##VIDEO ID:yJZeAnwXU_8## e e e e e e e e e e e e yes I will now call the January 8 2025 meeting of the Bernard countship Zoning Board of adjustment to order at 7 36m please all stand for the flag flag unit States of America stand in accordance with the requirements of the open public meetings law notice of this reg this reorganization and regular meeting of the board of adjustment of the township of Bernards is posted on the bulletin board in the reception hall of the municipal building CER Lane Basking Ridge New Jersey was mailed to the Bernardsville News whiy New Jersey The Courier News Bridgewater New Jersey and was filed with the Township Clerk all on January 5th 2024 and was mailed electronically to all those people who have requested individual notice the following procedure has been adopted by the Bernard Township Zoning Board of adjustment there will be no new cases heard after 10 p.m and no new testimony heard after 10:30 p.m. um Mr understanding that all four new members have signed their Oaths of office and are Dy sworn that's correct Miss kefir I uh did administer the Oaths to our two returning and two new board members uh just before starting this meeting so they're all eligible and now standing board members and uh that say us the trouble having to read off the typical speech we usually do but they're all they're all duy members and we're good to proceed all righty thank you I'm going to conduct a roll call now uh miss janers here miss bman here miss Mr I'm sorry Dr arol yeah Mr Krauss here miss pich here miss poar here Mr T here miss silver here Mr sheski here Mr Quinn here Mr SCH here and for the record Miss Kefir is present we have a quum we may proceed the first item on the um reorganization agenda is nominations for chairperson of the board may I have a nomination for the office the chairperson of the board for the year 2025 I'd like to nominate je Marie Jers to be a chairperson of the board I second that all are there any other nominations if not I'll close that section um all in favor I opposed abstain congratulations chairwoman on your appointment there's your G putting it right yeah thank you Miss kefir and thanks to members of the board um uh at this point I would like to uh call for nominations for vice chairperson of the board I would like to nominate David T grey for vice chairperson of the board second thank you all in favor I opposed abstain thank you thank you congratulations Mr um next we'd like a nomination for vice chairperson protemp of the board I'd like to nominate Beth poar as um Vice chair of protemp thank you Miss bman second second thank you Mr CR all in favor iOS stain thank you thank you congratulations Miss poar thanks for doing that again um next on the agenda is the appointment of the board engineer which is resolution 25-2 I'd like for a nomination uh for engineer of the board for 2025 Madam chair I nominate Thomas Quinn thank you Mr tankr is there a second who had that sorry second thank you Miss bman we'll do a roll call for this um Miss Balman yes M Dr Aral yes Mr Krauss yes M pich yes Miss poar yes Mr T yes uh and chairwoman Jers yes thank you thank you thank you Mr Clan thank you um Chris do I need to read uh the resolution into the record or are we okay that it was circulated and voted on I believe the fact that it was circulated ahead of time mam Sher and the fact that it was publicly available at least to my knowledge that just be okay terrific that's what I believe we have done in the past um next uh we'd like a nomination for uh traffic engineer for the board for the 2025 year Madam chair I nominate Joseph Fishinger Right View engineering thank you Mr T is there a second oh I'll second that thank you m um Miss Balman yes Miss AR Dr AR I will get this Aral yes um oh I'm sorry Mr Krauss yes M Pichi yes Miss poar yes Mr tank creedy yes chairwoman Jers yes thank you thank you next is the appointment of our board planner I'd like to call for a nomination for our board planner for 2025 Madam chair I nominate David schl for plan thank you Mr tanky I'll second that thank you Mr poar all in favor I opposed estain thank you thank you thank you Mr Sly thanks for sticking with us um next is the appointment of our board secretary I'd like a nomination for the office of board secretary for 2025 I nominate Cindy ke to be the board secretary for 2025 thank you Mr second thank you Mr T all in favor I opposed abstain thank you thank goodness and thank you thank goodness do that's right um next is the appointment of our board attorney um which is also resolution 25-01 that also has been circulated um in advance so I'd like to call for a nomination um for the uh board attorney Madam chair I nominate Steven Warner of the firm Sabo s corini Warner gby o brodnik and Fisher well done thank you Miss poar Miss poar was a second um Miss Balman yes Dr arwall yes Mr Krauss yes Miss Pichi yes Miss ptar yes Mr tanky yes chair Engineers yes thank you thank you on behalf of the firm thank you all very much for your contined comments thank you okay next is the adoption of our 2025 rules and regulations of the board that's res resolution 253 which was also circulated in advance of today's uh meeting so I'd like a motion please to approve uh the rules and regulations unless there are comments or edits I'll make a motion to adopt the 2025 rules and regulations and I'll second that thank you both M Balman yes Dr arwall yes Mr Krauss yes Miss Pichi yes poar yes greedy yes chairwoman Jers yes thank you next is the adoption of our stated meeting dates which is resolution 2504 all those dates were circulated um in advance for both our regular meetings and and special meetings um so unless there are comments or edits I'd ask for a motion to adopt the 2025 calendar meeting dates I will make a motion to adopt the 2025 meeting dates thank you Miss po second Mr Krauss Miss Balman yes Dr arwal yes Mr Krauss yes Miss Pichi yes Miss poar yes Mr T creedy yes and um chairwoman Jers yes thank you thank you next is the adoption of our official newspapers I i' entertain a motion on that please I will make a motion to adopt the Bernardsville news and The Courier News as our official newspapers for 2025 the daily record of Morristown and Star Ledger also are May as as backup as backup second all in favor I opposed abstain thank you thank you next is the adoption of our policy of adequate notice which is resolution 2505 also circulated in in advance of this meeting um like to entertain uh a motion uh to adopt the policy of adequate notice I'll make a motion to ad the policy of adequate notice resolution 25-5 second thank you Miss Balman yes Dr arwal yes Mr kuss yes M yes M poar yes Mr tanky yes and one Engineers yes thank you um and I guess last uh I'd ask for a motion to close the reorganization part of this meeting so moved thank you Miss P I'll second it all in favor I opposed estain thank you thank you so that part of the meeting is closed that's a reorg meeting mad chair yes well done everybody okay next on an agenda is uh 7A which is the approval of resolutions uh for ZB 24019 which was furah and silver I think that resolution was circulated in advance uh if there are any comments um or edits this is the time otherwise uh a motion to approve I drafted please um Miss keber can you tell us who can vote on that cheer women Jers let's see Miss Balman Mr Krauss Miss pich and Mr tank Madam chair I make a motion to approve as drafted thank you Miss bman I will second that thank you Mr Miss Balman yes Mr Krauss yes Miss Pichi yes uh Mr Tedy yes chair woman Jers yes thank you thank you um next is a completeness hearing 8A on the agenda for the penry corporation does anyone here from the penri corporation is that something we can just deem ourselves okay so I guess this one and um Mr Sly correct me if I'm wrong we are uh just deeming the application complete it looks to be complete yes okay so that was circulated in advance I think uh Mr Sly uh presented his uh completeness review I think you deemed it uh complete they're looking for us to pass a motion to deem the application complete all motion to deem the application complete I will second that thank you Miss Balman yes Dr arwell yes Mr Krauss yes Miss Pichi yes M poar yes Mr T Cy yes chairwoman Jers yes thank you next on the agenda is the completeness of public hearing for Gruber which was carried from November 6 2024 mad chair while I council is approaching I'll just point out for the record uh we heard this cour heard this case back on November 6 2024 and we carried it to this evening with no further notice being required the notice was deemed to have been sufficient in terms of both its content and time Li of service at that point in time back on November so the board continues to have jurisdiction to to the case thank you my pleasure happy New Year Mr Sy happy New Year good evening everyone Frederick zelli post poic on behalf of the applicants uh just by way of a quick refresher this is regarding 131 West Oak Street in Bas Ridge section of town it's tax block 1405 Lot 2 in your R7 Zone uh this is an application for which testimony has been completed uh back at the November 6th meeting uh it's for a D3 variance for permission to continue using the second floor apartment at the detach garage uh it is presently occupied and intended to be continue to be occupied by the owner's son uh there are two conditions under your ordinance that are not satisfied uh by this use uh and that's why we're here tonight uh and we're here in November uh the first condition is the number of Apartments within the single family resident shall be located within the principal building that's obviously not the case since it's within an accessory building uh and the condition number six which is to have certain familiar uh relationship between the occupants of the primary residents and the occupants of the apartment uh in this case we do not have a child of the occupants of the main house we have the child of the owner of the main house uh so those distinctions are what bring us here to this application uh the board as I said heard all the testimony uh asked lots of questions and we had lots of discussion about how we can uh craft an approval of this uh application that would be uh somewhat uh controlled uh the way to do that typically would be by way of a deed restriction uh at the board's request I have prepared a proposed deed restriction which I will pass out although I believe it's also been emailed to you ahead of time and I'll do that right now on mr's passing that out I'll just mention everybody that I had a chance to review it U as did Steve we both found that at least legally speaking it seems to be pretty solid and valid I think particularly at the prior meeting there was a discussion because I think the owner Mr Sil is technically a trust is that correct that is correct right and so so the son of the trustees is more accurately stated right right so particularly um you'll see Mr just circulated I think we may need to Mark as an exhibit we could do that is there any changes to what you just handed US versus what what is given to us there are not no I think we only got two days AG yes make sure what I right so I think we mark this exhibit a one just for the record okay um as I was saying um if you look at condition for I don't want to take Mr thunder away but um particularly C kind of speaks to the fact that the U you know the of Department are be you know related to someone holding a controlling interest and a trust Corporation limited liability company or other entity owning the property so that kind of solves that problem that we were discussing at the last Mee right thank you so I can obviously take you through it or if you'd rather just fire questions at me I can we can do it that way too can I just go back this as a summary just I don't remember all facts necessarily is they purchased the property correct no one was living in it at that time that is correct right they purchased it largely for this purpose in the sense their son works in moristown i r okay purchased the house of course the oans moved out did the son move in right away did the parents move in ever uh parents lived in California I don't think they've ever lived here the son moved into the accessory apartment they rented out the main house okay the son moved into the apartment he then rented out the main house to someone else or never rented it out the main house is occupied by a gentleman and his adult daughter okay so it's occupied right now the main house yes okay and the son is living in the apartment correct called the garage Department correct okay and at this point okay I thought somebody moved in and out it was occupied when you came here in November yes yeah nothing nothing's changed since November no change in the occupant of the main house no and the parents or talk parking there a state or something owns the proper it it's a trust which actually yeah there's been no change for planning purposes sorry no change to the trust as far as additional trustees or no still the same from correct right were they knowledgeable of the fact that they couldn't do what they did when they purchased the property or as I recall the testimony was that the there was a disclosure basically that the seller said we're not making representation one way or the other it's uh we're not declaring that we have listed as a a house with a apartment it was listed as just a house main house right I I mean I looked at the listing and it said it had no no acknowledgement of apartment whatsoever that could very well be I don't I don't know that we talked about the listing per se I know they did testify that the seller had a disclosure might have been in their contract um that basically that the seller was taking no position um by or beware so to speak yes they were buying it for a purpose but that purpose might not have been allowable and they were aware of it or aware of it they were aware that there could be an issue and then found out through the zoning actually through the tax office as I recall uh is how it came to light and again the difference I mean this it wasn't that the use of the apartment was something new or something in in question it was the uh specific circumstances so the apartment historically had been used by uh a mother uh you know grandmother so to speak um and and that was specifically permitted by variant so we have a difference here because it's Yeah by prior varant right did the sun occupy the apartment before the house was rented I honestly don't remember I think it was more or less simultaneous I don't think it came in I mean I saw a listing of rental and then it got reduced from 3200 to 3,000 and then it looks like it was rented at 3 ,000 at a period of time after the purchase a couple months after the purchase look I got listed I don't recall testimony that they purchased it with the tenant the main house tenant in place I think but I I do think it happened fairly quickly afterward so so the sun was was living in the garage right that was the intention from the GetGo for them right yeah Mr Z just for the respect to the deed um restriction I have read through it um do you want to uh focus on any particular sections that you think uh this deed restriction should make the board comfortable allowing so I'll I'll just take it through in order since it's relatively short um and some of this is just paring the language of the ordinance that exists uh it it uh starts by saying that we're only going to have one apartment which is consistent with the ordinance you're only allowed to have one uh the difference being that it's usually with inside the house uh so that's number one uh the floor area Department should not see 25% it does not it's about 19% uh and I just also indicated in here I thought the board would be comfortable and would want to see some uh indication that that would not be violated and also that there would be some limitation as to the number of people uh using the apartment it's you know it's obviously not sufficient for a family so I just limited that to two which could be a young couple or something along those lines I don't know I have a couple comments take them as they come to the end on number two is there a plan to increase the apartment there's not so why not just say the floor area Department shall not be increased and it shall not be occupied by more than two people sure seems to beor that's fine again I was just kind of following the language of the ordinance but that's fine so should not be increased um shall is that language okay and shall not we'll just say shall not be occupied by more than two people okay okay you want to go through yours and then we can just we want just take it as we go yeah I only okay number three adequate off street parking that's also part of the ordinance and something we did talk about and certainly something that we want ourselves and would agree to can you refresh my memory though is there off street parking there there there's actually plenty of parking there's a driveway that goes to the garage and then you have a parking lot between the two buildings and there's no on Street marke correct on West Oak I don't think so overnight yeah I think it's probably right you did did we get hit yeah there's no curbing I've seen it yeah but there is substantial parking so there's enough for occupants of both buildings wasn't the testimony that the garage the actual garage would house a vehicle right right I'm thinking why don't we just say the existing parking condition shall be maintained for the entire the driveway and the single or double garage B shall remain available for parking of vehicles um because adequate adequate all street parking Ian the board knows what we're talking about here but somebody else reading this that that's fine again that was just parting the language of the ordinance um but to do that maybe just a comma at the end including uh the two-car garage something like that yeah if both if that was a testim that both in garage spes would used for vehicles right yeah would specifically say that so the existing parking shall be maintained on the property theine Park needs the OCC of Housing Department inclusive of inclusive the two-car garage detached garage detached so if someone inspected the property and it was being used as a gym or storage area the whole garage then that would be a violation yes because it's not usable can't OCC cars can't occupy it basically so they right they by a shed and put it in the driveway right okay okay uh number four gets into the familiar relationship um there was concern or at least discussion anyway about the fact that it's presently under a trust uh again that is just a formality that is done for estate planning purposes it doesn't have any real practical effect but I do I did want to make sure that the concept of the occupant of the garage having a relationship to the owner in this case uh be maintained uh so the three scenarios here one of course the uh occupant itself or the owner being an individual is there um possibly if it's owned by an entity then at least the individuals have to have controlling interest uh that's basically what we're looking at I review that I think that checks out you know intents and purposes keeping maintain a familiar relationship great trust some owns right I have a concern about number four okay I I think number four obviously is to me being put together in order to allow the current condition to continue this is my opinion um it's very hard to know who has a controlling interest in a limited liability company in fact that's one of the reasons why people form llc's as so as not to disclose the principles of their company so um they have to swear to it every year though right but you get you there's very little information that's given out that's the purpose of an LLC so um I have a I have an issue with number four I I think the discussion that we ended with at the L meeting was that we were considering various options about potentially a time frame that the uh current owner could um rectify the situation which you know to the present state of the condition so I have a uh I'm just not comfortable with number four especially parts Part A is sort of what's in there Part B and part C I have at this point I don't think I can vote for a de restriction of those two conditions well part A is what's ex is what's permitted I said what's there I'm saying no it's not what's there it's it's what's permitted under the ordinance what's permitted excuse me Mr zi I met a is what is permitted right that's fine but I have an issue with b or c okay well without B then the Varian is denied not there to to allow a deed restriction for B and C unless there is board discussion that will change my my view and I you know I board members please weigh in and I have you know I may have a different opinion at the end of the discussion I thinkk you Mr I think it would be helpful if you go through why don't we go through all of them get all the comments we will um Circle back um and the board can discuss this as a as a document in general because I I think um to miss fi's point we don't know where the board stands on these but let's make sure that the board understands them sure let's make sure we have any um questions uh that need to be addressed and uh we hear Mr slid comments if he has any on on the rest of them let me just stick with uh four for a minute just to I just want us to be all in the same page as to what a b and c respectively do so a is what's allowed under the ordinance if it were a we wouldn't need to be here at all B is the existing condition which is the condition we're seeking approval of tonight um and actually actually C technically is the existing condition because it is a trust but B and C have the same basic concept if there's a concern about Corporation versus a trust versus an LLC we can discuss that okay uh number five basically this is setting uh parameters of what would constitute a termination um I chose 180 days admittedly somewhat arbitrarily if the board has a different view on that that's uh certainly something uh to be discussed uh basically providing that if the relationship that's required discontinues for uh basically if it's aband or vacated for 180 days or past 180 days then the uh approval would be terminated and deemed abandoned I have a question about that sorry um how how would we know if the apartment became unoccupied kind of the same way just about anything would would be known by is the zoning officer bring something to their attention they either know or they don't there is in this the only thing that's different here is you do have an annual reporting requirement so they would have to uh report every year that the unit is not only still being used but being used in accordance with these restrictions and the ordinance so it's it's kind of proving a negative if somebody's not there but technically it could be unoccupied for six months or more if and and until the reporting period takes place nobody would know right uh I suppose we could add something in saying that uh a upon vacation the town will be notified if it's more than 180 days could be twice per year just another way tack it could yeah I don't see any problem with that as it's not overly honorous Mr Z's comment work because you know the burden is on them to report to the town make that culation that's in theory a onetime thing as opposed to making someone do some multiple this again this would be a deed restriction so I guess town could it's a matter of enforcement as investigation but we could make it a part of this too right rather uh number six is just confirming that the existing annual certification is still in effect and does apply to this tendency or this use uh seven is just continuing uh really confirming that the one thing that's going on and what I had to keep in mind with this is there is talk of state laws for accessory Apartments as I'm sure you're aware so we don't know what the state's going to do we don't know what the federal government might even try to do on this issue so I tried to just keep it clear that that could happen as well as the ordinance itself could be changed so basically it's indicating that if this apartment is use of this apartment is discontinued It could only be replaced with a compliant apartment whether that's under the current ordinance interior of the house or something that might be permitted in the future what I didn't want was a situation for somebody to argue that because these rules are what applies to this property and we have it in a deed restriction that it doesn't matter that generally speaking under the ordinance something else might be allowed so the this is not intended to Trump any changes in the law it's intended to apply to what's there now I have a question on seven does that mean that this could become a two family house potential no no what what's what's allowed now is an apartment within the home okay not including the apartment though not including the apartment right so you're saying that if it was discontinued the owner could not then apply for use of that apartment again right yeah if if the garage apartments use is discontinued for more than 180 days they would only be able to resume it by coming back to the board unless the ordinance or state or federal law said otherwise which could happen because of what's going on in under our state law what's what's in real simplistic form there's there's a movement out there to make legal by state law such that towns couldn't overrule this kind of similar to group homes they're just they're Allowed by state law period you don't get to change that there's there's a movement to try to make accessory Apartments uh permitted as a matter of state law and it's really primarily to accommodate uh aging parents and things along those lines so we just don't know where what might be coming down the road try to buy the first time right right right um and then finally uh eight is to address the total time frame uh we're suggesting five years again subject to it continuing uh continuously per the other paragraphs I think that kind of goes back to what speu was saying Before Time limitation on the use right this would expire under five years requesting Mr slly did you have any other comments on on the other points that Mr zi just went through no I I have silly comment on why does it say calendar years I mean it's going to run five years from the date of the resolution what does that intended to mean to strike that word sure lawyer's habit it's all we get paid by the words so five years from the date of the resolution right date of adoption right should which is defined in the first paragraph another kind of comment were you using the word home in in the various defined in the first paragraph conditional it's supposed to say house as oh St I'm sorry did I do that if I did that it was unintentional where is that oh I see it seven I see four and three I see one and seven three four and seven two three four and seven okay I'll fix those uh well home's taken out of two now so we don't to wor that and four yeah thank you any other questions for Mr zelli Mr zi do you have anything else for us no just uh okay um does anyone from the public have uh any questions does anyone from the public have any questions uh on any uh other the comments we just heard see none I do have a procedural question do we only have six eligible members says use variance we have two board members who did M Miss kefir how many of us are eligible for this poar did you watch the video I did not okay then we have uh Miss poar and um Dr arwell Who are ineligible Miss review the tape yes she would no she would she would not because she did not see the video either of the November I'm sorry three four so we have five one two three four five we have five so I need a unanimous vote okay um then to avoid committing malpractice I'll s to reserve the right to seek a vote at a later date so that other members could review the tapes okay so are we stopping now can a question I guess yes would you be amenable to making number four stating just the name of the applicant of the uh person that's living there right now the Sun and not all this other language he just says I don't even know if that's allowable it's just his name we've done that with other apartments where it says the mother you know or right I remember one other apartments in area where it was like the mother-in-laws or some somebody was named in something and when that property was sold then it was the apartment went away you know the condition went away is there anything like that that could be done where it's very specific to that person living in that apartment for 5 years and then it goes away and that's that's where we because of the way this property was purchased you know knowing that you know what the regulations were in place all I'll I think that might be a little too strict Mr I I can ask I certainly don't blame me for asking I just think that's up to the well the problem is the a variance has to go with the land and there's case law saying that you really can't make a variant specific to a current or existing owner a specific person so and that's exactly why I was describing and for coming up as many scenarios that I could that still purported along with what we're trying to do here you can't say owner son or current owner son or current you could clearly make it more restrictive without someone you know son elest son I don't even know it's what we would call restraint on do that that might little too excessive I guess I'll throw it out there Mr your leg opinion on it I'm not sure if your clients would have an objection to it but to address Mr pich's concerns could we remove limited liability company from that I I guess actually TR an individual personally controlling interest in a trust could we just end it there that kind of accomplish what your clients are after at least as it stands right now I don't at least in my opinion I don't think too restrictive given that you know the conditions need to be related to a specific purpose I think that's kind of that if the board would be more comfortable with that I don't have an objection to that my drafting goal is to try to just keep as many to be consistent so if I say a trust you know it's as as you um know with the Moss case we had a whole discussion about you know uh what a church is versus a house of worship and so I just wanted to try to be as complete as possible so we didn't have a situation where say h it's not a trust it was made in LLC for tax purposes and even though it's the same people that that's was my concern I have a number of other concerns with a number of the other um points so are we going to stop or do we want to go on my advice would be to stop given the fact that we're going to have other voters on this case who have not viewed the tape and we're not going to vote tonight regardless right so I guess I would I want to hear all your comments but I think I'd like the other board members to watch the tape so that they can be more mindful right of your no I agree I had a question sure number five we saying unless how do we know that how do you prove that somebody could just lock the apartment for 6 months it's unoccupied Lo unless there written some kind of Le agreement or something saying that this person started living here and it's living up to this point how do you uh enforc I think it's not enfor yeah well the concern really for number five and then for the really for the whole application deals with the relationship between who's in the garage apartment and and in this case the owners I understand the point number what I'm saying is number five is not infor because there's no way to maintain a record right now unless you have WR agement to show that it was unoccupied for no way to no it's true I I I added that in really because I thought the board would want to see a situation where it couldn't lay empty for three years and then bring somebody in three years later and say no we're still you know we're still in effect think I haven't seen the form I guess May the zoning offish would a specific form specific property but given that would be on an annual basis um you might not catch it immediately but let's say you know they do the form they January 1 that person leaves the apartment you know 180 days past and they you know somebody else who's not otherwise approved to be in it starts occupying for the next six Monon period it goes to January the next year at that point they have to recertify that everything's being you know complied with but at that point if somebody else is in the apartment is's not supposed to be there at that point it would be enforced at least that's my I would understand the natural for prents such circumstance right could we just say that if the occupant of the apartment changes that it terminates or are we trying to allow the trust to possibly rent to a different family member at some point a different family member's possibility right right is because the way it's worded it seems like if this Family Trust had another child or whoever family member they could suddenly say oh well our son is no longer occupying and now we want this other person to move in that's the way and no no that's correct that is the intention that's also consistent with your ordinance so let's you have a situation in town which is permitted by ordinance right we have the situation where you can have an in-house apartment and it's restricted by relationship and this language in five and I'm sorry in four uh is taken directly from your ordinance exact same relationships that are defined so the idea is basically to that if you wanted to phrase the variance in a very simplistic term you're permitting an accessory apartment and the variance the deviation actually that's what the application's about is to uh the fact that we don't comply with the condition that it be within the house so the same rules apply the difference is just that it's not inside the house and then the second part of this application is the difference is it's not uh a relationship to the occupant of the main house it's a relationship to the owner of the main house everything else else generally should parallel with the existing ordinance so if we start changing it too much we're really modifying it quite a bit uh and not following kind of the general concept so what I was trying to do with the 180 days as I said I I didn't think the board would want a situation where it could just lay empty for a long period of time I thought you would want it to terminate if that were to happen uh so that was somewhat arbitrary uh it could be changed or if you don't believe that that's even a concern it can be taken out altogether again we included that thinking the board would want to see that not because it's something we want to see why AR voting I think because Mr zelli um because it's a d variance and it requires five out of seven and we only have five voters so he is asking because the board can only present five voters tonight he would like to carry the application to when we have a fully voting board of seven people will have to watch the video have to watch two videos they'll have to watch two one well one video One video they have this meeting and then they will be fully aare they they need to uh realize yes yes right so is that correct Mr Z that's correct okay so you want to carry it and and is it seven members that you would like yes we can plan accordingly so miss keeper let's make sure that whenever we carry this application to that we make sure that we have seven voters on it because if not then we shouldn't hear it we should push it again right okay do we know when we could carry this to no did not I'm not kidding are there any other comments that somebody might want to make that we can that I can be discussing with the clients in the meantime so we don't I might have an answer what exactly so and that's also part of your ordinance already so that says that if the ownership uh let's stick with the let's stick with what's permitted just by way of example so if you have an in-house apartment and it's occupied by the mother of the husband or wife who lives there um that's permitted there's a presumption that if they sell the house that relationship's no longer there and then it would automatically terminate unless the buyers were to demonstrate to the zoning officer that they're coming in with their father and he's going to live in that unit and so it still complies then it wouldn't then the use wouldn't terminate so the buyer comes with SAR kind of say that they can so they'd have to get a new variance unless which would be unusual but if if we had a buyer who wanted to buy this property still keep the unit rented the main house rented but they had a child who wanted to live or a parent or grandparent or somebody one of these relationships who wanted to live in the apartment um that would be allowed but they would have to prove that to the zoning officer that that was the case because the Assumption the uh presumption is that it's not going to be the case if there's a change in ownership so they would have to approach the zoning officer as a buyer for the house ask right if if they wanted to use the garage apartment yes they'd have to demonstrate it someone would have to notify theming the house okay so what we we didn't really discuss this deed restriction this will actually be recorded So when a title search is done for a buyer that's going to come up yeah okay M keeper do you have a suggested date for us would we just be basically doing a vote at that point I believe so unless there's F well sounds like there might be further discussion discuss can I okay at this point well if there's yeah I guess because there will be new board members who have watched a video they may have additional questions at that time that may promote different discussion or not but we don't expect any new testimony other than questions answered that's correct right Mr SCH um February 5th we have now okay March 5th then and Mr zeli I'll need an extension of time to act okay no problem okay and then miss keer you can um work with the uh new board members and Miss potard to make sure they have the information they need on how to review the video and how to let you know that they have I will do so keeper I will be out of the country on that how bad is that February agenda Mr SCH well we have two um smaller call Residential applications onry school one was just tonight that that's not a huge ask that seeking approval for but it probably will require a little more discussion they may have additional Witnesses they'll just take time to get through because it's dealing with a whole comp issues can I just just check does do people have any conflicts with the February meeting at this time that they know of everyone all right let's let's try and do it in on the FB five Mr Z I'll still need an extension all right so February 5th yeah okay okay I guess I'll make a formal announcement anyone else has anything they want to say okay this matter is going to be carried to for's uh February 5th 2025 meeting 7:30 pm here in the warcraft meeting room ATS Township at Municipal Building no further notice either by publication or by uh certified mail or other personal service shall be required right and just with respect to the public um we did close the public uh comment period however if there is additional uh questions and there's additional testimony we will reopen that right thank you all very much have a wonderful evening thank you okay next on the agenda is uh the completeness of public hearing uh 9B which is uh R cinity hope I said that correct and it's ZB 24014 you guys if you're here you can call up M chair real quick while the applicants on micone there it is okay real quick while the applicants are approaching I'll just point out for the record I had an opportunity to review their notice I de it to be uh sufficient both in terms of its content and timeliness of service having been uh sent to owners of property within 200t of subject property on December 18th and uh published in the burville news on December 26th 2024 obviously for both of those uh both more than 10 days in advance of tonight's hearing so the board has jurisdiction here and decide the case in my legal opinion so with that I see are here we are okay so I'm going to need to swear everybody in and need you all to raise your hands for me you sir over there as well thank you do all of you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to provide with the truth the whole truth nothing about the truth okay all right chair back to you thank you thank you did I say that correctly rest and needy you're pretty close pretty close sorry about that um okay do you want to um tell us while you're here we did um get your application in advance so we have kind of reviewed this but do you want to just tell us why you're here if I can ask you to speak directly into that microphone we are live streaming it as well I think you could just name an address for the record so we know everybody sure I'm uh Dr R Stevenson I live at 89 Blackburn Road and we're here for application for variance for lot coverage for a pool go ahead my husband yeah I'm Dr Matthew R 8 89 Blackburn Road um before you go any further Jo oh yes sir Gary Chang c h i a n g Mr CH I'm the um engineer for the applicant um your license is current good standing yes it is you've testified before boards like this in the pass yes I have okay I'm sure see qualified yes we will accept you thank you thank you sorry a lot of formalities got it please go okay do you want to tell us a little bit about um your application uh you know if you are familiar with Mr slio which I assume you saw we reviewed points the board will be very focused on that so if you want to think about it in terms of that yes yes so I think we're applying for 5% over our lot coverage with the addition of a 650 squ foot pool with some coping and walkway around it um I think that there's been some questions about the water yeah impervious coverage right yeah I I don't know a lot of the technical details but that's the gist of it that's why Gary's here that's easier you're in front of us for a maximum lot coverage correct um where you are asking for 25.15 where there's only 20% um allow we are aware that a couple of those percentage points come from the pool um but still counts yes um in your application we see some pictures are you familiar with these part of your application did you who took those photos I did you did and um do you know approximately when you took them probably July okay and does the land uh essentially look the same as what we're looking you know not withstanding the weather but yes it it looks like this it's the current and your pool looks to be I see it 20 by 38 right and in a regular shape do you want to discuss your project or I'm not sure okay yeah so we are proposing a um IR regular shape of about 650 square foot um uh pull with a three foot walkway coping and a small patio area that's going to connect to the existing patio and hotp area and we are also proposing a um storm water management system to mitigate any increase in runoff although we do not require one because we are under the you know th000 Square ft you know not counting the pool water but we are proposing one right I think you saw that Mr Mr Sly perhaps do you want to take this through your memo I know some of these are facts but um you want to take this through some of the points might be help us sure um looking at my memo dated January 3 2025 on page four um comments one and two just provide some facts about the coverage existing and proposed and what elements of The Proposal uh add up to the coverage that's being proposed um comment number three is pointing out that the project is exempt from the Township's storm water management requirements because the uh the proposed increase in coverage minus the pool water surface is less than 1,00 square feet um but in this case the applicants are proposing storm water management um uh presumably as mitigation for the excess coverage and I know Mr Quinn probably has some more comments about the details of of the storm water management um and comment number four is just talking about soil Ur and set of control measures that'll have to be um addressed as part of the permitting process if the applications approved uh same thing with number five which is talking about any trees which are going to be removed and I guess that's a question are any trees going to be removed no okay so if there are um no trees trees in proximity to the disturbance area anything like that so the um the engineering department is probably not going to require anything with regard to uh number five and number six uh that's recognizing there and you can see on the plan there's some fencing that that goes not only into the conservation eement in the back of the property but into the township property that needs to be removed yes we have a note there to be um removed from that area and relocated outside the conservation easement okay yeah I see that label it but you're talking about all of that fing there yes okay you'll provide of course the code compliant pool safety cor on the property um so number six should be a condition of approval if uh if the application's approved um number seven hand inand with number six there's a little bit of grading and limit of disturbance yes I would I would revise that it's it's a small small portion that's you know uh number eight just talking about the note regarding Wetlands on the plan the applicant have updated their U their Wetlands investigation and the the note which is number four on the plan should reflect the findings of that will be revised yes updated report uh number nine is a pretty much a standard comment on these cases about outdoor lighting and if there is going to be any outdoor lighting that it would be downward faced or no shielded number 10 uh is another standard comment about the soil from the pool excavation I don't know if you know what you're going to do with it now but if it's going to stay on the property you need to provide a grading plan to how that's going to be which the grading plan should those um any you know um soil that's been excavated it's actually respread it out um throughout the site from the grading that you see at the rear so and number 11 another standard comment about the environmental commission's recommendation for uh uh best management practices when it's charging cool water right and we will comply with that best management practice thank you that that's all I had thank you and Mr Quin do you want to take us through your memo I know you had some uh also some facts sure you have some um maybe suggestions in there and always my favorite the alerts that you have sure yeah yeah yeah uh the first couple are really deal with storm water you heard um talk about how this is technically exempt because it's less than a th000 square feet of effective in cover means what sheds water but since they're over uh the ordinance they've made an effort as we typically mandate for people in this situation to try to mitigate the impacts by storm water they've uh they've done that um it's an infiltration system so um you'll have to just make do soils testing which we will work this is a standard condition design elevations this is all stuff if you're submitting for to the township this detail will go on that's correct goes anywhere um as five is just a recommendation on some grading changes um six is a note on the plan I mean so I'll get to the the what I think is the most py comment here but the wet link investigation concludes that there's no regulated areas um in the developable area I don't take any any exception to that um I would I always advise whatever impervious cover you get at the end of the day there tends to be hardcap creep um make sure whatever you get you stay within don't go over that you come back a lot of times we have contractors who have a little bit extra material they try to talk to youal C covered creates a headache for you so that's the advisory that's on there that um also your s you very and you'll know this your limit here is showing about 4,400 ft there's not a laid down area so you may it may be easier to get so conservation approval up front rather than find out your limit expands later and then go back for sure there is a lot of grading in the back so um you know after we do a little rough uh grading we you know that could be at the staging area or the stock power area I'll leave it to you all I'm saying is that a lot of times when these mushroom all of a sudden the guy comes out and says hey you're over 5,000 and I and I will expand it a little more just to make sure that we have enough room just beware yes and and the other uh comment I've been making of note is that we're very we' been very sparing about Herby's cover overages right so you'll have to five is a lot so I see a lot of patio here I made the comment that are there ways that you can effectively remove some of this and not lose the vision of what you want to do with your property that's a comment I make when you exceed your purpose by 5% right so we were looking at the plans so it looks like so the pavers that are on the plans they they're already there the um the uh paver patio that's um next to the deck it's already there got the large wood deck then you have the and then it's the new area that you're adding said around the irregular shap pool and then it expands right to connect to the existing patio did you make any efforts at all like is this you know to Mr Quinn's Point like is this your dream of the way you want it to look or did you make any efforts at all to say hey we only got 20% what can we do yeah um and the rc4 zone is U relatively small you know so you know any small increases it's like um you know fast yeah it it starts to add fast um so we did look at that but and then but ultimately we were saying that you know the the flow for connecting the pool with the existing patio although it's it's a very small area just allow you know for the continual flow and also for a couple lounge chairs to be put you know next to the pool um so um we also looked at you know if we if we don't connect it then sometimes you know the um you know the the you know you you got you running from the patio to the grass and then into the pool and track you know sometime track some mud in there with the kids so so we did look at all that and this was the layout that we came up with what is the size of the existing paper patio it's about 300 and yeah how far is it behind the house and wide is it oh um yes di um it's roughly let's Dimension we had an we built that when we moved into the house there's an application that probably has we're not questioning it's probably 12 by 20 sounds about right so it's it's a relatively small patio yeah so it looks to me like the P that you're adding extend maybe another 10et toward yeah about 8 feet yeah fairness it's probably bigger than 12 by 20 if it's 300 right roughly yes 25 yeah actually I scaled it to 25 by 14 okay I didn't realize I did that do you need the three feet like even including all the back side ention to put loue chairs it would be nice yes there's a lot of things that would be nice I know so but if it's I mean that's negotiable so yes or whatever I mean we have a we have we have one foot of coping and maybe if instead of three we just do two feet you know so the total is still three feet you know so we we spend a lot of time on on inous coverage and we appreciate that a good percentage here Mr those numbers I think it was 2.5% is actually pooled water surface so we're not indifferent to that um you know whether it's all papers or part of it as a pool but uh 25% is a big number yeah I mean I'm not comfortable with the 5% I appreciate the water filtration and the whole system I mean i' be looking for like a two and a half% reduction somewhere that's possible yeah I I think we're going to need some reduction um you know we have seen applications where people have done pretty creative things with with respect to having um you know some garden areas in the middle of the the pavers just to try and break it up a little bit still have it look beautiful you know we don't want it to not work for you guys and we want to try to come uh away with with um something that will work for you um you know we tend to be more in favor of uh coming up with a number and you can decide um how you want to uh how you want to spend it got it would you want to cut as it's done in conjunction with the pool that that would be kind of my initial thoughts but I'm also concerned like Mr Tedy with the um with the overage I would like to see it come down I agree okay now do you want to maybe take the concern um they think yeah or I mean the existing patio has been dug up a little bit by animals so we could probably revise that a little bit and add you know take a little away from what's going on or maybe you want um the back walkway or do you want do do you want back walkway the back walkway if we take out the back walkway I believe it ticks out I took um so I had and Mr you tell me if I'm WR I had about 255 square feet for every percentage yeah is that about right okay so or the area we can make that like bushes in things like that maybe that off maybe we'll maybe we'll just take the um if we take the connection between the pool and the existing patio out and just we just leave like three foot walkway around the pool and then you know that's um that's a another percentage drop do we have other um comments from the board in terms of what number they might be comfortable with and then uh I'm comfortable around 23 yeah I'm okay with that because he does say if you throw a shed on there which you can't do that's what happens so you know like don't increase it we don't want to be that farad that if something changes because good okay so I guess what you're hearing from the board I mean it's your application you do not need to change it but what you're hearing from the board is that they would be more comfortable to facilitate this type of application if it was 23% okay and you can figure this out exactly at another time you know our stipulation would be so long as it's used in the conjunction with a pool because we wouldn't want you to just say okay we're not going to do the pool and we're just going to put up this you know basketball court or something like that so it would say something like that so it's up to you if you would like to amend your application if you do this is the time to do that so do we amend it 23 okay I think we'll be good application and request for 23 okay we would include question here okay yeah no we're not done with questions the public gets a chance to just quickly the drainage would remain that's still a station still agre so the new pool grading plan shows a very looks like a pretty steep Hillside yeah all the way like on three sides of the pool how are you stabilizing that like what what is to keep well I mean um once once uh you know it's um we're going to we going to conform with the soil you know conserva District on soil stabilization but afterwards it's it's it's going to be grass so the grass and M and and and and plus now that we're revising you know some of the walkways and stuff like that it will be you know it will be not as steep you know we could spread it out a little bit R what this is just my question at the bottom of the of the Hill you've got a dark line with dots and I don't see a schedule that says what that means what does that indic is [Music] that the line me the sil fence it's the sil fence thank you I just I couldn't figure out what that was that that will answer your other question about you know stabilization and so stabilization any are there additional questions from the board at this time you guys were coming out of the concerting yes we are MH umam chair can't believe I forgot the environmental commission no I haven't read I didn't so we also received um a memo from the environmental commission did you receive a copy of that I actually the environmental commission I have not actually that was emailed out to you on December okay missed that you can see my cop okay unofficial Ro is the Environmental Commission on buman here okay um so as I recall there were conditioned fortunately they don't number things in here um so kind of starting from the top um they requested that you guys provide a Wetlands Loi I don't think that's necessary at this point right because you guys have to no there are no Wetlands we we have that report that was done by by the wetlands yes just making sure I'm the on um the second Point Also regarding the conservation e they as I interpreted it it wasn't exactly here might have been a typo but I think they were asking you to install a retaining wall to avoid disturbance within the conservation eement but again you guys are we we were going to re revise that grading to be outside of the conservation that team mov way um they asked to to revise the plans to show the top soil stock pile area yes that's what we we said we were going to put in do that yes um ask you to provide an overflow for the recharg drywell system that's we could we could provide that okay do that um they ask you to employ storm water best management practices during site work and as part of final regrading and restoration and also to employ best management practices to protect and preserve trees during site work you guys okay with doing those yes and there's no trees being removed so they just want to make sure that's getting MH um next they asked you to make a good faith best effort as we call it to plant native trees and shrubs to mitigate the proposed impervious coverage increase um I'll throw that to the engineers you think that's necessary given the scope of uh you know and drainage improvements you're proposing or is that kind of not really necessary just going to read PR the grasp back there look I mean I you can't quantify how much plants you're going to uptake I like having the the drainage system done if you want to augment that with drugs that's fine but that would be an aesthetic thing I think much okay drainage aspect so I guess it's up to you guys if you want to do that or not but I don't think the board me board feels too strongly about that one way or another so I think we'll be that up to you okay if you do propose any Landscaping would you try to incorporate native if you PL anything sure okay all right we'll keep it you're not removing any trees so that renders the next Point Moot and then we already talked about best management practices for discharging water so you're good on that they wanted you to talk they wanted us to discuss with you uh lock coverage capacity advise you to reduce coverage which we just spoke about which you agree to do you know I guess just worthy of mentioning if you guys ever want to put anything else on the lot that's going to add coverage you'd have to come back to the board right you get approve tonight that place no treat permits were taken out obviously okay so that's it for the V thank you Mr Quinn or Mr SL we kind of bumped around a little bit do we miss anything um any further comments from other not for me not no not for me either okay do you any other questions from the board at this time just did you talk to your neighbors or they Fe back on the appli they're exciting exting a lot of children friends with and they would they all want to be here tonight fence is there popular is there any issue with shading on each side that you're going to add more we put trees on the one side along the fence and they're growing so they're getting bigger um the other side before we move yeah the moment have their trees up so yeah lots of trees anything else for the board everybody loves someone else's pool are there any questions from the public on this application are there any comments for or against this application from the public okay seeing none why don't you just leave it um with the board at this time okay so um any further comments or deliberations from the board or or a motion I think we all are what's in front of us is an amended uh request for 23% maximum coverage and do we have any stipulations there you want me to yes okay so as you stated Madam chair um only one variant is being requested that's for uh a 23% lot coverage ratio or 20% is the maximum permitted here in the RC core Zone as far as stipulation conditions um the applicants agreed to basically everything that would be applicable Mr SCH memo um obviously not including the anything dealing with removal trees because they're not removing any trees um everything in Mr Quinn's memo as I understand it and then everything in the environmental commission memo still applicable you know that would be removing the wetlands related and conservation easement related conditions um as well as uh tree removal replacement plan need that and as far as uh native trees and shrubs go if any if they're going to plant anything they would make an effort to make them native so I think that's it and I know anything else that wasn't already address some of of those mends you thank you I'll go ahead I appreciate the applicants working with us reducing the imperious you're in a cluster zone so we have to be mindful of the neighbors and all that and I do like the you're going above and beyond by putting in Advantage system so I would be in favor of approving this under C I agree with Mr and I do appreciate your very willingness to uh to work with us on it yes thank thank you so we have a motion in a second and I would just add to be mindful of the 23 um percent because we're like elephants we never forget it is important that you're planning it because it is sometimes EAS to just be like why not youve at the end I know everybody does sh I don't really can't tell you thatly miss Balman yes Dr arwal yes Mr Krauss yes Miss Pichi yes Miss poar yes T Cy yes engine yes you good luck thank you guys have a good night good luck thank you okay next on the agenda is 9C which is Grimshaw Ox um ZB 24022 Madam chair again while applicants are approaching I'll just point out for the record I had an opportunity to review their notice I deem it sufficient both in terms of its content and timeliness of service having been uh sent to by certified male owners of property within 2 the subject property on November 14th 2024 and also published in the Burnsville news on November 21st 2024 both more well more than 10 days in advance of tonight's hearing so we got that um I will swear in the applicants I'm assuming that's who's standing before us as well as our board professionals so if you all Raise Your Right hands for me you all swear or affirm the testimony you're about to provide with the truth the whole truth and nothing about the truth okay great sir if you can please identify yourselves the director name and address please sure um I'm Dr Rachel Oaks um 109 child's Road right into the mic so we can hear you sorry Dr Rachel Oaks 109 child's Road uh Robert Grimshaw 109 child's Road just a few you tesy just us we do not but he's very detail oriented okay great um so um a swimming and and I'll walk that's right would you like to um take us through your sure uh I mean fairly straightforward although I know that one thing we'll be talking a lot about tonight will be the the one somewhat unusual um choice we're making about how to stay under the lot coverage uh not applying for a a lot coverage variance for our pool um but yeah you know we're looking to put in a rectangular pool kind of you know clean type of design um and keeping it close into the house to kind of integrate it with a couple of patios that already exist uh towards the back of the house um you know of course the whole thing will be fenced in we do have uh children in the neighborhood um and um yeah we were a little surprised at the amount of uh impervious coverage we actually wound up having once an official survey was done when I kind of roughly guessed at it and measured it a little bit more Loosely I thought we had more to play with um and so I'm sure most people like yeah right oh I'm sorry and the actual variants we're here for as my wife points out she did ask about the project but um the V and so the variants we're applying for is um that the pool will uh not conform to the uh regulation that states that the pool has to be behind the line of from the back of any adjoining property's uh house and so there are some houses yeah some houses that the front of the house faces our property in its entirety several of them and then another one yeah so that's your property up there right it's um in the middle of this cluster of homes that's right yeah like a rustic neighborhood with the houses kind of splattered around they all Point different directions yeah and that's you guys are technically a landlock parcel correct that's a that's not a street that's a like a private driveway it's a private road that's shared by all the property so the two variances there's a number of variances and or a a number of um non-conforming aspects a number of them are pre-existing um did you also get a copy of Mr sl's memo that's right yep I have able to review it yes we have a number of um statements on here um popping champagne out [Laughter] there did you um speak to any of your neighbors about this project yes yes did they um did any of them voice any concerns nope lots of Thumbs Up emojis [Laughter] and you submitted photos and a walk us through all of these and I'm assuming you took these photos yes I took the photos um I assume you're referring to the four photos from uh around the area where the pool will be yeah would have been smart to bring take thank sure so if I'm looking at the picture with four photos um from my cell phone of our yard um if you look the pull up the photo you're talking about when did you take this I just looked it up it was early September September and it still represents the same conditions except for everything being Brown like everyone else's lawn yeah you're right um yes and so the pool would be located um I mean if you see where that that hot tub is now uh next to the Perla that would be kind of one corner and it would extend backward toward that garage you see that the disconnected Garage in the back um other pictures oh and so you can get a good sense of the location because of these 3D renderings that were provided by the uh the pool company we're working with do you use that garage so it's used for storage uh only we never Park cars there it's just too far from the house yeah it's it's far from the house you know the kids have always have it strewn with their toys um and the yeah we we we don't we don't use it and you can even see the the back of it uh has a a large porch which is actually just filled with um some large items that we need to get collected up for trash I drove back there today and he's saying is correct it's a child's play area the entire thing yeah there's nowhere three kids and two working parents yeah very unusual building I yeah I think that the fact that it's wide open is sort of strange there's a home a home builder I think in the 80s built it it's as I understand did you ever drive back there not really I mean we never drive behind it um and we don't ever drive down the driveway to the extent where and I wish I had a photo of that but um there's always a large amount of Weeds on our uh gravel driveway so actually outside of this whole project I've we've discussed removing that gravel just because it looks awful it's just a weed Garden we have to pay people to pull the weeds come back in two weeks because we don't drive on it it's just it's an isore okay keep going through the picture oh uh and so the third picture is of the rear of that garage um and this is something we included to show um where the pool would have to be if it were behind the line extending from 19.1 if you look at the parcel label up there uh but that was when I was under the impression that was the only property that we were in um in violation on uh and so that I was trying to demonstrate that that you know to remedy that situation we would have to locate it very far away from the house and there's a number of trees back there that we'd rather not remove but actually there's there's two other properties that we're in violation of anyway because they face our entire property so that wouldn't even remediate the entire concern we'd still need the variant so this was I guess superflous so just with respect to the placement so I think there were there's a number of properties just impossible think of if I remember correctly from the memo had to do with the septic field and the placement was it Mr memo one the issue is I think they need a they need relief in the township ordinance which requires 20 foot separation from an onsite f m or any portion thereof so as I try to outline in my memo the state also has a chart dictating how certain components can relate to a swimming pool so in the state code Administrative Code they mandate 20 ft from a disposal field which is the major area where all your affluent is leaving the ground so you don't want anything around that that's 20 ft they they mandate 10 ft between uh swiming pools and the holding tank or the distribution box and they don't have any minimum requirement for a building sewer line so in this case the building Su line is 16 ft away from the pool it technically doesn't comply with the township ordinates but practically speaking there is no impact to that building sewer line with the location of the pool I did because it was it was relief it was impact Associated at least it was relief required I did suggest that we talk about can we move the pool so that it's 20 ft away from the building sewer line but that seems a little extreme to me and it also adds impervious cover so I'm not recommending that we do that I'm just trying to put it in context but the location of the pool as it exists Now does not have any impact on that building so L okay so your point is there's a big difference between the septic field and the building sheline hug difference okay that's why I I was looking at Mr T would have an opinion on that I'll say it again so my my question is if something happened to the sewer line would that fouret make a difference no no I mean the other thing about having separation is you don't encumber with construction vehicles right but this sewer line comes out of the building where there's a retaining wall so it's protected by a retaining wall so nobody's going to be driving on this sewer line so you know there's no impact to the operation of the sewer line and there's no impact to the location of the pool next to the sewer line because you're not have to drive on it and hurt the sewer line while you're putting the pool in I don't see that happening so I don't see any impact on at all it's association with his and Mr CH creedy you want to weigh in at all here I agree with Mr Quinn I don't think there's any impact thatd be more concerned with the distribution field more than anything damage to those pipes and disturbing that but not not the piping it's a solid pipe it's not good it'll be deep question no 4 in pipes coming out of house could beere oh what do you mean on how deep um could be three to Sixt deep depending comes out of the house um can you just describe the landscape so our focuses will also be with respect to screening given that you're in the middle of different properties here talk about what the existing screen situation is and if you have any plans to ad that Yes actually I think you'll see on the grading plan that uh on the side of the property that buts 19.1 over there there is a small Gap where previous owners have made an attempt to complete a screen there's a there's a large spruce tree there that's very healthy there's some pryia that's very healthy and then there's a gap okay I see yeah I'm sorry to the southeast yeah to the southeast um and there's been previous Shrubbery that's been planted there that was not successful but nobody's you know addressed it but so we are going to try uh to put um as you'll see there some some Evergreens uh to address the screening concern it's the only place where there's a visual Gap I think Mr s MMO said that um it would need to be approved is that is that true yeah I mean just we want to see some a deer resistant species selected which I'm sure you would want well but since it's not specified here I mean to say 6 high Evergreen is certainly what we look for for screening generally um but the details of it um would be subject to review as part of the construction permit process okay so we don't want someone to go and buy one foot trees and put them in we want sufficient screening at the time when the pool is completed meaning yeah well they need to be 6 feet at planning height and the applicants already agreeing to that that that's what they're showing and they be um any other details mainly just a species uh give it a run by the engineering department yeah okay and then Mr Sly do you mind taking us through your point number six with respect unless you want to jump in before that but with respect to the garage and the fact that their plans are travel and how uh we should think about that one yeah looking um number six comment number six on page six of my January 3 202 2 memo um Mr Grimshaw alluded to it earlier about removing the middle section of their driveway uh basically stranding the garage and a paved area adjacent to the garage where you would not be allowed uh anymore to drive a vehicle out there because regardless of the surface on the ground if it if you drive on it it counts as lot coverage so whether it's paved gravel or even grass you can't Traverse that grass with a vehicle because that would count as coverage does that do you understand that point yeah and actually I had a really quick question on that um I was one thing that was suggested to me by one of our our pool guy um that didn't sound like it would actually meet the requirement I want to double check it was different types of surfaces that are that he considered pervious but I thought the whole point is that well anyway I did yeah that's there you may get more infiltration with something like that the engineers will tell you um like a pervious pver is better than a p um but for the purpose of how we Define lot coverage it's just like pool water counts as lot coverage even though there's no drainage concern with that um so yeah regardless of the surface even if it's grass um or any other type of thing if you if it's a patio or a walkway or a driveway it's coverage so of course we know what's proposed here and you're aware of the situation but somebody in the future uh says oh why does a driveway end here you know they may think they can um extend the driveway why wouldn't they be able to because who would ever have the situation so it it's Unique enough to me that the board feels it may warrant um recording a deed restriction or recording the board's resolution or something in the title uh that'll come up with a title search when the people bu this property and they're made aware of why this unusual situation is there and the Restriction associated with it and they may have the same idea as you guys do that well we're not going to park our cars way over there we're going to just park them here and this is totally fine of it so sorry I'm just they' be able to apply for a coverage variant if they wanted to connect it just like you could apply for that if you wanted to keep that um but and then that would also that would be worded in the in the resolution I'm sure our board attorney would um cite that as a condition and and write within that condition in the resolution say what the restriction has to say and then you have that restriction drafted up and recorded with the county clerk and then all future owners are on notice of that only because it's such an unusual situation that that a future person would not anticipate probably just like you anticipated that if you would put a pool in your backyard you'd have to worry about which way the other houses are facing yeah no one put that in our title yeah my thought on would be that a resolution would be sufficient Prov is a good the condition is in there specific State rather than have you guys go and hire attorney to rest you just take the resolution that's the final document to get it to get approv from the board go to the County's office rep that should be L100 I think should be about 10es so I just put any future property ERS are notic a title report on it not allowed to do that sense mhm so my question in regard to this removing the gravel driveway it looks like you're leaving the asle area in front of the barn but just removing the link between between the two the the kids uh on on scooters and bikes yeah that's where my kids learn to ride their bike and we have a three-year-old that I'm you know excited to teach there uh so I was like well that's going to be extra cost and also you know the kids actually do use it we have a basketball hoop there so the you know 12-year-old who's into basketball does that so it would be it it gets use um much more so than the gravel dve glorified sh s oh yeah uh and home to Wildlife did you say are you removing any trees as part of this project you're not no Mr there uh we talked about screening we talked about um well the trees if you look at comments number 9 10 11 and 12 are probably very similar exactly the same as you've heard on the prior application about your soil erosion set of control measures are going to be subject to further review uh and Outdoor Lighting if you are proposing any it'll be downward directed and shielded so perent glare nuisances MH um comment number 11's really directed at your engineer who will be preparing your plot plan if there's going to be uh that the soil from the pool excavation if you're going to use that on site you got to show on a grading plan where exactly how that's going to work and um and number 12 uh is a reference to the environmental commission's uh best management practices through discharging cool water you understand that yeah I read read through it all make sense that's all of mine thanks thank you Mr and you guys would comply with all those conditions that Mr yes sorry oh no that's okay I just wanted to turn to um our engine report Mr Quinn there's nothing here that hasn't already been discussed um I would note though You' got your alert on number 10 I was going to say that item 10 is you heard you probably heard on the last application that whole soul Conservation District certification C limited disturbance this is for your professional you are within 12T of that and I think it is a case where it's going to expand because your limited disturbance is going to include the area between the gravel driver that whole area is probably going to be disturbed it's going to need an area to lay down so the point of it is have your engineer prepare a Sol certification application for the count and stay ahead of the curve okay okay yeah I think like 850 of that is the gravel driveway right yeah you have it on there but literally within 12 ft and I see this happen all the time and I just look you you can you're free to go at it I'm just saying the township engineer comes by and sees that your disturbance limit is larger than what's here and it's it crosses the the certification requirement for so Conservation District you're going to have to for how many weeks to get it these things happen a lot problem for for the homeowner so not exactly free to go at it but just I have to tell you I had this in my own property and it was very easy okay doing it beforehand count was very easy to deal with I mean if you were several hundred square feet away I would say not a problem you can work with the township but you're going to you're not that right too close right right okay thank you real quick I think Mr Quin just made a couple suggestions for plan revisions um Rising the GRE plan to include a North Arrow or then uh enlarging the depiction of the approved that's something you guys would be will to do sure yeah I'm sure doesn't come here that goes once you get out here that's for your permit when you submit to the township okay they going want to see yeah that was very hard for me to read I guess the the engineer will know the best way to do that and meet the scale requirements deal with the town yeah okay thank you Mr um there was also um a memo from the environmental commission did you get a copy of that one got it right here sure want okay so taking it from the top in chological order um they asked you guys to make a good faith best effort to locate trees or excess top soil driveway something guys to so that the the concern with the with pudding trees in the the driveway area is that it's it being of right next to the pool right next to the pool our our our pool guy had concerns about like root incursion into the pool wall um all right so that sounds counterintuitive I so you you considered we we considered it we okay good um they ask you to relocate the evergreen trees along that you're proposing along the southern side of the property you be at least 20 ft from the property line and staggered so they don't encroach on their neighbors yeah so the the issue with doing that and and I I understand the the the reasoning behind it um I would look for whatever uh suggestions you all have that there's a large white spruce tree that like moving them in that way at least as I can conceive of it be directly underne put underneath that yeah you can see it on the grading plan it's a very large tree um you know I I assume that that's the shade from that tree is probably why the things there died in the past uh but putting things directly underneath would certainly not improve the situation depends on what you're putting there to be fair arites will grow in the in the shade of a 30 okay tree there and I I don't think that would Which Way see one of the problems there's no North so I can't tell which way is north but I mean I don't know which way the Sun comes into your property yeah but if it comes in from this side this is like the South Side no unfortunately the south side is where you're sitting this is the South Side that's correct this up on okay it's not there but I know well it's you know the property better than I but I I know that all proves wow in the shade of tree because they'll they'll they'll see those trees leave they'll see Sun especially in the spring I have that okay arborite don't prude it from you're showing that you're showing here um no you're not I'm sorry you're just showing right right that's why I was going to write right down yeah I think umies are really good use there because they don't they don't mind like they don't want okay so be call that will make good best effort to relocate ever well as additional trees proper line absolutely all right next we want you to revise the plans to show the top soil stock pile area and Sil Pence location we will okay these are kind of PL ones they're requesting that you use employee storm water best management practices during site work and also employ best management practices to protect and Reserve trees um you guys okay doing that yes good best effort to plant native trees and shrubs can you guys make an effort that any plant species are plant be native yes nothing basal repl you said no that's right so that uh best management practices when discharging cool water we T touch that Mr memo and then uh I don't know why they included this I guess they may presume were going to be demolishing that other garage but they they told you to take we want you to just to be aware of the potential for INR tanks L pain dises well I guess that might apply there something in the backyard right that's how I read it just want you to be aware of that you take props yeah we had it scanned during a purchase Oh great okay nothing to show up right right right right okay I think touched uh lock coverage so eliminating that portion of the driveway you're going to be are you like half out with coverage at that point close okay okay yeah I mean our long-term plan for the house is to um reduce the size of that garage significantly it's way way larger especially given that we're not using it for cars um but we also are not home builders like the owner who built that thing was well just so you know if you guys do want to go over that come back absolutely Ely I think that's it the two points just aboute remal that's it for the envir thank you for being mindful of the can like I said we wanted to remove that gravel driveway anyway it's just a weed farm you know just keep in mind those numbers because you know you're very close to it I think it's about 20 ft so yeah it adds up fast and um absolutely um anything else for us to consider okay are there any questions from the public on um anything that we've heard are there any comments from the public for against this application okay thank you thank you very um okay CH you want to uh summarize this here have reest okay so the applicants here are requesting two bulk variances uh one for the location of the pool this is our favorite one where the pool they're proposing is uh not to the rear of uh dwellings on adjacent Lots um as you heard them say I think there's three properties being impacted here block 202 Lot 12 block 401 lot 15 block 401 lot 19.02 those are the three properties that would be uh you impeded on I guess by that that particular variance and then that was the other variance was the for the distance between the pool and the septic system well any component of the septic system you're required to provide a 20 foot minimum separation distance here they're proposing about 16 ft as far as conditions and stipulations go I believe everything in Mr schl memo dated uh January 3rd 2025 everything in Mr Quinn's memo dated January 5th 2025 and then um the conditions of the environmental commission memo that we just went over um I won't pour you guys with those details but if you want me to R tread on that ground I will and I think that was it as far as stipulations everything you know we touched on was included in those memos this SOI so um Mr s Point number six we're going to do that solution right yeah so I think yeah by resolution we would just have them record that instead of restriction saves them a lot of money they get okay thank you um any comments uh deliberations from the board or a motion to Grant the relief or deny the relief just as a points number go ahead please I'm sorry I can't see the document but so you're talking about this uh there's a building label as office yes so that have anying on building the pool no I think it came up uh during the review of the application because that building had previously been approved uh to be used as an apartment for in like a family relation situation and um I can't remember who asked me but um some someone here asked me just to certify that that was no longer being used that way because that uh Authority had uh been vacated when the property was sold different purose right yeah and we that's what we did we home office it's mentioned in comment number seven on page six of my review memo it's a a similar situation not the same but similar to the first application we heard where there was an old approval in 1984 for an apartment uh Within the the out building the the L-shaped building uh on the plan the detach building and that proval approval went by the wayside once that use uh expired um and so there's an apartment there the applicant I did reach out to the applicant to see what their proposal was with regard to that that if they were proposing anything that's not permitted they would apply have to apply for the appropriate approvals and they're not the building uh the apartment approval expired it remains an accessory structure that they're allowed to use for any other accessory use just like the detach garage or a shed or anything and in this case the applicant indicated that they're using it as a to work from home um in a gym or anything else like that a playroom or the same kind of thing you would do in a garage or any other structure that um that doesn't or wasn't once used as an apartment um so that's just a factual statement not a it's not a zoning issue it's they're using it as as it is permitted to be used okay thank you um so we've heard some additional um testimony so I just want to see if there's any questions from the public based upon what you've heard any comments from the public for against this application okay um so uh yeah anybody who wants to kick us off or or make a motion on this application well I have to say I've been on land use Sports Bernard's Township for close to 15 years this is the most interesting lot I we have a lot of very very interesting Lots but this one took the cake I said what is going on visualize this and um uh I am in favor of the application um I think that you've you know you've done your best with the circumstances that you you have in front of you so I would certainly be in favor of the application with the with the conditions and everything that have been proposed i' be Happ a second good okay um no issues with this application sounds like even though it is facing every house around um and we've seen that before you know and people have had to put on the side of their houses but on Corner lots and different things like that you're well protected and shaded within that community of Housing and U it doesn't seem to be an issue also the the septic you know issue is nominal in that case too so so so would that be under C1 and C2 C1 and C2 C1 and C2 okay Miss Miss keeper I think we have a motion in a second we do miss bman yes Dr arwall yes Mr K yes yes H yesy yes chairwoman yes you good luck with thank you you thank you for your time you welcome to project thank you very much have a great night next up on the agenda is 10A which is a modification of conditions of approval I think uh we may lose some board members here is that right yes I'm recused recused Mr Ten is recusing himself and I'm Miss poar tapping out Miss keeper we don't we don't need these two to stick around right they could be no okay love you we do we want to see you next month we need to vote on on excusing the partial absence I just want to make sure but I'm noting it myself special absence thank you very much are two newly elected leaders leaving early okay I'm getting out do we um have someone representing Finley man real quick he's approach point out for the record I had an opportunity to review their notice they did notice for this um it was sent to owners of property within two Fe of the subject property on December 24th and also published in the Cur your news on December 26th the content was sufficient so in my legal opinion the board is jurisdiction hearing decide the case um is a little bit different than what the board's typically used to this is either an interpretation or modification of an existing board resolution but I'll let applicants Council give us little entrance first and before we do that can we um I just want to clarify who is able uh you know is everyone up here able to um vote on the modifications of conditions or do they have to vote initially or not this is a new application like in pery right so correct one two three four five six all six are voting right and they've all been provided the resolution that's that issue here presumably everybody so all six that are remaining we'll ask you to to vote um as we we'll talk about it first and then uh we'll see what it goes good evening good evening Madam chair members of the board David Brady The Firm of Brady and Cory Al on behalf of the starting over David Brady but you got to speak right in so if you want to stand you go over there okay so I would move to you uh David Brady of the firm of Brady and coral on behalf of the applicant um as the chair said this is a little unusual what we've got going on tonight and some of the members were not members back when the first approval came through uh I want to note that I thought my clients would be here by now I know I told them you had a full agenda I'm a little concerned they aren't here yet but we're incredibly efficient I think much of this though is there's no real dispute about this I don't think you need really testimony to kind of Judge uh veracity or anything like that I can lay out what happened here so if you'll bear with me I'll give a little background for those members that weren't here back when this was approved um Finley real estate LLC owns uh the site where the Washington House Restaurant operates the Jepson family owns or the principles in Finley real estate also the principles in the Washington house back during the covid pandemic the state adopted legislation that allowed restaurants to operate outside uh dining um special permits temporary special permits were issued for that and it included uh things like structures like tents and the like Finley obtained such a permit and they constructed with per proper permits the tent that I'm sure everybody knows is behind the Washington house it was put up on top of a parking lot a small parking lot that was there at the time um in 2022 in anticipation that at some point the pandemic may end and and the special permits may end we came to the board because there was a substantial amount of money spent on this tent it's not a it's not something the Boy Scouts use um to see if we could get a permanent approval for it um we had three hearings on it they were May June and then September of 2022 I don't remember why there was such a delay between the last hearing and the adoption of the resolution but it may have been because M because we had a lot of cqu back and forth over those three hearings it may have been Mr Warner and I were working through a complicated resolution but on May 3rd of 2023 the resolution got adopted 27 Pages reciting all the uh hearing testimony and hearing evidence and it has uh 30 separate conditions that appli to it essentially boiling it down what the board did was approve the application for the tent but it be to remain post pandemic or post pandemic special permit but not for ever it was what I think Mr Warner called a durational variance meaning it was a fiveyear period at the end of that five years we either had to come back for an extension or we had to come in with an application for a permanent typical building structure if we wanted to do that um several conditions in there um one of the ones that I guess I should point out there was a limit to to 250 the number of patrons we could have in the in the uh restaurant and the tent at any one time uh there were there were two conditions that were before the board tonight on one condition relates to parking in the sense that during the testimony uh Mr Jepson indicated there was what I'll call a handshake deal with the Wells Fargo branch uh that is at the other corner at the in that at Henry Street and Finley Avenue that our clients could use that parking lot so long as it wasn't full or being used for something else and that in fact the time that the most demand for the restaurant occurred was when the bank was closed know about banker's hours well the restaurant operates the totally opposite of banker's hours because it's usually in the evening usually on Saturday or Friday and Saturday that's when the heaviest demand is so there was uh a requirement placed in the resolution that we make that we quote pursue in good faith and provide written evidence of the same to the board attorney a lease or similar agreement with both Wells Fargo and Remax real estate Remax was a tenant of Wells Fargo at that building uh for additional parking at the Wells Fargo site um that was in fact pursued the Jepson family banks with Wells Fargo they know the manager there but trying to get a a manager to kind of help you through the Wells Fargo process to get a least or similar agreement they weren't exactly um motivated or eager to help out on that um our clients did speak to them last year as we realized that the the uh we needed to get this done and I'll go into timing in my next condition as we needed to get it done my client started stepping up their Communications and then they were learn then they learn then they ran into oh we now have a temporary manager and then oh I don't know if the bank May close the branch and then we eventually were informed the B the branch is closing still really didn't know who to talk to at the at the bank um but then the bank went up uh on the market with a multiple listing with a broker my client contacted the broker that con broker contacted the bank and uh provided a letter to us which I believe the board has refering to the one from James C Hansen uh yes yes it's dated December 23rd 2024 it's from Joan sakola James E Hansen Hansen is the the listing broker for the property and it indicates at this time Wells Fargo is not have an interest in leasing parking spaces at this location um we have since obtained another letter this one not just from the broker not that I'm in any way doubting her veracity in what she transmitted but this now is from the corporate Properties Group I don't know if the board has that I know I sent it to Mr Warner but as I was prepping for tonight I realized oh I sent it to Steve I did not send it over to Cindy so uh I have with me if we want to maybe mark it as A1 I was just going to suggest um multiple copies mad chair each Direction and that comes from Patrick mcken at the corporate Properties Group division or section of Wells Fargo and again uh Wells Fargo is unable to enter into any agreements associated with the use of the parking lot please allow this letter to confirm that Wells Fargo has no interest in pursuing a for lease agreement for use of the parking lot area so now we have it not just uh verbally not just from the real estate agent but actually directly from um the property section of Wells Fargo um earlier on in October knowing that this was coming up uh I had written to Mr Warner and provided him with a draft certification had not been signed by Mr Jeep which kind of recited what they had done as of that point and asked did this satisfy the requirement to demonstrate good faith and and provide that to the board attorney the response I got I think he spoke to to Dave about this was we really should come back to the board and talk about that hence hence that's why we're here um our position on that is the the condition number 14 did not require that we actually obtain approval but that we pursue it in good faith we believe we've demonstrated that we have in fact pursued it in good faith and we've hit a dead end it's not particularly surprising since the property now in the market that Wells Fargo doesn't want to uh uh in any way entangle the property with its requirement frankly I would I would have thought that even if we had gotten something earlier it would have been a license agreement terminable at any time by Wells Fargo uh but at this point it's just not going to happen um so that's that's the first request we have I don't know if we call it an interpretation a modification my personal belief is really we are just confirming with the board that we have pursued it we've hit a dead end with it and and we believe that we've actually fulfilled it but uh this way the board gets to hear what we've done um the second modification well the second thing that we're looking for before you get to that one just I just want to see you want to talk about this first I just want to see if the board has any questions with respect to um that first because we're going to talk about two very different right um stipulations or conditions right of if we want to do that one first Madam chair and kind of I just want to see if anyone has any questions on that one is specific are we voting what are we voting on that the condition has been satisfied well well I I think we're interpreting whether it's been um satisfied and then that would be one path to go down or whether we need to modify it okay so those are two different so if I could so for our board new board members as well this good point of Education here so you guys have been here you've seen a couple applications already this evening those are for development right this is an application for interpretation um njsa 40 colon 55 D- 70b allows zoning boards of adjustment to interpret not only zoning ordinances but also other U like approvals such as the resolution that they've already adopted pertaining to this particular application so the question before the board tonight essentially is within that context to inter is basically did the applicant satisfied this condition do you interpret that the applicant has satisfied this condition of that approval right they need this in order to Mr BR you will correct me if I'm wrong but this is a part of the compliance process right right in fact that's one of the things holding up getting the building permit is the engineeringbuilding department said well you got to show you complied with that portion of the resolution yeah since I was not here so I had two questions first of all the condition that was int imposed what was the intent of that in the event that uh they could not fulfill it and number two I would like to know that uh now we know that uh you could not fulfill the condition so what is the impact of that on you know other well my position is that we have fulfilled the condition we in fact made a good faith effort we've been unable to obtain proof of that or we have been able to obtain written a written lease document and we now have proof we're not going to obtain it the condition did not require us to obtain it it required us to make a good faith effort right and I think it would be easier for the point of this to take these two completely separate um one at a time because they really don't overlap and so just to be clear so condition number 15 said the applicant shall pursue in good faith and provide written evidence of s to the board attorney a lease or similar agreement with both Wells Fargo and Remax real estate for additional parking at 59 South Finley Avenue so that's all it said yeah that's all it said I'm just curious to know because you were there they this condition what are the intent if you could not meet that so my understanding is that the the board at the time had a concern about the availability of parking on site and within the surrounding area so as a condition of the approval they required that the applicant at least pursue the possibility of parking off site but still close by I think W Spar goes a lot immediately to the south on the opposite side of West Henry Street right right right right and as you can see there's a big parking field there um so again I can't speak for the board because I was not a board member I'm the board attorney my understanding of it is that the the condition was imposed um for that reason so that the you know while it may not be 100% guaranteed the applicant would at least try to obtain some offside parking right at at at the time of the application we we were there was a significant underp parking so to speak for the application I a different what if you never came before this board is there was there a time limit in the resolution that we had to interpret this condition by a certain time I mean not specific to they never came before us the condition would still be there so I'm trying to understand what what are we why are we interpreting this except for the purpose of your coming before us and saying that you want us to interpret this condition if if this was never on the agenda I gather we would assume that the applican is making a good faith effort correct they they can't get their building permit permit to do their work perm yes he needs to get a permit by a certain time which which we're going to get to on the wasn't clear to me in terms of why yes one of the stipulations is are they in in you know conformance with with all that's right and this one is is up for interpretation right right I I think also um part of the intent of having you seek and hopefully obtain a written agreement is that I think we know that people are doing it anyway right and I think it would be more comfortable to know that there was an agreement in place so I think as a board member at the time um I think that was certainly one of my thoughts um as I look at this I think you have fulfilled your obligation I mean in in my um reading of it I would say that you have fulfilled your obligation um my question would be and I wouldn't want to hold up the building permit for it at all um but I would hope that whoever Wells Fargo does to that you might try to obtain a written agreement I don't know that that's something we don't have any objection to that if that's part of the board's interpretation if the board says we interpret a good faith effort to mean you have an kind of a continuing obligation that would be fine yeah but I don't want it to hold up tap indicator I don't want to hold up the the building permit yeah yeah I you know I I would be comfortable saying they are not in violation of this and I do think at the time um we were well aware I think that you may or may not get this um you know we spent a lot of time on parking and where the tent was going and what spots we were losing and I remember spending a lot of time on parking so I think the board in the end got comfortable with it but said wouldn't it be better if you continued to pursue some other options and and get it in writing for what was already happening so I agree with Miss Balman like if there was a way that we could say this is the intent of it and that intent is still in place okay that you should always in good faith try to um to to obtain that parking with whoever comes in there and especially if it works from a timing that that would be fine okay that seems to be what if that's what the board wants to interpret as well I guess we'll get to the vote I was there too and I agree 100% we you know kept on saying that people parking and we said just lock it down yeah if we could yeah you can and we knew you may or may not be able to and they want to buy the building great that's even better up I have no I have no issue I just thank you did not number five Mr shalai memo I did that a relationship Tob not in terms of condition 14 and okay that's where I got way but I I have I feel that there has been okay okay okay sh would you like me to go on the second one or there's the second one okay the second one relates to condition Mr Brady hold on just a thought um given that there's a lot of nuance to these what I'll leave it to you because you're attorney here well would you think it might be a good idea to ask board members if we vote on the that' be fine I think before you vote though you would have to open it to the public no no we're going oh no you know what an interpretation do you need to open it to the public on this I think we should just be okay that's fine I don't object right okay um unless again it's up to you unless you want it you think it no that's fine I kind of like making it clean and uh proceeding okay is there anyone um from the public who has questions on the interpretation of uh condition 15 it's 14 oh 14 maybe there's a typo somewhere it's 14 oh I have there's a typo in the applicant's letter mrpo 14 too many things going on in DEC okay 14 and there's a typ tile Stein 172 Riverside Drive thank you how many parking spaces were supposed to be provided originally from your application back in 21 how many yeah okay I've been to all the meetings for this I always sat here for all this parking you wore that the the board down about the parking saying there's no place you to park but our employees park at well as Fargo so that should free up on parking for us and basically that's almost exactly what you you were intending to now you cannot park there so the question is how many the question is how many parking spaces originally were you supposed to provide well the question is though actually I would submit Madam chair whether we fulfill the resolution resolution did not require us to have these parking spaces actually under contract but to make a good faith effort we have made that effort and in fact to this day the parking lot is still used okay next question then is I think um this was supposed to be a temporary thing for about five years okay when is this five years end approval was May 3rd 202 so five years is 2028 28 so in 2028 when you decide what you're going to do with this tent and you do not have enough parking what do you plan to do over this modification because now it's going to come back I I assume it'll come back to the board you're going to either take that tent down or beg to have the tent stay so we want to know where you going to PL to park your cars now that we know you cannot park at Wells Fargo well not true we cannot park at Wells Fargo as I said still continues to this day with a a handshake a notd in a wink it's not formal with regard to what happens in 2028 that's when we have to submit either request for extension and the board will go through these questions or we're coming in with our application for our permanent building in which case we have to uh theoretically either have the board accept that the testimony regarding parking and CH chle is right we had a lot of testimony we had time lapse videos Etc of all the on street parking availability um we'll either have to have the board accept that that situation is still the case in 2028 or we're going to have to create that testimony and put the same testimony on regarding parking that's available in 2028 we don't know what the situation is going to be I I can't commit say though in response to M's comment that once the deal is finalized and once you know the new owners of that building you could pursue once the deal is finalized and we know the new owners we're happy to inquire a to no problem whatsoever make a start another good effort and it is for sale and I won't comment further on my client's intentions at the moment but no you have to finalize the sale okay are we for comments thank you actually maybe we should let do comments on this portion are there any other questions at this time are there any other questions okay are there any comments on just this portion of the interpretation of number 14 sir do you swear affirm the testimony brought Prov be the truth hold you tell about the truth I do okay thank you Mr Alon there's not a lot of park in that area the bord was worn down as far as I observed and it proved it because a lack even though there's a lack of parking I want to take notice of this so they know in 2028 whoever comes back with this property that they know there's a lack of parking and they need to either modify that property so they allow parking on there or they do something else one other thing on the agenda It says 55 South Maple I don't know if that matters or not the agenda that it does it says 55 thank you room I'll just point out the applicant notice mentioned the correct address so they're they they did their as side but but thank you for bringing that to attention Mr I appreciate thank you thank you are there any other comments on just that one portion okay so um just to summarize I think we're going to do a vote on the interpretation of just our first um right and as I understand it it seems to be the prevailing consensus is that the board would be making a motion in a second to interpret condition five to mean that the applicant would have an ongoing uh requirement that um whoever purchases that Well Fargo lot they would have to approach to see if they could these part yeah or or maybe each unique owner right right and would would we continue the same thing that when we do that and we get a yay or a nay that we submit something to your attorney's office or or Dave or whoever so we have a process right I think yeah again pursue in good faith and provide written evidence of say to the board attorney okay you know hopefully I won't have to be back here though interpreting a year from now whether that was good faith but right we'll go from there yeah okay okay so that's it again it's not a question of whether or not they have enough parking it's whether the question is you know do you interpret the ordinance or the that condition as such so uh okay a little different than we usually do here but that's that's what's important okay so does anyone want to make a motion on that so I would be comfortable um I would be comfortable making a motion if nobody else has comments um I think that as far as the language is written they've satisfied their requirements so um as far as the initial resolution I think you've met your obligation in my opinion so I would be in favor of moving forward um are we also modifying the the condition and in addition I would I would ask for the modification but being sure that it doesn't hold up the building well I was going to say perhaps then if we're having a continue obligation that it' be clear the board would indicate that this the fact that there's a continuing obligation should not hold up the issuance of the building program exactly so that the motion would be to find that the applicant has thus far satisfied their obligations but also that the condition means is interpreted to me that this ongoing um obligation will exist um the applicant shall pursue in good faith from rev virant notice of saying to the board attorney U that it's you know exhausted efforts to obtain a Le a parking lease agreement with the future owner of 59 South Finley avue and do we have to put in also that motion that the board finds that there's no that we've complied with the initial resolution so the building permit can be issued that's what I said first that was my comment as well I think you satisfied your obligation for the resolution okay okay so I think that's the motion thank you Miss Balman so we have a motion we have a second I'm sorry who is second Krauss that in on me Miss Bal yes uh Dr arwell no no okay um Mr KRA yes Miss poar oh I'm sorry I'm off the line here Mr T I I think you missed me we can start over do you want to start over we have yes and we have a no I think right way over on the lines here okay so we have a no and then the next one was Mr KRA so you said yes yes all right Miss PG yes okay M poar Mr Jack are recused so that would bring us down to miss silver yes okay and chairwoman juniors yes thank you okay you have one more for us yes uh the other condition that we want to talk to the board about tonight is condition number 30b that condition indicates the applicant shall apply for and obtain a construction permit within two years of the adoption of the board's resolution which I'll comment I think is this the typical Standard time or prior to the expiration of the special use pandemic relief permit issued by the township pursuing to a specific resolution as I said I think the normal Arrangement is two years but since the tent was a use of that tent and erection of that tent was authorized by a special permit under that statutory authorization by uh the state I I think it's fair to say the board may have had a concern over whether are we going to have a unauthorized use of this tent if the permit expires before the two years I say I think that was the board's concern because reading back through the transcript which we obtained to help Mr Warner write the resolution we really didn't talk about that during the hearing but trying to go back in my memory banks and and think about my conversations with Mr Warner I think that was the The Gap so to speak and legal uh Authority that was trying to be addressed um the permit expired the original special permit expired in December of last year but on November 25th 5th 2025 Governor Murphy signed into law a new bill that allows the holder of an alcohol retail consumption license to obtain a premises expansion permit to include outdoor uh dining including patios decks whether they're covered or uncovered parking lots uh Etc the same bill also allows restaurants that don't even sell alcohol uh and restaurants that do sell alcohol frankly the way it's written very I read the writing anyway to use the outdoor space as an extension of their business for non-alcohol related things food um and lastly most interestingly as a land use attorney both on the board side and the applicant side is that it declared that the outdoor dining um function and the tents and canopies and fixtures Associated there with are permitted use and so it kind of you know the uh statutory author the the authority of localities to zone is a um a state delegated function through the ml so the state in this instance is kind of from on high said it's a permitted use and and here's the rules that go with it we have in fact uh applied to uh for an expansion of the premises and on November 12th 2024 uh Bernard Township granted an expansion of the premises out to that tent and I don't know if we want to mark this perhaps as A2 but we can hand that around that's that's been granted Madam chair so we have that in place and my reading of the statute it's a little convoluted the way it's put together my reading of that is that if you had that if you had a prior authorization you are automatically extended to November of 2025 and if you've gotten the expansion permit in hand then the date on that expansion permit uh governs when your ability to use those outside um fixtures for dining and all expires so the difficulty we're having here is we submitted you know you have to through resolution compliance as the board is aware we had some engineering revisions to be done um that was eventually done and in November I believe in November the engineering was resolved it got down to some issue with regard to um handicap parking grades depressed curbs things of that nature my belief is I have not seen the document but my belief is that that was resolved in November we sub so the engineering review I think is done the building permit application was submitted in July uh our client was told then they had to go to the Sewer Authority because there would be a connection fee for the tent we went to the Sewer Authority one hearing was adjourned another hearing was held uh without the sewer Authority's attorney being there the connection Fee number was six figures was a huge fee but it turned out eventually that the when the sewer Authority attorney looked at it he found that in fact because it was already connected and this building is an is attached to and hence an extension of or addition to you did not need a new connection fee that we found out at the end of September so I believe we now have everything into the building department to get the building permits but as I mentioned as Dave mentioned if we're not meeting the compliance then um you know then we're going to have we're going to be held up as I say I think the reason originally Mr Warner put this in there was to cover that Gap in Authority that Gap no longer exists with the new law with the extension of the uh licensed premises so what we're asking the board is to say and interpret with regard to this as long as we do every Everything by May 3rd that we're we're still meeting the requirement of condition ition number 30b and hopefully now that we've gotten the parking issue condition out of the way the building application will be a building permit application will be processed and we'll have it in hand well before then so that was a lot that was a lot um so just to clarify though you you said interpret you're not really asking us to interpret you're asking us to modify the condition just to be specific well to May 3rd 20 2 which is two years from the date well I would yeah I well I guess what I would say is there's an argument to be made that because the way the condition is written the condition is written that it's um prior to the expiration of the special use pandemic relief permit issued by the township or May third which ever occurs first an argument might be made that by operation of law that special permit has now been extended because the state has mandated an extension the alternative view is well that particular permit may be expiring and the state has kind of come in and imposed a new requirement uh I don't care which approach the board takes but I'm looking for it to to make clear that we can operate until May 3rd and then we have until then to get our building permits in hand just so I the dates right the State's new uh date is November 3025 is that right I just want to get all these dates correct November 3025 yes okay so that's the new state date right okay we had our approval date which was May 3rd 2023 right we usually say two years right so that would be May 3rd 2025 and that would be the date that's the date we're looking for okay but because of the way we wrote this and we didn't have those laws and Co and everything else right okay yeah and like I said I I read through the transcript tonight while I was waiting we actually didn't talk about this during the board deliberations I think it was kind of after yeah and it was between Steve and I and I think I'm correct he's not here tonight obviously Chris is but I think I'm correct in saying what he was what issue he was trying to address that's comment on that right so actually is is I this might be an easier way to think about I think what the applicant is request just to correct me if I'm wrong is that the board interpret this condition to mean that now based under current changes in the law that the expiration date is uh the may you know two years from the date of the resolution I.E you know May 23rd hasn't expired yet Bas essentially well no that the expiration date is that day right and th that it as an expire as a consequence does that make sense yes it's simpler than I put it perhaps I shouldn't have uh prepared quite so much I think that might be the best way for the board to consider right because M Mr Brady's correct the with the state law that drags the expiration of the special use permits you know it preempts the local ordinance resolution um to November 20 November 30th uh 2025 right so you know arguably and at least in my legal opion the earlier of so the ear exactly right exactly we wouldn't have had that it would still it would had been two years been I'm sorry if we didn't have it about the co regulation it would have been two years it would have been two years I think he put that in so that we could it would be earlier to be honest with you later well I thought it was put in as I'm thinking back on conversations with Steve because we talked over it was because what do we do if you lose your right to use the tent but you haven't gotten your permits you're kind of like operating illegally in this that was yeah I think the the intent was maybe not to run a local right was that condition okay you know whether the the ordinance has expired but again state law basically says it doesn't matter we're dragging the state out a whole another year right right can I just ask um so ask you a question so um because you know I'm comfortable with the the May date I'm just I just don't know whether that's an inter interpretation or modification of this because I'm reading it so the applicant shall apply and obtain a construction within two years of the adoption or prior to the exploration of the special use permit issued by the township pursuant to the township whichever first so that says nothing about the state or anything else it just says the township so guess my question is is it a modification or interpretation in in my mind I think it's I you could there's two ways of looking at I I present a simpler way that you could interpret you the question is do you interpret this condition the question being you know do you interpret this condition to mean that the expiration date is May 3rd 2025 I think that's the simplest way to ask the question as if you wanted to to poach it as an interpretation but alternatively I suppose the applicant could request that the board just modified this condition wholeheartedly to just say that the expiration date is May 13 does that make sense two ways of getting the same yes right and I and I don't have a particular preference of either uh approach as long as we end up with that May 3rd deadline can I ask it a different way did the township ordinance expire and the state it so now you're operating under aate well the way the way it's written I believe the state has extended the prior the special use permits previously issued so again we get into this kind of aruse well if you if I don't want to complicate it further and I don't want to make the language you know talking about the state versus the town or anything else Chris may have the right idea let I'm comfortable with the m so I would be comfortable modify if I could just put it the simplest terms basically the state law says we don't care that your ordinance expired we're you know we're overruling you burn Township and we're saying that these won't expire until November 2025 but the ordinance the resolution doesn't say or the state ordinance or the state requirements so I feel as though and I understand what you're saying and I understand as a matter of law the state is overriding it but the language in the resolution States the earlier of the township ordinance EXP or the May 3rd date so it's simple it's more simple in my own mind to do a modification okay yeah I so I can see that argument okay any other uh questions can I just in general all effort was made to not take two years to get this completed Ian or was it from a practical business standpoint you kind of let it extend yeah I think for a practical business standpoint for like the for the first year busy doing things and running things and it was last spring when things started ramping up although I think before that there was some behind the scenes engineering stuff and revisions going on because I think it was last December if I'm not mistaken we had to have in all the engineering revisions and plans signed and thing and we met that deadline the only issue we end then ended up with was uh I think this ADA Slope if I'm not mistaken I I'm only asking because they're a build it's a Building Company you know scandic Builders is part of the ownership so you would think that they would be able to do it quicker than anybody else right they they were all busy so and they had a little bit of protection yeah okay thank you m any other questions are there any questions from the public are there any comments from the public okay so um do you want to summarize what our what the request is here anything else for us or are we okay no I'm I'm I'm finished so what I think I'm hearing from the members of the board what the motion should probably be is that it's a motion to modify condition 3B to state that uh time to obtain construction per the first half of that right right so I'm just going to pick up um at at the sentence the applicant shall pay for and obtain a construction permit within two years of the adoption of the board's resolution period and then we pick up with if during set period or extension there of etc etc yeah is there any reason we can't name the date yeah I was going to suggest name the date yeah let's name it which we know asru 3rd 2025 fine it the event it does would be very Min okay okay so I think that's the motion if anybody else well if unless there's other comments making it but other comments um from the board or a motion on this modification change motion to change the date as stated and language as described thank you m cross thanks M Miss keeper Miss Balman yes Dr awell yes Mr Krauss yes Miss pich yes uh Miss silver yes and chairwoman Jers yes thank you thank you very much everybody um any uh comments or members from staff I'd like to um welcome Miss silver and Mr Agarwal thank you for uh joining our board as you can see it's a lot of fun it's all good um and I'd like to um you know thank uh all of our board Professionals for signing up again so thank you um any other uh comments I actually have a comment um I wanted to thank Jamie Herrera for her service um she was um she was a very insightful hardworking member um committed a lot of time especially to the signature Acquisitions case and I'll be very sorry um that she won't be with us any longer so I'm sorry to see her go but I thank her for for her service yes thank you Miss I agree with you thank you for her service as well um any other comments motion to adjourn motion to adjourn second second all in favor I thank you everybody