they Haven submitted I saw it right good placees everyone placees you like extra paper I don't know I think I brought too many look at look at my MK I was doing some homework Clips up to speed on IC okay we'll hit it at the end of the night the meeting of the Zoning Board of adjustment burough of Somerville for March 20th 2024 or please come to order adequate notice of this meeting is required by the open Public's meeting act has been provided that on a copy of the notice uh specifying the date time and location was posted on the bulletin board outside bough Hall mail facts or emailed to The Courier News and given to the clerk administrator this meeting is a Judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to the issues the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and that the quum appropriate to a Judicial hearing must be maintained at all times pledge allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag United States of America to the which stand one nation under God indivisible liy Justice for All R he's absent here here Neil here Mr vski here Mr Flores here Mr Alvarez here Mr Daniels here so move that R be excused so move second all in favor I I uh approval of the minutes from February 21st I'm move them second all in favor I uh resolution for Bank of America I it second ready for roll call Mr allet yes Miss carpinet yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr Vimy yes Mr Flores yes we're going to uh switch up the agenda a little bit tonight Mr Anderson Mark Anderson come on thank you Mr chairman you're welcome I am Mark Anderson I'm the advate on behalf of myself and my wife uh I appreciate your uh putting me in some of you uh may be aware of the fact that I represent the Hillsboro's Board of adjustment and most of their meetings are on the same nights as yours this being an exception so I'll try to return the favor by being as brief as I can my request is an extension of uh time to obtain a building permit in the variance that was previously granted to my wife and myself uh we're proposing exactly the same improvements that were approved uh previously by this board that is replacement of a deterior 1980s vage solar collector at the back of our house at East Summit Street in Somerville uh with a with small addition to uh living space uh I might say that solar collector has not improved in the Years uh since the variance was granted and I'm becoming actually quite concerned about uh uh the problem of uh water getting into the house simply quick uh I will not repeat the reasons why the variance was originally granted unless of course board members have uh questions I'll focus on what I believe is the issue which is my request for an extension of time to obtain a building permit could you speak up just a little bit Mr certainly uh the board May reasonably ask the question well why didn't I apply for a building permit within the original time the simple answer to that is yes I did twice uh this was during the time that Co was creating a lot of problems for all of us uh but I made my application to the building department in each case uh let's just say I received no response whatsoever uh making some informal inquiries it became evident to me that my plans which I had drawn myself as a homeowner were not going to get approved uh so then I decided that the path of least resistance was to uh get an architect professional architect uh of course during Co that itself was a problem uh it took me a period of time to find somebody that I thought was good and uh for him to find time uh but suffices to say at this point I do have complete architectural plans uh professionally drawn and I have every expectation that the building department will accept them so that's the reason I'm here I I would appreciate the extension so that I had the opportunity to get these plans to the building department get a permit get this work started I'm well how long for the extension I would appreciate through the end of the year I don't expect it will take me that long but I would appreciate that well December I was going to say I think December 2024 would be the end date as far as when the when the uh approval was was uh provided so that would that was that's that's what you're seeking essentially yes you Mr Gibbons is correct the original expiration date was December so I'll move it again second right any discussion extension will be granted effective to December 16 2024 if the board so desires any discussion folks no questions danana Mr allet yes M carpinet yes Mr mclin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr vinsky yes Mr Flores yes thank you Mr Anderson I thank you again for fitting me in um Hab Humanity come on up thank you hey mik thank you very much thank you for moving us up as well appreciate that just before we go what what are we doing here is it even testimony or yeah what we had discussed this briefly a meeting or two ago uh our proposal is to eliminate some of the sidewalks and then subse that meeting they also I do believe the correspond is to eliminate the paving of the driveway going with the gravel driveway so they came here uh because I think we had discussed a rental situation with future tenants is saying that it's not a rental it's a fe simple this is who they're selling the property to he's not disabled therefore they're saying we don't have that future issue with other disabled tenants therefore they're saying there is no future need for the sidewalks I I think I summed that up correctly right that is correct yes thank you have about it good are we allowed to speak so the information just needs to be kind of corrected please speak into the microphone the information we're trying to just uh first identify yourself oh I'm sorry Mark malinowski construction manager at Ron Valley habitap Humanity so C does he need to be sworn yes I was going to say I'd like you to be sworn you would you please stand and raise your right hand you Solly swear at the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so hope you got thank you please state your name and spell your last name for the record again please m l i n o w k i okay I can start talking thank you uh it's a two-bedroom Ranch we have and um previously when we started the project it was before I came on it was supposed to be for a veteran that was disabled obviously that has changed dramatically and basically the person Brandon everheart right here is our person going in so what we're looking at now is a home that would have a ramp on the side side a huge 5x5 turning radius in the front of the yard uh the sidewalk going to the front where really for 34 year old we thought was kind of overbearing for someone to have that and also he's going to be the sole owner of the home he will have a 30-year mortgage through habitat also what came up as well too was a driveway we did remediation at the property next door 179 Grove Street approximately about 37,000 of water remediation you've been out there mik um he would prefer a gravel driveway and I think that would probably help with what we have that problem with because of the variance uh the zoning of that property and basically a couple other properties across the street as well or gravel driveways as well he prefers that we think it's a good idea and really in the long run for us as a nonprofit We Could scrimp every penny we can get together the only thing would be to go about what we need to do on the site maps and I could probably guess talk to you about now you said your a projected owner did you say your projected owner is is not disabled no okay s right there no no no I know that I understand that but I need to get the fact on the record we were we were thinking and what actually happened to make it much easier for you we had a huge issue trying to get a veteran that was disabled right we couldn't reach the people because they didn't have emails we were actually going to VFW Halls and American Legions to recruit we this was the third time around wasn't it yes so obviously and he works for some set he's the health department over here environmentalist health inspector any questions I have comments with no questions so what what are we voting on we're voting on no sidewalk we're voting on a gravel driveway right we're have to amend our our res resolution from from prior because the resolution included a ramp a pave driveway and a sidewalk down to the street so know about the stone driveway you know plowing Stone's going to be out on Grove Street and it would just make it and so that the only way to get into the building would be to walk up the driveway yes it's a gravel driveway that's a that's not an easy walk have we ever approved anything without mam or pavers 19 years no but the ordinance does allow single family the option it wasn't the board grael or black the ordinance does allow I have never seen the approve a grael dri one other question did you say you're going to remove the ramp or you going to have the ramp well the ramp is on the site map right so we don't even have it yet so we were holding to this meeting which was hopefully last month that this would be approved but obious the information got a little mixed up so we don't want to put a ramp in at all we don't have it yet we'd have to build it or put like a you know and he's not disabled and it's be kind of you know for a 34 year old to have a ramp on the side of his house when there's no need you know basically on the fact that he's the only one who's going to be owning the house like can I make comments instead of questions I think so it's not really yeah it's it's a different hearing I trespassed on your property today and also once last week so the cop cop station is a couple blocks away but I went everyone know everyone sees it yeah I I went down and looked around yeah and it's a very narrow lot and the house is not overly large access to front door walking up the driveway seems like the right thing to do putting another piece of sidewalk there is going to increase your impervious space reduce the lawn and it accomplish nothing there there is no place really to put a rent there unless you start chop chipping away at things and I I don't think it's really necessary and I think we're confronted again with this issue of minimum sizes of Apartments minimum size of houses giving people something they don't even need or want so here you've got a properly sized house if I were 34 years old and didn't have a couple kids i' be line but it's appropriately sized for the use we don't have enough of that in this town as it is we don't need a ramp so why put a ramp I mean we all know people are probably in line to get one soon who are going to need a ramp or need a ramp it takes a lot of space you know so if it doesn't serve a purpose why do it why make it happen the use has changed it's it's not going to be a handicapped accessible house although it could be made that way in the future if necessary but the dri way goes right to the to the entrance way basically there's a step and you're in the driveway so why make a sidewalk last month when I heard it no sidewalk I said that we can't have that but going to look it seems to me it's a practical solution to a practical problem now as far as gravel you know me I've got the crazy front yard I I don't like a lot of stuff I like the water to soak in that's what they're talking about and I don't disagree that I know gravel get kicked around but but I was a kid everybody on gravel and somehow we survive you know so having said that I think it's it's a practical solution to a problem and I'm not I don't inject any of it thank you thank you anybody else Cliff I don't want to tie them to gravel or cam or I think just a bend that they C either or the future if does need to put a ramp in he can put a ramp in or if he needs a front sidewalk he can put a front sidewalk in right so I think maybe allowing to add to the original uh resolution to say Andor sure we can do that we can do that and water is a problem we had all kinds of testimony of water when they first came to do the subdivision in fact your sister was the biggest you she gets the water so me it's the less we paid the better and I'm the guy at the butterfly garden whatever can I say one more thing the whole property is graded to ada8 so any time in the future there's no movement of the ground so I think my thought is to amend the resolution to allow you to do what you need to do but just keeping the original in so if it does have to go back if you need to put a ramp in you don't have to come back before Forest make sense so essentially we're going to amend the resolution to permit a gravel driveway and the installation of a uh of a ramp if and when is necessary they pop up all over time nobody doing anything right anybody have anything to add to that I need a motion to amend that resolution I'll move it second one just one other question is so we're removing the sidewalk we we're we're taking that out as well okay very good given the option to leave or take I just want to confirm that so it's on the record and okay very good roll call Mr allet yes M carpinet yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr vinsky yes Mr Flores AB I was absent and Mr alz I was absent too get got to stay after class today all right you're all set okay thank you and anyone can come down for a tour please do we'll prepare an amendatory resolution which will be adopted adopted you know memorializing what we just taken care of thank you very much for your time night guys next up is 25-27 north midall good evening uh Mr chairman of board members Michael Sagi from labor salaj Cohen uh we're here this evening continued public hearing uh the we began this process on December 6 um this is the uh property as the chair noted 2527 North minow it's block um 12 s lot n the original proposal if you recall was to take uh these two existing uh structures on the property uh and create 13 apartments with related parking if you're familiar with the property it's kind of a regularly shape it's almost like a triangle uh and to the South is an active uh railroad line we need site plan but we also need a use variance because uh the property R2 Zone which allows residential but doesn't allow multif family so at the conclusion of last hearing we went through our uh engineering architecture and planning uh there were concerns expressed about particularly if I recall correctly uh the parking and more so in relation to a garage if you will garage type structure that was on the property and why couldn't conver that into parking space so um the applicant heard what what board members were were expressing even members of the public who were concerned about more parking perhaps being put out on the street and uh made revisions to the plans and you'll hear in a moment uh from again our our engineer architect and and our planner as well the idea was to take that garage building and make it all available except for a small portion uh for parking and um the other thing that happened with the inclusion of this this additional parking there was a u there's the main building that I think you guys are familiar with the gist Mill and there was like an office building and to take that office building and to make that into two one-bedroom uh Apartments um there was also uh the plans were revised to eliminate some parallel parking that was in the front I don't think went over uh particularly uh well um we added additional EV uh charging uh spots um and then there was some architectural changes as well U you know with the roof and and some of the windows so what I'd like to do is to have our engineer uh last time you were here was Jeff Hower he's he's not available but uh Tyler vandervalk will see to Easter no plans and he'll uh explain those to you in the course of doing that Mr Cole had issued a report um which we will also address and then following that we're going to have our architect come in and explain some of the architectural changes and then uh we're going to bring Mr Dean back who uh was our planner uh and Mr Dean's also some of you may no is's also a uh well-renowned uh traffic consultant is going to address uh some of the parking concerns as well so Mr chairman if I can I'd like to there he is uh Tyler I'm right sorry all right um oh yes you saw me S the testimony you're about to give in this matter will be the truth so help you got yes I do please state your name and spell your last name for the record Tyler vandervalk v d r v l k here on behalf of Hower engineering 1141 Greenwood Lake Turnpike in Ringwood New Jersey thank you very much Mr Tyler if you can um let the board know your educational background um professional license as you hold in the status and your experience in testifying in land use matters here in New Jersey sure I have a bachelor's degree in civil engineering from New Jersey Institute of Technology I'm a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey my license is current and standing I have testified as an expert civil engineering before numerous boards throughout state of New Jersey can you just name three fors I'm sorry can you just name three boards three boards uh we do a lot of work up in North bton County Franklin Lakes uh s River upper s River coun these guys like okay okay I was trying to think something closer to here I can actually say I've observed Mr Vander walk in Hamburg where I've appeared so uh iiz up in Sussex yes sir that's sc's country all right I I have an office in Newton as well so all right uh Tyler and and again to the to the extent that I know it's been you know 90 days so U we're going to try to focus on the changes however you know for if some board members have some questions about the original plans we're certainly um going to answer those but for now we're going to lead off by just kind of focusing in on what the engineering changes were so uh Tyler why don't you go through and and high highlight for the board members of the public what those changes were to the plans sure sure so uh the overall intent of the revisions obviously was to provide additional parking that's the concerns were raised at the last hearing hold on I'm just going to by the way Mr gibons this was I should ask Ty this was what was submitted correct yes this is last revised February 8th of this year did we Mark that or was that submitted with your original application no this was the this is the revised uh copy that was submitted dated February 8th of this year it was probably submitted a couple days thereafter so it wasn't marked it is part of what I trust the board members have I leave it up to you if you want us to mark it we can or just to be on the safe side M Mr salvaji can we mark it all right and I believe I mean I've been as I'm sure you I think we were up to A5 is that what it was I I do not know whether we're up to A5 or not Mr I believe it's A5 but Mr lomber oi we because we had a record of this the last time yeah I think yeah those it was only those okay so 85 and Tyler uh please describe what A5 is uh so A5 is a revised uh preliminary and final site plan uh the original date of that was January 5 2023 and the latest provision is February 8 2024 okay so you'll be referencing referring to A5 and uh some please go ahead and explain what was done since December to now right so in order to pick up that additional parking uh what we've done is we've converted the rear building this is along the Westerly and Northerly boundary lines of the property um we've added additional parking within that building by use of garage Bays uh you can see at the Westerly uh property line in that shorter piece of the uh we provide four parking uh stalls within that building essentially with two garage bays and we're parking one vehicle in front of the other inside that space and then we have an additional seven phase along the Northerly boundary line each with their own garage door to exit into the main parking area we have converted uh the office space that was towards the east of that building uh that's two stories in that area we've uh provided for two additional single bedroom units in that space where it was previously office uh and then as a result we have updated parking calculations uh now with a total of 10 one bedroom units and five two bedroom units brings our total requirement to 2 STS for the project we in 26 physical parking spaces and then we get a two credit for the use of the EV bringing us to the 28 that it's required so we're still satisfying that standard u in order to accomplish the garage Bay on the souly side of the building we of course had to eliminate some of the parallel spaces that we had shown there previously and that's accounted for in the calculations that were provided the two EV stalls that we're showing were between the two buildings on the Northerly line there's a total of three spots in that area two of which are being shown as EV in addition for entrances to the apart the newart apartments that are proposed in that building uh we have these covered entrances to the east of that building you can see the bump out on the front uh again a number of architectural changes to support those units and I believe that that covers the changes that were made specifically for these plans okay now um you are you had an opportunity to review um Mr Cole's report correct yes I all right um and well I I I defer to you I mean we can for some of it is a repeat of what was in your initial report I don't know perhaps you want to just take us and the board to the points you know because I don't I don't want in invert end up going line by line we can do that but you cut to the chase EV charging you have to have an 88 charger which is going to take another space out because it has to be B access and it has to be EV only you can't double count the accessible space there you need one just for the EV by state rules therefore that plan doesn't comply it should has to have another accessible space for E charges second the stack parking requires a variance because it doesn't allow the stack parking in theage yeah Mr Dean will talk to that is it is it a variance or a design work a okay so I disagree that the parking requirements being met in project because of those two but essentially the three spes between the buildings shown reality twoes because of the accessible EV charging station par so in reality you have one less parking space than what's shown and then we have to start stack so to clarify um the EV Ada van accessible stall what you're indicating is that having an ADA it doesn't count towards the ADA requirements right so we would have to have an additional by widening another stall to feet and providing a 5 foot Right strip between that's where we end up spot what you're right what I'm saying is this this Project's more than five R units dwellings the EV rules require that 5% of the Chargers be accessible so you you have to install a Ada which is Van accessible space that's plered for just EDS so you end up with a handicap space that you can't use unless you're a handicap person charging an EV that's what the Nuance here is so it's hard to get your head around yeah stupid well it's similar to the to the credit right we're putting skulls that people aren't using but we got a credit to put but none of us made that decision right right uh yeah so certainly I'm trying to with one place additional car then the other issue was I think there's a utility pole front of one of the garage doors right and we would have to uh go underground with that power yeah it's understood that would have to be removed again Mr Dean who does a lot of traffic and parking uh will will address uh those concerns and and the legitim even with the stack parking uh as well we are going to uh request the variant because you'll hear in a moment all of that parking in the garage which is stacked is all signed uh parking to each apartment so it' be no different than you know if you had a single family house and you had two cars you you you kind of work around that uh so the the intent is not to just have this available for anybody just pull in and out which think you can see problems if somebody parks behind you you don't know uh but again Mr Dean will will talk to that um so the the rest of it um Mr Cole I don't I mean we don't really object to anything uh that you had in there um and and the board members as well if there's a particular item and I don't care we can go through line by line but I don't know if you want to uh take that much time you know because we we addressed a lot of this is the problem when you have a a longer uh time in between memories phade just so the board knows the trash enclosure was moved it was against the access building triang building I had a couple questions theing ofid con turning movements to get the truck a pick up so that's more pragmatic comments sure yeah an exhibit was prepared that we can uh circulate I guess I don't really need a copy it's not that complicated but uh essentially shows how the the A6 is a vehicle sweat path analysis of the refu vehicle and that was prepared today Theos so is the trash and recycl to it's probably not quite enough for everybody but everybody can get a look at it uh essentially it just shows how the vehicle can come into the site turn around within the parking lot even if the cars are parked in parking spaces and exit back out of the site we ran through a lot of this comp I mean I okay so you'll make the contribution in L of the okay and then I think Tyler you went through with the lighting there was nothing in with respect to lighting or storm water that we take any to I think the only question was about having reduced security lighting um because of the use being multif family and not commercial in essence people can be coming home at any time of night um so it would be preferred not to have reduced lighting uh just because the residential nature particularly you know along the railroad tracks else yeah I think it's it's Justified because the site is really well shielded uh we have the main building up front and then the building's immediately on the right or to the north um and the majority of the parking lot is behind all these buildings the only side that's open is to the railroad so everything is pretty heavily screened by the building itself and then storm number comments was there anything we took exception to I'm just going through again my notes no it looks like we were willing to agree to this buiness the RS reques obvious I'm sure Gary is going to say these are signed so we're not going to have a visitor on top of the visitor they're going to be on the surface locks which sure I guess in theory un not not a sign but I'll let Gary do is uh his magic right Gary yes so I I believe the the additional comments that Mr Cole has in his report kind of through those were architecture planning and obviously Mr so Ty's available members of the board or the public have questions to the extent you wanted to revisit what was discussed last time that's fine too not trying to hide the board you have any questions for the engineer M anything else now this utility think The Proposal is nothing to deal with three utility po are becoming a problem at least the one garage so eliminate and I do believe test last meeting was well we Chargers we might want to keep it charg so I go back to the question really clean sight up were not there apartment I don't I don't see an issue with that we could we could do that that would solve the problem with theity I believe we would need to do thatan some agreed so the fs be removed yeah they would put the service on the ground to the building and the P be removed the board gr approval I think part of the problem the the north building garage buildings were not addressed last last time we had no idea what was going in there that's successory build now certainly the one has that from the board members of the public can we ask questions of the testimony disg given you have any questions of the engineer of the testimony disg given so step forward state your name and address EXC sorry that's okay um Caroline flos 37 westring can you just remind me of where this will be located which the site yes near you yeah so there's an area map up here in the corner okay uh this is pretty near to the intersection of Somerset Street in North mid just on the other side of the railroad tracks there sort of a that goes under the railro tracks all right and then this is not a flood zone here because it's below the railroad tracks okay just wanted to confirm thank you yes siret could you please address the microphone prob B 43 North mid I just want to say as a citizen coming in here and not seeing this it's very hard to make a comment on whether we would approve something like this as a community uh I wish we had this before this meeting so as neighbors we could look at it discuss it so it's very hard for us to come in here and make a comment right now about what this is uh I was here for the last meeting sir do you have a question for the engineer um no this is just a comment in general to let you know it's very hard for us to understand comments generally are held to after the applicants had an opportunity to present its case in Chief no problem sorry Mr chair I didn't mean to no worries thank you okay hi my name is Leslie pry I live at 45 North M um you said it's not a flood zone yet the police arrive on our street anytime there's a heavy rainstorm to put well most of the time they arrive they uh put up the the barriers because they underpass floods I'm wondering what's going to happen with the apartment that's really ground level um what kind of water mitigation um drainage sewers that I haven't heard or read anything that is addressing that it's going to be a problem is it might not be a flood zone but is a question with the the street or is it with the site The Underpass gets flooded our last really big rainstorm there was car floating there so that was parked I'm not sure if this site can help that I'm just saying that there's one apartment when I looked at the then way back in December there was one apartment that was sort of basement ground level and it's G it's it's going to have issues so and your question was what will be done about that or yeah how do how do you mitigate the you got to pump you're going to have to have a sum pump or something there and where does that water go because they're going to it's just going to be a big Mr salvaji do your applicant have any response to that yeah well essentially um The Underpass is not directly in front of the property so while it floods underneath the railway you know some distance further down it doesn't necessarily need to driveway building is fine but I would say the corner of the building is not I wouldn't say it's underwater but because of the way it's set into the get set into the side of the embankment pretty much there's there's going to be there's just no way there's not well well to be clear this is existing space we're we're not Excavating something new I understand that understand that I just am not convinced that it's going to be something that's Happ ises the building Flood now I can't answer that yeah I mean what we're looking at is what are the flood uh numbers that's provided by the state stud and by FEMA and based on that you know we're not in a flood plane as discussed but what was that corner of the building used for prior I mean it wasn't residential was it no certainly not residential right it was something to do with the commercial use I just I don't I only knew of one business there and I talked to those guys but they were up on floor so yeah from a regulatory perspective um again it's not something that is indicated as being flood obviously from a practical standpoint if that's something that that's going on then the applicant certainly would want to know about that and look into that but it's not going to be something that's on on the record as far as this is how high it's not technically a flood plane but it's certainly a problem area and it's not only the circumstances it's anytime there's a heavy rain so I think it's a capacity right it's the street under a heavy storm becomes a right yeah it's just like Orlando Drive it's yeah it's in an area okay thank you Market Weinberger 42 North mid off Street and I'd like to ask you as the engineer how you worked around the Federal toxic cleanup site that borders this property right here there's a huge Federal toxic cleanup site that was an old paint factory so already the ground there is contaminated and just as my neighbor Leslie said in terms of flood mitigation the water does not come up because there's a retaining wall in the front of the building but if you saw the aerial photos and every single person here saw them because they were on national news everybody sitting in this room the water came up and actually came to the back of this property from the Raritan River so we we we live there we know it floods it floods um and I just want to ask you one more question so there are 15 there going to be 15 Apartments five one-bedrooms 10 two-bedrooms and a total of 26 parking spaces with two EV stations for the people who live in the building is that correct am I correct with that it's reversed so there's um 10 one BS 10 boms two B five two bedrooms correct um so that's correct as far as the flood plane issue there's not much more we can say on that because information regarding what may or may not happened you know we don't have access you can you can yeah no I understand that but we live there we you know we know the place floods we know it because we there's only one way out of our street when there's a when there's a a superstorm thank you have one more com wer 44 North Mador Street some my question to you sir is this we only talking about one car per family well rsrs would say 1.8 vehicles per no visitors we're not expecting any visitors Mr Dean I don't me I'm asking a question sir yeah Gary our next witness as far as parking my concern is this as far as the parking is concerned your visit is on the weekend and your families are home a lot of now have two cars and could be parking on the street but there's not going to be enough parking there and my question is this sir there's only one side of the park one side of the street park on North M Street only one side of the street parking on camping place so where are these people going to park in our parking spots where the homeowners are so I'm saying to this board how come we don't have permanent parking the home on us and for us handicapped veterans how come we don't have a handicap on the street on Mador Street or Cameron speak plus that's all that's my question okay I think your next witness will probably try to answer some of your questions it's my question is so again when we have visitors people have children kids teenagers have their own cars all these cars be piled up in there I mean I just wanted to ask you how that yeah we have a traffic expert that will answer that can I think that's all the public questions all right um so we'll go right to Mr Mr Dean you were here at the December meeting and you were accept yes I was sworn at the prior hearing Mr given um now the the prior hearing we focused really because you you were sworn in as a professional planner correct just for the record because we didn't have to focus on it that much is your expertise and traffic and parking matters because um that's how many people uh recognize you throughout the state I I I'm like Ed as a professional in both disciplines both licenses are current uh at the December hearing the focus of my testimony was related to the use variance and relief that was sought the review of your master plan ordinance however much of the discussion particularly from the interested public focused on parking and for the benefit of of uh the members of the public behind me when we last appeared in December this project had 16 parking spaces and I think both the board and the public express some concern um not withstanding Transit oriented Villages and some of the standards you've used elsewhere in the burrow that this particular applicant needed to do a better job and and make more efficient use of the structures on the site so where we had a plan that had 16 spaces we're now before you with a plan that features 26 spaces we're required to have 28 and under the state regulations with the Mandate for electric vehicle or EV spaces we get a two- Space Credit so 28 are required and we have 28 in answer to the last gentleman's question just while it's fresh on everyone's mind the requirement for parking includes visitors and guests under the regulations rsis as they're known um the residential units basically work out to need one and a half spaces per unit for the people that live there many are one bedrooms some are twos in addition the rsis requirements uh mandate half a space per unit for visitors and guests so I know that's a lot of numbers all at once but BAS basically what it amounts to is we need eight spaces because of rounding for visitors and guests and the rest are for residents and we comply with those standards and as as you've heard from our engineer and you'll hear in a moment from our architect and I'm going to point to the exhibit but on the north side of the exhibit being A5 A5 thank you um there are the two existing buildings that flank the driveway and then there is the garage structure for the rear of the proper on the North side um the the board felt I think concerned that the applicant wasn't taking best advantage of that infrastructure so in the revised plan uh that ground floor space has has is proposed to be converted to very generously sized parking stalls they're roughly 12 and a half maybe 13 feet wide so certainly bigger than a traditional townhouse uh design which usually has only about 10 um as you've also heard each because it's a fairly small building with 15 units there will be a management office each unit owner will be assigned to that specific garage as we get into the EV spaces we can be creative because power is already in the building where instead of putting a charging unit outside we could put charging units inside this is a code issue and certainly I can work with Mr Cole to resolve that we have to have them that's the statute it's whether they're outside in a pedestal with two I think hoses like gas pumps but two cords to charge or they can be like most homeowners do that have electric vehicles that there can be basically a dryer Outlet in the garage uh into which the individuals can plug in their vehicles so um the only other element that requires a little discussion I believe uh pertain to and I know Mr salv refer to them as stacked spaces I don't want to be overly pedantic but we call them pandem stack spaces actually exist and it's mechanical equipment where they're one on top of the other we're not proposing that we are proposing tandem where it's four and a half two spaces assigned to one unit it's no different than a traditional townhouse design that features a garage and a driveway because it's under the control of the individual unit owner it's simply a matter of you know one spouse or partner or roommate saying are you leaving early in the morning all right I'll take the garage and you park out fromont so there's nothing unusual I don't believe it requires relief um because it is permitted under rsis when we when we look at how things are counted with driveway spaces and garage spaces but if if we need that relief and that's Mr Cole and given's opinion um I believe it is a creative way to efficiently manag parking um with no detriment to the public visitors and guests will not have access to those they will be left to the surface spaces so with that I and again I can't stress enough the public principally expressed their concern with regard to the lack of parking and and we've improved it by another I think 80% however the math works but it's substantially more parking than than uh we had shown you last December um all of the other elements in Mr Cole's report um the plans reflect those same concerns the width of the driveway apron um the desire to narrow that up and improve The Pedestrian uh Crossing of that driveway all of that um we will comply with and beyond that I I think you know challenge accepted from the board and the public you have before you a substantially better plan the the only question and again Mr Cole and I can work it out pertains to the Mandate for Ada spaces and EV spaces now these are code requirements I think the most obvious solution in my opinion is to put a second EV charger and I'm pointing but where we have the van accessible space which is on the west side of the main building closest to the railroad tracks um on the south side of the parking field that could be uh the location for the required EIC so One Way Or Another We're obligated to provide it and and we will comply the the other alternative and I don't think we need to look at a restriping um that's our one handicap accessible so no I now now I know the answer what what typically happens is that second space to the one handicap space becomes the second handicap space it actually is a narrower requirement So within that delineated again pointing to the very Western end of the main or Souther building that's how handicap spaces are usually treated you put the little stripe Carter between the spaces and and they flank either side and if the board notices for Mr CO's benefit we do have a strip area at w building so if we need to adjust those spaces a foot or two to make that work I think there's plenty of room and for that that's all I have in the way of direct I I think it is a substantially superior plan and conforms I I think in terms of the bulk relief just to highlight a few areas and I'm referring to the zoning District chart on the on the side the only variance is uh pertain to building coverage which is a pre-existing non-conforming condition uh that the applicant proposes to marginally increase by 40 square feet maybe 50 square feet um and and for stairs and Architectural elements to get in the building uh maximum impervious cover or Improvement coverage uh is actually being decreased so that is uh lessening the pre-existing nonon of course we have the use variants and I think the floor area ratio is actually staying the same it's tabulated as unknown but there are no new floors or expansions to this building proposed so it should uh remain as as is okay and again Mr chairman board members that that's all I have in the way of direct just as a you have to pay for it people pay andwhere else have any questions for Mr Dean board Gary I would just point out that the two new one bedroom apartment I say new the ones in the accessory building that weren't the last hearing um they are in the rear so some VAR location of those units we had uh 12 in the tri called the triangle shape build one it looks like a sing family the apartment the accessory buildings behind it and that's when we're converting the two offices and two apartments they're behind so if you look at the let on my page seven I just listed the VAR because of the location of the apart post apartment so I guess my question is and this is a Nuance of planning the rear of any building all right I think I understand so by virtue and and hopefully I've interpreted this correctly the applicant is proposing to rehabilitate uh the the twostory smaller building on the north side um of the of the property and because the proposed Rehabilitation of the former office space sits behind that that that constitutes rear would that be remedied and again I don't think there's a need for it but if the two buildings were connected by a roof to cover that parking does that make it all one building and so the variance is is eliminated I wouldn't think so but I just want to you got that testimony and I understand what you're saying here I think it's still there I just you as I recall you gave most of the planning testimony I just want to say in my opinion we picked up a VAR G the location just to cover new testimony understood and and and again just because this is largely an academic discussion sometimes one considers rear behind all buildings so because the main building we'll say strikes a boundary where where my pen is shown but essentially bisecting the site anything but from that point West is rear and this building does not uh I'll say penetrate or go beyond that boundary if we narrow that definition to only the small building and forget about the fact that there's a whole much bigger building there yes this technically smaller building but it's still in in plane with the main building it's an odd interpretation I think the relief is we're uh disusing or taking out of service the office or commercial component obviously with the ability to put this property back in use for a far more for a far less intensive use more pass Ed going from business Commercial to residential I think the benefits of rehabilitating the site making uh more efficient use of the property rather than demolishing it and by having enough parking certainly poses no significant detriment and I focus on the word significant uh to your zoning ordinance or Zone plan and again not knowing really how to interpret it I personally don't believe because the structure is not only already where it's shown but extends all the way to the back of the property it's it's invisible it's it's a technical Nuance that proposed apartments in building located in the rear of the single I mean I'm sorry dwelling shall not be permitted at the rear of any building situated on the same line so I I guess by that narrow def of any building on the same lot then yes it does meet that but in terms of visual visual appearance it won't be perceptive and I think it does U add to the rehabilitation and opportunity um to continue to put this building into a use that is more compatible with the underlying zoning and by summary is therefore a superior planning alternative anything else Mike no just I know we will comply but the accessible route from the handicap spaces into the buildings has to be shown Gary and can't be the travel way so it's unclear what the accessible roots are I understand we'll should the board approve it we'll work that out down the road making sure we're all aware that you need the accessible route from the spaces and by code you cannot have the accessible route in the driveway it's not permitted I agree and that is a perfect segue to our architect who can more depthly handle that than I can just some qu more questions about the parking because I'm I'm hearing uh The Neighbors in in the last uh meeting and this one too they're they're concerned because street parking is already quite limited and you went through formulas and everything um like do those formulas what happens if two of the apartments have Super Bowl parties then they're small units for one and there's a finite number it's sort of like what happens if every existing resident on Mid has a Super Bowl party very unlikely it'll happen but I understand the premise there are a set number of visitor spaces and if they can't beom on site this is a small apartment building it's not a single family neighborhood or should I say property where you can invite more people quite quite candidly we're required to have eight visitor parking spaces we have those under hyper worst case scenario if it's known that the attendees are residents 12 and 11 what do we do in that circumstance we park behind the garages for those units it becomes a little trickier to get in and out but no one is blocked in you know the the hypothetical Super Bowl comes up but that's why things like rsis have dictated residential design over the past I think 30 plus years um one of the things we found in Somerville and other Transit oriented unities Maplewood Westfield the actual parking ratio in these types of Apartments even with one and two bedrooms is around 1.2 to 1.3 so the fact that we are at 1.8 almost 1.9 um we're well above what those needs are and by that same logic if people who live here are going to Super Bowl parties that means there's empty spaces so it it does sort of balance itself out but you know having done work and lived in you know communities like the Hills Town House land uh it it has never surfaced where I I've seen every spot filled ever so that's why rsis was written with that mandate for the half a space per unit so with eight spaces you might have four friends over each who drive themselves but I would also tell my friends look got a really small place and not a lot of parking so maybe we have it at your house I have a I have a question the the spaces that are included the um is it the tandem spaces that are included in 26 yes it is right correct okay there are 26 physical spaces and there are two credits for the E okay question so Gary can you go back on the original plan there were 13 Apartments correct and at that time there were 24 parking spots that were required no oh I'm sorry yes were required and and back on the first proposal that you brought in there were 16 that you provided correct so now we flipped to 15 Apartments and now the requirement is 25 spots required 28 28 but you get the two credit so it's really 26 well I I look at it a little differently it's 28 is the requirement we satisfy it by having 26 spaces plus the two credit I know it's the same math but I've never deducted from the required the the way the statute was written is to count it towards your supply but the requirement is never reduced Mor up to a maximum 10% reduction Max so you want redu 10% so Mike do you agree with the the 26 spots I agree if what Gary is saying is he's going toly his space accessible Charing double there's a there's a 11 to the triangle that's the accessible usually I do eight and eight but 11 and five is acceptable so he has the 16 so what he saying is next to that 16 he's going to put a uh five foot or not 8 foot space and use double up on the travelway so that he won't lose to much he'll push everything down to make it work that's what he's saying so he can get the handic EV space in there and maintain 26 spaces and the board accepts stack or can parking then it complies what Gary's saying about the rsis is absolutely true this was a driveway we have to Le credits for single family but it's not a driveway it's apartment buildings so I would disagree that the RS that parking in a res Park res absolutely they you about how many how long the driveway is and the garage and it counts for 2.5 and so forth but what he's saying is they're going to assk that for the one unit no different than you have in your house which I agree with saying address it they're going to have thees assign and then the visitors are going to do the surface that's no different than having the driveway at home and having the cars par one behind another that I I got that's that's the solution is assigned those cases and and again principally for the resident benefit we we are not in any way relying on on street parking along midall at all it's 100% the requirement is being met on site and and we were candidly inadequate the last time we needed an eight space variance and you know look with the 1.2 and the and the visitor spaces do I think we had enough for our residents yes could I Envision a scenario or where maybe one guest or two guests wound up on Mida probably so we remedied that with this plan and again by going from spaces to 26 physically and and you know to me the credit is Administration but it's we're substantially and vastly improved from where we were so on on parking spots uh one two3 and four that are in stack yes how far do they have to back up in order to do a k turn depends on how good the driver is in 24t I would say they have to come back at least three to if they're all full again I think the expectation was there was a little I'm poting so forgive me um in the southwest of those four spaces there there was a strip door area that may have allowed them to back into that to then come straight through we may nibble into that by a foot or two when dealing with with the Ada and EV spaces but that was part of the intent but they they're not going to back all the way to say for example that that handicap spots and they're still going to have to do a k turn correct there's no getting around that alternatively they pull into the handicap space and back into their garage but most people like to pull forward the other r with the EVS is they countered as Park SP by Statute but they're signed EV charging only so get your head around that one by code count but the code also requires signage and striping that indicates charging owners so so what happens in a situation where if all the units are rented by people that don't have EVS that's so so those EV Spots Don't those EV spots stay empty right that's the rub the count it is being a parking space however the strip and sign EV charging only if you read the statute you're not even supposed to park your Ed for charging only however it counts as a parking space so I don't know how you have it both ways but the statute says that that's what the statute says it says this is what you're going to do for these e charging and this is a s and this is the striping and it says EV charging only and as a residential apartment here's the way it functionally works you could charge overnight and then you're charging the whole time and meeting the intent of the statute so it's it's more problematic for quick turnover spots you know the wwas and and where they're provided at shopping centers that they don't want people we'll say just parking there and being lazy they want them to be used um one of the and I know Michael is an EV Advocate you know by 2035 Governor Murphy has said there will be that there no more sale of internal combustion engines practical or not I don't know but I do know that in 2023 12% of all automobile sales in the state were EV and that increases every year so the whole intent of the legislation was you know we're not quite having the S so part of the reason sales are tempered is because we don't have the infrastructure to accommodate EV Vehicles so if we force developers and Property Owners to put them in it will then encourage the sale of more EV Vehicles so chicken and I I do think it it was a noble effort and I've spent time with Senator Bob Smith who who wrote it along with kit baitman they knew there were some problems with it and but um it's for the time being the the laws kind of like Ada that we're all stuck with for the moment so Gary 26 spots two EVs and one handicap no the the handicaps included in the 26 but but what I'm saying is there's two EVs and one handicap so you have 23 spots for the tenants because if because if somebody's not handicapped I understand and two people and there's no EVS technically you have 23 spots now I understand that's correct is police going to ticket somebody who's parked in the EV if no one in the building has an EV no but I think usually what happens is an EV owners tend to get a little protective of those units uh you know hey I have an EV I want to park in that spot and charge my car so calls get made to management it sorts itself out we're not there yet but as as more of them roll out and again there is a requirement that within three years from the CEO another one gets added and then another one gets added now it's 15% total of 30 so or 28 no excuse me 26 so we're probably six years out going to have four you have to add those each year correct every three years okay but none of the ones that you have now are EVS inside the garage correct no they're not proposed there and and part of the reason for that is in in that um I know I just went through it at the planning board for the building that was approved on Fairview uh Fire doesn't want them in the building just combustibility the fear of if there's an EV fire it's it burns hot and it burns long so they want them outside that's not to say individual homeowners put them in their homes but in a multif family building like this where it's under the purview of your Fire official that's usually the comment we've received is keep the keep them outside so six years down the road these parking spots outside are going to be the EV spots that remains to be seen I and I say that only because perhaps in six years when there have been zero EV fires in multif family dwellings fire officials will be a little less worried let's just say accepted but will that h you really have normal handicap spot so reality have four spaces that might be lied juice who knows it's it's no no different than driving past the you know choose anything a doctor's office and seeing 30 handicap spaces and they all empty the codes are imperfect but they're well intentioned car just for the heck of it if you eliminate one of the proposed units in the uh the new plan there what would the parking requirement go down to well we I'll make the math easy two each apartment basically comes with a requirement for two of it so now these are one bedrooms so that's 1.8 what I don't have um well Tyler did the math so we've got 18 so it it'll still be it'll be two it'll round up but we will still have the same EV requirement and we will still have the same Ada requirement anybody else from the board have a question Mr Dean anybody from the public have a question of the testimony just given Aron Ward 44 North Mador Street this is to the uh traffic expert yes sir have you been there on the weekend sir yes I have have you seen the church coming there with the cars and everything that I have not then you haven't been there on the weekends okay so that's all I got that's all I want to know sir if you have not been there to see all the church people at the church there parking on the streets and everything you have not been there and it's been busy and everybody's home and the church is have Services that's all my question was that that's it thank you Jim Von Shilling 42 North midw Street and and my question is um you use the word passive to describe uh what it's going to be like for us passive and I'm I'm just curious what made you choose that word passive sure it it relates to the use in that what's been in this building was some element of Commerce industry a mill a Grain Mill trucks would come in and out active with commercial vehicles and employees by contrast people that live there go out in their car to buy groceries or they go to work in the morning and they come home at night so it's fairly quiet during most of the day rush hours there there's a few people that come in and out but by and large it's people living in their homes so my my follow question be you said trucks coming in and out with employees did you do any sort of a a study as to how that that I mean I I sort of did research by living across from that for 40 years last 40 years uh garbage trucks would come in and out and take out the garbage but the the idea that there were trucks and employees coming in and out of that site that's just that that it it was it it has been passive but it's not going to be passive when you start seeing people coming in and out in evening hours on weekends you know we never saw that in our neighborhood I I look at as not what it was but the rights that this property owner has to use the building for commercial purposes and I spent enough time in these proceedings to know every commercial use requires access by truck whether it's delivery of raw material office supplies bottles of water any materials they're sell selling an electrical contractor that can be used and and those rights run with with the land today absent this change for somebody to continue to use that building it's an industrial building so maybe in your time if you were working you didn't see it all I can say is I don't know of an industrial building that doesn't come with some element of commercial activity so that that's my opinion I understand yours I think this is a better alternative that is more comp with the surrounding zoning and leaving it the way it is thank you you're welcome think we're done thank you for your time thank you Mr Dean Mr chairman i' now like Bill burn bill was testified last time as an architect we will continue Mr burn then remain sworn okay Bill you continue consider yourself under oath correct yes and your license is still valid and good standing meeting in December yes it is um following meeting we made revisions both from an engineering perspective as well as from architectural standpoint um can you take the board and the public through what was done and particularly with respect sure so again at the last meeting I think there was some question as to the existing um condition the existing um function of elated L-shaped building to the north side of the property um again as I think I put on record we hav't really investigated that to any great extent it wasn't really part of our perview at that point Mr burn please speak into the microphone sure but since the uh last hearing we had an opportunity to revisit the site and prepare um as built drawings go through the building in its entirety and uh evaluate it for some of the concerns that the board had at the last hearing principally uh parking concerns and as it turned out I think the building actually was quite suitable for what we've proposed which is a conversion um not in part as we had um seen the building um but but more or less in its entirety of the ground level um area into um independent individual parking garages for use by the residents and what we've done is essentially um revised the facade which extends um toward open parking um to include individual garage doors and as we see on the exhibit that I have displayed here which is essentially the same there's no no change to what was has been submitted um we can see a series of garage doors replacing um some some sporadic Overhead Doors we've got um eight doors um that will be of a standard residential size and they will go into eight individual garage units um the other thing that we had noted was that there is that two-story frame section of the building it's got a slight elevation to the existing um grade level garages it's a few feet about 2 feet above grade and it was framed and used as office space it wasn't um obvious at this point I had um actually seen the space some time ago and it was still um a little more of a finished state but at this point it was more exposed U but again a frame section of the building it really offered no practical use as um additional garage space and so our thought was it was nicely um situated in relationship to the front building that single family building that we're converting to uh to a dwelling and to the remaining um units in the Triangular building that uh space just seemed to make perfect sense to include as two additional Apartments so the design of of that that portion of the building includes a main level apartment and it includes an upper level apartment which is depicted on the floor plan um but again while we're on this exhibit I just wanted to touch on some of the other changes that we're proposing um the building now has um some siding materials that are a bit varied um in particular facing um the open parking and and onto the site and so our proposal is to uh re revise and essentially renovate the exterior of the building as seen here um into something that's more cohesive more compatible with the the renovation work that's taking place on the Triangular building and um but but structurally the building's in terrific shape dimensionally the building works out very well there's not a signicant amount of structural change that we're proposing here but I I think it is um you know quite beneficial to the site sheet number two of our submission includes that main level floor plan and as mentioned the exterior you see the individual garage Bays the eight Bays that extend across the the main section of the of the structure to the right of of the uh of the view is actually the the side that faces mid Avenue and and you can see there the main level apartment which again is essentially just an infill of an open Office Space wood frame good repair structurally good condition um that unit enters from a new doorway that comes in um to a vestle there's a small portion of that building that we are removing it seemed redundant as an add-on and so in that area where we're moving that which is on the top right of the page um we have a new um landing and a new entrance way that would take us into that apartment and as mentioned earlier the um the tandem spaces that we're proposing um within garage bays are on the far left of the drawing on the portion of the L that that comes toward the bottom of the page and again just configurationally the dimensions of that worked out to be you know comfortably sized and and easily accommodating of two cars thought was since we do have two very generous sized apartments that include the upper levels um our thought was that those apartments would likely um maybe have larger family or certainly command a higher rent and those would be the two units that we would ideally tag those those spaces to so it just seemed like it was very compatible that the tenant that would be interested in that bigger multi you know level unit you know would would justify the additional cost of those garages so that was the intent and in the back right corner of the building of an infill corner of the L um again used as a mill there's a lot of different things going on there but that that area is is elevated Above the Rest of the building about again two two feet or so and we have that designated as storage currently and I think in Mr Cole's more recent review report he had suggested that that in prior testimony we had discussed the possibility of doing some Recreation on site for some of the tenants um maybe some exercise you know use or some other recreation use and I think that would really an ideal use for that space we had honestly nothing else we could really do with it because there was a slight grade difference there so I I think to maybe consider that open space as maybe a community room or a place where maybe people could gather or maybe have some exercise equipment I think is a good use of that space our thought was maybe some additional storage for the tenants but I I think Recreation probably does make more sense I just want to confirm this is this is material that has already been submitted right revised plans right no I understand that I mean I okay um since since since an amend since it's an amended submission I want to make sure that record reflects that should I believe we should Mark it right that's fine yeah no question we should Mark it anything amended you should always identify so we can keep the record consistent is sheet number one of our resubmission this uh sheet includes the exterior very good number of ourmission this this sheet includes a smaller scale view of the entire structure any further amended any further amendments and A9 is is an enlarged floor plan of both the main level apartment that's being proposed and the upper level apartment that's being proposed and again it was done at a larger scale just because it offer a little bit better Clarity so let's Des so again the top is the main level of the office bace it's identical to the size that's there now again it's on a slightly elevated Flor level and it shows btom laundry I thinks from the adcy to theages and includes an interior door to the so you know a nicer bonus for that particular res that apartment includes an attached garage which I think quite a nice bu the bottom right is the upper level apartment the upper level exists today the stairs exist today so we're not proposing a tremendous amount of interior change and it is wide open so essentially we're just delineating that space into one bedom apartment essentially a repeat of what we have on the first floor it's one above another but these are nice size apartmentos each around so as a one apartment are nice comfortes bill I understand one bedroom they have off right we we designate that area as an office but it's not actually a separate room it's an Al Cove and and again it's just you know the projects of this nature that we've been involved with everybody's working from home so it's I just want to board know the ordinance it's a two bedom off definition it's not bathroom a kitchen a living room by definition a bedroom so it's I understand what you're saying and I'm calling it a one so no window door yeah got out window the ordin doesn't say that I'm just saying I it's essentially a alcob off the hallway to try to hopefully not maybe go against the ordinance but we know what it needs to be it need to be a spot for a desk and a computer and hopefully somebody make a call the ground floor units of the main building which includes in excess of three units would in all cases be adaptable or accessible from from the onset so that that is our intent yes that's the rear most unit that that particular unit as it's currently drawn does not have ACC access to a ramp where each and every other one either has on grade access or access to a ramp it's an excellent question and I did research that I have another project that's rather parallel to this at this point and it appears that that is required to be accessible so our thought was in order to accommodate that what can be done is we got access via a ramp to level so our thought was we simply itly Windows back and extend this open to give us the ability to get into that unit so again we didn't really have the size or ability and certainly we're trying to fit a lot onto the um Ada spaces and make sure we have good access and it didn't make sense to try to put yet another ramp on a building that has two ramps but that's seems to be the solution that I think would remedy that issue absolutely I I would think that would make sense yeah I think we talked last time just some some identification signage not not anything that would be advertising there wouldn't be a requirement to sprinkler those we will have a fire separation wall between the garage and the units um what use group you calling those units I'm sorry what's the use group on those units UCC use group again that's a very good question because General principle if you're in the IBC get sprinkled if you're in the IRC it doesn't right it would fall under the one or two family but the problem is you can't have a one or two family correct because it becomes a mixed use if that but but again the separation becomes the private garage we could put up a firewall technically and try to divide that you don't get in the IRC there I think you stay in the probably easier to do a residential sprinkler system if that's what the board would prefer good answer y and that that is accurate I think we touched on that at the last hearing and talked about the diversity in size and obviously the ability to adjust rents but yes that is absolutely correct even though we may arua minim oh it it does Unit Nine will still be large the second largest unit Unit 10 still being the smallest but it still will meet the require the minimum size under the code we would again look toward a heat pump electric heat pump correct and we will and then the necessary testing as required I think that's something that we encountered on prior projects here we would certainly absolutely yeah there is no basement and then lastly comment number 19 consideration the overhang coverings to the entrance of each apartment what are we doing in are we doing something similar for the new building we are uh both entrances to the new building at least the apartment entes we do have a small overhang covering that which I think is a nice aesthetic feature for one thing the building is honestly somewhat you know blank right now so it was done partially for aesthetic but I think it offers a practical feature for this okay I think Mr Co I kind of cover yeah the only thing you didn't cover is that there's a portion of accessory building is to be demolished in between there's a small section I think it's a one story or Bill can you give some elaboration on what section of that accessory I call it the accessory building is being to open up more parking space sure yeah and that's exactly correct and and what it is when we went to the site there was anage that was added at some point I think it was masonry one story it had a fairly flat roof and it exists I I'll refer back to the exists today to the right side in this view it extends out about to 10et I don't have the exact and again it's one story so it didn't offer any aesthetic value it seemed to offer no practical it wasn't it was at at the grade level as compared to what we're proposing as the apartments which are at an elevated level and it did free up a little bit additional space for some parking so I think you know to some extent Mr had referenced that his past report that maybe there some availability to remove some of the building and get some parking and in fact it actually did help us there so that that's what's being proposed I believe that everything Mr and adequately describes the improvements to that new the board you have any questions for the architect are the garages heated I would say probably not there's no heat there today and I wouldn't be typical that we would heat them and how about the uh area that you're talking about for the recreational area how how would that be if we were to you know develop that into a recreational area then we would obviously provide Heating and Cooling in that and and again toward looking toward the heat pump type system so Mr salvaji um would would your would your client be agreeable to stipulate to uh compliance with Mr Cole's report as has been revised in your discussions with the board yes okay as a condition of approval all right B I had a question on the lighting you show loose neck lighting above throughout the facility it's fine obviously but I don't see that reflected in the sight light was I don't know if it's engineering or architectural I just would like to see the Inc into the S lighting I could certainly share that information with our site engineer and I'm sure he can amend his plan to reflect that again they're they're serving two functions as you're I'm sure aware they're obviously very aesthetic and they're shielded and I think they give a nice Ambiance to the site in the evenings um but you know as you said they should accurately be shown board any more questions would anybody from the public like to qu this of the testimony this given hi Margaret Weinberger 42 North mid Street I have a question about that little house in front I'm not you know not having had the time to really or the ability to really look at these the little Standalone structure that's right in the front that's going to be part of a one or TW story structure that's going to be built and built back no that that unit that building is essentially being converted back to a on story home there's really no very minor exterior changes just really I'd like to think enhancements there's a nicer entrance way and it's going to have a more resal that does today to hopefully help the streetcape one thing that none of these drawings show is that the house next door exactly right next door is probably three and a half feet and none of these drawings show that when somebody lives in that apartment the people who live in the house three feet they're going to be able to see each other and talk to each other through the windows ma' do you have a question based upon that or yeah I just want to know um how you were how you were uh how you were rectifying that situation and was there a variance that had to be provided that's really my question was there a because I I thought and I probably am wrong that there had to be a certain amount of setback between properties and so was this property given this variance because of that because honestly you probably just get a hand pushed lawn mower through that space between 37 and 39 North Middle that's a preexisting what they call as a pre-existing non-conformity that's that was probably what I needed to hear so in other words at some other point it was approved that that could be house think built it's probably prior to the zoning yeah yeah because the one house is probably from 1900 in the building so do you want us to knock the neighbor's house down or sure I'm just kidding 43th mle Street um I was have a question about the apartments that are going to be have front doors onto North Middle is uh is that going to be two or is that going to be three doors that I think in total it would be three it would be three well a single family home okay okay and how far is that doorway from the parking lot uh it's it's the length of the building there's doors already on that level um yes it's you know but you'd have to again so it's going to be the same distance correct so soon as you how far into the part into the property is the first parking spot I I don't actually have that answer so I would defer that to engineer I mean space number one is between the two ramps so it appears to be based on the scale about 50 50 feet so they'd have to park in that lot and walk 50 feet to their front door that's correct thank you Bill did you go over the changes the Aesthetics the painting of the wall and the siding and the windows and the upgrades proposed for the accessory building sure um the exterior of the building currently again has a mix of sightings different materials and even somewhat different colors the record what building you talking about I was actually referring to the um the northmost building the L-shaped building and I think that was what Mr referring bu yeah yeah so um we are going to starting from the top the pitch group is going to be removed I'm sorry replace the existing windows in this unit so again the windows that are there now there's a mix of Windows we're going to put in new windows um two over TW some historical consistency to the neighborhood they're of that era and you can see a number of those that face the parking area as well as you see on the top left we are going to replace the leers and gutters the existing siding it's going to be replaced with um fiber cement siding of Hardy plank Bon bat so um we think of it as an appropriate complement to what we proposed on the Triangular building and I think it's going to be a nice enhancement to the structure and that exists on areas that are currently CED which is area facing the parking lot surrounding do the area facing Ander what would be that second apartment the office the Bas walls which I believe about the church parking lot are going to remain but they're going to be um touched up and then they're going to be painted a complimentary color as we see here um the roofing is is appears to be in pretty good repair so the roofing is going to be retained it's a charcoal roof it Blends well with what's being proposed on the main building we also have overhead doors that are going to be installed and again we we took care to select a door that would be uh consistent with the aesthetic of the mill building and I think consistent with the period they become a fairly predominant element we've got them shown in a complimentary color so it doesn't done it we've got nice white trim surrounding that so we feel like that's a nice enhancement we've got goose neck lights depicted over each of those doors which again we feel provides a nice aesthetic it gives a little texture to the building um as we touched on previously we do have um two covered overhangs above each of the two doors to the apartments again those will be done in a standing seam metal roof to complement the charcoal roof on the upper portion of the building so I mean collectively I think the improvements are pretty dramatic honestly and we we purposely chose a complimentary color for this type of building in the Country Lane red which is a nice traditional color we've used that on other historic properties you know throughout Morris County in the area and it reads very well I just thought of something each of those garage are they private they are floor to ceiling you need Manors anywhere um it's not required by code that's it I think we're done all right um um Mr chairman with that we're concluded obviously if anybody has questions of any of the professionals want com okay other questions want to hold your summation to the public done yeah any member of the public have any comments they like to come up and make just ask that you keep it limited and don't repeat yourselves please identify yourself Rob Bay at 43 North M Street I wanted to comment about the the church I live next to the church um they're probably there three days out of the week their main day is Saturday not Sunday uh they're there Bible study or practicing choir the other days I get along with them great in the back there may be six maybe eight spots for them to park uh if you're there while they're having service you constantly see cars stopping letting children out letting seniors out and then going to park and uh I just want you to keep that in mind uh as far as the stack parking we do that in my house uh I am very considerate of my neighbors I tell my daughters do not park on the street we have parking in our house there are times where if you're in a rush D and you need to get somewhere you will take a car put it on the street get in your cart and take off and I don't know when my daughter is come and take it off the street but it does happen so I don't know about the stack parking if that's going to work in any apartment complex it's uh it works in home like I said our times but uh I want to thank you for going through all this I see all the hard work you guys do thank you and uh really even Builders developers it's a lot of work it's a process and uh thank you all thank you anybody else from the public have any other comments Harold Ward 44 North Mador Street homeowner um my concern is that uh you heard some of the traffic expert that he was there but he wasn't there you see all the traffic is there parking when the churches there all up and down caming and up and down Mador Street only one side of the street room with Door Street you can park so we have apartment buildings going up the front door is on the door Street and they come in with their packages people people walk 50 ft from the driveway to the front of the house their packages and not going park on the street and deliver their packages into their front door I think that's might be a pipe dream but as I said before as a disabled veteran we don't have any parking as it is on caming place where be gr to get in my apart house home there's no handicapped there we should have we should have permit resit home home homeowners permit parking the thing is that will relieve some of the concerns that the apartment building they're going to overflow and they have visitors company and the one point what is it one point what uh car 1.1 1.1 car 1.8 huh 1.8 1.8 car I don't know when they came out but that might be ancient the thing is now most families have two cars most families single families have two cars or more and they're not could be able to park all of in that one parking spot so I want to thank you for your time for listening to me but the thing is that as a homeowner here I think we should have some kind of respect for us homeowners and take our consideration in the consideration of where we live and that people are coming in and be coaching on our homes where we live the property owners there single family Property Owners I think we should take that into consideration thank you for your time thank you Jim Von Shing 42 North mid Street I just wanted to describe our neighborhood a little bit because you may not be familiar with our neighborhood but it's a very very old old neighborhood and um it's basically has kind of two two kinds of housing there uh some are very very small narrow houses if you've ever been on South midall to go down to the Wallace house maybe you've seen those houses but narrow houses small houses small properties not a lot of space for for driveways uh the bigger houses on the corner uh three of three of the four corner houses are represented here tonight and they were built without driveways so it's it's a it's it's a strange little neighborhood uh and parking is is very much a premium there uh and and uh Harold described what happens when when the when Church uh is in session and we have parking there but even in regular times the parking fills up um it definitely fills up uh especially when people come home from work the street is narrow and I I think of how people are even going to be pulling in out in and out of of the uh of the driveway at the building that you propos so it's it's not your typical neighborhood and and so if you think about the kind of neighborhoods in in Somerville where there kind of wide streets and there's like two or three spots where people could park in front of the houses and driveways that is not our our neighborhood thank you thank you councel yeah the comments from the public this evening as well as comments from December certainly suggest that there's a parking issue there and candidly if we were standing in front of you tonight with the same Proposal with respective paring that we showed in December um I think we'd be hard press to convince you that we've been considerate of the Public's comments uh as well as the needs for these future residences but we have come up with a proposal again if you're willing to Grant the variance for the tandem parking that meets the townships excuse the barels requirements as well as RSI standards and the reason why we have RSI standards is to take out the you know U the willy-nilly of oh do we need more parking or not I mean these standards are not something that we're just pulled from the sky they're based on uh analysis from a variety of different uh res residential settings and I I Believe by providing this park and indeed if there's a parking problem along mid out um that would only encourage people that have signed spaces to make sure they're going to park there uh rather than uh you know several hundred yards uh down the street and you know this is a unique piece of property you guys better than anybody um it's you know it's it's old uh it has been historically devoted to some type of industrial commercial use and um I I think because it hasn't been really used to its full capacity um I think it's easy for you know people in neighborhood to kind of say well you know we like it the way it is but that's not practical and you know this does you know it really is a creative reaped use of these buildings um it ain't going to be cheap to build this out um and I I think though it'll be a product that will as Mr Dean said in his December testimony enhance the neighborhood setting um aesthetically uh and it will provide a unique residential opportunity for the residents want to take of this type of setting um I we've also endeavored we said in December and again this evening Mr Cole's report which was thorough 28 Pages uh you didn't hear any comments from us that we disagree with anything that he has suggested um you know the the developer would like to be a part of this community and do so that for a product and a project that the neighbors although they may be a little reluctant now will come to appreciate it will certainly enhance uh that whole neighborhood setting and it it's going to uh offer another you know somerville's is a booming place you guys know that better than anybody because you witnessed it all firsthand and this is another component that and it does so in a way that will be respectful of some of the history that Somerville um has I mean you know an old rist mill uh you know a lot of towns would love to see something like this happen in their communities and the downside is yeah again if we didn't have the parking and we didn't satisfy your standards you could certainly say well the negative is you're putting up 15 units and you got no place to park everybody but we we've tried to to do that um and I think we've been successful in accomplishing what your concerns are in the needs of of the community so you know on balance I think we've met the medich standards um I think we've also met your site plan uh considerations um particularly when we incorporate Mr Cole's comments so I'd like to personally thank you for the coures you extended to both myself and and the applicant uh and questions I I look forward to hear you guys deliberate vote on this thank you thank you motion to close the public portion second all in favor all all right guys yeah so this uh this project I'm I mean it's great you know heard it in December um I was I was happy uh to see that you know uh the building will be converted to residential use because I frankly would be the best use however um in looking at the plans uh with the modification adding the two apartments I thought may not have been a good idea since we've already had an issue with the parking in the first place I mean when when you come and you present a case to us I think it should be for the betterment of the community and obviously the community has an issue with parking um and I I understand they did give us the the additional spaces I think it's a extra 10 I'm correct or or eight right electric cars with with the electric cars but right so it's it's around 23 once we really do the math of usable spaces um why the extra two Apartments you know uh and that's and that's and that's it I think essentially if we had the same apartments with the parking I don't think we have an issue from a lot of homeowners in the area but I mean hey you know it does meet the standards um and you know that's that's uh that's the purpose but I mean when you want to present something especially you want to satisfy a community it doesn't hurt to overs satisfy um I think that it's a creative use of the space there I think that it's uh bringing a non-conformity non-conforming use closer to what should be there is residential um I think the site can accommodate the parking especially well with the revised plans it seems like the site can accommodate the parking um it's it's a it's a it's not easy with the amount of uh parking issues but they do meet the standards so there you know I don't think there's um too much concern there that's really all I got right uh well a couple things the same homeowners they were here last time so it's the same it's exactly the same argument and I'm a little baffled because you added you knew they're upset and you added to the garages but then it's like a slap in the face oh let's just cut up the exal every little square inch we can and put more apartments in so I was like ble when I saw that too I was just like well the concern was more spots and we G you gave it some but we're also going to put more people so I don't get that um the parking's not met uh a certified appraiser would go to a property and it was always done this so many times and it's marketed as a fourcc car garage and and you would go the certified appraiser by the state has to do his job accordingly and they would go in there and say well there is a tandem garage that is not marketable as a fourcc car garage that's a two-car Tandon garage period no discussion so it's great it's a two-car big two-car garage it's a tandem garage so those spaces don't work for me they throw I throw those out and all the other problems with the spots I just that's they're saying what's going to happen people are just going to park in front of all their houses and you think they're angry now wait till it becomes permanent then they're really going to be upset and so I'm that's parking doesn't work for me at all that's where I'm at I think it should have been all right we heard you not only do we increase our parking but we cut down down the apartments to 8 and instead you went to 15 so I take that as a slap and I don't want to see these guys coming back saying you know you know month after month after month trying to get all these other additional permits to try to get their spot back that they've been parking there for 40 years I just don't think it's right so I don't see the parking satisfied at all the building's nice I think it would look great I'm not against any of that at all it would look better than the uh but oh that was the other thing that always is mentioned too about oh it's better because if it was a business the businesses are usually close on the weekends so there's no impact in the neighborhood and never would the business had enough spots that would ever bleed into the streets but this adding all these apartments I can almost guarantee that's going to happen and like they said like the one the one apartment can you imagine that guy coming home from the grocery store he's not going to park in a parking lot he's going to park right there and take that Resident spot away it's going to happen and so that's it basically I just don't think the parking is satisfied at all nice building too much cut up too much much put too many people in it's going to come back to bite us I know it so that's where I feel yeah Roberta um I'm not gonna comment this evening because I was not here for the first hearing so you know people who know me know it's killing me to say I have nothing to say how long can you do that not well you better start talking Rich okay Rich okay I like the overall project and I think the restoration of that Mill could be a positive benefit to the town and to the neighborhood I'm concerned about adding two apartments which basically erodes the parking that we asked them to fix and I'm having problems having problems reconciling myself with that I grew up in that neighborhood and I remember when it was an active business you know very active business trucks and trains and all kinds of things going in there it's not that anymore I think the residential compon good work and I think the building but I saw the plans was remarkably done by the architect but adding those two dwellings kind of is a kick Mor so counselor get a second yeah so when you came in in December and you presented the plan it was a PO plan because of the par you even said that but it was almost slap in the face to the community that the garages were not going to be anything done with them potentially storage potentially it was going to be a gymnasium down the road so you came in with a new plan and we vetted the parking I think the parking now is adequate uh you you've solved that I think it's going to be nice Improvement to the neighborhood because if we don't approve this it's going to remain an eyesore and and I think what you have to ask yourself is do you want an isore in the neighborhood with another type of development that would come in or do you want a nice quality construction and the architect has done a nice job it sounds like it's going to be really top quality that you're going to be putting into the neighborhood there so I think it'll be a nice project we're close uh I think I mean I I appreciate um that the developer is making some adjustments based on the last meeting but the reality is that Mida stre has a parking problem and the intensity of the property is currently zero so the moment you add you take that zero and make it a non-zero um there's risk involved uh I agree with the rest of the other board members here who were saying that you know um while you might satisfy the letter of the requirements um the idea of adding those two apartments um just seems like it I could understand the residents being upset by that um but again uh like you said Morgan it's like it's an empty building right now um it would be great if something uh what happened there uh I I think the plans are are good I think they're close um but I think in the interest of the uh residents currently there and the parking issues currently there it's it's a challenge you got CLI Mr chairman may I suggest before the board takes a vote on this it might be uh useful if we had a brief recess sure uh perhaps uh maybe I could speak with the applicants Council for a couple of minutes and you know we we've been on our feet now for couple hours anyway but I I I would suggest that we do that given the circumstances take a 5 minute recess thank you e e e my was B I cool perfect at so e yeah e e and that's not very that's not going to look good at all that very bad exactly call us back in session hey I like that shirt all right mam secretary Che counselor um okay um back on the record I I I appreciate the the call for recess um the developer was was listening um and what we'd like to do with the the board's mission is to amend the application now I know several of you talked about that building on uh you know the new building that we include as Apartments um and the addition of those two those two apartments what we'd like to do and this takes into account some of the comments by the the public is leave those two apartments in that building but eliminate units one and two of the main building those are the basement apartments and that accomplishes a couple of things the concerns about water go away and that space will be utilties storage non-habitable space it also uh Mr Willard's concerns about people parking on the street to get to these units they'll be gone and quite frankly it'll be just as easy to park in the back and walk your groceries to the front um the parking would remain the same but you're losing two units so it's effectively a decrease in I guess it's 3.8 round it up to four spaces so that would account for um you know those Super Bowl parties and things like that would give you some additional uh capacity to accommodate um and then the the only caveat is we'd have to make sure to account for Mr Cole's EV handicap space so I I think if we do that again you're down to the original 13 units you will we still have more than enough parking under the standards the objective standards that the state provides uh with some additional capacity and these two units which might be the least desirable assuming you know the who have lived in this area about flooding and water and everything else so I I think that puts this in a in a better position and by the way the the additional units and we apologize to the extent people felt offended the reality of it is is to convert that building for parking is not going to be cheap so like any developer you're like okay if I'm going to spend more money how can I do something to offset those costs it was not intended to be kind of flipid or or uh Cavalier that was the the rationale but the developer because again he listened in December you know you know he does want to be a part of this community doesn't want to have people show up at these meetings you know six months from now complaining about partnering and things like that so that's how we would amend the application to take uh those concerns into account concerns expressed by the board as well as the public how do we handle that so you would units one and two but that reduction 13 it would go back to the original proposed 13 you'd have 11 in that main building and then you'd have two the two that were proposed we talked about tonight in that front building in front of the the garage space the application application and everything else would the same everything else would remain the same okay the the only thing that we would ask is you know if the board was inclined to to vote is just in terms of there's modifications to accommodate that handicap EV space that you let Mr pole and and Mr Dean kind of work that out but um I think we'll have more than enough space to do that understanding that we would still need the variant for the you know the tandem space uh although even that at least theoretically uh should be less of a concern because you'd have more capacity in in It quotes the visitor area so so we' have the the parking situation would be much better than what I gather you know a lot of the other residents are experiencing now unfortunately on on midow there should be ample space um and and Bill I'm gonna ask you a quick question swapping out the two units one and two on the main building where one bedroom apartments that's correct and units that we proposed in the uh separate building were one bedroom as well all right so the mix would stay the same so you're not getting rid of a a one bedroom and picking up a two bedroom which arguably would uh increase your Park in the bedroom so that's how we would amend it any condition of approval would be added whereby you know in terms of any EV or parking circumstances you would coordinate that to the approval of Mr Cole absolutely correct I mean we have no choice um you know in terms of the state law okay and that's the extent of the re the extent of your amendments yes okay Mr chairman the uh you know the the ml would require not require would permit the applicant to amend its application at this point it's not completed yet so if the board wants to consider the application is amended it may and a vote hasn't been taken yet so you can red deliberate if you wish any thoughts so I just want to make sure that everyone knows so they understand so by taking that those basement apartments out we take that threat of that guy coming home from the grocery store Walking 50 feet that goes away that goes away yes absolutely so that helps big well the flooding issue I think also gets addressed yes excuse me but that so that helps that that solves that problem there's still one in front there was two in the main building there's one in the single building the mic please speak into the microphone much like the other single family homes on the street and that was really our goal with that building I'm sure at some point it probably was a home and we're just basically putting it back to that so oh yeah and that that's closer to the interest in the parking lot that's right we no what they're concerned about is the one that was really far away that someone's going to have to they're not going to yeah that one they're getting rid of but but there's also parking directly behind that home and there's access to that parking so in all likelihood if you live there you're going to park in the spot right behind your home one last point it was obvious to us when we went out and did our field work that that previous office space that we're proposing in this revision to convert to Apartments is much much nicer space honestly than those basement spaces ever no no yeah I agree with that we got Windows we've got access to a garage directly there's no comparison no that's a basement basically what the other one was anyway yeah because you I think if I'm not mistaken you have to step down and get to it I think I think it's pretty close to the sidewalk elevation yeah or it is but yeah yeah yeah so that's a better that's a better move with the app with the applicant stipulate that that would be non-resident that basement area would be non-residential space you pretty much indicated that as it is okay make it for utilities and Storage storage and utilities we can make that a condition if we if if the board wishes but again the board I'm the board will have to consider and vote on this separately what we trying to clarify all the changes and if there's any questions a board has this a good time to bring them up that's anything else uh the tandem spots still don't work for me I mean that I don't want them to be counted because I just I just don't want that to be an issue and have the say oh well it counts so it satisfied the requirement but the tenant says oh man I'm not g to I got to pull my car you know I don't want that to be is there any other way around that not really because you can't and I don't think you unless you amend the rsis uh it's going to be very difficult I'll leave it to the applicant but I'm not so sure that there's much can be done you take look at the Tes you say you count one you lose two parkes still a gain of 1. spaces so it works it works it would work yes it would work is a surplus single parking needs okay that's what I want to make sure so it doesn't matter if it's can or not because okay yeah I'm not as concerned about that because like on a weekday morning if a if a couple is leaving for the office and one needs to leave earlier those spots those open spots along the along the tracks are probably empty so they back it on they back the car into the spot they leave with the other car and then half an hour later that AR I'm I'm just trying to make sure that I'm trying to satisfy yeah this much yeah understanding that the the benefit of having it whether it's used all that much is the more you have on site that's available it reduces the likelihood of spill over onto the street yeah you know which is because you know look everybody knows parking is you're going to park where it's convenient and close to where you want to be at so if there's a tandem space there as opposed to parking 100 yards down in front of one of these neighbors homes they'll take advantage of the tandem space that said in order to meet the requirements because of the reduction of two units we don't need okay you know I think we're there okay well uh then I would then certainly the board can entertain a motion to it would be a motion to to uh approve the application with uh the conditions the the conditions as follows well certainly the conditions that are set forth on the record but uh my recollection is that you know compliance with Mr Cole's report uh the space in the basement of that unit will not be used for uh residential space which I think it's very appropriate given the fact that we've had at least one member of the interested public indicate there is a could be a flooding problem there um you know the other uh and I I believe I'm trying to think if there was anything else we really had in there shade tree well he's gonna what he's you know that's a waiver that's essentially been obviated because he's going to put the he's going to put up the uh money and that can be put in the resolution I did not my notes did not indicate going back to the original do not indicate any other conditions essentially the trench right going to handle the Ada EV spaces is basically compant with most of the comments in the report in a motion also our standard conditions of approval as I always say all right all favor roll call roll call sorry Mr Al yes Mr mlin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr binsky yes Mr Flores um uh I just want to say thank you for the public for coming out and thank you for the developer for listening um yes Mr Alvarez yes Mr Daniels yes thank you guys we really appreciate it congratulations a good night council congratul Mr salvaji I'll coordinate the preparation of a resolution with your office I expect it'll might be April might be may I you know got a pretty heavy duty one here so got one more one more yeah guys awake down there we're at there's actually CES in the fridge we have another another application on the agenda get PA by uh next on the agenda 90 grow Street LLC okay approved as amended 90 Grove Street no that worked out well yeah I did speak to brief good evening counselor good evening Mr chairman my name is uh Michael silbert I'm GNA attorne at the law fir D franccesco baitman located in war Township New Jersey um I have the privilege of representing the applicant this evening 90 Grove Street LLC as the board likely recalls we appeared before the board back in February uh February 21st and we completed the testimony of our engineer Craig Styers uh Mr primiano who was sworn in at the last hearing put uh put forth uh number or addressed a number of points raised in Mr Cole's report um that have that has just been revised um the revised report is dated March 13 2024 um as I'm sure the board recalls they required they requested that we make certain modifications to the third story we did that we submitted uh Revis architectural plans dated February 23rd 2024 uh more than 10 days in advance of this hearing and essentially I'm going to recall if that's okay Mr chairman Mr primiano to address the modifications made to the um architectural plans and we'll conclude our uh our application with the planning testimony of Alexander mlan um just to just to recap uh so essentially we're we're here before the this board because we're looking to renovate um a build a dwelling or a building located at 90 Grove Street which currently uh consists of office space on the first floor and the second floor with one residential apartment unit we're seeking D1 variance relief in order to eliminate the office space on the second floor and uh add an additional uh residential unit that'll span on the second and third floor so that there will be office space on the ground floor one one bedroom residential unit on the second floor and one two-bedroom residential unit that'll span the second and third floors and that is it just want to confirm Mr Prem if I recall was previously sworn so uh you remain under oath that is correct your license remains in good standing yes great yes uh Joseph prano for the record PR i m i a n o last time we were here um uh there was uh concern about smaller bedrooms on the Upper Floor the attic floor and um and the lack of a bathroom um there was also some talk about uh installing a sprinkler system by installing the sprinkler system um it eliminates a lot of the uh requirements uh to stay as a what New Jersey calls us a habitable attic which is pretty much much uh like a half story uh we were trying to remain at that half story but by installing sprinklers we can now have we can utilize a lot more of that Upper Floor um so that's what we did we took the the comments of the board um and we redesigned that upper level so what happened was the bedrooms got 2 feet larger um which gave them a little bit more space uh so instead of being uh the one particular room was 12T now it's 14t and the other bedroom they were both about 12 ft so they both went from 12 ft to 14 ft the other change that we did was we added a bathroom there is now a full bathroom up on that floor uh which is uh can be accessed for both bedrooms uh there's still a loft space in the center of the existing floor and everything else that we showed last time on the other floors is all the same uh I'll turn it back to uh the Border Mr Cole if you have any there were any outstanding architectural comments I believe we addressed them at the last hearing but if there are any lingering questions um that you feel needs to be addressed we can do that now Joe you add about 120 square feet 130 sare feet to the attic with those additions the bedroom size addition and the bathroom is that about right yes yeah and then as a as a result of that and um I did speak to this at the last hearing of course our our F increased slightly as a result of that um as a result of those modifications to the third story um I didn't mention this in my introduction but of course we're also seeking an F variance so yeah I I believe it went from 522 square feet to 620 square feet yeah the only exterior ifications were the egress windows correct on the or the third story now that is correct and the addition of a air condenser down at the ground next to the existing one I don't know if you want to open up to uh members of the public unless board has other re the board's consuming it right now okay give the the board a chance to review absolutely they may have they may have additional questions sure excuse your architect's finished correct no more testimony do you have any questions for the architect anybody from the public have a question for the architect you're good great thank you so uh with your permission Mr chairman I'll I'll call our Final witness uh Mr Alexander mlan who is a professional planner um and Mr mlan uh Mr Gibbons when you're ready he gonna swear you in M your right hand you saw me testimony you're about the G this matter the truth so I hope you got I do please state your name and spell your last name for record yes it's Alexander McLean I'm sorry I'm getting over cold um yeah last name is m CC l e a n and um my address uh one 37 Heckle Street uh Belleville New Jersey very good councelor your witness sir thank you Mr kin and uh for the benefit of the board um would you mind providing the board with your academic and professional credentials in the field of uh planning yes sure I hold a Masters in City Regional planning from ruter University I'm a member of the American Institute of certified planners and I'm also licensed by the State Board of Professional planners and I have testified before boards throughout the state just name three three local boards okay yeah um sville new work and Clifton that's fine thank you councel acceptable thank you thank you so uh Mr mlan you're obviously familiar with this application property correct yes and you attended last month's hearing you heard the testimony of Mr styes the testimony of Mr primiano from from last month's hearing as well as this evening great yes and you're obviously aware there are a number of D and C variances being sought in connection with this application yes so uh if you wouldn't mind why don't we start with the uh with the D D1 use variants that's being sought um I think for the benefit of the board I also have exhibits to kind of help um get the the board oriented toward the location of the property uh they should be they should be marked yeah absolutely I think that I don't believe we've um distributed any exhibits thus far so I think this could be marked as A1 very good that's going dated today yes thank you very much so I can go over each one um just to kind of establish the property for the okay so these are just a collection of uh Maps uh we have a zoning map it's the first page um the parcel map second page um and on the first page you can see the you know relation relationship of the property to the surrounding zoning districts um to the rear of the property you have the uh Garden Apartments District the large residential area and to the South you have the uh accounting government District um next page is the uh parcel map you give you an idea of U land uses in the building building Footprints uh third page is the uh or some aerial shots of the front of the the building subject property the fourth page is the uh another aerial shot um looking over the building into the the parking in the rear of the building building and the fifth page is a is an aerial shot um showing you the entire building um straight down the exhibits obviously marked today uh pictures were taken um as identified on the exhibit is uh February 19th 2024 is that correct the entrance to the office on the first floor on the sixth page and the entrance to the um second unit staircase in the rear of the building on the seventh page and on the last page you just have some some additional aerial shots of the surrounding neighborhood as you can see it's a u a nice mix of u a variety of of housing types and and uses as well all right um so that being said um so this site is a is a cornal lot um totaling 95 uh 9,558 square fet and it's ight slightly undersized and it's located in the northeast corner the grow stre uh to the West and East Cliff to the North and the land uses as I noted before is a healthy mix of housing types including single family two family homes and Commercial amenities um and this application here we're seeking to modify and retrofit the interior of an existing uh structure that was built in 1960 uh to provide for two apartments for one one bedroom and one two-bedroom unit uh the zoning conformance um this property is located in the P or the professional office residential Zone as noted in the on the first page of the exhibits and it's in it's in compliance with much of the bulk requirements for this District um going over for minimum lot Frontage along Grove Street and uh East Cliff Street minimum lot width along East CLI Street minimum lot depth rear yard setback and the parking rsis standards um so as um the attorney noted we are we are seeking a D1 use variance um as the multiple residences um for this mixed use is not expressly permitted in this Zone and we are seeking uh a D4 F relief uh some minor C1 relief uh for the existing non-conforming conditions of this property and the Improvement of the parking lot uh to the EV charging stations um as far as the uh justifications for the D the D1 relief um I believe that the for the positive criteria I believe that the benefits of this application substantially outweighing detriment by the advancing the goals established in the Burrow's 2019 master plan reexamination report which uh has multiple goals established so the for the housing goals it notes that the it seeks uh to provide a range of housing types to meet the the for varied resident population needs as well as to preserve established residential areas and promote Redevelopment by establishing Redevelopment areas and locating housing in selected locations within and around central business district to stimulate business and Retail activity Beyond traditional work hours increase opportunities for households to obtain satisfactory housing at a variety of prices and specifically for this Zone the reexamination report calls out uh the PO Zone U by stting that the district should encourage where possible the Adaptive reuse of existing housing stock so buildings can be used for multiple uses uh so they are fully utilized I believe that this application achieves that that end um this project also advances multiple purposes of the ml uh purpose a for the promotion of General Welfare by creating new housing for growth uh for growing population to meet the meet the housing needs of the community um providing adequate light and air go preserving it you know um promotion of populations and densities and appropriate locations purpose e u purpose G for providing sufficient space in appropriate locations and of course a purpose ey for the promotion of a desirable visual environment I'm sorry oh sorry I should have noted purpose C for providing adequate light air and open space thank you very much purposes AC C EG and I oh u m for encouraging more efficient use of land okay very good I think you would agree with that as well okay sorry um as far as the negative criteria I believe that this uh relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and substantial impairment to the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and ordinance as the applicant satisfies four elements of the medich test for D1 use variances that includes site suitability this this site is particularly well suited by virtue of the of his condition in context uh site's already being used as with the residential on the Upper Floor and this is a minor retrofit for of an office space above the ground floor uh the massing from the public realm is not going to change and this is a much better internal side Arrangement and separation of uses I believe uh as far as context and neighboring land uses are predominantly mixed residential and office uh there's an office directly next door to the right of the property uh with the Gard Apartments to the rear AB budding surrounding residential Zone uh the second prongs for special reasons uh as noted before the project promotes multiple purposes of the ml for efficient land use new housing stock promotion promoting a variety of housing options retaining the retains and improves the already was already there both visually and functionally uh parking improvements for better organization and definition of space uh the improvements will add value and quality to the site and that will benefit not only the property but the surrounding neighborhood um the third prong public impact I believe that relief can be granted without substantial detriment to the public the project will have a minimum impact if any as a testimony uh from The Architects has already been noted provides a foundation for the flow and the function of the of the proposed building um and operat safely and efficiently U visually the building will retained was already there so there's no deviation from in massing um exception of enhancements that would be visible from the so no no enhancements um to be visible from the streetcape and the building has been designed and upgraded in accordance with all applicable of building and fire code requirements and and the unit is units are comfortably sized then the fourth and final prong is the Zone impact um every variance needs to relate to a distinct piece of property and here the site is clearly distinct based on its use at the office space and residential on the second floor the use is slight is a slight uptick unit than what is what the Zone currently allows uh the yield and the bedroom count was be the same with a less intensive renovation to allow substantial larger footprint um the relief will not cause substantial Zone plan impact as three family homes have historically been allowed and the U Integrity of the Zone be remain much intact as as this is a minor retrofit um and I'm also again I'm going to move on to the uh the D4 you don't mind I just asked you a couple questions about the the D1 variants just to wrap it all up um just so couple things so under the uh medich enhanced quality ofof standard is it your opinion that the uh use VAR that's being saw can be reconciled with the fact that the use is not explicitly permitted in in the provisions of the master plan or zoning ordinance that your opinion it is yeah okay and then I just wanted to touch on this we I um so obviously you went through a number of different things that the board is supposed to consider when they're considering the granting of a D1 use variance would you agree that the board must clear the overall site plan uh overall site design um and the reason why I'm asking that is because I was wondering if you gave a lot of the um a lot of the POS special reasons under the positive criteria as to the support of the D1 view variance and I was wondering if you could um state to the board whether you think that's transferable to any of the bulk variances that are being sought this evening imag so yes I would imagine so yeah okay and that's under uh would you agree that that that the that should the board Grant a D1 variance that the um that the board that the that the D1 variance would essentially subsume the bulk variances under both price B hedi and poo V North uh Brunswick Township Board of adjustment yeah I do okay thank you I just wanted to put that on the record and please proceed with the uh thank you for getting that on the record sorry and uh so for the D4 uh are variants um the added FL area uh makes better use of the existing structures dead space and the oversized half Story Attic and the intent of the F's residence residential is is better to handle um this kind of parachute and micromanagement this is an existing structure that has great neighborhood continuity as you can see there's a lot of two families in the surrounding area um and and it's very much in line with the built environment and there's no physical addition to the structure as noted before which results in results in the F but rather better use of the internal floor plan and um the site can accommodate additional floor area with adequate living space and comfortably sized rooms and the F allows to the site to provide for a fully functional utilized structure um there's a number of uh C variances um that are being sought many sorry to interrupt you but just just to be clear so we originally were seeking uh approximately 37% because of the changes to the third story we're now seeking uh an F variance uh in the exact amount of 39.4% is that correct where the Zone permits 25% that is correct all right and is it it's your opinion that and it's your opinion there's no problems at all associated with the increase in the f is that accurate it's all contained within the existing structures okay and and if the board would you agree with this that if the board perceives there to be any issues that of course the board can condition the uh variance relief to address any problems associated uh with the increased F absolutely yeah thank you um and I'll just wrap up with the going over the um I guess the C uh variances um just to confirm the the C variances that we're seeking they're all exist either existing non-conformity or there actually improvements to exist to to non-conformities that currently exist on the site is that is that correct and they would all be subsumed right and you list did what were the what were the special uh what was the under the positive criteria what under section two of the M what were the reasons or the criteria you had listed previously think it was just go my not think it was AC oh yeah the uh yeah a purpose a uh c e g i and m and and under the under the C2 criteria in your opinion obviously as you had stated these are either existing nonon non-conforming conditions or improvements you believe that the that the benefits of these non-conformities in consideration of the overall project far exceed any uh detriments absolutely excellent so so under the under the C2 criteria you believe that that the uh Vol variant can be that the bulk variances can be granted under the C2 criteria okay sure one question Mr mlan fine job by the way um I just uh in connection with the D4 would it be your testimony um that uh the property can absorb or I guess accept the uh the additional F based upon its existing size and shape uh yeah that's I think that was the goal of the the applicant very good thank you very much okay so I I guess to wrap up I mean U uh so I believe that the uh the project would resulted a a replacement of an existing office and second floor uh with a much better more appropriate use um than was presently there especially because we're replacing uh a second floor office um with a with a residential um use which is common you know you see type of ground Flo commercial space with residences on top uh as far as the uh U demand for the vehicles is offset by the walkability and access to nearby amenities and mass transit such as the bus stops on on Main Street to the South and the Somerville train station also further down a few more blocks away uh from the property um it brings a healthy balance of housing options as noted before and supports the goals of the Burrows master master plan reexamination report um and IT addresses this issue that planners referred to as the missing middle by increasing providing additional housing options for the community that people that can't afford a single family home um there's no physical change to the property from the public realm and I believe that the statutory criteria has been met and approval is is warranted and if I may just for for score keeping purposes so we're seeking the variances identified on page 18 of Mr Cole's uh updated March 13th report um Mr gibons if you want me to to go through it or if you think that's satisfactory if you could just just mention what they are briefly uh yeah so um so we're seeking a Max Improvement coverage uh for 67.4% where 50% is permitted this constitutes an improvement Building height we're seeking a variance it's a c variance not a d variance um where two and a half stories are permitted and 35 ft are per are is permitted we're seeking a three-story building and the height that we're seeking is I just want to make sure I have it uh as exact it's actually it doesn't say it in the report but it's 36 give me one moment because it's in my notice 36 5 ft right okay what we are seeking um the maximum permitted F in the zone is 25% we're seeking NF of 39.4% um as was stated by Mr mlan this is a corner lot so we're seeking a minimum front yard setback variance um 25 ft is permitted 24.7 s fet from Grove Street is proposed 10.06 feet from East Cliff Street is proposed again both are existing conditions we're seeking a change in use so we're we're seeking to uh receive variance relief for these for a number of these existing non-conforming conditions uh with respect to side guard setback 8 ft is permitted 4.42 feet is proposed parking spaces um 11 spaces are required we're providing 11 spaces with an electric vehicle credit um it would count as a credit so there's really 12 12 spaces with the credit so I think that it's that's conforming it was identified as either conforming or a variance on page 18 of Mr Cole's report so I think that's a conforming condition actually um we went through the the D1 use variants where uh one and two family residences are permitted what I refer to is mixed uses with one apartment and office on the ground uh is permitted and we are of course seeking office with two apartments which requires D1 use variance uh we require a variance for parking location another existing condition where um it's permitted only in the rear yard in the p district for non-residential buildings this is a corner lot so we have parking in the rear and front yards as the site has two front yards um there were also a number of waivers which we are seeking um we're seeking relief for um just go through them quickly for for lighting uniformity ratio uh 4:1 is required we're seeking 4 point uh 5.8 to1 light trespass uh Street trees and driveways so that's the uh the relief that we're requesting oh would you stipulate that the uh that the applicant would be agreeable to the condition set forth in uh Mr Cole's report as a condition of approval yes he said he's other questions from the board any questions for the planner any questions from the audience for the plan give I'll give a very very brief conclusion so I think uh I think good suggestions for Mr Cole from the board as it relates to that third story obviously we we were more than willing to to address the uh sprinkler concerns so I think um think we've we've tried to obviously accommodate the board's uh thoughtful and uh thoughtful suggestions we have a better plan now than we did when we came in so I thank you for for your time and I ask uh that you vote favorably on the application thank you motion to close the public session second all favor any comments board to go to me e we got down there Cliff uh the only the only condition is compliance with the call report uh and our standard conditions of approval which uh I just so you both know and it it's pretty straightforward but compliance with uh compliance with the uh all local state and County requirements or federal requirements payment of your escros payment of your taxes uh all representations made in testimony you're considered as sworn you're bound by them uh those are the standard conditions I generally impose and we're uh we agree to them of course with the exception of that that you we have that one condition as to the call report that's the only other condition of approval any a motion second Jen Mr allet yes M Carpet yes Mr mclin yes Mr O'Neal yes Mr VI vsky yes Mr Alvarez yes Mr Daniels yes congrat you're welcome thank you I'll coordinate the preparation of a resolution with your office okay and also thank you very much for staying an extra extra couple minutes for us we greatly appreciate it we don't have any place to put you thank you both for thank thank you both for a very good presentation guys take off do anybody's parking card work anymore my card didn't work to get in here now none of the cards work I don't think okay so how do we get out I only tried one once and it hasn't worked so I parking in a handicap parking space you I have a car the last five digits in the card right they ask your name and they'll erase it just have your card H they're going to ask for the 5814 or whatever it is motion to adjourn slip the guy A10 Bill all in favor oh I'm sorry wait yeah it's on the agenda it is on the agenda isn't it we put that first we should have put that first yeah I'm sorry we have to go back in session for a minute goad Sor go ahead step to the mic first all right that's a shame this has been a journey tonight all right uh Caroline flamos 37 West Spring Street um so I just have general questions and also a couple of General comments um so I think I'm going to start with the comments first actually so um some of you may have heard in relation to the store that is opening on Gaston Avenue the gun store that is opening uh that there was in fact a court case in relation to that and judge Shanahan from the Superior Court had directed um the folks involved in that to come back here to you find people um so basically he considers the decision of the zoning officer Mr melli who I don't see here tonight to be an adjudication and as such the appeal was supposed to be brought forth before you and I actually have a state law here so it is correct so uh when you want to appeal the uh zoning officer it's brought before the zoning board correct um the only time that happens is when someone thinks he's misinterpreted the zoning ordinance we do yes so the problem with speaking to us is as we are Quasi judicial the other person is not here right so this is the situation and and I know we can't get into the thick of it today because the other folks aren't here to chat with you um but we had actually m Michelle Vos had reached out on January 18th um she had actually reached out to one of the council people and then also reached out to various folks in regard to how to start that appeals process and had actually cited the New Jersey statute wanting to start that appeals process before um a certificate of occupancy was issued before all the permitting had been issued so there's couple parts of this yeah okay so yeah one of the part is no one on the board can really comment on what you're talking about only because if it's ever brought before us it's kind of like asking a judge who's being appointed to to speak on something the second part of that is it would have to be not allowed in the zone and I know there's a difference of opinion of what is and what isn't allowed in the zone um but is so there are actually zoning ordinances though that they're not in compliance with that are our own ordinance es not talking about what's allowable but there are actually some things they're not compliant with which is part of what was brought before the judge and so he had indicated that those types of things should be decided here um in addition to the adjudication that was made in reference to the zone and what's allowable within the zone and while I know we can't get into all of it the request was made January 18th and so we were within that time frame at that point to make that request and we were told there was no process for an appeal well there there's also it's called lack of standing um you're neither the applicant correct am I correct on that uh yes I I I when you have a chance I'd like to uh you know I'll I'll me I want to just mention because I'm I'm a little confused yeah so there's a couple things that play here one it's it's never come before the board that's the first thing so the second part of that is you neither the the applicant the land owner or you're not in that process at all The Grieving part parties wouldn't be you it' be either the applicant or the zoning officer those are the parties at play the zoning so I mean I guess as as as a citizen of the Town though it seems like I'm at least somewhat party like I checked the last time I checked I paid over 10,000 in taxes last year so it seems like I'm at least somewhat a party but here's here's the other um questions that I had that are they're a little different so um how do you all become aware of businesses that are approved by the zoning officer that don't need to come to you like how do you find out about them we don't it's not given to us so for example if a citizen wanted to appeal that would we just have to Oprah every like 21 days to figure out what was issued s what the judge says is the citizens themselves so the zoning ordinance is already made the zoning officer looks at the zoning ordinance and says either this is allowed or it's not allowed if it's not allowed then then it can appeal to us if it's not allowed we're not going to get the ones that are allowed because they're allowed within the zones so there isn't there isn't that process there um and when I said that you kind of lack standing that that part is that you're neither the applicant nor the zoning officer so there's there's no appeal in there to us um because it's it's up to the zoning officer to interpret that zoning to say what what is allowed what isn't allowed okay um and then going forward I guess and I don't even really know which body in the town would do this but maybe you guys can just answer this question so New Jersey passed a law in 2022 that requires that the town collect certificates of insurance from all businesses as well as landlords and keep them on file to be sure that they have current general liability insurance of at least 500,000 um low in my opinion but doesn't matter um we're not doing that so uh we have emails that say we're not doing that we haven't been doing that who's in charge of making sure we're doing that that be the township administrator okay and then how do we make sure he does that or she does that whoever the person is it's a good question are you I just want to ask are you the property owner of the property in question are you a neighbor just so uh I'm a neighbor well I live in town yeah okay I know I just um I'm yeah I'm a neighbor and I I'm also a parent in the school district who pays $10,000 a year in taxes so that's that's the other piece this course you have you you have standing as a as a citizen so as a citizen right uh and then the other um piece that I just wanted to go over real quick so in terms of the process of application what we have G gathered from documents that were opra is that when a business wants to open they go to the zoning officer they submit a zoning application which appears to be relatively uniform um you know they fill out the information on that um but what I have gathered is that we don't require the following we don't require a certificate of formation okay we don't require a current lease right well a lot of times some of these things are pending upon the approval of the zoning department so typically they won't sign a lease until they get that makes sense that makes sense in the process okay uh and and we don't require them to show that they're able to get any type of general liability insurance or provide it upon approval I'm not sure at what point of the process that gets collected so I can't answer that question so they don't collect it right now I I can't answer that question yeah um and then the other piece is if it's a business that requires federal and state permits to sell with or selling um for example like liquor or possibly in this case Firearms right um we don't require them to submit those permits to show us that they have them it's not a pre-existing requirement because a lot of times you can't get those licenses until you get the space yeah so do we keep those on file at any point though it's not something that the town could ask for because it's a different agency it's a federal that be a federal law so they they have to register with the Feds that wouldn't something that the town it's not the how do we know that they did that because they're not they wouldn't be able to open so in order to operate the business that you're it's one of the most heavily regulated businesses there is so there's multiple layers of Licensing that goes in and any step upon if there's license from the state police there's licensing from the ATF there's licensing obviously for the business license and then the zoning all that car so the town is only at the at the local level we can't reach above that we can't reach to the state and say hey we need to see this first because that's not so like if I were opening a restaurant the town wouldn't be checking that my health certificates are up to date or anything like that the town would have no idea no because the health the health department does that through the county okay and then um in regard to just like I just want to bring something in general to your attention that I'm going to conclude because it's late and we've all been here a long time um just so you know we asked to collect a Certificate of Insurance the town from a group of people who wanted to hold an e Easter egg hunt for children who are homeless and as a result of that the homeless children have to do an indoor Easter egg hunt in the church we actually have Public public property yes we have a higher burden of insurance proof for the homeless children of the agapy house than this business that's a little different because you're helding that on public property so you have to get that insurance waiver I do understand that but just understand that we have more insurance requirements for the homeless children who wanted an Easter egg hunt and now have to go indoors then a gun store that's going to be spitting distance from the disabled three-year-old class at Vander and that's not really something that we could even take up have you have you brought this before the council an open session because yes numerous times I'm wondering why they were refering why they referred it to us because some of these question questions are really not zoning or land use question so the judge actually sent us back the judge sent us back here so really what's been happening is each body has been sending us back to the other body and we've kind of been spinning in circles since January um but the bottom line is as that's oh it's not your fault sir the as parents in the community who like I've been paying I've been here oh my gosh I think almost 13 years I'll have paid around 130 Grand in taxes it took me 12 years to adopt my son I'm G to put him in the schools here well I don't even know if I'm going to anymore because I'm no longer comfortable to be honest so I may now have to go pay for private school for my child after I paid 130,000 into this town and I can't even move because of what's happening in the real estate market that's what a lot of parents are feeling like right now and I guess sitting there and seeing you all actually make a difference difference with that group who came here and had their day to appeal right like they had standing even though they don't live on the property so they had their date to appeal and that was very inspiring to see you all be able to work with them keep in mind the needle so basically when you're at before the zoning board what you want to do on a piece of property is not allowed so if if there's something that's allowed they're not going to come here that's not going to come here um so the things that you heard tonight they needed variances because what they want to do they they couldn't do but be bearing in mind though that the only reason that what they're doing is allowed is because it's categorized as miscellaneous then miscellaneous then sporting I ran through schedule a and it comes back to Sporting's Goods that's right but then when you look at New Jersey administrative code for sporting goods firearms aren't on the list yeah so those are two differents right so New Jersey admin code should probably in all likelihood supersede NAIC but at the end of the day regardless like we've just been looking as Citizens for literally any way just to have an appeals process you guys seem like a thoughtful group of people it seems like there are a lot of things tied up in this and and at the end of the day we're really just trying to be reasonable here with this process so I do have a question for you what did the judge ruled and said it is allowable so not exactly so what the Jud judge said to us he dismissed the case without prejudice and he listed about 30 minutes of case law for us to consider going back to him with an appeal if we come here and try to appeal and are unsuccessful here but we have no way to appeal so if he's telling us to appeal here and you you guys are telling us we can't appeal here he's telling you to appeal to the board of adjustments yes he brought up the board of adjustments do sense to me he brought up the board of adjustments specifically in his role yeah it's typical a zoning decision can be appealed to this board either the positive or negative can be appealed but there's a clock so if the clock is expired then it becomes does the judge allow that clock to beich do that clock includ what he was saying is we hadn't done a formal appeal with you all but when we asked to do a formal appeal we were told we couldn't do a formal Appeal on January 18th and so the thing that's confusing to me is we were within that time that clock in January because not all the permits had been issued and the ones that had been issued were within the time and so now here we are in March and I'm back in front of all of you folks who are probably sick of hearing from me at this point so we've just kind of been going in circles and I do understand I can't have an appeal here without the other folks sitting on the other side but the bottom line is this appeals process is kind of murky for us and um if there is any way for us to have an appeal like going forward I don't even really know how things get on the agenda to be honest with you but hey Cliff who can appeal a zoning permit I don't understand well appeal I think you have 20 days from the issuance of the permit but who can appeal it I think any any any agreed party anyone any grieved party and if you're an grieved party you can do it yes what makes an agre G party when a greed party means someone who's who's affected and and you know disre angry and just disagrees uh you know that's essentially what that's essentially what what the standing is you don't have to be like the nextdoor neighbor or anything it's a it's a party that's impacted by the decision but the judge after the 20 days can send it back to us is that what Mike said I I my li role I've seen a judge typically has said this you have not exhausted your administrative remedies that's the that's the principle the admin ex an appeal to this board of the zoning officer decision so I haven't read anything but when I hear I mean we have the transcripts I'm happy to email them to whoever would like to do a little light reading but at the end of the day um he told us to come back here to you good people so uh as I said I'm a little confused that a judge took such a rule you know made such a ruling because the and sent it back to the zoning of board of adjustment uh not something basically he wanted you guys to say either you'd hear us or you wouldn't hear us and if you don't hear us then we go back to him and file again so what would be but if you do hear us then we could maybe just deal with it again with you find people I would much prefer to deal with it with you than to go back I don't want to go to court again if if she's an agreed part of an agreed party and and disagrees with the zoning officer how does she um what's the process you fill out go ahead well you would essentially file an appeal with the zoning officer that's why I said I didn't know if our zoning officer ever heard anything about this because was you would have 20 days to to file file essentially an appeal with the zoning official at that point what the zoning official would do was you know he'd have to he you know he have to make some kind of decision on it it might end up coming before I don't think it would come before us uh well yeah okay now that now that you mentioned yes it would come before us because happened it would listen to me for a minute it would be an appeal from a dis zoning officer's decision except it's the rare instance where it's an approved decision you know we're used to dealing with denials decisions okay and uh and so at that point you'd be permitted to present your case against the ad against the issuance of the permit I'm sorry I got a little confused because as I say 99% of the time we deal with denials of permits we don't deal with approvals yes I know this is an an unusual circumstance and once again with the 20 days it's hard to appeal something you don't know about so like for example none of you guys well I don't know maybe some of you knew about it immediately but the earliest I could find anyone who knew about this was January 8th so um in terms of the 20 days does the 20 days start at the issuance of the first permit does it start at the issuance of subsequent construction or other permits there's only one permit for zoning so be that zoning permit okay it seems like they applied for multiple per to it was honestly very confus building permits and there's zoning permits okay it was very confusing to follow if I'm being honest with you but regardless if no one it's like if a tree falls in the woods and no one hears it did it really fall kind of thing no no you're right a good point it like if there's no process for the public to know what's been approved then how do we appeal within 20 days and I guess um when you got that order did you communicate with anybody okay I you clear you communicated with us did you communicate with the administrator did you communicate with the yeah so we went ahead and emailed asking to appeal and then we were told we're not allowed to appeal again um and so I'm not yeah I I I mean I I'm not going to question that but uh I mean I'm happy to just like because I don't know all the facts send you guys a whole like wonderful Cornucopia of documents we have emails we have Oprah documents we have all kinds of things because we've been actively exhausting every possible way to appeal this since January 8th when we found out um but to be honest with you yes we did immediately reach out and ask for an appeal and then we were told uh no you can't appeal again so that's part of the reason I came here and and hung out all night was that why were you told you couldn't appeal I'm just I I I I'm sorry to ask I have uh the screenshot here hold on I'm not trying to keep everybody here that's um so I believe it's erroneous because I did read the state law and this doesn't appear to be true uh but it says here there's another state law that allows an appeal of a decision of the local not Regional zoning board approval but again the zoning board is not involved um but and then the inappropriate statute was cited back to us and um so Kristen Brooks has been emailing back and forth with Kevin trying to just like sort all of this out and just being told like essentially like no you can't appeal um but then like the judge told us we could appeal and we can't go back to him unless you say no we can't appeal do you have a copy of the order to judge yeah yeah I want to yeah yeah actually I do get to Cliff typically you after 20 or 30 days to appeal the decision the last time this board it was about a decade ago it was a glass cutter manufacturer that this board heard an appeal of a zoning officer uh but obviously the 20 or 30 days have expired for the appeal process however the judge says right you clip that you can get a copy of that Court agrees give a copy of the court case to see if you have a copy of the order of the Court well I mean I I can't it be sent to me no the order from the court can you give him a copy of the whole 20 30 40 documents whatever how how many the judge issued like a lengthy order or something a leny decision oral opinion yeah this building again blow up but we also have the transcript of the entire proceeding if you wanted to I understand no no I understand that's why but the this is the order the first the first thing to look at is the order to determine what what happen yes I mean yeah so the order says it's dismissed without prejudice uh which means that we can come back back to him if you all tell us that like if we seek relief at this level and you say no then we could go back to him but I'd rather not go back to him I'd rather just deal with you find people if we could just handle this okay it sounds like what you want you want us to say that your your administrative remedies that you have exhausted your administrative remedies before us but but you don't want to do that because you don't want to go back to court you want well I I would rather just have a meeting here and go over the the facts and have a chance kind of like the folks did before to even appeal this at all um I think what she's saying is this is my speculation the the judge the judge is allowing her to appeal it to ignore the 20 days or whatever the appeal process correct and submit the application in front of the board this board that this board finds an affirmative the zoning officer is correct then she would have no recourse than they go back to court and this body found the zoning officer was misinterpreted then she wouldn't have to go anywhere there there would be yes there would be a hearing before that board before this board so it's just another step yeah of again going back to the concept of exhausting your administrative remedies being a remedy is this board if you file things within the time frame yeah which and and again did you which we did attempt to do I don't know no I know no nobody's doubting your intent but did you did you speak with the zoning official uh We've emailed with him I don't know if anyone's actually spoken to him on the phone but there is an email chain okay because frankly the instruction the instruction you would ordinarily file you know if there was something to appeal from if he has indicated to you that the permit that that he provided let me finish that the permit that he provided is is is valid then you would appeal to this you have to file you have to file an appeal with him and it would be referred to this board yes that's how it would work now because I I'm asking like question because quite frankly this is very this is very unusual this is very confusing and it's very unusual I've been doing I'm been I've been a municipal attorney for almost 40 years so it's also unusual to have a gun shop across from your own I know and I understand it's a very I I supercharged an issue it is sorry do you know if that was the only gun shop ever approved in town you know I was told that many moons ago there used to be a sporting goods store on Main Street that had a couple of hunting rifles in the back it was more a couple it was more casing it was like an Armory okay so they did have some some rifles in the back however this is actually not all sporting Firearms they are actually some of them are handguns some of them are semi-automatic weapons so it's a little different than like a a sporting goods store that like a Cabellas with a couple of hunting rifles in the back kind of thing it's not exactly the same thing and I come from like a family of hunters I'm I'm not anti- gun I'm not even anti the store to be honest with you I'm anti the location it's not you know if they wanted to open on 22 I would say they have a party Mr chairman if I could say if you could if the the homeowner here could get the a copy of the Court decision to Cliff to see if she has the right to appeal the decision to this board I think that is the next step yeah it's the only step so if the board comes back and says no or the judge says be you know Cliff says based on the judge's decision yes she has a right there's forms there's a whole process if you look at the buau L use of what you need to submit for the appeal it's not honorous it's not 50 million you dismiss that go ahead right so I think to keep this process since it's late in the day if we could just get the court order the decision judge to Cliff to see if this board does have a jurisdiction to hear the appeal right let me ask a question okay try to keep everybody here the dismissal of your case exactly what was what was the applic what what did you apply for before the court that got dismissed without prejudice so we had done an order to show cause with temporary restraint asking him to while we fact found and tried to figure out what was going on essentially to hold off on the opening of the store because we felt that the permit was issued erroneously and then essentially um um what he said is we hadn't exhausted our administrative relief here however we had tried to go ahead and exhaust that administrative relief but we were told we couldn't exhaust the administrative relief and so that's why we ended up before judge Shanahan instead of again here and just dealing with this here because it would seem to me that if a permit had been granted okay assuming a permit had been granted uh you had 20 days from the issuance of the permit to appeal I'm not saying you didn't make your deadline the court clearly has said the same thing but uh that's why I'm wondering if you if you communicated with the zoning official which would have been e you know which would have been something where what many people do is write a letter and saying you know we hear by appeal the decision of you know Mr Meli dated you know whatever uh pursuant to you know the Pres provision of the municipal land use law uh and at that point a hearing would be set up before this board and then this board would make a decision based on the decision made by the board you if if if you weren't in agreement with that decision the you know you could take that the court correct or uh or or if if the party who is denied relief because of the decision another party could take it to court right okay the normal process would be I'm just trying to piece us together well I think part of the reason you know we had reached out to like the clerk administrator and various folks have been told there was no appeal process but I think in part because it's very unusual for people anybody talk to the municipal attorney I mean I mean the the the the bur burrow attorney because I I hey Cliff you they came to a council meeting he was there yeah he was at a council meeting he was oh okay all right yeah um so it's just kind of again we've just been kind of going in circles on this issue and um and and we just want to resolve it at this point so that's the story I would think as a okay I would think as a preliminary matter again not having seen anything you know that that you know a an applica you know an appeal could be filed and you know based upon the based upon the decision made by the judge uh which essentially allow you to do this you know they call it no Pro tunk uh you know basically on the Court's own motion you can bring that before you bring that to the zoning official and the zoning official would arrange a hearing before us well another you're right what the process would be there's land use forms you would fill out there an oh yeah no no there is I'm happy to fill out forms that's not an issue does that pend on what the decision of the Court said I was going to say I I'm very interested to see what the court says do you have an attorney we were proos okay I I you're you're going to hit me for this but I'm going to say it you should get an attorney we we keep hearing that yes and and that's something we're looking into at the moment um but again we were just trying to exhaust all our Rel as as like just citizens of the town I'm trying to help we wanted to just have the town help us and not go through any of this to be honest I'm trying to help you I mean I can't represent you as an attorney because I obviously I represent the board the bo but I can but what I've suggested to you is I think the way this is going to work out uh again it will depend on what the judge said and what the order say if the judge allows it you would make an application you would put the application fees deem the I would deem the application complete you do this a checklist then I would do a similar report to on you see here on theal Mike I'm going to join the meeting you can give it the no I'm mer to join thank you thank you very much so you can