I'd like to call to order this January 22nd 2024 reorganization and regular meeting of the P moris for judment I don't think that's me sorry let inv for notice have been made inord with the open public meeting act and statement certifying the been ex please join me for the pl ofes thank you I will at this time I will ask Mr oler to please uh Minister the oath of Allegiance and the O of office to Mr Paul Woodford you raise your right hand please repeat after me um I do solemnly swear I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey and the constitution of the state of New Jersey and I will bear faith and I will bear faith and Allegiance and allegiance to the same to the same and to the governments and to the governments established in the United States established in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people under theth authority of the people so help me God so help me God and the O of office I do solemnly swear I do solemnly swear that I will Faithfully that I will faithfully impartially impartially and justly perform and justly perform all the duties of the office of board of adjustment all the duties of the office of the board of adjustment regular member regular member according to the best of my ability according to the best of my ability so help me God so help me God right thanks welcome back what I dooll call now Mr goldber here Mr rman here Mr tractenberg here Mr Schuster here Mr Beno here Mr framer here Mr wooder here Mr oler here Mr Hansen here here at this time I will entertain nomination for chairman of the board of adjustment for the year 2024 I'd like to nominate Paul Woodford I'll second it any other nominations can I have a second you had second already oh I'm sorry all in favor I we move Mr chair you may have your [Music] [Music] chair okay all right next is the selection of a vice chairperson do I have any nominations I nominate Lee Goldberg I have a second second I have samanth Andor Andrew Tren any other n Mr jaberg okay any other uh nominations if not may have a roll call or not a roll call but a um vote as to the uh selection of Lee Goldberg's Vice chairman in all in favor I opposed congratulations next we have several resolutions first being the um designation of Richard oler as legal counsel aoll this yes okay any questions about the um resolution if not uh Sonia can you have uh please call the rooll Mr Goldberg yes M rman yes Mr tackenberg yes Mr Schuster yes Mr bore yes Mr Kramer yes Mr wer yes so move thank you everyone next uh the um resolution uh design ating um Paul Phillips as the planning consultant any questions about the resolution if not M uh Santiago can you please need a oh can I have a motion motion second thank you do all in favor all in favor opposed next is the uh resolution designated Joseph Fishinger as the traffic consultant any questions under the resolution if not I'll entertain a motion move it have a second second thank you all in favor I any opposed next is the designation of Christopher melik as the licensed land surveyor for this board question okay thank you second thank you all in favor oppos next we have um professional appointments meetings um yes we have the uh resolution for the meetings for the year 2024 and for January of 2025 any questions please note that in April it is the fifth Monday of the month I have a motion motion thank you second second thank you all in favor all oppos next we have a um resolution for the designation of the official newspapers of this board any questions on this if not can I have a motion motion to approve okay do I have a second second thank you all in favor any opposed okay what do we have next okay professional appointments for the year 2024 so we have David Hansen as board engineer assistant engineer I mean alternate engineer would be Jim SL Jim slay Berard Sanger Berard Sanger and Sonia Santiago as the board secretary very pleasure thank you thank goodness um move to all to approve all those appointments yes I have a second second all in favor opposed you're back Sonia job security next moving to our regular meeting first resolution is that of um ba1 18-23 Mr oler thank you Mr chairman this resolution is a memorializing resolution with respect to the application filed by Christopher white uh Mr White applied to this board for permission to remove an existing 8 foot by 10 foot shed and replace it with a 10ft by 18t shed in the rear yard creating a rear yard setback to the new shed of ft where a minimum setback of 25 ft is required side yard setback of 5T where 20 ft is required and creating a combined sidey yard setback of 15.13 feet where 50 feet is required that property is at 17 Normandy Boulevard in the ra15 single family Zone district and for the reason set forth um in the resolution it was um it was conditionally approved with our standard conditions okay any questions on this resolution if not I'll entertain a motion to approve the uh application in line with this resolution so move have a second second M Santiago Mr Goldberg yes Mr tractenberg yes Mr ker yes Mr Schuster yes Mr Woodford yes so move next resolution is on ba 21-23 for Michael lock um who applied to the board for permission to permit a 6ot x 21t expansion of an existing non-conforming garage to create a 21 foot by 22 foot G garage which uh required several variances including sidey yard rear yard combined sidey yard impervious coverage building coverage and uh the expansion of a non-conforming structure um for the reasons that were set forth in the resolution that application was conditionally granted with our standard conditions and the property is at five Sherman Place in the ra7 zone okay any questions on this resolution if not I'll entertain a motion motion approve resolution have a second second thank mren M Santiago Mr Goldberg yes Mr tackenberg yes Mr Kramer yes yes Mr Schuster yes Mr Woodford yes so move okay you want to make an announcement on the you so um in the event there's any members of the public here we do have some correspondents from applicant Michael Ying from his attorney indicating that they have um requested to be carried from tonight's hearing into a date when the board can hear it they were requesting February Sonia I think our February agenda is uh full yes it is what would be the next available date then that would be March 25th March 25 is that agreeable to the board yes you need any kind of uh requirements for an extension on that are we okay with time uh yes so then for any members of the public who might be here regarding Michael Ying's application on 40 Springbrook Road that application is not being heard this evening it will be carried to March 25th there'll be no further notices um to you from the applicant okay all right next we have uh ba-15 d23 Mr chair I need a a moment okay be right back all right you can get it started why you come on up and get set up they Yep they're ready to go to draw your mic can you turn on your microphone please just push the button there you go you have the green light it Mr Broden you could use that one too if you need to address the exhibits okay you know what let me go turn on the [Applause] [Music] prer has returned and ready to start good morning Miss call good morning good morning good evening good good evening Mr chairman members of the board congratulations on your reappointments Simone c c Law LLC on behalf of the applicant the bertrams um why don't you give us a short review as to where we are and what you propose to do tonight you got it um as the board may recall we were here back on October 23rd where you heard from our two witnesses um the applicant is proposing a two-story addition to the house located at 8 Hillview Terrace youve heard details as to the design proposal from Jeff roding and then we brought up our planner to go over the planning proofs and this is where we stopped um we were concerned with a lot of the questions from the board members requesting information as to the neighborhood and how our proposal fits with the neighborhood so what we've done since October was our experts have done their research pulled data and we plan to show the board this evening how our proposal does in fact fit with the character of this neighborhood both of our experts are back this evening I plan toef and call them in order first Mr roding is going to discuss his findings and show the board some exhibits and then we will conclude with Mr Ricky who will continue his planning proofs unless there's any preliminary questions we can jump right into it Mr roding was sworn in at the last meeting yeah but we'll do it again new year new day got it would you stand up please Jeff 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 God thank you sorry I got to I'd like to do a little bit of housekeeping first and that is U uh there was a question that came up about the size of the first floor uh of the of the home being a little bit uh oversized uh we about ,500 Square ft or so on the first floor level um and as you recall it was going to be a first floor one story living environment for U my client's elderly mother uh initially and then uh ultimately they'll probably move in the house themselves uh the uh just to describe the first floor again um the the only thing on the first floor is a living room kitchen a breakfast area a laundry room and a master sweet um in addition to that there's a garage and a wraparound porch uh that uh constitutes about 700 square feet of the 1500 square feet that we show on the plan so over half of that is non-living space so it certainly is not an ex an expansive uh first floor living it's it's it's quite modest actually if we consider the size of the house and the balance of the square footage is on the second floor so uh we feel it's very appropriate in size uh Sony can I ask to get the slides up yes Jack so in response to your concerns about the the the rest of the area and the neighborhood we had engaged a uh aerial survey from uh dpk Consulting uh they flew uh the uh immediate surrounding uh what you see on the board there is a an exhibit uh showing 58 lots and that's the extent of what this era coverage to handle at that point before you keep going I just want to see where we left off uh exhibit numbers yeah I'm going to mark that I don't think we marked any I I don't we did either okay right to the plan that we we're to mark that is exhibit A1 and just for description um Jeff would you just describe it title it and if You' like I have four exhibits very similar U so this one being A1 uh we we we called it uh drawing za1 uh this is an exhibit which shows uh the surrounding properties and shows the fully compliant Lots meaning uh lots that meet the bulk standards uh within the ra15 Zone within this within this area here so the the five highlighted lots that you see on the property are see on the exhibit are the only lots that comply to the bolt uh setbacks within the Zone in this neighborhood so five out of 58 five out of 58 so about 8 and a half% or so compliant to the uh to the full uh extent of the Zone in this neighborhood uh if we go to uh the next exhibit uh it's exhibit za2 so I'm going to call that A2 for our purposes and that's za2 y okay and again just give me a what that is Z2 uh is an exhibit that shows the lots that comply to the lot area The Zone requires a 15,000 sqare foot minimum lot area uh within the 58 Lots shown only 13 of the Lots uh comply to the uh to the lot area and that's about 22 and a half% or less and a quarter of the 58 uh are are compliant to the lot are if I go to exhibit 8 Z3 we can label that A3 yep A3 y A3 um this is this shows uh front yard setback compliance uh there are um 37 lots that are predominant ly are in the front yard setback U which you see say that again differently 37 37 lots that encroach upon the front front yard setback they're and and and physically are predominantly within the front yard setback there are 10 of those lots the darker shade blue you see on the screen there on za3 uh that are holy in the front yard setback so front yard setback is behind the house so it's it's a 50 yard it's a 50ft setback which really isn't um uh set up well in this in this uh this Zone um and and that represents almost 63% of the Lots uh are predominantly in the front yard setback but there's another 13 of those or 8 86 and a half% are not compliant to front yard setbacks within the 50 58 that are there so U it's it's a you just one those numbers again sure yeah 37 you have 37 in total that are predominantly in the front yard setback 10 of which are wholly in the front yard setback and there's another 13 in violation to the front yard setback and that brings it to like a when you say in violation meaning it encroaches on the front yard set back but is that part of the 37 no no there's an additional 13 on top of that so there's 10 that are wholly in the front yard setback 37 that are substantially encroach in on it right another 13 that don't meet it don't meet it but they sort of edge their way in right correct so there's 86% of the that those 58 lots are non-compliant relative to their front yard set there and then my final exhibit which is A4 uh shows uh the and and this is U za4 the labeled A4 uh this shows the lots that are over the 45% imperious coverage there are five of them that are over 45% uh one of which is 52% or so uh but our our lot there is highlighted in the green the other the other four that you see there uh are over the coverage percentage and and uh I should say this is these are approximate numbers but I'm told that the aerial uh is within four or five feet accurate so it's it's it's significantly uh uh um accurate in my opinion the uh so five of the 58 U or 8% 8 and a half% uh are non-compliant to the 45% uh maximum coverage and uh we're at our what our proposal was at 48.5% so we're three and a half% over the over the required coverage what we're asking for uh we're going to have these exhibits available for the uh plan to provide his proofs as well uh but as you can see from the the aerial most of these lots are similar in nature and non compliant to both standards uh of the ordinance um as we are requesting relief as well so right now uh your proposal is 48.5% coverage is that correct that's correct and how many square feet would you have to remove to get it down to the 40 5 that is permitted we would have to remove 227 square fet is there any place in this design that would allow you to do make any type of uh I'm sorry Mr could you repeat that question again I want to be sure I that he'd have to reduce the square footage by 227 square feet in order to comply with the uh uh maximum permitted uh improved coverage that correct yes that's correct 227 on the first floor on on the whole uh foot footprint on the on the lower level yeah because it's coverage well it's on a whole lot so uh you know we could remove uh the turnar around at the end of the driveway uh do we have a our PL still Sonia or is it I'm sorry the original architectural plans do you have those as well I thought from the first meeting from the first meeting from the first first meeting architectural plans put up cover sheet the cover sheet yeah with the on if uh if you recall on the on the right hand side of the the home it was a long extended driveway that's pre-existent long extended driveway that goes down in the end of the garage from the from the rear the main dwelling uh there's a tail on the end of that uh Road uh that provides for a turnaround out of the backup area turn around out of the garage uh that if that went away that would constitute the that would get rid of the 200 yeah I think we should look at that so we can determine whether that's feasible or is that going to be like mud all over the place well no would well it would it wouldn't be pavement it would end up being grass but the problem would be uh one of logistics it is a narrow side yard and if somebody's using the driveway they would have to either go in the garage or uh block the driveway way for another car to get in and this affords essentially a parking space at the tail end of the the driveway so you can use the driveway in the garage without blocking the road so it's it's it's a uh it's a little bit of a hardship had we uh try to get rid of that um the other thing you could do is lose the wraparound por aspect of of it but uh you feel that that's part of the the character that makes it uh fit into the neighborhood because right now to recall the original pictures there was a there was a jousy closed in porch that really was unattractive right my my client really wants to make this fit and and provide a nice wraparound porch uh on it so if you look to the lower left of the plan there you'll see that there's a an extension that goes all the way almost all the way back to the rear property line that affords one one car uh to be able to sit there uh and get out of the way of another car coming in on the left hand side board members any feelings about the the uh rear parking space basically that a way to turn around parking area turn around parking area are we good with the the uh 485 because we're going to have to if we want to cut something we should discuss it with the applicant as to what they want to do and whether they want to just not do anything and just put it up for a vote but we have to give them that right with the constrained sort of property setup I mean I don't I I I don't think it makes sense to sort of have them you know lose that mechanim there to be able to park a car and make it a usable sort of normal uh flow and and you know it is a constrain lot so I I I I personally don't think that's that's an issue okay any other people want to weigh in on that yeah I I think uh you don't want to trim there I'm wondering could you take a couple feet off the porch front and side in order to comply uh we would have to lose the entire uh wraparound portion of that porch we we would be left with a a little covered set of steps in the front uh so uh if if if they have a whole setup there maybe we can look at the the elevations but the uh the wraparound porch we thought was the was the key to the aesthetic of this house uh the other thing I I should have noted too is that the the distance between uh our home this home here and the neighboring home to the left as you're looking at it from the street is in excess of 60 feet and most most of the homes in this neighborhood are within 20 feet of one another you if you look at the zoning map so there's plenty of room to accommodate visually uh the the massing of this house we did try to keep the house the roof lines down lower too you'll noted in the in the original plan we went with lower plate Heights in a lot of instances so we did try to play the massing uh as Bo board members any question any further questions sh I have a question yes is it your proposal to combine these into one lot no sir no the were not the it's a 65t lot that were remaining at 65 but they were originally subdivided if you recall the last testimony U the the line the property line had shifted the previous drawings you showed of the 58 Lots in the different categories that of non compliance do you have any of those showing this house with the improvements in relation to the other houses uh only well it's gone only only the the survey that we have there that you saw on the scen so I found that to be very helpful I thought if you had your house with the improvements with all the other houses it kind be easier to see it would it would be it would be similar to the house we have on the the left of us uh with the exception of the garage which is shown detached uh can we go back to exhibit Za okay so the house immediately to to uh the left of us that uh if you looked at the uh massing of the house and the free the free standing garage and essentially attach those that would be the the size of that same footprint so uh you see the green lot there um on exhibit za4 let me bring it up here or za3 same thing green just to the right of that in this plan if if uh you were to attach that detach garage there that would be essentially massing similar uh massing to what we have on our L I'm sorry now I have it up if you were to do what so uh to so if you look at the screen there next to the green U that the if you were to attach the garage to the house on the lot to the uh the massing the foot the massing of the house itself uh would be similar to what we have on our what we're proposing [Music] sorry what I was going to say any other board members with questions I just have a question about the um in terms of you know trying to to get within the um the allowable coverage for the for the the first floor bathroom um showing I believe is that sort of just like a giant tub or a giant there's a there's a tub in a shower store yeah there's there's a soaking tub in a shower how much um if that and it's showing there 18 feet I guess from the WID well I guess it's a total of 34 feet from the the wall of the bedroom back so if if right I looked at that uh if pulling that bathroom I mean like if it's a two-story Edition you pulled it in three feet would that give enough square footage well it's really only the square footage on the first floor that's accountable here so if we have to pull it in we have to get the whole 227 out of the first floor out of the first floor okay so the problem would be if we try to go say across the back of the house we'd have to lose about four feet of the back of the house to make that work and and that that would render the garage useless go yeah okay right thank you for clarifying board members any other questions Mr Hansen any questions no any members of the public have any questions of this witness please come up to the microphone and identify yourself and give you address coms not yet not not comments yet questions questions all right okay I have a question I'm sorry go ahead sure the garage doors open to the rear property right they actually open to the the side they open to the to the property on our right this is to the side yeah the side okay that's so that turnaround becomes quite important if you think about the depth there we only have about 20 feet or so so to be able to pull into back into that that portion and pull out yeah you might have to do a couple of right yeah it's it works but it's right okay all right thank you okay any other questions from board members based on that question is there any member of the public with questions those the public portion witness thank you Paul you're G you Mr R would you remain standing raise your right hand do 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 got and just for the record please State your Paul Ricky RCI thank you Paul in of prepared for this evening go through your planning grps again and pleas refer to those as need sure um if the board recalls you know I provided full planning testimony last time and I was going to you know summarize some of my conclusions and embellished based on uh the new information um a couple points the board likely recalls is that the the minimum lot size for the district here is is 15,000 square feet and here we have an existing lot that's 6,500 Square ft so it's a it's a property that's whever it came to be it exists today um and with with that said it's my opinion that there needs to be appropriate standards for this lot moving forward given the fact that it does have a high degree of of non-conformity um today if you looked at the The Zone plan um this lot is afforded a a building square footage of 375 square feet if it if it met all the setback requirements for the zone um what what I discussed last time is you do have other districts uh in in the town and I talked about your ra s District right that District requires a lot that's slightly larger 7,500 square feet um which is roughly 15% larger and this application would adhere to all the requirements of that of that zone um with the exception of the of the front yard set back which is non-conforming today and it's being changed within 1.32 feet of his of his existing condition and here the applicant is opening up the porch we think it's a nice embellishment to the house I personally like what Mr rding has done with the structure and how he's broken the structure up doesn't result in creating a lot of Mass from the street he turned the garage door which you don't see the garage door from the street so architecturally the home is is very nicely very Tastefully done um for sure um so when we speak to the intent and purpose of the Zone plan where you allow this size lot elsewhere in the township this application conforms um so I thought that spoke to the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and why this would not result in a substantial departure um the board asked some additional questions regarding some additional properties I think that speaks more to the character of the area and that how whether an application will will negatively impact the public good and the character of the area and you heard the testimony um um from from Mr rding that showed a large degree of non-conformity he said that uh 20% of the Lots don't meet the minimum lot size requirements these are approximate percentages based on his numbers 22.5% um only 22.5% comply with the minimum lot width requirement only 10% of the Lots complied with the required front yard requirement and and he said that only four Lots or 7% of the properties are fully compliant with the district standards if I got that correctly but nonetheless it was a very low it was a very low uh number uh in in total um at block uh 73001 lot 18 if I can bring the exhibit up there is a is a lot with a building coverage right at the intersection of of Hillview Terrace and and you say fanic correct fanic road I think I pronounced it wrong last time right um if we pull up at the intersection of H Hillview Terrace and and and fanic on the opposite side of the subject property is a corner lot four and that property has uh a building coverage of of 33.9% um it has impervious coverage of 49.3% a front yard is 17.54% 64 feet in a sidey yard of 8.29 feet so there's a lot in the immediate area that has conditions that are substantially more nonconforming uh than the subject property for that reason in the testimony provided uh by Mr rding U we don't believe that this this this property as proposed is out of character in the area we believe it it's it's been architecturally it's a custom home uh designed by by Mr rding that could be harmoniously integrated to this area it's broken up nicely um the wraparound porch and the side facing garage I think are are very Tastefully done architectural features uh in ones that would be a benefit rather than a detriment uh to the community that's that's board members any questions okay answer any questions no any members of the public with questions of this witness those the public portion C anything [Music] else Mr chairman um that concludes our presentation this evening I think um from the October meeting meeting and this evening you heard testimony that the design is appropriate the size certainly well before we go through your information uh as any members of the public wish to comment on this application your name and your address please Sharon vellis 5 Hill Terrace spell would you spell your last name please V is in Victor a r n e l a s and your address again five Hill viiew Terrace then would you raise your right hand please do you somly swear that any statements you make to this board will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God I do can you just tell us where you live in relation to this property I live directly across the street okay um yeah I I face my husband is also here John Baldwin we face that property fully um we've lived there for 32 years we're the longest term people on the Block um we welcome this Edition the house has been an eyes sore forever the the front porch they mention now is just you know it's awful looking it's terrible it's uh not pretty um we've reviewed the plan I've reviewed the plans and I'm very much for this uh what else did I want to say it's going to be beautiful we it's a dead end you don't get a lot of you don't get drive by traffic so nobody's even going to see much of this house um what else it's a very mixed neighborhood like he mentioned doesn't seem like a lot of things conform so every every window in our house faces this property so we really for it I don't know if you go down and and do you actually look at these places yes we do you do so you've been on the street yes we have yeah we're the house right across the street it pretty much looks to me like a vacant lot in in the middle between their beautiful house which they've already redone and the one they purchased for their mom board okay thank you thank you any other member to the public wish to speak find up your name and address please Michelle Foley 49 fanic Road M Foley would you raise your right hand please do you Solly swear that any statements you'll give to this board will be the truth old truth and nothing but the truth so hope you got I do and is it f o l y yes thank you uh my property is directly behind the law in question I'm sorry again and your address again 49 fanic thank you um we've lived there for over 20 years the is an existing garage structure uh on the back of the lot that once that's remove that will be a great Improvement our backyard we can see all of the the back of this house um I think the plans are appropriate and the visual aspect of it will be greatly improved I asked that the board approve these plans um even the garage that it's not facing the back of the property is acceptable to us as well it will greatly improve the visual effect and I think that's it okay board members any questions okay thank you thank you any other members of the public wish to speak if not I'll close the public portion now Miss Kelly thank you Mr chairman I will be brief our proposal is appropriate in size um this is an improvement aesthetically from that which exists today the proposal conforms to the neighborhood and this proposal will also enhance the neighborhood and I will leave it with that and respectfully request this board act favorably on our application and we thank you very much for your time thank you so my thoughts are initially when this application came in I was a little skeptical about it but I was familiar with the neighborhood uh I've been through that neighborhood many times uh and uh I I knew that many of the lots and properties on there were non-conforming so I really appreciate the um additional testimony you gave tonight it really brings all that into Focus all the nonconformity into focus and given that and given the lot size of 6,500 feet and that it will enhance the property and the neighborhood I would be in favor of this application but I'm welcome to hear what other people have to say any other board members wish to say anything Mr chairman yes um yeah I'd be happy to say something because like you I was very hesitant about this at first because it's one thing to say well this has a setback violation this is a setback violation but if you look at the the the scale the massing of this house compared to the property and the others I just it's large but I want to say that I put a lot of credence in the testimony of the neighborhood and the neighbors and I think that's very important and like you have to look at it it is at a dead end and it is a beautiful home the architecture is very nice and I was the one behind getting some architectural standards in the township so I'm very happy with this and um so all things considered even though I think it's massive if the neighborhood is happy with it then I'm happy with it and any other board member will comment just that the uh the comments the analysis that was done spot on yes that was very helpful we don't usually see something that presented that way right and I guess that brings it into Focus you already did so uh can I have a motion on this application i' like to make a motion that we approve this application based on the the testimony information provided tonight I think it's going to be a good addition to the neighborhood I'll second M Santiago roll call Mr Goldberg yes M rman yes Mr tackenberg yes Mr Schuster yes Mr benois yes Mr Mr Kramer yes Mr Woodford yes so thank you very much you're welcome thank [Applause] you next is ba- 23-23 yes Mr chairman this is application ba 2323 block 8303 Lot 4 70 Glenn Road in the ra15 zone for section c Patrick and Megan Luc an Lani Lani the tough one y okay applicant proposes the second story addition creating a sard setback of 11 feet where 20 ft is required applicant will also seek a variance for expansion of a nonconforming structure okay hi uh to the board members my name and Mr Hansen will you both be testifying tonight yes would you both please stand I'll sore you in at the same time great you solemnly swear that the testimony you'll give to this board will be the truth the whole truth of nothing but the truth so help you God and for the record would you identify yourself sure Patrick Lani I'm the homeowner along with my wife Megan at seven Old Glenn Road ASR and Mr rol um are you a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey yes I am and have you appeared before this board before I have years ago yeah and your license is current yes it is okay accept you as an expert okay you may proceed great thank you I saying good evening to the board members Mr Hansen um just briefly I introduced myself I'm patani uh my wife Megan is also a homeowner she was unable to um come today but sensor regards um I have two children in school district as well um and a dog and um I think this is why we it's a three-bedroom house one and a half bath so kind of out growing it so um my wife and I spoke and you know we put this off for many years then Co hit um and we're friendly with Bob benett who's our um contractor and we decide to go forward and see seek solutions to maybe uh expand the house um this house was built in 1940 the colonial it's a beautiful house uh up up um towards Madison AB I'm not sure driven by it but it's but it's small um it's a smaller home U what we're proposing is to just simply not um add on to the footprint but just add a um an addition over um the family room now the family room was many decades ago um the a garage actually and that was converted into a family room so what we're proposing is to flatten the um family room and just add an addition so uh spoke to you know our our contractor we submitted the permits and that was denied we find out that uh we we're in compliance with three sides of our house but the one side um on the side setback is less than 20 feet from uh the border of the house um I believe we're at 11 feet so this must have been non-conforming is my understanding maybe it wasn't but uh you know there is the structure there which is you know the family room so um so that's what we're seeking we're seeking a variance to uh build build up um and there's you know three considerations I would I would just uh like to say one is that as I mentioned we're not changing the footprint um uh we're just you know adding uh essentially a room on top of the family room um the second consideration there's it's the um height of the um addition Remains the Same it doesn't go higher than the height line now that's existing um and we're in the third consideration we're not encroaching we're not asking for more space on the um side setb it's essentially the same since we're you know we're not moving uh the footprint and the extented helped I did speak to our um you know the neighbor whose house it's affecting it's nine Oldman Road and he's you know he's like Hey listen go go right ahead it's great I'm all for it I'm not even what's that person from uh David Rhoden r n not sure if he's he travels a lot for work um not sure if he's able to attend via Zoom or not but I spoke to him a couple weeks ago uh about it so in essence um it would be adding a room and um I believe the plans and and the uh pictorial the graphics were submitted to the town and really it kind of it looks great from uh the street um it would add um it fits into the character of the neighborhood as well um and um you know we think that it's not going to be this monstrosity since it's it's really just uh adding on top of the um uh the existing um family room one other um note is that I I I I I don't have the the number of the of a house on Old Glenn Road it's definitely on the um odds side it's closer down to towards Woodland that did something similar a year or two ago I'm not sure if they needed a variance but they they expanded then they added um you know an addition up up top um and that was um you know I can get you I could you know submit to son I could submit that um add four five years okay okay thanks J yep um it was a while back and so um so you know and it and it fits in nicely into the neighborhood so um essentially that's that's that's really what kind of we hear to say and we thank you for your consideration and if you have any questions for architect or contractor well we'll hear from the architect in a minute um you indicated at one point you're G to Flat you're are you going to take down the existing family room or just build up because one time you said flatten and no right right it's a cathedral ceiling so yeah I didn't mean yeah so we're just essentially we're just adding um but it right now it's a cathedral ceiling on the family room okay um so there's no Garage on this project no garage and do you have plans for a garage in the future or I don't think there's room yeah garage would be great sure but no so this is not going to approach any further than what's already existing and that was built in 1940 so that would preexist the zoning ordinance depending when in the 40s 40 5 was our first zoning ordinance so if it was early 40s there was no zoning on in the town okay and I don't know what this Zone would have been back if it was 48 or 49 I don't board members any questions of this witness members of the public any questions of this witness okay he from the architect what he proposes good evening um um yeah 7 Old Glenn Road um um has a certain hardship in that um the building is placed in such a way on the property um that if it had been maybe it was pre ordinance um but it could have been placed entirely within the setback limits um but because of its circumstances where it's placed right now uh we have a sidey yard of about 11 and a half ft on the on on the left side um it Con uh complies with every other restriction um the this is the one restriction it doesn't comply with pre-existing non-conforming not seeking to um go any closer um just going straight up on top of the existing structure um the neighboring structure at nine Old Glenn Road to the left um is at a distance of 42 feet away from um um Mr luchin yani's uh house and um in terms of the spirit of the uh uh setbacks um a 20 foot setback requirement means about 40t between houses which these two properties would still maintain um so we're requesting that um uh you see this uh uh small this master bedroom Edition uh over an existing structure favorably uh so as to enhance um life for luchin yanis board members any questions members of the public any questions to this witness if not close the public portion anything else any any any comments you wish to make I no that's all thank you okay board members any comments on this appli I think it is a perfectly reasonable application um I think that but they're not really changing as they said the height of the cathedral ceiling will now instead be living space um you know I really feel like they're not asking us for very much at all here and this is a modest Edition that will make the house much more functional um so I I'm for this I have a second I think that's a move to that is a move to approve move to approve second yes thank you m Santiago Mr Goldberg yes Mr rman yes Mr tractenberg yes Mr Schuster yes Mr benois yes Mr prer yes Mr yes some thank you thank you okay next is ba2 24-23 Miss Santiago yes Mr chairman next application is ba-20 2423 Stephanie hornman block 3907 L 12 16 3 Western Avenue in the ra1 zone for section c applicant proposes construction of a 22x 40 foot twocc car garage creating a sard setback of 3.72 feet for 15 ft is required and a height of 24.25 Ft where 15 ft is allow good afternoon or good evening Mr chairman members of the board mark BL appearing on behalf of Mr blous who will be testifying tonight um I have three Witnesses this evening uh first Miss Horman will testify give you a brief overview of the uh property and for intentions next we will have our H project architect testify Mr burn and lastly our project engineer Mr horley okay all right when we have them all rise up raise hands and we can do it all together you somly 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 God and just if you would each um just identify yourselves for the record thank you okay all right well thank you uh if I may as Miss Forman testifies in order to put this application of context this is an application to reconstruct the garage that destroyed so what I'd like to do is offer up three photographs that show what was there before have M testify to those um and then we'll get to the professionals as to what it is that opposing uh what I've done Mr oler is I've taken one set put on the back a want fortify two thank you m Horman if you would give the board a little bit of a brief background on you uh your acquisition of this property and a little bit of the history of it if you know sure um I've lived in this house with my husband for over 40 years I love the township I'll just say that I raised my son here in the township um and I acquired the house and it had a two-car garage with storage above it and it was basically a Farm property I believe it's built in 1907 so it's a historic pretty much a historic property it's very old house and I love it back in 2014 uh we had a major snowstorm and the garage collapsed sorry what year was that excuse me which year 2014 14 um the roof collapsed into it and um I'm seeking a variance from you to rebuild the existing garage that was there with a few minor adjustments M if you would um can you describe ride for the board what is depicted in uh the photograph marked A1 yeah this was the original um garage uh you can see that it was a two-car garage and above it there was a barn door um and that was a uh flooring there hardwood flooring and we stored all kinds of containers based on the picture that you saw once it collapsed so it was all storage and um we used it we had our house is um unusable for storage we have a finished basement our attic is finished that's our master bedroom and the second floor has one full bath and two bedrooms so the how the house has no storage basically and we have no garage at this point Thank you and if you could describe uh what appears in photograph marked A2 Yep this is it um which was the garage and um we would pull in um the doors were smaller was built in 1907 so the garage was smaller so we had a smaller car in there but anybody that has an SUV or a larger vehicle couldn't pull into this garage because the doors was just too low so um but we use a ladder to get up to the stairs up to the second floor but now we would like have stairs inside so we don't have to place all these containers above our head um for storage thank you Miss Horman if you would describe what's depicted in this was a very sad day um when it was a beautiful day but we woke up and shot out of bed when we heard this crash uh the walls just caved in from the weight of the snow was a very heavy snow and and um all our belongings were a lot there was a lot of damage so we're very upset about it but hopefully after tonight we will have a new beginning thank you um and just so the records clear it is not your intention uh to ever utilize the second floor of that garage for residential no it's strictly storage thank you those are the only questions I have for Miss foran at this time can I ask um what have you been doing for storage for the last nine years uh I'm going to say this but I think my husband will be upset we've been using chadam Moving storage for the past 10 years so I think we're about do for a garage okay now um this this proposed garage is significantly larger than the prior garage it's actually smaller but you guys yeah you tell us about how large the original garage was was 94 square feet and now we're proposing I believe 890 I mean the guys the guys can speak to it Mr chairman I believe our professionals can give you the examp yeah but I was just like wondering because like the um survey shows um remains of a garage and then a pad in front of it and I was just wondering was that whole pad part of the garage yes okay that's where I was confused because it looked like you were doubling the size of the footprint of the garage and I wanted to get that make that clear I left the foundation when it fell um because I knew we were going to rebuild um eventually um so yeah the foundation there's still part of it there um but yeah it's actually smaller a little bit smaller okay thank you board members yes the denial of permit from engineering said the original was that this is 22x 40 and the original garage H dimensions of 20 by 22 Yeah so there's a distinct this is half you're say you're you're you're saying they're doubling it right she's saying they're reducing it right understanding that there was a ground a garage foundation in the back and a concrete slab in the front and seeing the pictures I now see that the entire concrete footprint that was shown on the existing conditions was a building one of its foundation one of its slab now the whole thing's going to be slab I'm guessing I was just it was confusing yes so that was just brought to light I was going to bring it up no problem came to me read this somebody does um any other board members with questions any members of the public with questions no I have a question okay so um do you have any plans to have any utilities in the new garage no just electric that's what was originally there was electric nothing else okay no Plumbing no Plumbing no water nothing zero just electric okay so if the board were to approve this you would agree to a condition that indicated there'd be no no uh no Plumbing yeah oh absolutely building y just electric okay want to have an electric door that's okay you want to pull it up all the time H any questions no I'm fine that that size of the building is confirmed now it it's going to be just a the hair different than what previously exist it's fine there's no stone Water Management that's required okay how about the height do you know the height the height is going to be higher than what is permitted I don't know what existed oh okay I'm just going by the ordinance at that point the the existing uh well our our garage height maximum is 15 ft they're proposing 20.85% feet but when you average it 20 ft off perance it's actually 20.8 20.8 yeah okay and our our engineering yep thank you great thank you would you like me to go through qualifications yes please thank you just briefly if you would provide the board with the benefit of your professional and educational background just what just one second we turn that microphone Mr BL can you please use the microphone recording the meeting the handheld yeah you so we get every important word you sayk so again my name is William Burn I'm a licensed architect um in the state of New Jersey I've been licensed since 1994 um my office is in Chester uh let's see I've uh appeared before this board many many years ago it's been a while um but I have appeared before other boards in Morris County and I do pretty regularly get accepted as an expert in and your license is currently in good standing yes it is exp Mark please proceed thank you so again I think the uh the the photographs were very helpful um for me in in the redesign of this uh of this structure as Miss Horman has mentioned you know the home and the property itself is just just a beautiful um historic property again being in Chester we do a lot of work in that area we do a lot of work with these types of homes and and especially you know Carriage Houses it was a a fairly common um you know dependency type building in this era of these um homes and it's nice to see it was nice to see that one was still you know fairly well preserved um so our goals in in the redesign of this again based on the existing footprint more or less um was to Designed something that really inspired um the the Carriage House feel from those previous photographs um and just offered a few different enhancements to try to make it a bit more functional for today's um you know uses um as as Miss Horman had mentioned the the previous garage doors were were a bit tight a bit small for Access um what we've proposed in the new design is is a single with door so it would be a 16 foot door instead of two individual doors um but but fortunately um door manufactures and Styles have have come around and and the door style that we see here this Carriage House style door which actually looks like um two pairs of doors um you know nicely blends with the uh aesthetic of the building and I think offers a much more functional um point of access for modern day cars um you know again similar to the photograph you can see that we've got a higher Gable with softer and lower plate Heights on either side so the attic storage or the Loft storage that exists above the garage Bay would have full height in the center and slightly less height to the sides um and that's really the predominant view of of the structure that the top left of of our drawing um that's the view that you'd see as you come up the driveway and that's the view that would be most visible from from the hormon residence um the side elevations in both case um reflect the fact that the the lot is quite um quite sloped in this area um we're not really proposing much change to the grade and again the engineers can testify to that but um you know the height at its highest point would be at the front where the garage doors are as the property slopes toward the rear the building becomes quite a bit lower we've added a mandor to the grade height at this back section that does allow us to have an interior Stairway to take us up to that Loft storage um which we think is a nice feature certainly a convenience to to have um available um you know the exterior it finished in a vertical siding very similar to the appearance of the original structure um we've got some some enhancements that we've added um we've got a little bit of a side gable roof over the door which again just breaks up some of the massing we do have the koua on the main front section which we think has a very nice appearance and again very period correct possibly something that the structure may have had at one point we've got goose neck lights shown various locations again typical and consistent with the architectural style and we do have a little bit of a a metal standing seam shed roof over the garage doors again to break up some of the vertical emphasis of the of that front facade this um presentation is actually what's been submitted so these aren't I just going to ask you bill there's been no changes to what we have right so I'm not going to Mark these that's correct yeah no no changes here um so again the the garage um elevation this this lower level elevation um 22 feet in width by 40 foot1 uh again the 16 foot single door providing much nicer safer access for cars we've got the stairway shown beyond the point where we would have those uh cars stored and we've got some some slab level storage at that elevation as well so we've got some good main level storage the stairs go up half a flight to that door that we showed coming out to the yard area and then another half a flight up to what would be the storage Loft shown to the right on the page um again the height changes as we go through just based on the roof lines but good usable storage and and I think a nice enhancement for the for the property thank you Mr Mar you're welcome just I have a question um yeah that uh that uh exhibit sheet one um it almost looks like the rear and if the upper left uh uh elevation front elevation it almost looks like the Traverse roof line is higher than the regular roof line is that accurate or that at this point it is about 12 Ines higher 12 Ines higher okay 12 in higher it's not substantially higher just slightly higher that that's correct all right and how does this height compare with the uh original garage would you make any comparisons like that I I had no um record of the height of the garage so we based it on really just the best we could determine from the photographs that were provided and in our opinion this height is is similar to what was there it may actually even be a tad lower from from what we could tell but it doesn't appear that it would be high fire and how will this garage as where it's presently located and maybe I should be asking the engineer fit in with the Contours of the hillside again I'm sure the engineers could probably do a better job than I but the the the slab that's there now those elevations I I believe are to be retained we're not really proposing a change of what was what was the garage the driveway that enters that garage is not changing um what we see here which is the uh the view from the horman's yard again they have a beautiful lawn area there's really no changes proposed here there are some beautiful stone retaining walls that appear on the engineer's drawing um you know maybe period to the house are certainly quite old and quite beautiful and that network of walls is not being proposed to change so there's really no no site work I I think that really would be um required based on this or nothing substantial um but again the the back of the garage as I had noted when we were on site um really you know exists at a point where the grade then continues up toward the property line you know pretty dramatically as it gets toward the back of the property the topography gets a bit steeper so again there's not necessarily A Change proposed here but we think it'll fit in very nicely with the existing Contours board members any questions yeah I see there was uh there's a passway between the garage section and the storage section on the first floor um is there a door proposed uh for that or is it just an access wi it's a 6' 8 in wide trimmed opening so there's no door that's proposed it's just an you know an arched opening so does this does this need to have a fire stop between the garage and the storage area or I would say okay because it's not living quarters right okay thank you it's no different than you putting stuff in your garage now they just doing it on two levels understood thank you any other questions by board members any members of the public with any questions okay next thank you Mr bar uh next I'd like to call Mr horley toy Mr horley if you would provide the board with the benefit of your educational and professional background uh sure um good evening bordon uh I received my engineering degree from r p techic Institute in 19 uh 91 I received my professional uh license from the state of New Jersey in 2002 and it's been in good standing ever since thank you and you've appeared before other boards uh not not this board in particular but other boards in mors Essex and Bay counties all your wife lies are in good standing oh my licenses are in good standing yes okay except them as an expert in engineering okay thank you Mr horley if you could um walk the board through the project providing a little detail on the existing conditions and then the proposed improvements yeah the uh the engineering for this project is is um rather benign we try to utilize the existing footprint as it existed for for the new structure um so there's no impact to storm water management or any of the surrounding areas outside of the footprint of the building um the request for variances today is is for the sidey yard setback uh the existing facility was a non-conforming Structure uh before the uh before the collapse um and the uh the new building will be similarly uh requesting a a sidey yard setback variance of 3 72 ft right the second variance being requested today is the building height which has already been discussed um calculating the building height 20 feet off the perimeter um at 20 feet calculations because of the sloping of the grade the rear of the building only has a building height of like 14 and a half feet um I could check that exactly um the rear of the pro the rear of the building is going to be 14.19 ft in height and the front of the building is going to be 25.8 ft in height but the average when you calculate it across is 20 85 ft is what we're requesting for the building height uh ordinance is that measured to the top of the roof or the middle um again it's measured from 20 feet from the building uh to the building height um 20 yes to the peak yeah okay but it excludes the Copa correct it excludes the Copa at this point yes all right um again with no uh no Plumbing or other Utilities in the building just electricity uh as I said the the engineering for the structure is is uh is fairly straightforward um there'll be no negative impacts to the surrounding properties uh proposed by this project what about um water runoff coming from the roof how would that be directed was is going to go right down the driveway how's where does it where does any water run off go um the uh the water runoff will be properly managed um to make sure that there is no direct negative impact to the surrounding properties Dave is that something you would be looking at or how would that work we could look at it yeah I I was assuming that there was a building there at some point in the past and uh the contributing drainage will just follow the the prior path there was no um no complaints lodged on runoff for this property right but I mean if maybe nobody complained but maybe was running right down a driveway into the street right but uh I just make sure we're not icing up the Western Avenue yeah yeah I mean because the sled is there now um there's certainly not going to be any more runoff created by this project than already exist and we'll work closely with the the township engine years is to make sure that that's the case okay good with that then I'm okay all right board members any other questions members of the public any questions Mr Hansen any questions no Mr oler no right we're good okay thank you uh just briefly I think the request that just one second any members of the public wish to comment upon this application he's my son well you might get up there you never know how's your chance not you can deviate if you want more yard work the public portion thank you Mr chairman I I I think overall this is the applicant tried her best to keep this aesthetically and functionally as appropriate as what was there in the past and make it hisor Al appropriate to the house and it's a greatly needed Improvement that we think is a modest request for this board so thank you yeah when I I first saw this and I was questioning you know the remains the uh foundation of the uh garage and then thinking you're doubling it in size I was like getting a little skeptical I also knew the age of house not exactly but I knew it was a very old house and I was wondering where storage was in the house itself uh So based upon what I've seen and heard uh I think we're I'd be in favor of this but welcome other members that chime in I'll chime in about the garage I live a late 1800s house and um and then before that I lived in house from 1920s and getting a modern car in these garages is virtually impossible so I actually feel like you were very conservative in just putting one garage door instead of asking us well it was a TW Bay garage so maybe we could get a bigger so um I think this is very appropriate reasonable um you know and having a little bit more Headroom too so that you could get an SUV in there I think is totally appropriate as well so my only reservation is uh my friend's family owns chattam Moving and Storage they're going to lose a customer that but it'll save a marriage oh boy I'd like to make a motion that we approve this application I'll second it and that's with the condition it's only going to be electric into the building no that was and snorm water to runoff would be worked out with the engineer at the time of Permitting those conditions motion motion not a second second Miss Santiago Mr Goldberg yes Mr rman yes Mr tractenberg yes Mr Kramer yes Mr benois yes Mr Schuster yes Mr wer yes so move thank you thank you thank you nicely [Music] done Rich did you mark those I did thank you you yes please yeah there's a set that I can keep you with yourself thank you no problem put Ju Just one item before we uh uh close up for the night um any request by any uh Commission in town uh or other witness professional witness that we might want to have a here have to come through the secretary of the board uh we don't want individual board members reaching out to any commissions say uh the environmental commission uh to um request them to appear any request to appear would have to come through through the board in a formal session or or have us directing the secretary to reach out to them yeah it's entirely appropriate to have if the board has questions on any reports that are presented to the board to ask whoever drafted those reports to appear and give testimony or answer questions but that should come through Sonia if we with the authorization of Mr Woodford of the from the board from the chairman okay if we don't get a report from a particular body but we think there should be a report you request we can request we can make that request at a meeting oh yeah of course I was just wondering I mean I've never had that happen before where I've been like where was their report but it might it's a good point to bring up yeah we often have reports at the planning Bo right and be honest you I don't know how they know to prepare one it comes through goes through Sonia son so why put 16 packets together because they get handed out to you guys plan they go to the uh the professionals so there is a process in place to there is a process especially planning board when there's a planning board application there is like 16 17 package that are submitted and they go to different departments different committee like the environmental commission but not all the time I do get reports from the environmental commission sometimes I don't even get a response okay so if you don't get especially on planning board you don't receive an environmental commission they submit any okay the board felt like there were questions that they needed answered it's appropriate to discuss it at the meeting and say okay we're not going to vote on this tonight because we want to hear from whichever commiss the open space committee or whatever it is and ask for a report if we don't have one um with that in mind we did get in our packets tonight I don't know if anybody else has looked at it uh I environmental impacts of small environmental impact statement for next Tuesday's meeting and Sony could you uh forward that to the environmental commission for their uh review forward that report to the environmental commission yeah because it is environmental impact so be it' be appropriate for them to see it Ral it so I don't know if I sent To Us by the applicant sent To Us by the applicant yes and it's in our packets tonight I don't know if we're going to have any feedback but before Tuesday okay oh yeah well we can can email it to them and maybe I doubt it very much but I try I'll do it tomorrow okay great so along those lines at the last meeting I think in in in during the meeting we had put in a request for the environmental commission whether the person that wrot the report or the chair to come to the special meeting that's been scheduled for Springbrook and I know I I follow up with an email um on that so right you can't not to the not to the just to you and Sonia and Mr all that's where the email went to so I'm still waiting to hear back whether is that an inappropriate way to no you can direct it to us yeah so I've not I haven't reached out to the environmental commission I've reached out internally here within the board and so I'm still waiting to see what has that invitation been accepted will we plan on seeing them here next week or yeah but that's the appropriate way you deal with it because you know all of your emails even your text messages would be subject to requests correct so you know you wouldn't ever want to appear to be anything but impartial correct right so if there's a question though that the board has hey you know we want to hear from the environmental Commission on this right just ask her and let's get them here okay so main would go through Mr Woodford Mr Woodford would let me know says son reach out to the environmental commission not CC Richard yeah I sent it to where does the status of that request I mean that was submitted initially they'll be here they'll be here they will be here okay thank you that's what I was seeking to get confirmed thank you and I have a question about the um process for the environmental or historic review I know there was an issue with who can actually draft that report and sign it how is it official is it the chairman do they need a vote of the of that committee from the environmental commission from any of these commissions what makes it a formal they're they're appointed generally by the mayor and councel or Township committee members so right right so that's they they are created and then from their their appointed members they can select the chair and if they create a report based on something well if they create a report it may be designated out to a particular person in the committee um who would who would then sign it I don't know what they're individual you know what the commissions regulations are rules or bylaws whatever they right but they could I don't see why they couldn't say you know look we've got 12 things to do we got six people so we're taking two each let's look at them and then you signed the two you did but we all looked at them and said Yep this is good to go but you wrote it so you sign it I don't think there's anything wrong with that when I served on the Morris Town environmental commissioner because I was on there for 10 years um I often was the person that was delegated for reviews and I would write them and I would report back and it would be a part of minutes but I didn't get like the board's consensus which I don't think you really can because then you also become at least in my case there I also became a person who was testifying right so I'm Fielding questions from the board which of course I can't turn around so the whole board have a mini meeting to give my answer so we would just kind of appoint a person uh or a couple of people on a case-by casee basis to say you know what there's going to be a meeting on this you know can you guys look at it write up a report and be available to answer questions so that's how we handled it it's a good amount of responsibility for somebody want to volunteer committee yeah and unfortunately you know environmental commissions do not have any regulatory or you know they have no power they're just advisory they just unlike a shade tree Commission where they can actually you know do something so a lot of times your suggestions would get ignored so then what kind of teeth do these reports have well they don't have teeth they're not intended to they're there to give you their advice ADV it depends on how receptive you are to their messaging as a board member for this body you may conclude that while it's important it wasn't important to that particular application at that time that's entirely within the board's jurisdiction to decide the application and also when you have a good commission they bring you ideas on how to make projects better exactly right they raise ideas that you may not have V them yeah because that's their area of expertise invasive plant species you know so that's yeah all right anything else one followup question on uh Samantha and I were talking earlier so for example an application like one whipy road which is almost fully implemented now um in terms of the lighting and things that are going on there so we go back to the original resolution or what was agreed upon and there's an issue or something there what is the redress there in terms of right there zoning officer gets to say Hey it said this that hey and you did already seen lights on all the time trees taken down during construction so they did take some additional trees trees you couldn't see the damage from the road but the back of the tree was rotted out wasn't until they got into clearing that we noticed it and they asked permission to take it down but we also told them to plant more trees in the hole that was created too and some of that is on hold because of the weather is the additional signage down now that they permanent sign is up not yet but I think they're allowed to keep that up for a few months while the it's opening up and launching I believe I thought it was just they could have it until their permanent signage went up I don't know building not open yet two signs there's a punch list on that that was done back around Christmas time it needs to be Revisited things so I'll put the sign on I'll put the banner or the temporary sign the that and also the lighting they leave all the lights on the inside of the building on all the time workers that don't know how to turn lights off could be I was there at Sunday at 6 and it was like a glowing ship as you drove down the road is the lot on that opposite corner Dave is that in the township that's for sale that's also one on the other side of wed yeah yeah yeah okay yeah that's that's for sale doesn't that have an that has an approval that has an approval it's been extended a couple times right right it was just extended for another year guy's having money problems he's having partner problems so they are looking to sell the project oh all right any other any other business if not a motion to adjourn motion all in favor I I all opposed all right