let's call the meeting to order good evening everyone this is the meeting of the municipal lanus Board of the burough Riveredge it is Wednesday April 24th 2004 time now is 7:31 p.m. this meeting of the bur Municipal lanus Board of the burough of Riveredge is being held remotely and recorded via Zoom due to burough council chambers unavailability and is in compliance with the provisions of the open public meetings act and Associated regulations notice of this remote meeting was published in the record posted on the front doors of burough Hall and posted on the Burrow's website the notice included the dialing and login information necessary for public participation and access to this meeting remotely a copy of the agenda for this meeting was made available on the Burrow's website near the posting of the meeting notice and included the dialing and login information during the public comment period of this meeting if you would like to make a public comment please press the raise hand button on Zoom or dial star9 on your telephone keypad to raise your hand the board will address You by name or by the last four digits of your telephone number you may mute and unmute Yourself by pressing the microphone icon on Zoom or dialing star six on your telephone keypad you must state your name and address clearly prior to making a public comment with that I'll ask Miss steinley to call the role please all right thank you and just so you know Lisa has arrived um I'll get started with the role Mr Mayor here Mr klin here miss Boland here Mr merman here Mr feffer is excused tonight Mr cig here um Mr kigo here councilman glass yeah Mr Gibbons here and Mr besed is uh excused tonight okay thank you for that uh first agenda item this evening is under approval of minutes we have a draft of the minutes from our meeting of March 27 2024 was circulated prior to this evening's meeting for review open to the board for comments from or questions on the minutes Mr chairman I have one minor correction Mr um at the bottom of the at the bottom of the first page it refers to you as opening the meeting when actually I ran the me so we should read Vice chairman merid States y y y That's it Mr chair okay any other comments for the board okay with that one change I'll look for a motion to approve the meetings as revised sorry the minutes has [Laughter] revised so moved thank you Mr G there a second second thank you Mr Cano we can just do a a voice okay all in favor I I any oppose any oppose any abstain um I think Miss Poland did you I was not there so I abstained I I will abstain too because I was not present for that meeting as well okay thank you thank you uh next on the agenda this evening under memorializations um we have before us uh a revision on the draft ordinance recommen recommendations um concerning uh changes being made to Food Handlers uh license terminology uh and we're going to take up this evening uh the revisions that were uh discussed and received from the board's Council um for circulation back to uh the and councel so I'll open it to the board for comments Andor questions on the revisions made to the draft ordinance Mr chairman I believe it was more than just the food handl license it was to various other aspects of the code um that was one of them correct yeah there is there were revisions made to various definitions within the code uh dealing with lock code coverage building coverage impervious Services uh and yard amenities amongst other changes okay I I have multiple comments I don't know how you want to approach this though um why we why we dive into it okay so some of them are repeat but um if you go to section three uh paragraph B some of these are just minor typos okay um we need a comma after pergolas right before gazebos okay and then I would suggest as confirmed by the burrow engineer prior to approval okay we want them to get approval first not prior to installation right well the problem it I think um so first the burrow engineer is going to confirm then they're going to get approval then they're going to install it right well you don't necessarily need approval like a Bo a board approval to in to get a discount on the permeable pavers if they're under the improved lot coverage number or the lot coverage number now they'll they'll just need to get a building permit I'm just I just just have to read again permeable surfaces shall be counted in lack coverage figure at 50% of surfaces claim permeable as confirmed by the so we need that information right before the burrow engineer approves it right we need to know how to count that right the building Department's going to need that I don't know maybe there's a better way to clarify it but I think something needs to happen before they install it right someone's got to agree on the discount and how it's discounted maybe there's better language than just changing that word but can I can I comment on that um it would probably come through um the zoning review and as I review it and they're asking for a certain type of uh permeable pavers um I would refer that to the burrow engineer uh for the specifications of that uh installation okay I could change it to prior to approval and installation that sounds good or or an application for building permits something to that affect my work as well all right um is it okay to keep moving yeah why don't you keep going okay so under the definition of imper impervious surfaces surfaces still 3B I just wanted to ask you guys so we've got asphalt paving concrete brick stone gravel maadam do we want to add artificial turf or shredded rubber because I know we talked about those types of surfaces probably not critical but just to raise the awareness that that would be considered as well just a question for you guys well I'll defer Miss SN but the the lead in there is including but not limited to those items so I don't think you can probably add it but I think something to your example okay yeah it would just be to help people you know get an idea it was artificial turf or what was the other shredded rubber surfaces you know like a tennis court even a track not that we're going to have any installing a track but you know those types sometimes play areas okay I'll add those two as well just to be to try and add some clarity thank you okay in um the definitions at the bottom of page uh 3 46-4 um we list driveways park parking airs garages under the definition of lock coverage walkways deck shreds we add peras gazebos patio swiming pools later on in when there's a similar description we mentioned Pavilions I don't know if you want to add that here for consistency you know it's kind of similar to we have pergas gazebos I know if I'm going to add Pavilion too and then also here you have the same thing with installation if you want to make that change again y so my my comments repeat I won't to repeat them again but they they appear in multiple places um where you might want to make those same changes Pavilions and stuff okay more um material I guess yes is a question for everyone um this would be under 46-15 maximum lock coverage paragraph a um we say this is about the reserve a minimum of 5% of the lock coverage in each residential zoning District shall be reserved for yard amenities I'm not sure what that means if it's clear to everyone that's fine but when we say reserved so they can't use that or they need to they couldn't use that for other types of coverage is that what it means and they can only use it for yard amenities that's defined in this chapter I'm not I just want to be clear exactly on what we mean that it should be reserved and that also ties into the table later you know I think the table's great but it has the paragraph Reserve res d right and we give the 5% I'm not sure what reserved how how do how how is that treated with respect to an application like they can't go up to 35 unless they use that 5% for these types of things yes that was the intent okay so if they don't have any yard amenities example they only go to 30% so I don't know if there's probably people on this board that are better than me at determining whether that's well defined in here that you can't use it unless it's used specifically for amenities it so so this question came up and and yeah you know so I agree that I think it warrants a bit more clarity just so the average you know homeowner can understand what this means um and so again if we go back to the intent right it was to reserve 5% of the 35% for what we're calling amenities which are reserved for primarily the rear yard which are things like decks sheds patios Etc and in 99.9% of cases people have these things anyway so necessarily they will occupy some amount of coverage I get there's a discussion at you know whether or not 5% is the right number that's we could could get into that or not but in any event I think we could make it more clear that it's you know 5% of the 35% or of the maximum permitted walk coverage so Tom to clarify I think we're kind of saying it can only be used for right is that kind of what it means well it it's meant to the intent is that there be a a specific set aside or reservation so correct only You' have 30% to do everything else basically so you'd have 30% uh to do the dwelling which there's there's a maximum building coverage of 20 5% which does not change and then presumably you'd have about 5% left over to do your driveway and walkway um and depending on the material of the driveway and walkway there could be a discount credit there also if it's with a certain type of Pap P or stone um I mean that's that's the intent I agree that the wording could be uh refined a bit um it doesn't I know that there's a concern of does this take anything away from anyone uh again the the thresholds are not changing there's still the same 25% building coverage there's still the same 35% uh we're calling it lock coverage now we're also giving more flexibility with certain um paving materials in decks where you can actually get more coverage so in some cases you'll be able to do more than you could today we're just saying that in cases where well the issue was you know in the cases of a new build or even certain additions that there was no room left over for these things and the board's experience was was that variance application after variance application that this was an issue that needed to be addressed because um people were taking advantage of it frankly yeah I I'm good with all that I wasn't trying to reinvent that I just want to make sure that the language is clear and it's clear what we mean by Reserve that's no point well taken I think we could tighten it up I think Marina and I maybe and Steve think collectively we can tighten that up and again the way the process will work is assuming this gets recommended to the council the Council can review it chew on it it presumably it would get introduced come back to this board for master plan consistency review and then go back to the council for adoption so there's still a few more you know checks and balances on this um and I you know not to get into the weeds but on this issue there's a question of I know we landed on 5% but I just thought it might be helpful to put some numbers to that what does that actually mean so I did a quick table and in consideration of this new 50% discount we're calling and that means that if previously you were entitled to 100% square or excuse me a 100 square foot patio you can now do a 150q foot patio up you know up to a certain limit so I'll share my screen for a moment if you can bear with me just so the board is comfortable with you know the allocations that we're talking about and uh you know the options may be to Simply confirm that 5% is okay or consider something different so can you all see my little quick chart that I made here yes on the very left hand column it includes the typical lot sizes in River Edge which are 5,000 to 10,000 generally of course there are anomalies some that are larger and some somewhere in between so the new 5% set aside gives you those numbers of what what those Reserve numbers mean so for the typical 5,000 foot lot that means you have to save 250 feet for the backyard which is out of whack and if you add the the new 50% bonus you know for certain paid materials you actually end up getting 375 square feet um in the backyard if you adjust that to 3% for instance you have those same respective numbers in the column so I'm not suggesting a change but I know there were questions um in the board and I've heard others just you know what do these numbers actually mean I thought that that this would help the board you know confirm that um you know this number makes sense to have some you know data as it were behind uh the decision or recommendation rather it's a recommendation at this point so does this make sense to everybody yes least does it warrant further okay so I I guess the question would be if you're comfortable with the 5% we uh keep it that way and and uh again these would be the applicable numbers so again nothing is being taken away in terms of the ability of somebody to improve their lot in most cases they'll they'll be able to do a bit more because of the new coverage discount for patios and decks and the like this just merely says that you have to save some space in the back to do these things and a person could still come to us asking for a variance after they have these things too so you know it's not limiting people to being able to do it's just forcing their hand you know and I think more importantly forcing the hand of the builders to set this aside um I I'm I I don't think we should reduce it because I think we need to encourage it people to have these spaces because it's what they want you know it's what they're going to need and we have too many people buying houses that not realizing that they don't have the space so I'm hey Tom I don't agree with your math the parentheticals okay so if you take the three the first example at 5,000 square ft 5% 250 and then you had in parentheses 375 right it wouldn't really work that way okay 375 time 0.5 right isn't 250 it's 187.5 so I have to back into the parenthetical well I was doing if if the 5% would get you to 250 and you could add an additional 50% on top you so so if you had if it was permeable right and we were giving a 50% discount itcl be 500 square feet right and then you multiply that 500 by 0.5 right and it would be then it would be equivalent to 250 feet of lock coverage so you divide by take the 250 and divide by 0. five instead of banging it up by 50% saying look if you if you install 500 square feet we're going to Discount that 50% so we're only going to count it as 250 okay so you see it as subtractive and not additive it's just the math we're saying look okay it's as if it's 50% permeable right so you put in 500 square right so you put in 500 square feet it's like you only put in 250 right the the language in the document I see what you're saying yeah get a discount okay right okay well I stand math too Tom I I it's a discount so I honestly I did it very uh quickly minutes ago so so what would those numbers be then would they would they be higher than what he just shared on the screen or would they be lower um higher it would double parentheticals would be you're just doubling you're doubling what could have before so if I was allowed 100 feet I can now do 200 feet instead of calling it a discount Tom we better off calling it a bonus yeah I yeah I think a bonus makes sense just that I think people bonus would be additive I think in people's mind discount you're kind of taking anyway I'm just thinking yeah well it it is intended as sort of I guess that's the appropriate way to look at it okay I don't think the math would work out I think that it has to be called the discount and then the math would be n * 0.5 equals uh whatever the amount was and then you you would uh divide by 0.5 on both sides and that's where you would get yeah I mean people are going to tell us what square footage they want to put in and then we're going to say well it's 50% permeable so we're only going to count it as 250 right it's like a discount do we do we want to put them math in the in the ordinance well actually Tom there is an example the math is right in the ordinance there's an example a parenthetical example in the ordinance and the math is right where is that so under the definition of lot coverage for deck we had previously agreed to have a discount of 75% in the lot C lot coverage calculation if the deck has opened joints and no impervious surface below so if you had a 100 foot deck with open joints no impervious below um then the lot coverage calculation for that deck would be 25 square feet EXA even though it's physically 100 square feet it would only count towards 25 square feet of lck coverage correct correct and I think that's the right way to do it because you you're starting with what's going to be there and discounting off it yeah so the example in the ordinance in the parenthetical is correct yeah and it's important that we we don't give you know um important that we let them present what they have and then explain to them what the discount is instead of encouraging you know an amount that might be problematic to the because we don't want them to have to come to us uh if they if they work within the um because it's expensive and timec consuming to come to us so it's much better that this is as long as um as long as Steve is comfortable with the math I I I'm comfortable with the ordinance the way it's written I I am just just to clarify then so on the deck you're you're dividing by 0 75 and that that gets you the number is that the right you're multiply you're multiplying your proposed area by 75 and that's what's considered the lock coverage multiply by7 okay okay anything else councilman I have a few others yeah I'm sorry uh burden everyone I don't know if you guys agree with me on this but section 13 um paragraph a starts with the term accessory building or rure is not intended to include and then A3 is air conditioning units HVAC equipment solar panels and so on and then in B we say the term accessory building or structure shall include air conditioning units H so that just confused me the difference is in a it's for residential buildings and then for B it's for non-residential buildings okay so this was that was our intent well I I do I do think at the end of the day we still need setbacks for AC's and generators in residential zones we we've had them' been feet so you know whether or not we call them accessory buildings or structures I would recommend a few things one that they not be in the front yard and two that there' be a minimum side and rear yard setback um and and I guess there's two ways to achieve that either we remove it remove it from the exemptions or we just give it a separate provision that says that clarifies it uh I mean feel free to disagree but I mean it seems to be fairly common place in in codes okay I don't see where it says residential and non-residential in A and B though under A3 the last it's the last part of the sentence last part of the sentence uh oh okay okay thank you okay thank you okay yeah I think that's good okay yeah I think Mr Baron's suggestion on the residential you know have some minim have a nominal setback kind of makes sense if there are any objection to that from the board okay oh with the generators I think you would want to put a uh maximum distance from the house also is there a there's a generally accepted I guess depending on the the layout of the House of the property is there a general configuration for where that where they're generally located Steve well um no not necessarily um there's been um situations where um the generators have been put back quite away from the uh from the structure uh so they didn't have to hear it or buy a detached garage or something like that but then it affects the neighbors uh when it goes into uh you know your um your um startup modes okay I think that can be covered in our next round of zoning ordinance updates not necessarily in this one sounds good councilman one more guys um and this is for discussion in section 13 again still in the same section paragraph C we're allowing garages and flag poles to be up to 15 feet high I don't know if we wanted to add gazebos pergas Pavilions too I don't know why any one of those would be more offensive than a garage at 15 feet just the thought well a garage is more of a structure for storage uh um with cars and possibly um a small attic space u having it 15 feet high uh will eliminate the the um uh possible uh um putting a a second floor um as far as the sheds uh sheds are aren't as large as a garage I think they would look uh you know narrow and Tall um and uh Burgas gazebos things like that um average size is 10 feet as long as you had head head clearance coming into the structure excellent thank you one last thing um on the table I think the table's great uh by the way I think all the work done on this is terrific um single family cluster um under lock coverage so we have building coverage 30% and then we have lock coverage 10% that does didn't make sense to me that the lock coverage is lower than the building coverage is that a typo um I think I took that from the prior ordinance um I can check though yeah so right now the building coverage is 30% the lock coverage is 10% I would would have thought the lock coverage has to be a higher number than the building coverage that is in the current Table Steve does that need to be fixed uh clusters uh you're talking about tow houses things of that nature and they usually go into a um you know more building coverage than than lot coverage you have smaller backyards more smaller front yards um so possibly that's where that number smaller number came up does it make sense that the lock coverage would be smaller than the building coverage uh it wouldn't make sense because you're including building coverage within lock coverage right Tom and Steve can you guys fix that before it goes to the council yes yeah we'll take a look I think there's a anyway yes St your question good okay councilman thank you very much for entertaining my comments okay um anyone else in the board comments okay um [Music] so at this point um would there be consensus to let um Tom and Steve and Marina do whatever Visions they need to make to this and have one more look at this or we is is the board comfortable enough that assuming those changes are made refer taking a vote now and referring this on to the May Council and and just to add to that um the bur the board will see this ordinance again just for the master plan consistency review Mr chairman nio uh I think it's time with these changes uh that we move it on to the council it's we've talked about it for a while and I think uh it's time that they look at it we'll get another shot at fixing anything else that we feel maybe may need to be addressed thanks okay thank you anyone else I would I would agree okay AG okay all right that being said with that consensus uh I'll look for a motion then to to make that uh recommendation so move okay thank you I Mr K on a first and Mr merman on a second right we can just do all in favor want to do a voice over okay uh on the motion all in favor I any pose any abstain all right thank you very much thank you all okay our next agenda item this evening is under completeness review the first item is Leon and Jennifer Chen 135 Kensington Road this is block 814 lot two a proposed uh rear on story Edition to include a deck and stairs and looking for Relief on a rear yard setback and I believe the applicant is here good as well in case we have questions um Miss steinley yes thank you prior to the meeting I reviewed the proofs submitted by the applicant and found them to be sufficient for the board to hear the application tonight okay Mr duckin any comments on completeness it yes when I did the zoning review um it was a non-compliance letter that was sent um and uh we can discuss uh that during the uh application okay thank you sir Mr Costa good evening Mr chairman good evening you can uh my recommendation would be take it to the public session okay thank sir thank you questions from the board on uh the application as far as completeness okay there being none I'll look for a motion on the deem the application complete so moved thank you Mr Gibbons is there a second I'll second it thank you Mr merman I'm sorry I didn't get the the motion uh Mr Gibbons and Mr merman okay all right Mr Mayor yes Mr caslin yes Miss Boland yes Mr merman yes Mr Craig yes Mr kigo yes councilman glass yes Mr Gibbons yes all right the motion passes okay thank you everyone uh our second application this evening and my apologies if I do not pronounce this correctly the applicant is yuman kulov property is 606 Kinder kak road block 617 lot 14 this is a uh food food handler's license on a change of tenant I believe uh the applicant is here as well as his Council this evening so we have them available uh Miss steinley turn to you yes thank you prior to this meeting I reviewed the proof submitted by the applicants attorney and found them to be sufficient for the board to hear the application tonight okay thank you Mr dekin uh yes I did the zoning review for um the application and uh deemed it complete in regards to zoning to be presented to the board okay thank you sir uh Mr Costa any comments on the completeness aspects I I concur I would my recommendation send to the public meeting okay thank you sir any questions comments from the board on completeness okay there being none I'll look for a motion to deem this application complete I moved thank you Mr Keno is there a second second Mr chair think I may have gotten Mr merman a hair head of M bowan so oh you steinley when you're ready all right Mr Mayor yes Mr cin yes Miss Boland yes Mr merman yes Mr Craig yes Mr Keno yes councilman glass yes and Mr gibons yes okay the motion passes okay thank you everyone we're going to move now on new business our first application is Leon and Jennifer Chen property is 135 Kensington Road Block 814 lot two uh application is Seeking a rear yard setback uh relief in connection with a one story addition to the existing dwelling uh believe Mr I see Mr Chen good evening hi how you doing my wife is actually with me but uh our our uh our baby just had a little accident so she she's uh taking care of it all all good do you have anybody else with you this evening do you have an architect with you uh that's me Kevin okay good evening sir good evening okay uh before we get started I'll ask Miss styley to take care of the formalities all right if you please raise your right hand do you swear or affirm that the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do all right and we'll start with Mr Chen if you just state your name spell your last name and provide your address for record sure my name is Leon Chen uh L O N last name is C hen uh my address is 135 Kensington Road in River Edge okay thank you and Mr if you state your name spell your last name provide your address and give the board some background on your qualifications and lure certainly uh my name is Kevin SP is and Peter in ink from The Firm of tanzan associate Architects uh we are located at 21-00 uh Route 20 South in FW New Jersey uh Suite 260 um I am a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey in good standing since 2009 um I have worked at the firm of canania associate Architects since uh 1994 so uh 30 years this October I have presented in front of this board as well as hundreds of others up and down the East Coast okay any questions from the board on Mr sp's qualifications okay thank you and I think uh uh Mr Chen is is your wife going to give testimony as well should we Square her into no just me just you okay all right so why don't we get started then Mr chair if you would for the for the board's benefit if you could describe what it is that you're looking to do with your property and uh the relief you're looking for from the board this evening great thank you everybody for your time um we been here for about four years we moved here uh July 20 20 um you know the height of pandemic and we really love this town and we grow to love our neighbors and we make friends here so you know we we we like where we are and we like our house but uh we now have a fouryear old and also a four month V year but so we just had a new baby in December and um even though we have enough bedrooms but we're just kind of really growing out of the living space um our house um if you come into the front entrance it goes directly into dining area or the living room area and uh the one living room area is basically one living area where all of us and at times my in-laws come visit and stay with us um everybody's just basically on top of each other in the living room now if you come the other entrance it goes right into the dining room I mean the kitchen where we are right now so really we have no space for uh shoes jackets and with a four-year-old it just kind of things are everywhere um we don't want to move because we like this town and uh so we do want to kind of expand a little bit where our deck is that we don't actually get to use as much as we you know were thought we were going to so um we figured that we'll make it into a little um addition play area uh living space and just give each other a little bit more space uh overall so that's kind of what we're looking to do with this uh proposal okay thanks for that maybe I'll do Mr if you in mind if you could get some the technical aspects of the application certainly um would you like me to uh share the screen to to present it or sure that's fine okay okay uh is everybody see it uh see this now we've got a plan up yeah okay perfect okay these are the uh drawings that we submitted uh consisted of A1 and A2 which are the elevations and the floor plans um our property is located in the R1 Zone uh we are a corner lot and we are deficient in total square footage the uh the lot area supposed to be required 7500 we are uh 7,163 Square fet so we are short on the overall size the fact that it is a corner lot as well has created some of uh or all of the conditions that we have as as two front yards um as you can see on our site plan you have the two front yards at uh 30 feet you have the 25ft rear yard and the the 7 and 1/2t sidey yard um ultimately that creates a a really a non-buildable area on this piece of property to put anything so um what we are looking to do is there is an existing deck on the rear of the house that is in this location we are looking to uh basically Square Off the rear of the house with a one-story addition removing the deck creating a family room and a mud room um that would allow for access from the side of the house um as as Mr Chen had uh commented currently when you walk into the front of the house you're walking pretty much directly at a staircase that goes directly to the dining room on the uh on the right hand side and on the leth hand side you're going right into the family room or or their current living room um so there really is not any place to take shoes off or or hang up coats you're you're right into the into the space so we looking to create go to the second floor we were looking to create a a mudroom area that as you come in we'd have someplace to actually remove clothes remove your shoes uh be able to hang them up and and put them away without uh encroaching on the front of the current house uh we're also looking to add a as I said a family room which would give them additional square footage area for the family to uh meet and join together without having all of the kids toys in that area because they tend to uh I have two children of my own I know it fills up the area very quickly um ultimately the variance requests that we're asking for is due to the fact that this addition will be built both uh or completely into what would be the rear yard setback we are not increasing our rear yard any bigger than what it currently is it currently is 9.5 feet to the back of the house um we are looking at the corner where the the two-story portion of the house currently is is 14.25 that is our our closest encroachment that we are looking to do and then it gets back to a 20.54% um the neighbors's houses both left and right if you will on the property are the garage sides of the house um on the Northern portion it is a one-story garage so there is no uh house extending over it so this does not really impact or impede onto the neighbor's house the opposite side there is a two-story portion of the house but it is garage so again as a one-story our windows are not looking directly into somebody else's house um and they are not looking directly into ours um we felt this was a DI Minimus in nature overall and because of the hardships of the property shape the location of the house and the undersiz of the lot we felt that this uh would be an acceptable um application um I would like to uh review some of the Costa engineering comments if I may um specifically number four in his General comments the schematic site plan references surveys by done surveying uh and mapping dated 119 the survey surve submitted to the application was dated February 24th 2020 uh the reason for this discrepancy is that our firm actually did the original renovations to this house and we had the site plan from that 2019 and we had reused it uh the only differences between the 2019 and the 200 uh 20 uh site plans are there is a second air conditioning unit at the back so there are two air conditioning units in L of one uh instead of one um and on the front of the house instead of the walkway extending directly out to the front of the house it is just a a ball shape and it extends up to the driveway those are essentially the only changes that were on it uh continuing on to the comments from the engineering comments regarding storm water management and drainage um we just received this this copy so I we have not been able to update our drawings or calculations but we will um concede that we will put in a drainage system um and they were asking where the location should be to pick up for this roof uh the best location for it would be right in this location right here to the northern portion of the driveway due to the topography um that is one of the additional questions Topography is that the property is high in the the southern corner and it slopes downwards to the northern corner at this bite here so by placing it in this location here we are catching it at the low Point as it's sloping down it is in front of the neighbor's house and neighbor's garage so at no point would we be um initiating any additional wood or runoff onto the neighbor's house through this detention system um and we will agree to do whatever calculations that are required if this application was approved um it would be based on on that condition that yes we will provide calculations for a drainage system that will capture uh the roof leaders for this total addition um everything else I believe is just generic in nature there is no additional Landscaping that would be happening there's no additional traffic concerns um I believe that that would be everything um and I I I feel that uh this is as I said Minimus in nature and that uh it does not affect the Neighbors in any way um it is not even visible from the front yards as you're driving by uh the overall finishes that we'll be putting onto this will match the current house so it will be a white clapboard siding um and I feel that the board uh should hopefully look favorably upon this application great thank you Mr SM you can stop sharing your screen for the for the moment that we absolutely great thanks all right let me open it to the board for questions um let me start with Mr Craig uh yeah just briefly I just wanted to make sure I understood the the addition is going to be built on the footprint of the existing patio that's being removed it's not expanding in any way is that correct no that is not correct the the current deck is probably about 5 feet uh short of the corner of the house we are squaring off the back corner of the house got it okay so it is gonna so then that's where you're going down to the nine and a half feet then kind that is correct yes the existing the existing deck if I'm not mistaken is approximately 192 square feet um and our addition is about uh 272 square feet when you actually take the total square footages okay and what was the uh existing patio construction what was that made of it was an elevated deck okay okay uh that's all I've got okay thank you Mr Cay Miss bowan I have no questions thank you uh Mr Mayor I'm good thank you okay uh councilman class I don't have any questions or comments thank you okay uh Mr Keno seems uh reasonable to me no comments thank you okay thank you Mr given I am good thank you okay Mr merman I'm also good I have no questions okay no questions from me either um at this point I believe we will uh I'd like a motion to open uh the meeting to the public this application alone I think I got a first from Mr Gibbs and a second from Mr Keno all in favor iOS opposing obstain all right at this time we're now open to the public for comments on this application alone if there's anyone in the uh in the audience or on Zoom would like to uh be heard on this application please raise your hand missyy we have anybody we do have some attendees but nobody's raising their hand you can drop dial Star n or raise your hand on Zoom doesn't look like anybody all right that being the case I'll look for a motion to close to the public so thank you Mr Cay there a second second thank you miss ball and all in FA I oppose the obain all right we're now closed to the public for comment on this application um any further questions comments from the board or our professionals okay uh there being none I will look to the board for a motion on the application please may I offer a motion Mr chair uh please do so Mr merman um regarding Leon and Jennifer con 135 Kensington Road um block 8814 lot two um regarding the proposed rear Edition um which repl rear Edition and St um there's one variance required and that's a rear yard setback uh variance the existing non-conforming variance is 9 and A2 ft um code requires 25 foot the um proposed uh setback still results in a rear yard variance of 14.1 feet which in essence approves an existing non-conforming condition um I make a motion that the the planning board Grant approval and that the approval clear applian incorporating Mr K's uh storm water management comments that's it Mr chair okay thank you Mr Mur is there a second to the motion second thank you Miss Bowen miss steinley when you're ready I just wanted to clarify that the rear yard setback there's two numbers one is 9.5 feet and the other is 14.21 Ft both of those are going to be existing correct okay yes they are okay Mr is nodding that is correct yes the the 9.5 is to the two-story pre-existing building uh the 14.21 is to the other corner of the two-story pre-existing and that is where our one story will start okay all right just so we're clear in the motion all right we have a motion and second and I'll take the vote Mr Mayor yes Mr caslin yes Miss Boland yes Mr merman yes Mr Craig yes Mr Keno yes M uh councilman glass yes and Mr gibons yes okay the motion passes great thank you very much good luck congratulations right thank you everybody thank you all the best bye bye okay moving along on our agenda this evening under new business we move now to uh applicant is Yan KY rulof property 606 Kendrick Mack Road Block 617 lot 14 this is uh a in connection with a change of tenant and application for a food handler's license I believe we have both the applicant and the applicants council with us this evening Mr Barrett good evening good evening Mr chairman um as you indicated this is an application necessitated by the ordinance which states if you need a food handler's licens then you need to get site plan approval uh the premises were formerly used uh most previously by The Monsoon restaurant uh and to my knowledge it's been a restaurant for at least 62 years um when I moved into River Edge in 1962 it was the Madison and then it had various improvements over the years going from a neighborhood gin maill to a restaurant then a Chinese restaurant then the Indian restaurant and now uh Mr kulov would like to open a and I might not pronounce this correctly pistan restaurant yeah um there's there are no changes proposed to the site whatsoever and everything is staying the same the same number of seats uh there's no outside construction um I stand correct there is one change and that's to the sign U the monsoon sign would be replaced uh with the sign copy of which was submitted to the board uh it's going to be mounted in the same place the mounting um irons or whatever they're called are located on the roof they're still there the sign itself The Monsoon restaurant restaurant sign was removed and U if the board were to Grant approval the new sign uh would go up it's black and white um and um as I say there there are no changes proposed but Mr Kasa did have a couple of questions which I will ask my client just for confirmation and the first question uh that he had was I'm sorry Tom I'll just have toar sorry um so if you please raise your right hand do you swear airm that the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth yes yes and just state your name and spell your last name for the record and provide your address my first name John last name H address 369 Safari Drive Jackson New Jersey 08527 thank you thank you okay Mr bar thank than you so Mr kab uh the U BAU engineer had inquired whether or not the existing uh aspects of the restaurant are an acceptable condition and whether or not you proposed any interior Renovations no everything the same nothing change okay also Mr CA had a comment whether or not the uh whether there's a necessity to be compliant with the latest Ada accessible designs and I think we've had this discussion before since there are no uh improvements uh proposed that the premises do not have to be brought up to the latest standards um Mr K what what do you intend to be the hours of operation of the restaurant so uh I am planning from 11:00 a.m. till 11:00 p.m. that would be seven days a week yes sir okay and also there was a question as to whether or not you uh plan on any improvements to the existing patio the outdoor patio no it's fine I don't want to change anything I like it it's very nice everything good it's going to stay the same yes sir everything the same and there was a question too from Mr Costa whether or not you we're proposing any additional Landscaping no just just you're going to keep the existing Landscaping yes how it is everything I like it everything fine and the existing lighting for the patio are the uh lights that are mounted in the wall surrounding the patio is that correct yes sir and you do you plan on any additional lighting no everything fine everything I like it new nothing to change because everything fine okay um there was a a comment that the uh parking spaces that are on the site should be relined are you in agreement with doing that yes sir okay uh and okay uh how do you plan on having uh your products delivered to the restaurant because I have already one restaurant in Mal ship this is my second restaurant so hopefully I do well first one second one also I know what I'm doing so how how how are you going to get your supplies how will they how will they be delivered so uh supplies the delivery morning time maybe every Wednesday and do you know what kind of a truck they use to make those deliveries but uh I use everything Halal so it's come small cars you know they bring me everything fresh okay so in a in a in a van yeah it's like minivan okay so no no tractor trailers no no okay um and and what about the garbage pickup what Arrangements have you made for that so I I already spoke with the guys every a week twice they come to pick up the garbage I have spot on the back side already 20 yard so every Wednesday and Saturday they come to change so that there's a dumpster in the back right now yeah yeah yeah everything like before so again uh the the company that is going to be removing the garbage is familiar with the site and they don't feel they'll have any problem accessing that dumpster because uh I spoke with them they told me before they make it service for the restaurant Indian so I I keep it how it was a week twice they come to pick up everything okay so it's the it's actually the same company as the prior restaurant yeah yes sir okay no changes okay I do not have any additional questions at this time okay uh questions from our professional let me start with Mr dekin there we go thank you um yeah they met all the requirements um the fact that there's uh no changes interior or or exterior it just seems to be a TurnKey operation um the only issue that I have is signage um I didn't see the signage uh application I did see the uh proposed sign there's no um measurements on those uh and I see the location they will need to obtain a building permit for the installation of the sign so just so they're aware of that uh that they can come in and uh you know submit a a permit for uh the uh the signage uh will the signage be lit and if so how is there G to be any lighting for the sign it gonna be a a light shining on the sign Mr crew no no there is no shine no there is regular sign that is white and black he he can submit that with the building permit so that that's fine just so the board is aware I mean it was submitted but it is a large sign you know relatively speaking it's 40 sare ft it's uh it's 10 by 40 and it's the same size as the one yeah as the monsoon sign that was there we so Tom to be clear the monsoon sign is 40 square feet currently I'm not sure it's not it's been taken down well okay so the prior the previously approved sign was 40 square feet I think I think that that warrants confirmation because we allow a maximum of I believe it's 20 square feet so correct either you'd be held to the 20 square feet or whatever was previously approved so I mean we can accept those conditions without a specific number if you want to do that yeah I mean um well as you know it's um somewhat difficult to find out what was and what wasn't approved um you know even even I mean I was able to get a copy of the uh Monsoon resolution when they put in the patio but any any of the other documents were not available um so you I can I can try and ascertain um you know unfortunately the monsoon attorney is now retired that's Sam sesty uh so can't get his records uh in any event I'm sure we can you know get some information somewhere I mean if you just look at the I I would just be hesitant to rubber stamp the 40 square feet without confirming so I if if in fact the previous sign was larger and we can come the building department can come to an agreement with that that I think that's I don't want them but that seems reasonable or 20 square feet just to say 40 square feet I think would I understand I think that the yeah right and again I don't even know what you call the things on the roof that H the you call them stanions or there there's three of them on there and there's a picture that was submitted with the application showing those the former Monsoon sign can be observed on Google Street View I believe so that gives an indication you know an estimate of of what was there whatever that may be right that's fine that's that's all that's all we want to do is have what they have if that's the case then yeah I would need something from the board state what the the size of the signage would be um on on approval so the board could decide tonight that they're okay with the 40 square foot sign um yeah that's up to the board okay I have I just have a comment about that um looking on Google Earth the monsoon sign might be 40 square feet but the lettering um it's not a square for by 10 um and if if what's being proposed is it would appear to be much larger the the the monsoon sign is just the lettering without the frame so we'd want to make sure it's not a solid versus just the lettering does anyone have the ability to share the sign so we could you know just take a quick look put this to B the one I submitted I haven't seen seen it either I assume be email I only have I only have the paper copy Shar just a big I think I can share my screen all right let's do that that shows what's existing well not existing what was there what was there right and darl do you have the the exhibit that was submitted for the proposed I don't think I have the exhibit now okay does does anyone can we hold on scanning my email is it in the documents that are listed on the uh website yeah but I believe it it would be either part of the application packet or separate yes yes it was well I Marina do you want to try to hold it up again if that's the best we've got I mean that's that's kind of where we're at so it's hard to focus with this but right will all the black Square rectangle be the full sign or is it individual letters no it's it's a solid sign the letters are on the sign and then that big that rectangle would be hung up on on the brackets brackets thank you yes the word I was looking for Mr chairman Mr merman that sign was included in the packet and it had a cover sheet that said it was 40 square feet correct and the picture is as Miss steinley Miss steinley showed so basically in my packet I had a submitt of a Sign by the applicant with size total square footage and a layout I think we also have pictures of the bracket that would be supporting the new sign that had previous supported the previous sign for Monsoon that is correct and they remain in place bracket is still there okay all right so why don't we come Mr Barrett is it safe to say that the applicant is proposing a 40 square foot sign um of the layout shown yes that is correct okay okay and that is that part of our application that's part of our application tonight for review is the sign yes it was all submitted okay just making sure we have that covered okay um Mr dep anything further from you before we move on uh no that's all thank you uh Mr Gibb Mr C excuse me sorry about that the only thing and um maybe Mr merman can refresh my memory also I think the previous application they were supposed to do some streetscape but they never did and then I think ultimately the uh they went they either moved the location or went out of business there so I'm not sure if that is that's still um probably needs to be done under this I I don't think this anything in the resolution Mr CA let me just find it here I could be I could be mistaken that's been know to happen uh no you are correct good memory uh the applicant was to update the streetcape similar to sanducci's number 14 of the resolution of 2018 that is correct but that was never again that was never done and I think ultimately the restaurant closed um I'm not sure if this gentleman's purchasing the property or is's the tenant no he's the tenant the uh the landlord is on is on the zoom Miss that's Mr Raiden um I don't know if he was familiar with what occurred back in 2018 or not I could uh swear you in Mr Aiden if you please raise your right hand do you swear affirm the testimony that you're about to give will be the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth I do all right and please state your name spell your last name and provide your address for the record Gabriel Aiden last name a yd i n for Beacon way Jersey City 07304 thank you and you are a representative of the landlord yeah managing partner for Hannah realy oh okay good sorry Mr Kasa can you repeat your question no is the previous the previous application um there was a requirement to do the streetcape which never got accomplished and ultimately I think I was under the impression they were the owners I didn't realize maybe you guys bought it after the fact I don't know but that was never done so it's up to the board whether or not they want to wave that previous requirement which if I was a betting man I would say they wouldn't um but again I mean you can certainly request that but I'm not sure how we get to that that point based on the previous they built the out patio and I'm pretty sure and Tom I don't have that resolution I apologize but I think you read it and that was a requirement back in in 18 or 19 18 yeah so what what would maybe if you could explain to us Mr Costa what would be required basically sidewalk brick pavers um I'm not sure if it says verbatim the sanducci property I think Tony what's that similar to sanduches right they I'm pretty sure they have a light there also if I'm not mistaken the good news is they no longer make those lights which is a uh which is a very large cost but they don't they don't actually they manufacture them anymore um but again it's it's strictly up to the board so so if I understand it and just so Mr Aiden understands you're suggesting that the uh sidewalks in the front of the property be changed over to the brick pavers or whatever they're called It's a combination of both okay it's I I mean it it looks like it would be pavers between the existing sidewalk and curb potentially and maybe replacement of a few slabs if they're broken which he might have to do anyway with or without the light post is that or accurate Mr C I think one of the the trees is dead also so that might be worth be another right could be trees depend again I'd have to recircle back to it but I think that's I think you get the gist what's out there right so it's about it's about 60 feet because the uh this southernly driveway alongside the beauty salon is um almost 33 feet and then the Northerly driveway appears to be almost 7 feet so about 40 feet of the 100 foot Frontage is driveways so we'd only we'd only be talking about this the sidewalk area is that right Mr C that I'm not sure of if again if it goes back to what sanducci is and I don't have the Google Maps or Google Earth in front of me they might have changed their their actual aprons for their driveways also so whatever that mimic is again but certainly you could come in with a sketch show us what you want to do and if the board wants to to change that you could do that otherwise I think it's got to go back to what the condition was in the res the previous resolution or get that waved well whatever is installed there ultimately should be consistent with what what exists today correct up the street okay correct well I think that that was the intention right I'm I'm looking at sanducci's on the map right now and it's from September of 2021 and as mentioned I think the grass area between the sidewalk and the street is now pavers um as of this picture the the the driveway is just the old sidewalk type screen on the SC yeah that's what I'm looking at so I think we're just talking pavers for you know 3 feet by 60 feet I guess something like that okay so the sidewalk would remain unless unless the slabs need to be replaced and it's just that minimal area between the curb and the and the walkway that we're talking about well actually it would be the it would be the side the sidewalk pattern is probably not the same as this so it's probably the sidewalk and the papers and then possibly Street trees if they can fit there and again that that's what was constructed you know many years ago so all right so so help help me here so are we saying that you want the sidewalks replaced with pavers they'd be they'd be the only ones with pavers as a sidewalk the sidewalk would would have to match the streets gate which this doesn't and then where the grass is that would become the brick pavers you have trees there you would have to well the trees with the belg block curving right but still confused if you could maybe I'm being dull or something but what what are we doing with the sidewalk what's the sidewalk would the sidewalk would have to match the sidewalk that's required under under the SE streetscape ordinance which is a different pattern than what is existing there it has it's different type of concrete pattern with a curb um the the curve the strip of brick pavers as you see there with wells for for new trees and then walkway for you know concrete walkway right so why is this required for this location with the existing buildings next to it don't have that papers as well well it it was required when we we we had an application before us for Monsoon that was a condition of approval that they make these um improvements back in 2018 those improvements were never made so what what should have happened was what you see here should have been done to the front of your property it never was and it wasn't that those those conditions were never satisfied got it so it's you know as between you and the and the Tenant you know you need to come up with who you know if the board takes action on this and and does continue to have that as a requirement as a of approval tonight as between you and the Tenant you'll have to um determine who's who's going to be responsible for making those improvements sure yeah we could talk offline on on that okay why don't we let's continue I have a I have a question there Mr chairman Mr mer okay Mr coner we're putting in we're putting in a handicap spot in the front uh would not that walkway have to be replaced with heavier slab be cost of the wheel loading well the the requirement for Ada is can cannot be more than 2% in each Direction so if the grading there doesn't work they're going to have to modify their that parking area if it's steeper than in any direction it won't meet the new requirements well the space is space is already there and and it's marked as a you know handicapped space right if if you don't touch it that we determined that previously no harm no foul but if you touch it then you have to right so we we don't want to touch it okay so you're not touching so that that wouldn't it wouldn't come into effect okay question sidewalk in the front not touching the parking no problem so that that's that's the only again everything else stays the same Mr Barrett I believe sent a um or Marina sent this afternoon the agreement between uh the adjacent property owner and the parking spaces I don't know I'm sure there's some board members left that remember it was almost like the Hatfields and McCoy on that with the with the shared parking Arrangement that was worked out and according to what you sent uh Mr Barrett you can put on the record that's still in force right and I believe Mr Gorski and his attorney are were they're supposed to be president at the hearing to confirm that but to also make a request which I'll um say for them that it's limited to these the spaces that are mentioned in the agreement the 12 parking spaces it doesn't the the agreement to share parking does not extend beyond the um the Northerly property this Northerly property line if it was extended uh through what is Mr gorsky's property so we on our plan they're listed as spaces nine through or something yeah spaces 9 through 19 19 and essentially full basically that's in full force and effect that's correct everything else stays the same um from what the I guess the gentleman who's who's actually going to run the restaurant or own the restaurant so the only the only outstanding on it would be then the streetscape in the front and if there is any Landscaping that that dies then obviously it needs to be replaced and right if there's any other you know issues with with anything else on the on the actual property outside it needs to be corrected obviously yeah we're not aware of any we think everything's okay but of course um you know once the burrow does its uh Co inspection uh if there's anything that needs to be corrected it will be Mr chairman that's that's all I have okay thank you Mr CA let me continue with uh questions from on the board M Bolan can I start with you yes so I'm still I'm still going to go back to the signage I I don't I think what's being shown uh will give an appearance of being much larger than what was there um because of the fact that it was just letters there and no backing and now we have a full backing so I think 40 square feet is excessive for the sign that's my opinion okay than thank you uh let me go now to Mr Mr Keno thank you Mr chairman I agree with Miss Bolan about the sign uh especially given the fact that it's a it's a just Square 40 foot sign as opposed to the individual letters uh and uh I also agree that the streetcape component that was not adhered to or or followed through with um back in 2018 must be uh followed through with now if we're going to approve this um the Kinder clac Corridor businesses of River Edge don't have in certain uh instances the greatest streetscapes so I think it's important for our town uh to beautify it whenever it's possible uh the board in 2018 uh saw fit to require that as a condition uh and I don't think we should step back from it because it's going to give future uh applicants just the impetus to ignore what we ask for once uh they get the approval and go ahead with whatever they want to do so I think it's important that we adhere to what was requested beforehand thank you okay thank you uh Mr Mayor I very much agree with what Miss Bolan and Mr Keno said in wholeheartedly uh I'd also like to just opine for a second on the sign um the sign is uh is not a full uh 40 square fet it's clear that that's not the case so I I would think that the applicant should propose a sign closer to the 20 square feet or at least less than the 40 square foot um and that's those are my thoughts okay thank you uh councilman I don't have anything to add thank you okay uh Mr Craig uh same all my questions that we ask has been have been asked and answered so thank you thank you Mr Gibbons uh nothing really to add just to reiterate um you know on the sign I would agree that you know the monsoon sign I think is less obtrusive than what's being proposed um you know and also a little disappointed that the streetcape was not addressed seeing it's been six years and uh it does look like it's the same ownership that's owned the property for about 13 years so um I think it's time we we clean up the front that's all I have okay thank you um Mr merman um several [Music] comments missar um can you give or your client give testimony that the lower level is uh currently being used to storage and Will Made storage only Mr uh G is is the is the basement or the lower level currently being used for storage yes for now I am not using because upstairs very big I I have enough upstairs for the rest and will we remain is storage yeah like storage we put everything okay fine um you're a dumpster you're dump enclosure is in need of repair the gate is coiling off so I'm going to request that um you repair that okay okay um great um i' I'd like to solve the sign tonight so that we can at least give criteria to the applicant and the um borrow uh um authorities uh So to avoid having to come back in to the board for any kind of sign approval if we can set up some criteria on square footage and size um that would be fine um can we do that somehow uh Mr chairman I have no objections to that unless anybody else on the board does um I've heard a maximum of 40 square feet I've heard 20 square feet by one other board member might might have been a mayor I'm not sure um can uh can we hold the this is to the board now maybe we can um hold the board somehow can we hold the total signage square footage to uh 40 square ft um Mr Mayor can you m Mr chairman can you pull the board uh I'd like to walk out of here with a clean slate okay um let's start with uh go around the room here miss Bolan start with you what what I don't know if I so so dick you're saying you want to give 40 square feet I I want to give a square footage Maxim I want to Che criteria for the sign so the applicant nor the board have to address this again well without can I interrupt can I interrupt I'm sorry my suggestion would just be that they comply with our ordinance right all right the ordinance says 20 square feet is that is that what it says uh Mr again miss sttinley do we have our what what is our our sign on what's the maximum they can have size I believe it's 20 square feet I think I believe so also I'm not I'm not certain but it's the applicants uh uh it's their application and they should be presenting what they are proposing yep Tom Tom Barrett would you are you willing to reduce the sign to either meet the ordinance or do you have a a a reduction because many members of the board have expressed their concerns with the um Mr K do you have any alternatives to suggest regarding the sign okay I can make it 30 square fet well if I just have to interject it's pretty simple if they don't comply they need a variance or they can rely it's no problem okay or you rely on the monsoon approval that those are the only options without getting a variance so Mr Barett did did notice for a sign for sign change okay so so the board has the ability to Grant the variance if it wants to Grant the VAR but so I guess you could either Grant the variance or or not I that's where we are I think I think Mr Mr K has asked the board if they would uh consider a 30 square foot sign um and I think that you know we do need to take into account uh the location it's you know it's not a freestanding building so that there's only the one sign on the front and it has to be a you know sufficient size that people aren't going to you know um be distracted trying to find it uh find the location um so I think that you know it may take into account some of your comments uh certainly smaller than what has been proposed uh and we would ask you know the board to consider that uh you know 3 3x10 or whatever Dimensions you know it's a the building itself is uh 50 feet wide so you know if we went down to uh you know 3x10 we we still have uh I'm sorry 60 feet wide the building's 60 ft wide so we we don't you know we still have a 25 ft on either side of the sign if it's centered if it's you know if it's 10 feet wide all right so our ordinance provides for a maximum of 20 feet without relief your your client's now proposing 30 feet Mr I think our ordinance may be 16 feet if I'm reading it correctly it's 46-53 is the ordinance number and it says maximum area of signs and it's talking about retail and Commercial uses for such business or Commercial Business having a principal Frontage of over 12T she be governed by the material of which the sign is osed as follows number one no larger than 16 square ft all signs painted silk screen decal Etc on boards metal wood or plastic the area will include our lettering wording and accompany design and symbols together with background whether open or enclosed on which they're displayed so the way I'm reading it it's 16 square feet and my understanding is Mr Barrett requesting a variance for 30 square feet correct okay okay all right now so miss Bolan you've heard the latest proposal that the applicants come down to 30 square feet is that something that is is you might find acceptable I would lean towards uh having it conforming okay thank you uh Mr Keno I think we I mean I I would like to see I mean can we get a mockup of what the sign would look like on the building I think that would help everybody to understand what it is we're looking at we're trying not to make these signs overly ostentatious not too large uh we don't want Billboards on on the top of buildings it's very difficult to really understand what the 40 by10 would look like on this building when I think a very simple mockup it shouldn't take you know more than a couple of minutes to put together and show us but otherwise I would say you know uh every time we change these things we set what I think are dangerous precedents so you know without a reason to really consider as to why it needs to be different from other businesses in the area I think we stick with what Miss Bolan said okay um Mr GI I would agree I'm just looking at Google the Google Maps here and going up and down Kinder KAC and looking at sanducci and looking at uh hilum and M and I don't think they're anywhere near 40t um so I would rather see it be consistent with what we have on Kinder kak already um and comply okay Mr Mayor I agree okay councilman I'm in agreement with uh what others have said about comping with the variance thank you okay Mr Cay I agree that 40 square feet seems a little excessive um but I do think there is some consideration that could be given here because if you look at the frontage of this building versus the ones that are adjacent to it um with I don't know if those were conforming or non-conforming signs or there are variances but their signage basically takes up the whole front of their building where you know the sign that's existing right now or was existing for monum you know covers you not even 25% of the of the frontage so I think you know the how the building presents and and and the visibility of the sign does get impacted by that so I I would be open to a little bit of uh variance on the sign I wouldn't go 40 feet but I think you know allowing it to be a little bigger would not be out of line okay I'm gonna I'm GNA go back Mr uh Mr dekin there's nothing as far far as you're aware there's nothing in the in the records that indicates this the square footage of the monsoon sign when it was installed uh that I don't know I wasn't to hear at the time okay Tom you don't know of any anything I I've been trying to look during the discussion and I haven't found that resolution uh or plans I I mean I can maybe I I don't have it not my fingertips no but I would say if the if we can find it the applicant would be entitled to that amount um Mr kigo pointed out there's a distinction between what the ordinance allows if it's a a board sign as is proposed versus individual letters there's leeway let's say but um without confirmation we are where we are well I think at this point we've got a proposal for a board sign um right yeah and I don't know that we you know and even if I guess we could find the monsoon Dimensions I don't know if that necessarily would ma match Apples to Apples in this in this context okay Mr chairman regarding sign um I'm going on a motion propose that um the applicant submit a separate application sign application to the board for a sign permit and um so this if and when I make this proposal for this uh application it will not include permanent sign it'll have to come back to the board which I was trying to avoid um so that that's what's going to happen right now okay any further questions for on the application Mr merman from you um I got the fence of closure oh the restriping of the parking uh Mr Costa had a u comment in his original um in his original report that the uh parking striping sh conformed to standard um standard spacing but like likewise his handicap striping um needs to be detailed properly um from what he's shown um one other thing I had U Mr Mr Barrett I will point out to you that the what was it 12 parking spaces right now um reserved for this application this this site um have standing vehicles in them so your applicant is going to have to clear those before he Stripes that whole backside there that's you see what I'm saying Mr Mr Barrett you you mean there cars that are parked there yes or in the 12 count that we had I believe it was 12 12 or 14 there 11 actually that are noted okay so so I'm sorry you mean they're park there permanently or yes right now they are when I was out there yesterday you had um minimum of three white vehicles of of various Styles so they're going to have to be moved before you restripe restripe those for for your for your appli okay well I mean so we're just going to restripe the spaces that as they exist we're just G to you know paint over the existing striping so that that it's more visible We're Not Gonna Change the dimensions or anything no well the ones by the building uh the ones Mar four through eight I think have to be adjusted accordingly but I'll leave that to Mr CA my my point on the vehicles is on the allocated parking spaces to this to this applicant has current has Vehicles currently parked in it they're going to have to be removed okay well it's actually those spaces are actually shared they're not allocated solely for the use of this applicant um Mr Gorski or you know MCG realy the owner of the property has agreed that they can share those spaces they're not solely for the use of um you know the restaurant well how's the restaurant going to share them if if they're permanently um well no right we have to look into that I wasn't situation I didn't hear anybody what was what was the point I I'm just saying we have to I don't know anything about it so I have to look into it I'm not sure what the situation is so I certainly have a conversation with Mr Gorski later in the week if he knows whose cars they are or what have you Mr Mr Gilla do you know what cars Mr merman might be referring to on the back side yeah yeah uh there is I think two cars all the time on the back side but we have still nine spot when you go backside we have n parking always available right do you know do you know who they are though who those folks are no I don't know exactly who is and do they do they come and go or they just park there uh but uh most mostly I see their car but now I don't know exactly how you know because when I come here always I see the car in the back all right so we'll look into it uh just m okay yeah it's it's it's it's to your applicant's benefit U I understand in a okay um I that's about the only comments I have and um Mr chairman whatever you we did we go out to the public yet not not yet I just make one may I make one comment before you uh go to the public Mr chairman yeah I actually have one I actually have one question for you Mr be actually for your client I apologize if this wasn't was already covered did do we have a count as to how many employees are going to be uh working in the restaurant no I didn't ask that question Mr Kev how many employees so we start with four and for future maybe six okay and is how will those employees be arriving and departing are they because uh we are uh family run restaurant we come with one car every day and because I am Chef also I cook myself and my wife and my brother you know we are family we come with the car and we go with the one car perhaps one other question for the board's sake um you were describing the operation of your other restaurant to me uh yesterday um yeah in terms of how how your patrons arrive at that restaurant would you would you describe that to the board uh about the sign you mean no no about about your patrons the customers who come to your restaurant do do they drive to your restaurant most of them or how how do they come yeah because uh 40% my customer they are coming with the Uber because they have you know they come to drink to restaurant all the time so that's why mostly customer come buy Taxi by Uber the other restaurant I have only six SP spot in malra Township very busy area but most customer you know they come buy taxi buy Uber that's why I never had a problem with the parking so your experience based on the other restaurant is at least 40% of the patrons arrive via Uber or taxi yes sir because they come and drink alcohol you know right okay okay thank you Mr Barett I think you had a want to go ahead with what statement well I just had one one other one other comment understand the board's going to reiterate the necessity of complying with the streetcap but we would like the opportunity uh for Mr Kula to you know begin operations so if there could be a time limit on when that has to be accomplished without prohibiting him from opening up um you know he's he's he's been paying rent and hasn't been able to use the space because no one was aware that they you know needed to obtain the approval um I think we can consider that as as part of the conditions thank you okay um any further questions from the board before we go out to the public okay uh this time I'll look for a motion to open to the public so moved I have a first Miss ban second Mr Cano all in favor Iain okay at this time we're now open to the the public for comment on this application alone is there anyone in attendance uh on Zoom who wishes to be heard okay Louis ltina if you please state your name and address for the record good evening I don't see video but u l ltina I'm attorney law um South 105 farvu Avenue promis New Jersey uh representing um MCG real LLC I'm here with Gary borski the principal good evening evening good evening so I don't see any opportunity for video that's fine so um M Gorski is here oh okay um have to remove you yeah all right you should be able to use the video now okay up yep go see my camera is closed it work this morning rep so I don't know what the problem is if you don't mind I guess you won't get to see my my suit and tie and everything I board so as I said I'm here with Gary gor aka Mr Hatfield of the Hatfield McCoy um PE and uh I'm new to the game here um Mr gorski's a longtime friend and colleague so uh we've heard the testimony uh I can and he can testify he's next to me not that you can tell Gary if you want to just identify yourself yes I'm here good evening everyone so uh as Mr Barrett said the agreement does exist and it's uh it it will be honored I just do we can still hear you okay I'm now everybody's white so um so the agreement does exist the concern though is um as I read Mr um Costa's report the variance required is almost 100% variance um you you need a 37 spaces applicant has seven spaces the rest are shared and we just heard testimony that two of those spaces are taken they are taken by one of um Mr gorsky's tenants the tenant does move the trucks but uh there's a need for those spaces uh sanduches is a very busy restaurant and we're very concerned about awarding such a large um variance of 18 spaces um I would also point out that there's been no testimony whatsoever on the criteria the C1 or C2 criteria so I don't think this board has the ability to grant that variance uh finally I would note that um while there's other existing conditions noted non-conformities this is not noted as an existing non-conforming it's simply noted as a variant so I think this Board needs to look at it um a new and say are we going to approve a restaurant with um 91 seats with only seven dedicated spaces um Mr chairman the board's resolution in 2018 um address the issue uh the parking variance was previously approved correct Mr I don't I didn't see that in the report it it listed as a variance so I guess you would say it's an existing non-conformity that's been approved correct that is that is correct correct okay okay Mr Gorski I I don't know if he was aware of that but I haven't seen the resolution so I will take Mr Barrett on his word that it's been improved before um I do ask that the the resolution of adoption if that's where the board is going indicate that the applicant needs to M maintain uh only using those 12 spots and not encroach on Mr gorski's other spots uh which are needed for a very busy sanducci restaurant and a school that he operates in his building and just just just to conclude uh he Mr Gorski spend considerable money on the streetcape and would uh urge this board to require the applicant or the uh the landlord to conform with the I understand the Burrow's streetscape ordinance uh the intent of which is to make the streetscape somewhat uniform so I'd ask that also be considered by the board that's all I have unless you have anything no that's it okay thank you Chan anybody else um there are other members but no one is any yeah anyone else in attendance this evening was to be heard on this application please raise your hand or press star n on your telephone keypad I don't see anyone I don't see anyone all right uh this time we'll look for a motion to close to the public please I think Miss band and Mr Gibbons all in favor hi hios obain all right this time we're now close to the public for comment on this application uh further questions comments from the board before we comment I think Mr ltin is still as a panelist and his mic's not on his mic is on yeah I can't I can't do anything to my screen so if you can just mute mute us please I'm not I'm trying to but I don't my screen says zoom women are not responding um should I try to leave and come back yeah that'd be great thank you thank you I don't know if I can oh I'm just gonna close the program okay I think that might have worked that seems yeah okay mi Mr chairman I have a question for Mr dekin Mr Mur yeah um Mr Dean yes sir um there was some discussion about temporary operation um without a sign and without installing um L some of the amenities that we uh we uh discuss especially streetcape um how can we go about that just mention it in a motion or is there time limit or what's the procedure I would suggest putting as much information as you can into the resolution um a timeline is certainly um uh something that I would suggest you do uh they were giving uh we uh issued them a temporary uh Grand Opening Banner type of thing for 28 days um okay if you want that extended uh further until the board approves a sign uh we we can do so okay very good thank you um Can can we make that is it possible to make it renewable for one one or two cycles um I can I can do so okay all right just in case the sign doesn't get become installed because he's gonna have to come back to the board now and that's going to take a bit of time okay I would put I would put it uh timeline on the uh streetcape though yeah okay so what what uh what sort of timeline would you suggest I guess it's probably a question for you and Mr Costa as far as timeline for for the Tre streetcape improvements that's that's not up to me that's up to the applicant getting his contractors available and uh doing so maybe Mr Barrett might suggest a time has how six months months no Ser I mean you know six months is you know they need to they need to find somebody they need to get plans drawn um you know I think that's uh you know perhaps it could be done a little quicker but I don't know how much quicker uh Tom you're gonna need you're gonna need approvals from the County Road opening permits you're going to depending on the pavers if they're even in stock I think six months is is definitely reasonable that that's that's true as long as they don't forget right is then I think the applicant has a choice come back to this board otherwise either myself or Mr dekin then we issue uh violations and then you deal with that side of the the borrow I mean I think that's reasonable at this point okay does this hold the the owner's feet to the fire because this person has owned building for 13 years and they didn't do it last time I don't want to hold this if the app right now it would be a condition correct it would be a condition of of of any resolution or approval tonight if they don't do it the owner probably gave consent to this gentleman to make an application before you so the applicant technically is on the hook and there's no way to put the owner on the hook because he he didn't do it six years ago so I don't again I'm not an attorney I know there's one in the middle column right in the center but I think the applicant would bear on the applicant then it's up to those two gentlemen to to fight it out but the bottom line is if he doesn't do it in six months somebody's getting a violation and ultimately if he loses he's going to get a a CO pulled from him I would imagine isn't the owner non-conforming now based on the last application though from 2018 like don't we have power now separate and apart from this application to address the fact that this was not done when it was should have been honestly I don't have the resolution I don't know who the applicant was if if it was the the restaurant you'd have to no you would have to go after the uh the restaurant closed up and moved out the the restaurant was the applicant according to the uh copy of the resolution that I have that's my if I need if I need to issue a a violation and a penalty uh it would go to uh the applicant and the property owner and the owner yeah I I just don't want to see an the applicant here getting penalized for something that this guy didn't do six years ago and I don't know that's going to get you know these things should be in my eyes these things should be taken care of by the owner not necessarily the you know the person trying to run a restaurant um you know so I I don't want to see this applicant get penalized for this but it needs to get done obviously didn't get done before with the same owner the only the only sad to say the only way you could do it would be a developers agreement and a bond and if they default then you go after the bonding company but again based on something like this I don't know I think they need to discuss what they're doing and then figure it out otherwise any resolution in my opinion goes back to the applicant so I think the applicant should think long and hard if he's responsible for this that's that's up to those guys contractually Mr chair yes sir the original the original resolution for monsoon in 2018 was issued to RSM trading just so you know so so that was the restaurant in all likelihood okay okay yeah just just for additional context that that was the restaurant Hannah realy is the landlord myself um apologies on not getting that done I was not part of managing that at that time my Uncle Neil Aiden on the all of these documents um since then has passed away not an excuse but just facts um you know has been in River Edge for a very long time also owns 111 Kinder Kack I'll make sure that there's all necessary actions taken to complete the streetcape I think six months is reasonable I can work out contractually with the tenant that's really the least of my concerns just want to get it right um but just sharing that detail as some context of what's happened then and what would happen now Mr Barrett do you want to proceed this evening before you have your agreement your client worked out with the landlord on this or I don't know um Mr K r up do you want to have a telephone conversation with me and the board will give us five minutes to do so sure yes yes please all right I'll call you all right so it's 9 let's call it 9:29 we'll adjourn until uh 9:40 pm thank you Mr chairman thank you oh it's not there yeah that's to trying to get you to be able to open uh and so the board will approve it tonight but what the board is saying is since you're the applicant if the owner doesn't do it then you're the one who be responsible for doing it that's why I'm asking you you be comfortable with uh okay okay you're comfortable then proceeding getting an approval and then dealing with the issue with Mr a okay uh and you have any thoughts on the on the sign as to what may have been improved there titled to whatever approval she received but we don't we don't know what that was that wasn't addressed in 2018 no no the resolution only addressed the patio it didn't address her sign that would have been addressed uh earlier when she when she initially moved in Mr Barrett Mr Barrett your mic is live oh thank you let me figure out how to M mute it you're muted e e hi Mr chairman I'm back I don't think you don't I don't know what happened but I'm just uh I think we're going to sign off for the evening we're in a 10minute recess yep like kid [Music] that like e e e e e e e for e okay we have everybody back looks like got the board at Lisa Tom Steve Rob's here okay Mr Barrett I think we're just uh missing your client you should be with us momentarily Mr chairman okay for okay and there he is all right uh let's go back on the record please now 9:41 p.m uh this is the meeting of the municipal land Board of the burough River Edge uh Miss styley wanted to call the role just yes thank you Mr Mayor here Mr caslin here miss Boland here Mr merman here Mr cray here Mr Keno here councilman glass here Mr Gibbons here all right we are all back we are all back we have Mr dekin we have Mr Barons and Mr Costa as well uh Mr Barrett I will'll turn to you sir yes uh we would we would like to proceed my client is confident that uh he and Mr Aiden will be able to resolve any contractual issues uh we heard M Mr Aiden already speak to the issue of the streetcape and uh you know wants to get it right this time so we would like to proceed my client is anxious to open um so okay um before we move to a motion any questions comments left from the board anyone in objection for not taking action on the application this evening okay and in that case I will look to the board for a motion on the application please Mr chairman Mr merman let me take a try at it I'm afraid that this is going to wind up being a combined motion by input from U several of the uh members okay so regarding and Mr Barrett I'm going to apologize ahead of time to mispronouncing your client's name um regarding the umon kolov uh application at 606 Kinder kak road block 617 Live 14 um for a food handler's license I make the following motion that um the board Grant approval um upon the following conditions that the um rear rear dumpster enclosure friend be um reped that the parking uh on on the parking stall uh all that all the parking stall striping and all um be in accordance with the proper standards and the 12 or 11 I believe it's 12 11 or 12 Stripes um under along the rear fence line um um be restriped also um regarding the rcap that rescape previously approved and not installed um now be installed consisting of new sidewalkers required plus pav U between the curb and one um being current standard P borrow standard and at the existing Tre or their replacement be installed that the street scate um be granted a six-month time period from the approval of this um application or installation and regarding signage that's a temporary sign inst stall that has a 28 day uh renewable um permit be renewable um to the extent the building department deems necessary prior to installation of a permanent sign that the permanent sign is be um be submitted separately to this board for review and approval and that the applicant be permitted to uh open for business um to open for business period um I think that's it Mr chairman I'm sure I left out something and something can be polished at the same time Mr mman lady mentioned also there was a that need needed to be repaired for the waste container um there is there is a uh a um a dumpster in closure there already and it requires repair Mr glass you you had mentioned that first Mr y I think that that was Mr glass's question yes okay all right on the motion Miss styley oh I'm sorry we just need a second sorry yeah I okay I have a second on Mr motion second all right Mr C thank you Miss steinley when you're ready um my only comment was about the signage is that the motion reflect that the signage needs a permit and that the applicant um will either comply with the prior approval or with the burrow ordinance and Mr Barrett that's acceptable yes that's the permanent sign correct yeah okay all right so that'll be the motion and I'll take the vote Mr Mayor yes Mr klin yes Miss Boland yes Mr merman yes Mr cray yes Mr kigo yes councilman GL class yes Mr given yes okay the motion passes all right thank you very congratulations thank you everyone congratulations thank you very much we will move we will move forward thank you good luck thank you good luck a thank you much all right good luck that is the uh that is the last item on our agenda this evening unless anyone has anything else in welfare I will look for a uh motion to adose moved Mr given is the first have a second Mr go is a second all in favor I all right good night everyone good night 948m thanks everyone good job