okay we will call the meeting to order if we can have a roll call please Fuller here Delo here Litman askanazi here shamura de Janero here leneski here pelli here car manica here chairwoman Beal here okay we can stand to salute the flag I pledge allegiance to the flag and United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice okay the notice requirements of the open public meeting law for this meeting have been satisfied a copy of the notice having been sent to the Asbury Park Press in the coaster and in the office of the Township Clerk on July 21st 2023 there is an emergency exit through the courtroom doors and two exits at the rear of the room there will be no smoking no new cases will be started after 10:00 p.m. and no new testimony taken after 10:30 p.m. in addition the applicant will be limited to 45 minutes of testimony all meetings will be video and audio taped and shown on the township of oceans Community cable channel channel 22 on Verizon FiOS and channel 77 on cable vision all cell phones must be turned off or if you need to make a call please make your call outside of the meeting room we have the minutes from August 17th 2023 um I will move to accept is there a second second this all in favor all in favor I I any opposed okay we have the following resolution memorializations Marcy sultan 17 Shadow Lawn Drive block 25 lot 43 Deborah haredy 64 Park Boulevard block 95 Lot 1 memo Investments 44 Mammoth Road Block 7 lot 51 and someone offer oh I'm sorry was that the commercial one memo Investments LLC there's three of them resolutions for 44 Mammoth Road there three resolutions three resolutions okay they can all be voted together okay have to do each one correct we have to do each one no can we'll vot it together okay that's fine I don't know Deo other words we are a different meeting so um right Sut Harmony or one vote and memo could be the other okay this is for sultan and Har haredy yes no you D Jano yes leneski yes pelli yes chairwoman deal yes okay next three for memo Investments LLC ashkanazi yes D Jano yes veski yes caram manica yes chairman be yes okay the following cases will be carried to June 19th um please note that is a separate that that's a different date than our regularly regularly uh scheduled June 20th meeting the first case does need to Ren notice Amanda Simi and Ryan Grove 238 Overbrook Avenue block 22 lot 33 and the following case is carried to June 19th no need to further notice and this is due to revised recommendations from one of our experts I aat Services LLC 1700 Highway 35 Ur 075 07755 block 34 Lot 12 Zone C2 and IIT Services LLC 1418 Highway 35 Oakhurst 07755 block 182 lot 7 Zone 0-140 okay our first first case Hannah Boyce 904 grass mirre Avenue Ocean 07712 Block 87 lot 9 Zone R5 applicant seeks approval to construct a two-story rare Edition with deck and rinse stations covered front porch and install an AC condenser the r rinse station and AC condenser conformed to the accessory structure setback requirements however the shed is within the 5T accessory building side yard setback and and Miss Boyce if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay and do you have um Miss uh is that husband yes Mr Boyce Spiller Spiller if you can just raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth I do okay you two can have a seat and I will turn it over to our experts first and we will Mark the packet surely it's a 8,803 ft lot it has 59 ft of Frontage and 66 ft of depth so it's very narrow and deep there are pre-existing non-conforming conditions and basically what they're trying to do is expand the residence generally within the confines of the pre-existing nonconforming conditions they're putting a very small covered porch in the front of the building that will be 4 feet deep so therefore it'll uh reduce the front yard setback for that area of that covered porch to 21.2 Ft wor 30 FTS required there's 25.2 ft exists now and and the sidey yard setback uh what's required is 8.5 ft which is 15% of the lot width uh the Zone requires a 75 ft lot width so if you had a conforming lot with in terms of width the setback would be greater permitted would be greater um they're actually just proposing to maintain the uh the second story addition over the existing setback of the the existing what first story U I don't really have an issue with that I don't have an issue with the accessory structure setback which is the deck at the rear of the building again it's just maintaining the existing setback of the building okay and Mr pavick S I have a technical difficulties right here um [Applause] you have no problems um yes we Have No engineering issues with this application they gave you a grading plan and there's satisfied uh Miss Boyce and Mr Spiller if you can just tell us about your request and the need so we're just just looking to uh put a rear addition on the um existing deck that's currently there um we're looking to just expand the footprint of our house to add an additional bedroom um and we want to work within the confines of what we have and we really don't want to change the profile of the house or really do much our whole goal is to to keep it looking like a traditional Cape Cod as it currently stands okay and you have an uh expert here with you that you would like to give would like to give testimony if you can uh state your name sure anthonyo with passino Architects okay and if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay and I believe you've testified before this board and we'll continue to accept your credentials thank you so the existing you can see the existing one story dwelling that's or one and a half story dwelling that's there now [Applause] story there's an there's an existing deck to the rear of it which is going to be taken off and then a new addition be put on there and then continue a new deck towards the rear of it now um since these drawings were given to you the deck itself is shown at a at a an elevation of 5417 um we've split it into two separate decks an upper deck deck and a lower deck the piece towards the back that's actually closer to the proper sorry you need to use the mic you're not getting picked up okay okay um so the portion that's too close to the property line is actually being dropped down lower so it'll only be about 16 inches above the grve um at this point with with and I have new drawings I can can hand these out to somebody believe we need to Mark I just made three copies of it for now I'll make whatever you need we need to Mark those as well F we're not ring no plans tonight that's okay it's it's really just the the deck that got lowered the back portion of the deck got lowered everything else is staying exactly the same the structure is not changing but the outline of the deck Remains the Same the outline of the deck is exactly the same we just lowered the back portion of it so that it's lowered to ground with the enabled us to do was get rid of the railings around it so that when we're sitting inside looking out we don't have to see the [Applause] railings all right so the the architecture part of it is we're adding a family room um and a mud room towards the rear of the house um and then from there's a hallway going to the existing kitchen that leads out to what's now going to be the upper deck and the lower deck space important on the second floor and we've actually jogged the addition in about a foot from the side so the side this is where the side yard setback uh we were kind of close so we actually jogged it in a little bit architecturally it looks better the way it connects to the house and it gives us a little bit more space to that side York both both stories are JG in or is it can't no they're both both stories are jogging in so it's one foot less than the existing MH correct okay one foot more than the existing no less less sidey setback side yard setback yeah the sidey setback is more right that's right yeah the size of the building is one foot less the side yeah yeah the side setback is is more yeah okay you're right so it was to basically to to add a master suite uh bathroom bedroom area and a walk-in closet which none of these have houses have these small capes so it's still got the two existing bedrooms towards the front uh as for the front porch which I ignored um yes we're we have an existing stoop and steps or you know the front porch and steps we're just putting two columns out and covering it with a roof I'll show you the elevation of that so on front we'll have this aesthetic couple of columns and a Gable room again similar in Pitch to the pitch that's on the existing Dormers uh on the rear of the house this is um the again the master bedroom up top in the family room down below and then this is the uh master bathro and then the mud room down [Applause] below uh this is a a stove pipe for the is it wood burning stove finishes finishes finishes oh law match oh yeah yes mhm yeah well no you're doing new horizontal siding we're changing the siding right on the whole house yeah so it's going to be all new siding but all match it will all match doesn't have to match new sighting siding house and a new roof uh we're matching the roof match roof okay yeah the match existing so new sighting and we're going to match the roof any other questions questions from board members okay any questions or comments from the public at this point okay motion to close the public hearing motion to close the public hearing I'll second all in favor any opposed okay so it's uh for the front yard setback side yard setback and the accessory structure setbacks okay someone offer I'll offer propositive resolution who second Fuller yes delomo yes ashkanazi yes regano yes neski yes kuui Elli yes car man yes chairwoman deal yes okay best of luck thank you good luck next case is margerie hamui 232 Overbrook Avenue O Oakhurst 07755 block 22 lot 31 in the R4 Zone applicant is seeking to demolish existing single family dwelling and construct a new two-story single family dwelling with a covered front porch and rear deck and new driveway minimum required lot width is 90 ft where 75 ft exists and 75 ft is proposed the minimum driveway side yard setback is 5 ft which one foot is proposed and did I pronounce that correctly hamui hamui hamui okay U Miss Hui if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay and I will turn it over to our experts and uh if we can mark the packet please okay basically the lot width is an existing condition there's no way it can reasonably be changed so there's clearly a hardship there um the driveway side setback the ordinance requires 5 feet they're proposing a 1 foot driveway side setback which would be a problem if you had a residence on the lot next to it but what you do have is a very wide grass area that's actually part of the right of way of the road leading to PP Village so aesthetically somebody's going to look at it not realize that driveway is five is not 5T from the property lot so I just I don't have a big problem with that and also there's a uh issue of whether it's building or not within the flood plane and I defer to the board engineer in that regard okay yeah we uh issued a couple of reviews for this one most recent being may turn um yes it's it's in the flood Hazard area zone uh it's in elevation 28 so any improvements would have to comply with the flood damage prevention ordinance um that's our first comment the second comment kind of goes hand inand with that um it's specifically related to flood vents uh for the crwl space um so again anything any construction would have to comply with um with the flood damage prion prevention ordinance that the date of that report May 13th and we have some other technical comments um sidewalk sidewalk replacement leader drains that are through can you move your mic closer sure we have some other smaller technical comments um related to the plans U add a couple of details on there um they would have to get a Township Road opening permit for any work in the RightWay and then the it looks like the leader drains are going under some sidewalk they should show on the plan that the sidewalk is going to be replaced uh in that area uh other than that those are those are all the engineering related issues we have so if they comply with your letter then you're okay with the flood planes VAR correct well they would have to comply with there shouldn't be a variance it should they should comply with the need a variance right Jim yeah the need VAR for any construction within the to drive even whatever it is but if they're complying to the requirements that would be the mitigation to Grant the variance right okay and so items um five six and seven also Remain the grading plan the apron and the uh uh Township Road opening permit those still stand right okay okay Miss um Hui if you can tell us about your request and believe you also have an expert yes so um my name is Marjorie Hui we actually bought this house because it's next door to my parents and it's just way too small for our family and we wanted to make it bigger so that we can fit comfortably there we love the neighborhood and just want to be there okay and Sir if you can speak into the microphone if you can state your name hi my name is uh James Conor I'm with Mike salar and Associates and I'm the architect for the project okay oh goe I'm sorry I'm a New Jersey licensed architect um I've appeared in front of you guys uh before and uh I can I'll take you through the uh the plans I've been uh oh I'm sorry I'm been an architect for uh licens for three years I've been uh working in Mammoth County for 20 years now um graduated from Drexel University okay if you can just read oh James Connor C nn a walk thank you and if you can just raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth I I do okay you can take us through so as margerie had stated um the um concept of this this plan was to uh create a home that's large enough to accommodate the expanding family um and also something that they can you know ultimately grow into um this is like a forever type home um right next to their parents so they can uh enjoy you know close family get togethers and whatnot what side are your parents on uh they're on the other side side and the other side is the roadway into right the street there's no land on either side that you can buy well but they have a lot take it away from them they're going to have to come to us that's a finding that we can make that there's no additional land available to to to eliminate the VAR and um so to to take through um the initial comments from the engineer um schematically we have um flood vents which are not labeled but they are shown on the um crawl space we know that they are necessary they will be included in the final plans um they've just not been uh calculated as for size yet so we will definitely include all that make sure we comply with his request on that one um and as well as all of the additional information that we need to include include between our grading plan and our construction documents uh we have no problem complying with every one of uh cme's uh points uh 2 through 7 um so to take you through the plans a little bit um primarily what we really needed was a large kitchen and a large dining room so that is what's taking up this this side of the home um as you as you know they have a large family uh get togethers you know can go upwards of 20 people so it's necessary to accommodate um that kind of a gathering um and then adjacent they wanted a nice family room and breakfast room that they would use on a daily basis um we wanted to utilize an open concept plan as our footprint was not you know as large as we you know would typically have liked um given the constraints of the site but we uh did our best to comply with everything um and then it was important also to put a uh a screened room as part of the uh the uh everyday function because it can get a little buggy over in that neighborhood and they wanted to be able to enjoy it mostly through the summer um and then as we go upstairs um oh and part part of the uh the concept was include an elevator for um the possibility of aging and staying in place um and on the second floor we have um a large master bedroom that would utilize the entire back of the property um with three additional bedrooms to accommodate their family and a front-facing balcony over the front door with the laundry room um since we didn't have the ability to have a basement where we' like to put a lot of the functions we decided to move the functions up to the attic space to we create a Hab habitable attic um half story which would include a room for either guests or housekeeping um a loft area an additional bath bathroom and access to the mechanical room that we couldn't put in the basement um and then uh on the outside we wanted to use a kind of like a Hampton's beach house style um low pitch roofs um Cedar impressions or Cedar Shake depending on what the budget comes back at um kind of exterior um some wood accents and kind of keeping it very minimalistic and you know plain but still speaking to the vernacular of the neighborhood um we pushed the second the third the I'm sorry the half Story Attic space back as far as we could so it wouldn't be so dominant on the street plane um so it's located about midpoint of the overall house and and then this is just the the um other two elevations this is that rear elevation with the screened porch area shown um there we wanted to again as we start to get away from the street and everything and towards that um popular Village so to diminish the scale of it again um really trying not to impact and be so dominant um in the in the landscape um and the square footages just so um I had them I want to make sure we included them the first floor square footage is 2324 ft the second floor square footage is 2166 Square ft and the attic square footage is 709 squ ft where if you did a third of the second floor would have allowed for 722 Square ft so our overall concept was to comply with every zoning um ordinance that we could other than the fact that the lot width was non-conforming and since we had to come here for the variants anyway we thought asking for The Wider uh driveway was within reason thank you okay questions from board members nothing okay questions or comments from the public okay motion to close public hearing make a motion to close second all in favor I any opposed okay um and someone offer offer a positive resolution a second okay Fuller yes yes askanazi yes Jiro yes weski yes fi Ellie yes manica yes chairwoman Beal yes okay best of luck thank you next is Lewis and Jacquelin Massy 500 runan Avenue West deal o 7723 block 40 lot 16 Zone R2 applicant proposes to demolish the existing one-story dwelling and construct a new two-story single family dwelling minimum lot size 22,500 ft required 2,696 square feet proposed the attorney is James baru did I very close barui thank you barui okay thank you m field members of the board uh I'm James buuy I'm an attorney in Little Silver New Jersey I'm here on behalf of Mr and Mrs massre who are here uh they're the owners of the property uh and their application is to demolish the one story family uh dwelling that's on the property now uh to allow the Reconstruction of a two-story uh family dwelling to suit their growing family needs um I have with me today uh John boleta a professional engineer um as well as Tom Lavin uh who is the architect who submitted the prints before you as well um if I might just have the uh application marked A1 for identification and the prints of Mr uh boleta marked A2 for identification thank you as Miss beel has mentioned the application requires a variance because of a pre-existing non-conforming condition that being um lot square footage um and I'll represent and can provide testimony that the surrounding properties are single family residen is fully bu built out there is no uh property that can be acquired in order to satisfy uh the need for that variance um there was also uh a note from the engineer U what we usually have them the engineer yes we usually we usually let our professionals like sort of tell us in the point thanks this way you can address any um questions or concerns you on a roll good job thank you okay your work I will just summarize the only variance that's necessary is a minimal variance for laot area 22,500 ft is required the existing lot is 2,696 Ft they appear to meet all the other requirements of the ordinance my report did say that they should amend the the tables on the plans to comply with the current ordinance requirements which they did and I couldn't see doing a new report just to just for that reason so B basically it's only the one variant okay Mr P we had four comments in our review letter uh the date is April 3rd of this year uh the first one is just that uh Tren that of detail for trench repair should be added to the plans and um limits of payment repair and side replace should be on the plans uh the second comment are is U related to the sanitary sewer lateral and the depth um like to hear if an injector pump would be required I think we'll have your engineer testify to that we will thank you third comment there was a uh a difference in the plans I think the architectural showed a two 2.1 fot difference in elevation uh between the finished grade and the first floor uh whereas the clot plans showed a three-foot difference so not quite a foot if that could be um rectified there and the last comment we have was related to storm order mitigation um we'd recommend that something be included to um to mitigate the increase in impervious area okay Mr Buu now what's your turnning you can address the um comment as well thank you uh Miss beel if I might uh have Mr bleta SW okay if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes ma'am okay and have you testified before this board before yes ma'am okay my licensed engineer a licensed planner certified Municipal engineer in the State uh testified here many times okay we will continue to accept thank you thank you m Bei Mr boleski you've prepared the plans that have been marked uh for evidence purposes today is that correct yes the engineering plan thank you there are a series of five uh plans Associated is that correct yes um and you've reviewed the letter of Mr U matlack from CME the engineer for the for the township yes all right uh if you could address those requests uh one through four uh we we can address items 1 through three no problem uh as far as number four goes storm water management if you refer to sheet three the demolition plan and Sheet one compare them they're very similar uh there's an existing house an existing driveway uh and as far as the storm water ordinance in the township goes this is not considered major development uh as a matter of fact applicants are going to request a waiver from the requirement in the engineers letter uh due to the fact that number one we're increasing the impervious area on the property by less than 600 square ft approximately 595 Square ft additional impervious area it's almost identical uh number two uh we're well under the maximum permitted lot coverage of 45% in the existing condition we're about 24.1% loot coverage total loot coverage impervious and that goes up to 26 8% in the proposed condition and the third reason being that it does not uh meet the uh a definition of major development to which your storm water management ordinance uh addresses uh onsite uh recharge systems so we're respectfully requesting that a waiver be Grant from that from the engineer's letter in addition I also did the soil Bings on the property we did two they're shown on sheet three in the backyard which is about 3 ft higher in elevation than the one that we did in the front yard uh we got a groundwater of about 96 in season high water table and in the front yard uh we got a groundwater elevation of about 66 Ines there so that's about 5 1/2 ft in the front yard the the water was evident the applicant does wish to have a basement and we've designed it such that it's 1 foot above the groundwater table so that's another reason that we would request to the board to Grant and the engineer to uh grant that waiver from the item in the letter such that it would not put any more water into the ground uh than there is now and in your opinion the uh plans you've drafted uh with the calculations that you've provided will adequately prepare will retain storm water uh uh based on this application is that correct yeah the increase in storm water like I said since we're adding less than 600 square feet of impervious area the post development rate and volume of runoff uh will be not too much larger than the pre-development level all right and you indicated earlier that you you could satisfy numbers one two and three of Mr mle's letter of April 3rd is that correct yep and you will do that on revised plans is that correct yes all right thank you uh why we let our engineer I was going to ask are you finished um Mr Buu with certainly the engineer Mr pic are you in agreement with the waiver for number four um I understand I understand the request and and the reason for it can you give us a little more detail as to how the site is going to operate as far as stormw where is it going what's going on with the um leader drains and um down spouts and you may need to use the [Applause] microphone yes sure Drew uh I will if you uh take a look at sheet two that's a grading and drainage plan uh house sits on a uh a lot that drains the house is at the high point of the lot uh up is North referring to the plan and the uh storm water drains towards Mammoth Road and towards Rion Avenue uh towards both of the uh Road rways and we are not uh changing the uh Watershed pattern of development on the property uh the post development will still drain towards both of the roadways so no additional uh no increased volume or uh rate or volume of storm water will be directed toward any of the exist existing neighbors okay and the um the roof runoff the down spouts are they directed towards the road yes I can actually add uh roof leader locations based on the architectural plans and show their location and their direction of surface flow and also add a note to the plan that they should be directed towards the right of way and not towards any other uh adjacent properties okay and are you aware of any drainage issues or capacity issues in the roads there in the the existing system once it gets into the road where is it going from there uh once it hits the roadways it would enter into the municipal storm drain system and that system I see one Inlet on the plan you know where that um where that system discharges to where it's going from from there yeah there's uh one Inlet shown on Mammoth Road but uh where it where it trains to I'm not sure okay yeah I I understand the request um if they were to put a dry well you know near the house there could be issues with groundwater mounding um related to the basement looks here like the basement is at the ground floor of the basement floor of the basement is 35.9 right so a dryw have theoretically have to be a bit deeper than that um I don't have any major concerns with that assuming that there are no significant issues with drainage in the road uh if that system is undersized or if it starts to create any issues I'd recommend that um you know a condition be put in there that they would have to address it so you support the waiver with the condition with that condition okay thank you I'm sorry what was the condition if any drainage issues were to arise from this construction they would be responsible to address there any yeah okay did you want them to give anything off sight or as long as it flows you're okay right correct uh could we make that subject to um building approvals that grage plan will be uh reviewed at the time of the building application right that that should be reviewed anyway I'm saying once construction is completed M if there are any issues that would arise it would have to be addressed correct okay all right okay fair enough oh I'm sorry any questions from board members questions from the public okay Mr barui thank you Miss beel there was one other item that was uh noted in Miss Malone's letter the zoning officer's letter uh that evidently the bur ordinance had been changed and uh the proposed driveway uh that's shown in uh in the application uh was short uh we proposed 35.6 ft from a corner of a parcel where 50 ft is required um that was not indicated uh uh originally but we are able to address that if the board so desires just trying to find them that's Miss Maloney's letter of April 5th oh the drive okay I have a couple of copies here Mr the second page any um comments for that Mr Higgins that you're aware that's that's in Kate bal's letter ofil [Applause] [Applause] I can I use yours okay no I did miss that one I I don't see how well they could avoid it but they need eff to have the driveway away from the house so I don't I don't see that as a major concern in this neighborhood okay what do you mean drive went driveway the other side uh what what Kate Maloney was referring to is the corner lot on a corner lot uh where on Mammoth Road and RAV the distance from the corner to the edge of the driveway I'm showing on the plan here which would be going west from the Mammoth Road right away is in the ordinance uh 50 ft minimum and uh it's dimensions on sheet number two on the sorry on number one on the planes you have that distance instead of 50 ft as required it's approximately 35.6 ft and if you refer back to sheet three the demolition plan the existing driveway uh exits onto Mammoth Road which is a much busier road than runan Avenue runan Avenue being a dead end street so the driveway was designed to remove the access off the busier Road of Mammoth Road and put a turnaround on runan Avenue the Denon Street such that uh we could accommodate a vehicle to never have to back out onto the RightWay yeah that's that's the key here I I apologize I grabbed the wrong sheet I was looking at the wrong application yeah they're making the situation better by moving the driveway off of mro and also the whole purpose of that requirement is to avoid having a car having to back out onto a street within 50 ft of an intersecting Street and here they designed the driveway so that that doesn't have to but the variance is still required variance is required still required okay okay thank you so that's the second variance is okay and just as a last statement that there was a front yard variant in the existing condition it was required 50 foot minimum front set back from both streets and the applicant is eliminating that variance and uh complying with both minimum setbacks in the proposed condition to bring it closer into conformance with the municipal ordinance in that respect okay thank you fair enough that's our presentation did you Mr Lavin was there uh yes the architect is here Mr L if the board has any questions of the architect thank you John welcome feel i' ask that Thomas L be swor in if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth whole truth okay I know you've testified before the board Thomas Lan architect uh 3430 Sunset AV ocean um basically we're taking the one-story house down building a new twostory everything is is within the requirements setbacks height uh coverage limitations so okay that's pretty much it questions from the board Noe Nothing questions from the public or comments from the public okay motion to close public hearing moved second All In in favor I any opposed okay and then uh motion for the variances and the waiver with the condition someone offer two VAR I'll offer for positive res have the driveway location yes second okay who second Mr Fuller Fuller yes delomo yes asazi yes de Jiro yes leneski yes guelli yes manica yes chairwoman B yes okay thank you best of luck thank you ladies and gentlemen and the last case Samuel habber 507 staffa Street West Allenhurst 07711 loock 67 Lot 8 Zone R5 applicant seeks approval to demolish the existing dwelling to the foundation and reconstruct a new 2 and a half story single family dwelling with covered porch rear deck and AC condensers um I believe someone from Mr uh farber's firm is here uh yes we share office space name Timothy sh M and your name is I'm sorry Timothy Shay I practice in the same office as Rob okay and I'll just be filling in for this hearing and my witness that I'll be calling first will be Mr Felman uh my client seeks to raise the old house on the property and construct a new home it's an undersized non-conforming lot the variances that we ask for really primarily to the front uh and side porch which are the bulk issues regarding the building coverage uh we are fine with impervious coverage there's no issues there uh with a few exceptions the house itself without the pches would be conforming with that I'll call Mr and Mr Feldman if you can raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth okay okay um and we'll hear from our experts Mark the packet and then turn it over to you Mr Shay thank you you sure just a brief summary is that the applicant had submitted an application which I looked at and I felt there were a lot of variances and I felt it should be redesigned and I wrote a report they they looked at it and they newly redesigned the site turning the house 90 degrees eliminating a number of variances so that right now there are three variances that are necessary the front yard setback variance the ordinance requires 30 feet the plan proposes 22 ft to the covered porch and then a small and the attached garage which is a little over 11 ft wide that matches up with the front of the covered porch I don't have a big problem with that the master plan actually recommends that the uh ordinance be relaxed in terms of the setbacks for front for covered porches and specifically talks about where you have a 30 foot front yard setback required that a porch could extend into the front yard as much as 10 ft and recommends that that be done for both aesthetic and functional purposes um basically the applicant doing this the only other change there is that the garage itself also lines up with the forge and it seems to make sense from an architectural standpoint that I'll let their architect talk about that um the side setback the ordinance requires 15% of the lot width in this Zone to be on the side setback and that's 11.25 ft there's a portion of small little bump out on what the side of the house that is 9.25 ft it's it bumps out 2 feet it's Cal levered over the the side setback so it doesn't extend all the way down to the ground uh the ordinance actually permits an extension of 2 ft into the sidey yard set back if it's a bay window so if they were to take this little bump out and put a window in it it wouldn't require a variance I think what they're doing is really consistent with the intent of the ordinance and again they could eliminate it by putting a window in there I don't see from a planning point of view of the need to do that but that's something the board can look at and see whether they want to see that done and then the other issue is is maximum building coverage the ordinance required permits 25% the plan is proposing 28.5% that's a little over 3% more than what the ordinance permits and again that that's due to the cover fromont for de which is an open front porch it doesn't really increase the intensity of the use of the site and in fact the uh impervious coverage that's being proposed is below what the ordinance requirement is so again we'll let hear testimony about that and you can make your decision whether you think that's appropriate like to St May 13th uh thank you Mr Higgins with that I'll Calla let Mr pav go I apologize and then you can go so we reviewed this application we issued a review letter on May 14th um generally we have we have no engineering concerns with this application as it stands now a little okay thank you your turn M with that I'll turn to Mr Felman could you begin by describing the plans that we provide the board yeah um as Mr Higgins uh mentioned we submitted a uh a plan previous to this one uh that plan the existing house currently FS on thank you the existing structure that that's there that we're proposing to raise uh currently fronts on to Stafa Street um when we submitted the original plans a month and a half or two months ago we also had the house facing Stafa um as Mr Higgins pointed out it created um significant setback requirements because now where the lot was at at its narrowest created a front yard and a rear yard setback so we were encroaching on that as well as some other variances um after reviewing his uh letter um and suggestions we rotated the house 90 degre fronted the structure now onto um uh Myrtle and what that did was it allowed us to comply with the house itself um to almost all the setbacks and when I say almost all the setbacks the house itself where it sits off of Myrtle um is is at 30 ft so that's conforming the majority of the home as Mr Higgins mentioned that fronts onto Stafa also um complies with the 30 ft what doesn't comply with the 30ft front yard setbacks are the is the wraparound porch that fronts onto Myrtle and then wraps around onto Stafa what we then did was rather than extending the driveway in additional 8 ft and pushing the garage back um we felt that architecturally it made a lot more sense to have the porch die into the uh garage so the front of the garage is at 22 ft off Stafa it still allows for ample parking to come off of Stafa and park in front of the garage it now creates a much more functional garage space itself and it's only 11 4 in in length that's um really within the uh 30ft setback the rear yard which is now opposite Myrtle is in compliance and the side yard which is now opposite Stafa for the majority of the home is in compliance except for this little 2T by 84 bump out that we uh we um Incorporated um we did that for two reasons one is for an aesthetic value on the elevation so it creates a little deviation as opposed to having a long plane in addition to that what it is it allows is a 12T wide dining room now is 12T wide that's totally usable because it would allow them to put a brake front within that twoot recess and not take a 12T wide room and cut it down to 10 ft which would be kind of tight if they had chairs on both sides um if the board so desires we can put a high awning window up there which would alleviate the or eliminate that uh necessity for that variance um and we still might opt to do that um after having some discussions with the client to see you know if they want to bring some additional light in here in addition to the two windows that we currently have flanking in uh the first floor plan really consists of uh a dining you know coming in off of Myrtle a dining room living room kitchen Breakfast family room which now fronts the rear yard and the garage with with a powder room uh the footprint of the home itself uh that's a typo it it is actually 1575 um we're we're actually allowed I believe 19 uh 1950 in terms of the footprint so the house itself is significantly under that as pointed out by um your planner what then pushes the building coverage into the variant situation is the wraparound porch that exceeds about 500 and something square feet I think closer to 600 square F feet so when you add that porch into to the footprint of the house you are then creating the uh the variants um for building coverage uh Total Lock coverage we we are uh significantly under um so there's no issues there second floor um consists of one two three four bedrooms and a loft area or play area we originally designed the home and the previous um application was a home that was designed with a basement uh we do have water issues and a high water table on that site so that has been um taken off the table and in Li of the basement which would give them a play area we created a loft area on the second floor we also have a set of steps that go up to a habitable attic or a half story which would consist of a um guest room where Ma's room laundry area bathroom and an additional play area or study area um your zoning officer Kate mentioned um brought up a issue that the engineering drawings and the architectural drawings didn't match in that we had the height of the structure at 30 ft which is from finished floor to top of Ridge uh which she said is conforming to your ordinance the engineers plans had 33 feet I believe they were either measuring to grade or to the top of the uh fireplace um I I uh spoke to Kate and that's in uh in conformance with your ordinance stuff so is it true that the house m mostly conforms other than the garage in this 2 and A2 foot bump out other than the garage the twoot bump out um um opposite Stafa and the uh Total Building coverage again due to the um porch it does everything else conforms and as Mr Higgins articulated if it was just a window on that bump out it would actually be conforming that is that is correct he mentioned that no it's it's 22 ft it's 22t you need 30 30 yeah that's another variance that is Vari which you didn't mention is in your report yes it's in my report okay I get your just sent it to we'll get you the report Mr okay any other testimony no okay thank you questions from the board no no questions from the public if you can share the microphone with the gentleman and if you can state your [Music] name uh William Bo I lived at 506 daffa directly across the street from this property uh was not aware that the plans have been revised I got a shotgun notice here that said you were asking for everything so I'm glad to hear that some of these have been removed uh specifically I just want to confirm there's no uh hike variance required no there isn't there isn't now okay and the coverage is acceptable within the coverage is 3% over build but but it's mainly the the porch is you know they could cut the porch down andly but it wouldn't look as good yeah if they cut the porch down on Stafford Street that would fix it wouldn't it yeah um I I just I if you Excuse me give me a second I haven't seen this plant Claire was hiding it when I was there all right so the frontage is going to be a 9ft encroachment 8 foot yeah foot it's going to be an 8ot encroachment across the whole front correct yeah so I'm going to look at that okay yeah yeah that's and the master plan actually recommends that but the zoning they haven't had a chance to update the zoning yet took the steam right out of my sales sorry thanks sorry about that no that's okay I mean I if that's encouraged and and the architect and the applicant have met that that application requirement then I'm what can I say um it's a little bit better than what you had first time um you know if the board is is in agreement you know the porch is you know part of your master plan I I can't argue against it against this won't impact me anyway how long be gone okay thank you I really have no other questions okay seems like it's I just close to conforming Mr Bo is was I guess you retired now bill or was a land attorney and I worked with him many many years ago you can thank me for w Rec conflict there but I did want that on the record yes and I know Mark too from years ago so no big deal I mean I'm happy it seems like that we went from a shotgun approach to very specific I can live with this it seems like it meets the requirements of the ordinance so thank you any other questions from uh the public any comments from the public okay motion to close public hearing I'll make a motion close second all in favor I any oppos okay and uh this one's just for uh variances no waivers so okay someone offer I'll move for a positive resolution I'll second Mr Fuller did Fuller yes Delo yes gazi yes D janiro yes leneski yes chair manica yes chairwoman B yes okay get me oh yes to okay just a reminder um the next meeting is the third Wednesday June 19th not the third Thursday which is June 20th and uh motion to adjourn pleasure all in favor okay