into the the pretty picture stuff now so just just identify the sheet and this was all on the packet as well yes okay so the sheet I just flipped to this is the first set of the architectural plans and this is um VA 0000 Z on this sheet we just have some uh conceptual renderings really just to show the improvements aesthetically that we are proposing to make to this house um we are proposing a tutor Style with some Modern flare to it um but predominantly stucco exterior some Composite Materials black frame Windows uh to focus you a little bit on the front facade so this is what's facing Lake Valley Road you know essentially the bulk of what's below here this roof line is what's currently or was currently there today it still is there but it's fire damage what we're proposing is this centralized addition which um in conformance with being a habitable attic or a half story it's mostly confined within the roof line of that uh second floor so what we're proposing in our mind wasn't even adding too much to the mass at the rear of the building um and I'll get into it a little bit more in the elevations but essentially we're asking for this volume here is our two-story Edition so that includes the and and I'll get into the stories our ground floor is considered the first story because everything's a story about upgade so we have no basement here we have nothing that's Subterranean most likely to do with the wetlands and the flood elevations um so it's a two story um but more or less a raised Ranch that's the only volume the only other addition we're proposing to add is this deck along the rear here um it is cladded in masonry but it's not a solid um masonry Terrace it does have openings to it so it doesn't seem as messy and bulant bulky as as a typical masonry Terrace would appear um additionally it's all compliant with the setbacks that we were um going off of as well as the coverages the next sheet here is VA 100 this is the existing floor plans not much to talk about here but I just want to bring up the existing house is currently a four bedroom home um has your typical living space it has two car garages um you know typical kitchen living room very characteristic of homes that were built throughout the 70s and 80s of these raised Ranch styles um the next sheet va2 200 here I have the first floor plan so this is our ground floor plan as well as our second floor plan the addition we're proposing is located at the rear of the home back here the addition again is about 399 square feet or roughly about 16 feet deep by about um was it 23 feet wide and that's this portion here that is spelled out the covered patio it's roughly about the same dimensions just on the opposite side of that to extend to the other end of the home on the first floor again our our second floor would be over this portion here we are proposing to bump out the first floor a little bit but it's not at into our footprint because it's going to be Canal levered um and that is to get the clients a slightly larger kitchen and living space um and all in all with all the improvements we're only adding one extra bedroom so we're only bumping it up from a four bedroom to a five- bedroom very characteristic of many homes that I work on today and many homes I believe in the area as well I think our planner can definitely get into that more um but aside from that you know the program is pretty standard for a house of today's needs with a primary Suite um bedrooms for kids a playroom dining area kitchen and an outdoor area to enjoy um their property I think I think that pretty much covers it from architectural perspective um the next floor va21 sorry it's just showing the uh half level but you can see we're really not adding much program up there aside from a study office space um and a fitness area most of that is voided space that's going to be cathedral ceilings from the floor below and then finally the elevations which here I can show you we do have a dimension from our average grade to the top of the highest Ridge our new Ridge and it is at 34 foot7 which is compliant with 35t Building height again most of the mass we're added on the front of the structure is centralized on the building so trying to respect the um adjacent property lines mainly our one neighbor to um the East there um and then on the rear really this is the mass that we're we're talking about that we are proposing to this structure right here um you know just a two-story structure with the uh one-story open deck that uh we are proposing again materials modern tutor style home we're going to have some composite sidon on there predominantly stucco going to have some metal roof accent um you know all stuff to just try and make the home beautiful and fit in with its surrounded context and then that is my last sheet okay M yes Mr chair c can either of you talk a little bit more about the the nature of the damage to the house from the fire because when I when I look at what I've seen um on Google Maps and then what this is just an absolutely beautiful rendering by the way if I ever need to have my house redone I know who to call it looks like two different home completely two different homes so can you talk a little bit more about the the nature of the damage and how much renovation to the existing structure is going to be needed to create this beautiful home sure I mean um you know as far as the existing house goes like you're 100% right it's it's a facelift and I'm not going to beat around the bush I don't think we still really fully understand how much of the ex exting structure we can utilize yet I don't know if a contractor's really been in there yet to evaluate that we are utilizing the existing Foundation to the fullest extent um you know they're going to have to go through and and verify you know what stud walls they can use versus which ones they can't you know the house if you drove by it and you're driving by quickly you probably wouldn't notice it because there's there's fire damage on the outside there's boards on the windows but most of the extensive damage was on the interior of it um which you know we didn't even go inside to measure because it was extensive enough where we didn't feel comfortable walking there so you know we want to try and utilize as much as possible but at the same time we don't want to compromise on the construction for the improvements the clients are hoping to make but again the foundation 100% we're reutilizing that garages we're reutilizing that um you know where they are located we're not adding garages um and the additions are solely to that additional space on the rear of the house that we're seeking so it's it's not like you're going to be raising as best as you can tell you're not going to raise the the the current property and then start from scratch no not at all yeah even the first floor you know we're keeping the exist where the existing first floor was so we're not saying we're adding more steps to walk up to that first floor that's all staying the same okay thank you no problem any otherin questions I just have one question um in the letter of denial it was it was referenced to 3 AC units were F which were sort of facing Lake Road um suggest recomendation that move to to another location on the property was that accommodated for um it does not seem like it was accommodated for on this side plan but we we would be more than happy find a different location we can make that subject to your board Engineers approval where where we put the hbac units that's F there yeah yeah there's no tie to having them there we can certainly work out another location Mr Hansen any questions just got one question that I brought up in my uh in my general summary um I don't know if this would be considered an expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming structure because we would lead that up to the building department if more than 41% is remaining after demolition then it would be considered new construction I believe yeah I I would you know my notes myself I saw that Dave was to really treat it as it was an expansion I think they're trying to save it you know and if it turns out that they don't save it then fine right right okay that that that was my main concern um was that um um I didn't know how to classify this because it is an expansion of the existing footprint but if it's new construction it's not an expansion right other than that uh moving the air conditioners we do have rules and regulations that say air conditioners can't be in a front yard so they got to get moved around so okay that's fine certainly and I apologize for that I don't have a problem with anything else and Dave the Height's okay at 34t with the way we measure you know 20 feet from the corners as we're good yes okay yeah it's just shy at the 35 maximum okay you know what we can do since this is going to require an asilt survey after construction's finished ask them to recalculate the height sure thank you Yep this portion of the meeting I'll open it up to public public uh questions for this witness please come forward state your name address hi Josh Kel I'm and address so would you would you spell your last name sure k a g l i me one g l bagel with a K gotcha okay and your address that usually gets a joke um one Ras and Road okay just one question that you raised and that's actually why I came the you said something about the fence line um if you're on Lake Valley Road going north you cannot see to the to the right sorry going across Lake Road because of the fence line so is that something that that you're contemplating change so you're talking about like a side triangle issue yeah so when you're at the stop sign if you turn if just with kids driving and everybody driving that area I have no issue as we said with the air conditioning units making sure your engineer is good with the placement of the fence to make sure that there's no sideline issues I mean we can we can work on that typically when you get to an intersection the fence has to be a little bit lower so you can see yeah so we're happy to work with your engineer on that to make with the board's engineer rather yeah I was about to say not uh no happy to work with with Mr Hansen just to make sure that that that that is a proper you know within the means and methods conditions that's fine as as construction is slowing down they'll have to go for a separate fence permit and at that time we can locate sure where the fence is uh if it's going to be changed you were saying you were going to be moving in R so we'd have to look at yeah that's only for the benefit of the applicant too they have small children and kids so you don't want you know yeah the main fence that we've talked about was really this fence along the rear yard line and pushing that closer to the proper line again our intent is everything to be compliant with the Burrow's ordinances with everything behind the fence the property yeah so yeah that was the only concern is that going one one way is you're getting closer to the fence line so well well here I mean this is away from the inter it's opposite side of the property so I think the area you're talking about is probably here because that's what would be but I I know there you know sorry it's hard to see for you yeah I was about to say what you're pointing at you're you're up here at the intersection and you're probably point exactly that's we're talking about the fence back here we discussed moving that closer to that property line so it's it's while it's not part of your concern I I do agree with you and you know obviously we want to make it safe and we we're willing to comply with all the municipal ordinances for Sight lines and site triangles at an intersection other than that as being a resident it's lovely home I mean I think it's understandable to to redo it thank you that it any other members of the public questions for thisness hearing that and seeing that we'll close the public portion okay our last witness Mr chairman is our professional planner Matthew Flynn you raise your right hand please you Solly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you got I do and your sorry state your name please and yeah Matthew Flynn fly YNN business address 101 Gibralter Drive Morris Plains New Jersey my education comes from Ruckers I have my master's degree in planning and public policy I have my professional planner license in the state of New Jersey as well as my U National licenser which is the aicp license and your license is current it is okay board will accept Mr Flint okay Matt just to go through some of the foundational questions you've been to the site in the surrounding area I have you rev viewed all the plans heard all the testimony yes and you've also analyzed the relevant portions of the zoning ordinance and the master plan yes all right so why don't you give an overview from a zoning perspective and then we can get into the justifications for the variances sure so as the board knows we are in the OSG which is the open space governmental use Zone which does allow for single family uh detached dwellings so long as they comply with the ra 130 Zone which is a Zone that's intended for 3 acre lots uh 130,000 square foot Lots whereas our lot is 19,000 square feet just over that um so we do have to look at those requirements although I would say that there is a hardship like our architect mentioned seeing that if we were to look at a zone that requires for that large of a lot looking at the setbacks that are prescribed for that size of a lot we would be left with pretty much no buildable area so that brings in what I'll get to in a minute which is the C1 hardship test the other thing I wanted to just point out by way of background is we are at a corner lot on the corner of Lake Valley Road and Lake Road uh it's sort of interesting like I said we are in the USG Zone which does permit single family reverting back to that zone that I mentioned but I will say across Lake Road is the ra15 Zone I think the architect mentioned that zone as well being that that might be a more compatible Zone to look at in terms of our lot area and also across Lake Valley Road the other street that we have Frontage on that's the ra25 zone so I actually looked at both of those zones as well as the Zone that's catty corner to us which is the ra 35 zone so there's actually a lot of different kind of zoning requirements going on at this particular intersection um that I think is probably worth noting uh so with that I think just to jump into the proofs um like I said the C1 hardship test again hardship being that if we look at that uh 3 acre lot uh requirements we're looking at setbacks that would render this lot into in utility um and I think that pretty much speaks for itself uh the C2 test which is this the balancing test we look at the benefits of the application outweighing um the the negatives we look at the municipal land use law in terms of the benefits purpose a promotion of the general welfare um what I'll talk about is compatibility the proposed side setback and the proposed rear setback which are really the setbacks that are changing as a result of this application are actually compatible with what's required in pretty much all of those zones that I just mentioned um just to give the board some real numbers here uh that ra15 zone which requires 15,000 square feet um we would be compliant in terms of both side setbacks the combined side setbacks the rear setback uh likewise The ra25 Zone across the other Street we would also be compliant in terms of all of those setbacks um and I think that really speaks to the fact that this is going to blend in with everything that's happening all around us purpose G variety of uses in appropriate locations again this is a permitted use in the zone and I think that this is an appropriate uh use of the of the property purpose eye desirable visual environment again we saw the highly aesthetic architecture that that was just up on the board there um purpose M efficient use of land I think this is really an important Point um we comply with both building coverage and impervious coverage for that large lot so we have 9.6% building coverage just as an example we would be allowed 10% in the uh ra 130 Zone we would be allowed uh up to um up to 20% in the zone across lak Road and we would be allowed up to 15% across the other Street there in the other Zone um whereas again we're at 99.6% so this is a relatively small building we have an under undersized lot and I would say we have a proportionately undersized building so all of that goes towards the positive criteria the fact that this is going to be a compatible structure with everything that's happening around us in terms of the negative criteria no substantial detriment to the public or to the Zone again I would say substantial compliance with the requirements of everything that's going on around us it's not going to stand out um and I would say the compliance with those proportional requirements which are the coverage requirements I think uh are more important than complying with the setback requirements which wouldn't change no matter how big or small the lot is uh so all said I just wanted to give the board some some real numbers to look at in terms of whether this is an appropriate use of the space whether the size and the setback measurements are are appropriate given the size of our lot and I think that there are some some good proofs on the record at this point that that support the application and Matt your your comparison with the other zones that are liter surrounding the property would that go to substantial impairment to the Zone plan and Zone ordinance that this proposal would not would not substantially impair that prong of the negative criteria yes so you believe that as a from as a planner that both the C1 criteria for hardship is met and a C2 that the benefits substantiate way the detriments are met absolutely yeah and the applicant really only needs to uh meet one of those tests in order to justify an approval and I think in this case uh the applicant does meet both thank thank you Mr chairman thank you board members any questions Mr Hansen nothing all right I'll now open it to the public portion the meeting if any people public have any questions for this witness the planner please come forward seeing none hearing none close the public portion thank you and anyone have any uh members of the Public Public comment on this application now would be the time to come forward to State any public General comments that you may have hearing none and seeing thatone I'll close the public portion okay that concludes our presentation Mr chairman members of the board like I said it's somewhat of an unusual situation based on the zoning and based on what occurred I think the applicant put on the proofs for the C1 and C2 test there were two conditions that I noted that we uh contemplated during the the application which was moving the HVAC units um for the direction of your board engineer and also ensuring that that fence um I guess that's at the intersection doesn't obstruct any sight lines in his conformance there so with those two conditions and based on the testimony I would respectfully request that the board Grant the application as proposed so thank you very much everybody thank you Mr some stipulations well just the those two um conditions with respect to relocating the HVAC units pursuant to Mr Hansen's letter obtaining the fence permit um when they install the fence and keeping it out of a sight lines let me just take a look I don't think there's anything else they will require an as built survey to recalculate height yes sure when you're uh completed think that was it okay excuse me are we going to do expansion of a non-conforming structure yes okay that's it well Mr chair based on those conditions um and the applicants um expertise I think that um we should approve this um this application I'll make a motion that we approve it thank you Mr Mr Williams Mr thank you roll call M Simmons yes Mr Williams yes Mr yes yes yes great thank you everybody okay we'll have that resolution for you for the next thank you good to see [Laughter] [Music] next the agenda is the application Walton ba- 11-24 22 Concord Lane again this proposed construction of a playground area set I might not be as fancy as the others that have so far yeah um my name is Christine Walton this is my husband Chris before we even do that I'm going to ask you to stand both you and raise your right hand so they will swear you in so do you solemly swear that the testimony you will give to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you gu I do okay and now we can have names okay I'm Christine Walton this is my husband Chris Walton um we live over just right here on conquered Lane um we bought the house in 2019 I actually grew up in that neighborhood my parents still live there my sister and brother-in-law live on simore um so all all stayed very close um we are seeking a variance to add a play area a swing like an area to put a swing set um to our what we thought was our backyard it turns out we actually have two front yards because while we Face conquered we also back up to Woodland and so our backup to Woodland is considered a second Frontage um and so because of that the play area would not be within the setbacks that are required ired um so the play area would be 20 by 25 um runof-the-mill swing set you bought it at Costco um you know kind of two levels up a couple of slides three swing areas um we have a two-ear old daughter who only wants to be outside all the time um and so we are um hoping to put it kind of in the back corner of the yard um I I did um provide some photos of the backyard um I believe you have but I also um printed out a couple copies that I can give to to each of you or well you can share um so these all the same these are all the same okay so I'm going to just take one of them and just for the record we're going to mark this is A1 today is just the whole yard photo the backyard the backyard yes okay so the back yeah so A1 is a picture of your rear yard or backyard yes grass area with an existing fence that's right yes and so it is fenced on either side um and we would want to put the play area kind of where that corner is so that we can still retain you know a portion of the rest of the yard for other um so it would be in that back section where the corner is about three feet or I guess probably a bit closer because it it from the property line um so maybe about two feet from the fence so the The Back Fence there is Woodland and the side fence is the corner lot on conquered and Crest View um the the fence is probably about six and a half feet tall um so that's I can I'll pause maybe on the swing set portion because then we have a second um portion of our Varan application if I may Mr chair sure so I'm looking at that photo I see um some foliage back there trees bushes and do they go through the length of your backyard which actually is your front yard on Woodland they do so there is also an easement between there's a fence on our on our side and the the next yard also has a fence and there's an easement in between because there's the gas lines there and so there is some kind of brush there that's technically on our neighbor's property and then there are kind of bushes and trees on Woodland in the I guess it's an easement there as well behind our fence okay so there's there's foliage between the back of your property yeah and then this photo was taken just the other day got it yeah got it well you see there behind all that you see there behind the fence where the Big Pine Tree is that's right away for Woodland for Woodland got it and just a clarify there is another chaining fence behind that fence that's right that chaining fence that's behind that fence that comes to the corner there on Woodland is your neighbor's fence so our neighbors have both well no I think the chain I don't there's a chain link they also have a wood fence that is on like on their yard and then there's also a chain link this is our fence but then you can't see it in this photo but another there's another fence on the other side of those bushes that's our neighbors also same height wooden fence and there's also sorry goes along um yeah so that's their fence that's this person SE another CH there's a chain link fence here as well yeah on the survey there is a chain looking at that back left corner yes there is a chain like fence there um that's not the fence I was referring to that's our neighbors I was talking about the wooden fence um there's two fences but I went to the yeah I think it's I I honestly I don't I don't know who spend the chain link fences I'm sorry I kind of thought it was the township if I'm being honest because it extends like all along other property lines yeah it goes all the way the intersection and it goes down the on the other side Town doesn't own the developer install that okay you can't even see it yeah other fence yeah I've only found it going to retrieve the dog's toys over the fence and you believe that that that your Stockade Fence is about six feet high I think it's about six and a half feet high we have to stand on the Bottom Rung to be able to see over the M59 okay so that's the first portion the second portion of our variant request is to um consider two sheds that have been on the property since we purchased it um so again we bought the property in 2019 um both of the sheds are there when we bought the property we were told as kind of a condition for our certificate of continued occupancy that we had to move the one Shed off the property line because it was too close to the property line um you'll see in the photo that's called sheds um that we did at the time move move that shed as far as we could but there's a very large tree that prevented it from being moved any further um and at the time we did have someone come inspect it and they signed off that it had been sufficiently moved um and gave us our CCO we have been living there put the sheds up please so so just while we're waiting for the picture to come up your testimony is if we're looking at the survey there's the two sheds the shed closest to the right property line you did move that's right we moved it as far as get Tre we had landscaper come and pick it up and place it back down inent of the photo it looks from the survey it looks like you just move it over as much but large tree there and what they did is they actually raised the shed up a little bit and moved it on to actually of that tree get it as close to that as I possibly so the one that's got the closed doors is the one that they were trying to move that's right yeah how far is that from the property line so according to the survey I believe it's about three and a three feet um it should be the survey it should be on the survey I think you have multiple surveys one has um one's our original survey which did not have it um the second survey that should be dated 2024 um should have the dimensions I believe it's I have it here um it shows it to be um back I think it's I think it's about 3 feet it scales it scales three feet yeah and what is the ru like three feet 5T requir requ yeah they're under 100 square feet so five Feet's required yeah and and the other part is you're not allowed to two sheds correct right ex yeah I understand but I don't were they permitted to have two sheds like was there I only found paperwork for one shed doesn't say the other shed didn't have paperwork right but uh um I don't have an answer for why there's two sheds I tried doing a paper trail on this and I couldn't okay so what all that means is the town doesn't have a record of a prior varant to allow it and we recognized it wasn't you that was there when you bought it so tonight if the board agrees you'll have paper that's why Mr Hansen suggested we add the shed the second shed to the variance yeah right and it looks like you couldn't put one large shed without taking down the tree correct and ideally we not like not to take that because it provides quite a bit of shape yeah okay we would not want you a lot of trees have been taken in our neighborhood yeah is that complet that's yes that's up yes I sorry there's one other thing in Dave's report though about the yard rain oh yes yes on the submitted plan that you have dated I it was received July 8th yeah was probably the submitt for this meeting uh the drain is now Loc at on their property and we approve a pipe going to the catch fa and there Road opening okay so it was on the other side of the fence with the water draining under the fence to the inwit it's now on their property so we're okay with it okay okay board members any questions just to be clear the two sheds you purchase the property in 2019 both of them were there at that time that's correct but we didn't have any record records of either one of them we have zoning approval for one shed however back when they purchased a house uh the CCO inspector was only looking at the inside of the house now they inspect the outside of the house um so got it they they inspect the yard and that's where it came up with with two shed two shed okay did the original variant permit 3et there was no original variant Vari for the one was just it was just one shed and I'm guessing it was I'm guessing it was the left sh on the picture but they just clarified that not by variance just by zoning permit yes okay board members any other questions Mr Hansen no I'm good this point a public portion uh if anyone in the public has any comments uh questions I'm sorry questions for the applicant please come forward hearing none seeing that I'll close the public portion open it up to public comments now if anyone has any comments uh on the application please come forward okay hello I am Joshua O'Neal O Apostrophe Nei l l from 24 simore Drive hopefully I can uh Mr chairman just um give some background here since I see no one else here and unfortunately Mr O'Neal I'm G ask you to raise your hand since this is comments I'm going to swear you in okay so do you solemnly swear that any testimony or statements you make to this board would be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you got I do okay thank you yep um as Christine said uh she grew up here they lived in the city they looked to move back here in 2019 the house that they ended up purchasing honestly had a lack of disclosures up front it took them many many more months to purchase the home than any other one that I've heard uh in recent times um the previous homeowner likely didn't pull permits for many of the things because I know that during the co and CCO process they came across fire blocking in the basement that needed to be done uh whole house generator that needed to be moved to a new location sheds that they moved um I think there was an exhaust hole of some sort in the garage so they spent thousands and thousands of dollars during an already expensive part of the closing process to mitigate those issues um and since then they have invested a significant amount of money improving the house they've put a small addition on they've uh uh improved the flow of the interior of the home and uh a various other things so they've invested to stay here they're looking to improve the backyard for their daughter my niece and their growing family hopefully so um I hope that you uh see what they've gone through already to improve based off of your prior recommendations or the town's prior recommendations um to bring the house and property up to Snuff if you will um and to improve it uh from from that point forward and that was it thank you without close the public portion comments board members some invation um Mr chair it's a slam dunk for me I mean they want a playground who are we to say kid can't have a playground it's just a shame you know if it was any other property it probably wouldn't have been an issue but because it's on Woodland and the other that's that's an issue um and the sheds is beautiful you can't do anything more with that I think you've done what you you needed to do you could do um and as a result of that I strongly recommend that we approve this application I'll second that motion simm yes William yes Mr yes Mr tber yes and Mr bber yes okay we will have that resolution for you at the next meeting okay do we have to attend the meeting no okay thank you now that we know how it works if you really have nothing else to do sure we have a two-year-old good luck yeah exactly thank you so much it could be an evening thing thank thank you guys good luck good night next item up on the agenda is other matters let's we have one issue or one line item on the agenda regarding the mount kemell track so Mr chairman this is we have a letter from Mr ino's firm maybe from him that's um just yeah requesting a one-year extension of the site plan approval that was granted by this board for SK Mount kemell Associates if you recall that was the one that really provides driveway access to the property and Harding um under the municipal land use law I can tell you the board is actually required to Grant it says does they shall Grant an extension if you're satisfied that the developer has been prevented from moving forward due to um other approvals that they haven't obtained and that they have been trying uh to OB those approvals and in his letter he goes into pretty good detail about what those other approvals are and the status and how they've been trying and so my recommendation would be to uh approve the one-year extension I'll make a motion that we approve the oneye exlamation i i i resolution yes I should just let the board know we've worked with bowler engineering on and off now for about the last four months plans are almost there uh Joe Fishinger our traffic expert is working with Brad bowler personally to just finalize the location of a couple signs that he thinks are conflict so we're almost there for sign and seal PL for Signature there was a line item on here for public comments um seeing the members of the public in attendance I will move on to uh adour the meeting well I want to let you know Mr chair that after 20 years I think you did a um Yan's job thank you three applications in one hour I tell you commed lessons learn best practices build efficiencies thank you thank you for your coms I apprciate I