##VIDEO ID:xvuK9adEr-4## creator [Music] so a figure it out in accordance to section five of the open public meetings act chapter 231 Public Law 1975 be advised that a notice this meeting was made by posting on the Volta board town hall and mailing to officially doed newspapers list of the meeting dates annually indicating that this meeting would take place at Town Hall at 7M on September 16i pres shrew har here CH here here Vice chair J here here we'll start this evening with a couple sets of uh meeting approval minutes first one being of July 15 2024 any corrections or changes and who is El Jose Gary Regina Jess um any FR changes from that list not have a motion move approval meeting minutes for and a second I can second all those in favor oppos uh next up to 8524 the minut 8524 any corrections or changes if not same crew or not same okay uh can I have a motion second all those in favor I I anyone oppos okay moving on to memorialization first we have calendar 4224 Alex Bergman at 134 parel Road Short Hills uh any corrections or changes and who is eligible what doing oh um Joe shandre Regina here Priscilla Jessica have a motion if there's no Curren or changes move approval second Joseph Coffield yes johnw har yes Priscilla s yes Jessica GL yes next up we have calendar 41-24 DJ nanir and anily VJ at one Allen Drive eligible are shandrew Priscilla Jessica any corrections or changes otherwise can I have a motion second second Shandra V yes Priscilla SRA yes Jessica GL yes okay so a couple announcements here regarding the applications for this evening we had a rather uh lengthy list on our agenda which has been truncated so calendar 35 3925 which is Lucky Express USA at 11 M hour road that matter will be carried to November 4th meeting 2024 uh no further notice will be given any corrections or changes will be put on to the website uh next up we have calendar 3995 24 that is dated shefer at 52 mebrook road that matter is going to be carried to 10724 so here for that one uh that matter be carries go then and with no further notice next up we have calendar 39 9624 the applicant is stafos uh arthus at 38 Crescent place that matter is being carried to 11424 um no further notice will be given on that next up we have calendar 39 8424 Veron and midh high rogi at 57 Factory drive that matter will be carried to 10224 with no further notice so first up this evening uh we Mar matter that was uh previously um heard in front of this board calendar 39123 uh property located at 146 Sagamore road so that like on down good evening Gary Goodman on behalf of Maya Garbo who is the owner and the and resides at 146 Sagamore Road um this application um was carried from the prior date uh purpose of Miss Garbo's application is to uh try and utilize in a better fashion her backyard at her residence uh at the last meeting uh there were a number of suggestions made by the board with regard to reducing uh the uh the extent of the variances and as Mr gallerano our engineer planner will testify uh we have worked to eliminate the majority of the variances and we're left simply with the C1 slope variance uh with that I would like uh to call Mr Alo uh SW okay so 'll be speaking as an architect as well correct uh engineer engineer ler okay good okay thank you uh so I have um just three renderings six three Revis renderings that um these are exactly what was submitted with the package they're just enlarged uh for the presentation so um Mr Been pointing out we did make uh several changes based on feedback in the last meeting so I'm I'm sorry Tony this uh rendering has has been provided to the board just in a smaller version smaller version correct this is just large version submit it um so go right to the changes so the first change is uh we reduced the impervious coverage for the accessory uh to the 7% that was allowable um and basically that was by eliminating um from this uh side door there were some steps and some additional walks that were eliminated uh we reconfigured the uh lower patio uh so that brings the impervious coverage to the 7% so we've eliminated uh the need for that that variance um we've also reconfigured the fence um first the fence was changeed from a six foot solid to a 4 foot ornamental uh you know with an open open configuration and we've pushed that fence back 3 ft from the wall top of the wall and provided Landscaping along the top of the wall that eliminates the need for the uh wall fence height uh combination so that's eliminated that variance as well uh and then lastly um we discovered at the last meeting we actually we missed that uh there's a requirement the ordinance that there could be no disturbance to a steep slope within 5T of the property line so in this area along the back this side property line uh We've pulled that wall uh back uh or pulled it in 5 ft uh so therefore not to uh create any disturbance to that steep slope so that's also eliminated the need for that variance at this point uh we just have the one variance is for the disturbance to steep slope uh under the ordinance it's 1,00 square feet uh is permitted and we're over by 738 square feet uh that was slightly reduced when we moved uh this wall in uh we eliminated about 125 square feet of disturbance um also keep in mind uh that that uh 1738 square foot also includes an area one on the side here uh we just put a gravel just to clean up that area it's kind of a tough area to maintain uh we're don't really not regrading or doing anything to that area except putting the gravel down we did include that as a disturbance but that's again it's just really just a gravel dress on top of that um so with that I mean that's what we have as far as the uh the changes and uh again the elimination some of the variances um I did take a look around the area and as you know I don't if anybody's familiar with this area every every property in this area slopes um if you drive around the neighborhood you'll see that there's quite a few houses I me most of the houses do have some kind of a of a wall um which basically it's almost impossible to do anything out there to have any kind of usable area without creating some kind of a um a wall so I just I just have a couple of photos I just want to pass them out now um real quickly yeah this is just kind of gives you an idea of the the hardship that you're up against in this area trying to create a usable area what estimate is that area one that you said is slope no distill but just the grav yeah let me just um probably see that better actually this is another view just looking at the house that area hold on okay sure this second colored rendering was also provided to theard this is just a larger version of that 23 version yes correct no no change so this is area along the the side here there's a walkway and then there's a wall that's about 150 square fet of area that's just grael getting no grading or anything like that so it's just kind of a hard area to maintain being this kind of between the uh walkway in the wall so just and you said that's included in your disturb area we included that but we did include that I point it out that we really we weren't sure we count as a disturbed area so we just we just included it to say just your revised site plan um I'm looking at the harbor Consultants plot plan most recent revision August 26 2024 does it reflect the calculation to get to the 1738 squ ft yes again that's about um think 125 sare ft less than the original application that's just due to this we pull the wall in on the side just to uh create a uh you know to eliminate disturbing that keep Sol in front so and also just real quickly I do have there is one other was one other rendering that was included just just so we're clear so I asked you about that plot plan it looks on the plan it says deep slope area to be disturbed 1863 sare ft on the left is that just make sure we get our numbers right that's all I see on your your zoning table it says [Music] 1738 yeah I just forgot to change it on the plan but it it is 1738 that's the okay and it's in that it's in the area that you're identifying on the top left hand corner of your plock plan that's correct yeah I it's actually kind of easier to see on the r ring it's really it's the it's the this whole area of the yard um is all all the steep slope um so it's really impossible to do anything in the yard without creating some kind of other starb it's just unfortunately that's that's that's what it is so um I do have some some photos um so I believe I up to right so so all the photos are A2 mark this is A2 everybody get copy so why you lay a foundation to what A2 is we're going to Mark A2 is one exhibit which consists of one two three four looks like five photos all right so so Tony you took these picture of yourself no what I did was um I took these from Google street view um I'm finding lately that if I stayed in front of somebody's house taking a picture of it generally the police are there in five minutes so um I did drive the neighborhood I mean familiar with it but I just felt it was better just to pull this off for Google um for the presentation purposes so um so the first photo is before you go through the photos give us the punchline what's what what's the purpose of introducing this okay so I just want to show that um because this entire area slopes right the entire neighborhood every lot has some kind of slope to it trying to show that it's really difficult almost impossible to do anything on these on a proper property out there without creating some kind of a wall um it's just to get a usable area or a level area um there's no way to do it without some kind of a retaining room um so that's what this is for it's just to kind of to show what's around the area um so the first photo is the address is actually 92 Pine Street this is the opposite corner along sack of more from the subject property as you can see they have kind of a similar situation uh a tiered wall um that lot is also sloping um there's also a couple of rock walls in the front so um not you again it's not exactly the same configuration but it's kind of the same idea that they also needed to create some level area and needed the walls um 152 Sagamore which is the second photo that's the property directly next door and again you can see uh some walls in the back there uh to create um some create a patio there the third photo is across the street on Sagamore and again it's just to show you in order to grade those driveways um those lots need a retaining walls and that's pretty typical if you drive along again Sagamore Road uh if you drive also up and down Pine Street and Cyprus uh you'll see the same thing um the fourth photo was actually a a just a street shot on Pine Street looking up towards Sagamore and again if you look to the left of the right you'll see you know retaining walls these are in the front yard primarily to be able to grade grade in a driveway and then just lastly same shot um same view looking up towards Sagal along Cyprus again if you look to the right to the left you'll see you know these retaining walls and again these are for the purpose of putting the dryway in but it's the same concept if you need to create a level area somewhat level are level area you need to need to have some kind of a retaining just put be possible to do it so you know this is just basically to support you know my argument for C1 variance I think clearly due to the Topography of the site uh I do believe that does fall under the C1 criteria so but that I I don't have anything else oh one other thing I do have one third a third rendering you guys have it but also just showing um what this looks like look like from side again you can see the change in that would open I don't I don't think we had that one our just you see again open now opened with the Landscaping that that's that's all I have question any question for uh you pump the back wall rear wall in 5 feet in one section you didn't do the entire wall though no the wall um we Mo the fence in 3 feet but the wall only bumps in in this area here along that that side par line only because this area is a steep slope and your your ORD said you can't Dore with at 5T so we wanted to just eliminate that barrance and and the aan was going to um landscaped that area anyway so it wasn't like it was a loss usable area there was intention was was to landscape the perimeter anyway and just based on the renderings from the last submission to this one the the wall there along the southeasterly lines a little higher what's the height of that oneall so when I real I realized on the last ring it was a little um it wasn't it wasn't correct it wasn't a correct view was a little um how you want to say um was it just didn't reflect what was out there so this wall is 5T but then it tapers all the way down to zero um so the last rendering didn't quite reflect that exactly that was a little out of proportion that's word I was looking for you 11 for variance though on your first application corner and then you stepped it in so you Elin corre I was wondering um do have we discussed any water management yet some water management uh yeah that's a good point so what we did was we are we um going to install a uh small detention pipe along that property line uh there'll be a catch Bas the corner everything will grade to this corner will'll catch that water it'll go in there'll be a detention pipe and that'll discharge out to to Pine Street out the storm C further any questions for the audience uh that is our testimony tonight we feel that we've listen to your suggestions and tried to implement them as best we could ask for your support thank you thank you um any comment from the audience regards this application I close portion of this application thoughts I like that the applicate has really scaled back the plans and listened to um what the board had to say um at the last meeting where the application was heard um I I I'm fine with the Ste float disturbance um I I don't I don't see a way that you can make this usable without um disturbance um and it's really it's really you know a character ISC of the entire neighborhood um so I would be happy to support the application yeah I think this probably the least invasive way of trying to achieve this goal um I think it's it's very well done now it's extremely well done and um it's not a land grab by any means in terms of the Steep so service I think it's kind of what you need to get this done and have it look right and it's uh it's very well executed so I would support agree with that clearly there is hardship and uh with this propy in that that section so well drawn on plan um I think that rendering is excellent just put together there that's on the board there so I support that entirely I think you actually should also get credit for the extra 150 square foot of the gravel eror because I'm not too sure that would be a disturbance anyway so I mean it's even smaller than you say it is so I'm definitely support it uh um shre you Jessica okay so uh would one of you like approve yes yes yes yes good luck with the project than next up we have 399 3989 24 uh Merchant at 241 Drive second start that right be yes who's gonna speaking this evening just remarks for a couple of minutes and then our Architects going to take where you all in then okay everyone raise your right hand from Tes tonight proceeding do the truth whole truth and love truth I do your name's the record Merchant Nikita spell it please n i k i t a g o r a d i a Daniel andn C uh hey everyone um I'm Nikita Gia and along with my husband Al Merchant uh we purchased our home uh in 2015 uh we have lived in shills for about 9 years now um we are raising our family here and we are really invested in the community I don't know if you guys remember but we were here a few months back for my um dental office variance um which uh which got approved and the construction is underway so we are now even more uh invested in the town um well we need to update our home um and bring it to like a more current living situation uh and enhance the appeal of the house um and the function as we have like a multigenerational family our parents are um now retired and as they grow old they're increasingly spending more time with us in the home um so we need like larger living area and dining area space uh and need to expand these areas and when renovate our home um we we've been working with Dan for all those plans and because of the shape of our lot we are at like a little bit of a um we trigger the variances um Daniel will tell you about the variances that we need to um like you know we need the approval for qualifications you uh sure um Dan lson I'm a principal of men of design Architects I'm a licensed and register architect in the state of New Jersey since 2007 uh my license is in understanding I presented in front of this board multiple times and all of the adjacent municipalities thank you your credentials are acceptance please continue um before I I begin with presenting um the there are one or two updates that are on the plans that are on here that differ from what is there so then we're going to need to so right so first of all you're referring to this is A1 is your plan even though you have a Casey and Keller um I guess that's whose plan is who let's these are all before we Mark the plan these are all our plans the Casey and Keller was the original survey and the delineation of the prevailing front yard setback but that all of this other information overlaid onto this plan plan and on our title block this is all of our CLE okay so we have a date here 4524 issued for variant is there an update to this plan there is 9524 so why don't we mark this A1 um revised site plan are there other sheets that have been revised as well two other sheets within the set have been revised to reflect okay so we're going to Mark as A1 the entire plan sheet set okay and then you'll just identify as you go through your testimony where the changes are as compared to what's before the board Mark Mark that whole thing as a as A1 our A1 with today's date and A1 for the record is going to consist of the entirety of the plan set consisting of sheets A1 through A7 is that accurate yes these changes did they exter or reduce any other the Varan they were specifically done in one area to reduce the requested amount of Varian okay I just want to make sure you weren't violation your notice no okay uh and and starting with that just to highlight the change and then I'll walk through the change is clouded um up in the uh back portion of the Cyclone here and what the change was uh the the largest um variance that was being requested was for uh proposed rear yard setback um and the previous or what is listed uh in the uh in the application is a requested 10.9 foot setback uh which would be 6% uh of the uh of the depth of the lot and in looking at it with no detriment to what's being proposed on the project or the deck area um it seemed to make sense to that was the corner of the landing for the stairs and so it seemed to make sense to shift that over along the deck uh and by doing that it increases uh the the rear yard setback at that point to 13.2 feet from the proposed or previously proposed 10.9 feet so from that corner of that deck you're 10.9 and now you're going to what you say uh 13.2 13.2 okay and that equals what percent of lock de uh the 13.2 would be 8% of lock de and previously was 6% and and what's the the various theise number how much is 55 uh the required um for uh for the lot is 20% of the depth of the lot uh and it's the main the main issue that we're dealing with and I'll run through it is based on the unique shape of the property where this back side basically the rear yard is a triangle we have quite an extensive lot depth going back and when you take the 20% of that lock depth it's a significant rear yard setback but that rear yard setback is coming from this angled line into the house so it's almost like it's being taken from the sidey yard as opposed to the rear yard so that rear setback variance now you're going from from your proposed was 24.6 14.5% correct the proposed re yard set back FL was uh 10.9 ft oh got it and now okay I see you're okay and now we're trying accessory structure you're talking about accessory structure rear yard set back to the back corner of the know I'm just looking at your table here okay I'm trying to see on your table here what what you're helping out here uh which which table is it yes okay yeah so so attachment e what dat attachment uh the I don't have a specific date on this but the what was in yes and I mean have requested an update um before complet I have one may dated May 15th that's the most re that's all I have I don't I don't have the data on this one the yeah this was requested changed um by eile with a letter that had been sent to us and so that had the one yes all right so here okay this one you put accessory structure and then I correct okay okay so I'm looking at the accessory structure one for Sor okay now we make sense now we're going because You' never percentage on that because it's not a percentage right VAR uh okay so now we're going to 13 Point what we said uh 13.2 feet at what percent that would be 8% 8% okay all right now okay done so the property it's 241 lill Drive um the house was constructed in 1956 uh currently it's a one and a half story house uh and so mostly everything is on the first floor um there are some bedroom spaces and shed Dormers and other things up at the second floor but it's not currently kind of a full Second Story uh the lot has significant slope to it both in the front of the lot and also in the rear of the lot um where the house sits uh towards the center of the property uh there is is less slope and uh although you do have currently the B the uh garage is in the basement so the driveway comes in along the right side of the property and comes down and is lo located in the basement underneath the living space at the lower level uh and then the grade comes up and the left so while this side of the house uh has that drop to it and the exposed basement garage the left side of the house the grade is much higher uh and it's more of a typical condition uh so the house is located in the R4 Zone uh the property is 20485 sare Ft so it conforms in size to the 20,000 ft uh for the R4 Zone um the the lot is 17.6 ft deep uh taken through because of this of the Triangular aspect of the property we have this unique shape where you generally we would have an extended side yard and then something of a of a squared off rear yard in this case this side yard comes up and based on the four sides of the property uh or the four lines uh this becomes the rear yard uh and and so with our lot depth and then the rear yard coming in this line coming across on the S plan is the 34.1 Ft rear yard setback for the 20% of that um so it's a bit of an odd condition where the sidey yard is is essentially acting like the rear yard um the the proposed work this is uh this is she A2 within the set that you have um the one difference between what you have in your set and what is shown here is I added these are the existing conditions plans I've added the wood deck that's currently on the house to give a clear depiction of of how it relates back and forth to what's being proposed uh so the current house uh has uh towards the right hand side of the house uh bedrooms uh and a study on this main floor and then you have towards the left the existing living areas uh so you have a kitchen going towards the rear a dining room small dining room area adjacent to that uh a living room space and then a a small kind of truncated sun room space uh which has a large masonry fireplace that bisects the two uh and kind of blocks the space from being used together uh there is no family room space on the house now so it's with the footprint that it has um it's fairly Limited in terms of of living area because the majority of the bedroom are located at the main floor at the second floor of the house there is a shed Dormer that runs along the rear uh and that uh as you come up the stairs that creates space for for two bedrooms and a bath that are at the that current second floor the uh there's an existing wood deck on the house that comes out from behind the sun room in this area next to the dining room and then fills in and extends out behind the dining room and has a Cher corner to the side here and the steps of this now run right along side so the proposed project uh consists of a one and a half story Edition at this front area and of taking over the existing Sun space removing that masonry fireplace uh and extending the wall out so still maintaining a living room on the house but then uh creating a proper family room uh for for living area and space along this left side utilizing as much of w as they previously as possible but getting a good size space for furniture Arrangement and just usability of the space uh and then the rear corner where the deck currently sits now and goes out on fur uh that area is proposed to be filled in again with a one and a half story addition uh creating a a larger dining room that's more consistent with the limit space sizes and also allows for a slight expansion of the kitchen it's still bom is large but at least it's functional as a current kitchen with sink range and and being able to have an island within the space um you know making that usable and still having something of a breakfast the the clouded area uh is the stair which was previously all the way at the edge over here and we shift it over to reduce the request of the side set or the rear set back uh this outline here is silhouetted in is the the line of the existing de so we actually by getting rid of that stair we're pulling it further away from the side um and over here now where that setback or re setback line comes to for the 13.2 uh we' proposed to SAR off the corner of that existing deck just to make it more usable um and be able to to take advantage of that space without having to really enlarge the so uh back on the site plan you can see the proposed one and a half story Edition here the two story Edition further in kind of set more towards the center of the house uh and then a one and a half story Edition in that back kind of missing corner of the house now to fill in for that showing as that dining room area and then we have a pre-existing wood deck where we're getting rid of the stairs that are there requesting to fill in and create the rid of that angled corner of the deck uh and then the flatted area up stairs so the proposed variances uh for this are uh a front yard setback variance uh the the prevailing required front yard is 51.3 Ft as calculated by the the definition for front yard um and the proposed is 50.3 so the the requested variance is for one foot uh the rear yard setback variants uh which we discussed is currently the existing is at 15.5 ft and the request SC at is at 9% and so the proposed is 13.2 ft to the corner of that deck not to the building uh and that's 8% but the required for the zone is 20% or 34.1 uh and and the extent of that is exacerbated by the uniquely shaped angle the triangle shape of the property uh there's a building coverage variance requested the current uh building coverage is 10.9% the proposed is is 14.14% the maximum allowable is 14% uh so the requested variance is .4% which equ go out to about 28 square feet uh and that stems from in the back right hand corner down at the lower basement level um coming out where the garages uh only at that lower level there is a proposed uh essentially extension to that foundation with a roof at the lower level there's no first floor second floor space there but it essentially continues the the inside shape of the garage to provide some storage space um within the house currently there's the two-car garage they're limited on storage the slopes of the property and everything else somewhat limit any kind of shed or accessory structure to be used u in a good way so they're looking to fill in uh the corner here that uh the square footage of counting that towards the uh building coverage uh accounts for that 0.14% of that sareet over expand yes well we're so these aspects right these aspects these pieces for the proposed addition um would sit under the the prop the allowable coverage in terms of the percentage it's it's how you pick it correct yes but in this case this and I guess the way that I'm phrasing it is this this was in the process of the project um this was proposed at a kind of a later Point down the road um kind of separate from this but yes you're correct it all goes it all goes together um so yes the the overall amount of uh exceeded building coverage from be allowable is 28 square feet in total uh and then the fourth is a uh second floor sidey setback uh the two one and a half story editions on the side of the house um those as at the outer edge uh they are at the 18 ft but as that wable roof slopes inward it goes beyond the 18 ft requiring the 22t setback uh the house is not squared or the property is not squared to the edge of the house and so we have two numbers there uh at the front of the Edition uh currently or at the front of the house it's 19.87% and at the rear it's 17.39% at the rear based on you know that angle and the required is uh is 22t for that do you show the 19.8 on your uh no there is no 19.8 uh Dimension line but it's to be reflected that's it's the front corner it is the front leftmost corner of the proposed Edition right so the the goal of the project is to to add space to the existing home that will allow it to function more for current living standards slightly larer ler spaces especially in the living area um and and also for um for the clients needs in terms of multigenerational living and kind of a large living area um inside the house where family can gather um that family room is that piece uh towards the front and same in the rear uh where it is proposed to be filled in again to get a slightly larger kitchen uh and a little bit more spacious dining room area uh so the house really kind of meets a current size or a current living standard um the you know again with the deck area similar uh scenario where we have uh you know not expanding much beyond what the existing deck is looking to square off that uh that corner of the champer edge of the deck um to make that space uh more usable and functional for the house uh we're somewhat set with and stuck with based on where the house is um having those living areas and things with the location of the kitchen towards that left side and then the pre-existing bedrooms and other things towards the the right side of that space which would be remaining in the first FL and and just as a note in terms of other zoning requirements um because of the the slope of the lot none of none of the aspects propose any disturbance in steep slope areas um and we provided a uh know calculating the average ground elevation um it was very specific uh and detailed not only for uh working within the required 35 foot height maximum which eight on 12 in steepness um but also uh to satisfy the building code at a future Point approve uh so we're not uh creating a situation uh where we have res zoning approval but we're then creating what's considered to be a an additional story of if the the basement would considered a story above grade that would make this a three-story house and so all the calculations associated with this and everything that is listed here it is only a TW story house um based on all of those required calculations going around the gr for the the only other point um would be that in terms of the overall bulk and size of the house uh and what's being proposed uh the the allowable floor area um within the Zone the total amount of the house is allowed at a maximum of 26% and with the proposed additions and everything going on to the house the proposed amount of total floor area uh is 22.9% so the overall area within the house is still significantly smaller than the the total allowable maximum Flor area any questions from the board you have some anom with the slot we do yes we're little we meet the required size we're 2,485 Square ft and the required is the 20,000 so the building cover anything you can do with that uh with the building coverage since it is only 28 ft we could you know with the extent of that if we were to lessen uh some of this area over to the side where the storage is proposed I'm sure we could squeeze out 28 ft and and reduce that portion of it so you you would eliminate the request for a uh a building burgage variant question uh show that there's no one in the audience than the applicant theal just maybe it's that you're going to um propose to eliminate the uh building coverage variants just can you be just a little bit more specific as to what you would do I I know you you're pointing to the you know the back rightand corner where there's what proposed storage yeah lower level storage at the basement level right so what would you do specifically to eliminate the variant to eliminate the variants we would uh currently we have the rear wall of that or the rear wall face lined up with the rear wall of the existing house right and what we would propose to do uh is pull in so you can see pull in that rear wall I believe it's about a 12 and a half or a 13 foot long wall pull that in uh approximately 2 feet from that back wall to maintain uh storage space there but therefore eliminating 28 square fet of of overall coverage on the prop or building coverage on the problem thank you any thoughts of any thoughts of moving in the front um extension in and maybe even eliminate the front yard setback we we had discussed that and I had brought that up as as you know kind of a way to approach it since it is such a small amount um the the size of that room and that that main kind of family room or living area in the front of the house was there was a very specific size driven by family members furniture that they have within that space and kind of us it of that space for what they wanted uh so uh it was discussed um but uh but ultimately decided not to to pull that back the foot um and that's where that that stem from so there was discussion to do that um but I on the second floor that you have a 26 foot deep closet which is a great closet fill them up with scrubs yeah we have no closet now so it's going to the other yeah moving around my stuff every every season like so the I don't I can't speak to the technicalities of this right the whole reason the storage designed the way it is to dance Point leaving aside the constraints we have on the main level on our basement we have a two-car garage and the garage is side sized as such anything more than a five-seater doesn't fit in all our trash cans have to be outside everywh the regular ones as recycles we can put kid bicycles in it is really small and so the notion for building that storage was to at least make sure right now all three trash can are outside every day it's an isore not just for neighbors for us as well so we want space to put that in you want space to put the bicycles in and all of that 28 square ft to us eliminates all lot of that need so that we don't have to if you're going to do all this and make this continue to be a forever home and make it the way is going to look we want to reduce every possibility to have an isore challenge is we pull that in that has to go back in the garage we only have a two-car garage that means the cars have to be outside which is functionally what we want to avoid as part of this renovation we contemplated really hard building a third garage is just not possible uh because that reaches I think variances to a much higher degree so we are kind of dealing with all a lot of these constraints challenge for us also I think to Dan's point is just like this is it's not a complaint we love our house it's extremely steep so we're going to have to deal with a lot of those issues as well and so that was the whole reason why we pushed that to say hey if there is a way to avoid any more jagged lines and we can just flush it out to just make sure we get the space to just store stuff inside let's see if he can get that so that was just to give you guys a perspective on why he asked for that variance to address the board's question um the question that they're asking is ultimately if that front front corner of that family room and everything else that is being pushed out if that was pulled back to the front yard setback line that would reduce 26.5 ft of building coverage so in essence the storage area below would not have to be changed maybe two or three inches but to no significant amount and in pulling that back one foot you would conform with the front yard setback as well as essentially eliminate the building coverage BS and that that's the question is has that been discussed or is that something that's yeah it was discussed like it was discuss extensively amongst us and look this is not stuff that I guess you know within the perview or your should I honestly care about our request to Dan was look we don't want to do anything egregious it's a it's little bit less than 12 Ines if you go precise so our request to him was to us it doesn't feel honorous but again you all have the perspective more than us let's make the ask and get your guidance it would matter to us but again part of this is kind of getting your guidance because we are coming from an environment after the last nine years we love our house our kid doesn't even have an one bathroom she shares it with her grandparents so there are constraints we are genuinely trying to solve for every inch matters to us undeniably but again part of this was coming to you guys getting your perspective it is 11 is Ines it's literally under the foot is that something we can get looking at this where where what gets to be a little more complicated is that you know your your lot does have some anomalies to it which make developing in it slightly more of a hardship the problem is that you when you get into things like building coverage and front yard setback variances those are manufactured by your design so that's where we get a little bit of a stumbling block here we understand for you it's a matter of your need but from a municipal land use perspective to say okay is the criteria met for either a C1 or C2 hardship and this is where I struggle with this is that from a C1 perspective um I don't think you really have a hardship in your front yard clearly or in that back corner where you're talking about so th so then you go to a C2 you say is this good planning in terms of the the zoning plan the master plan to take an oversized l and come closer to the street I personally don't have so much of an issue in the front door set back because I don't think it's going to be perceivable it's to me to say okay we have an oversized lot and we're still exceeding the building because that is something you still get the benefit of regardless of the demography but we are not able to use a large chunk of our land because that part over there is all wooded well that's that's neither here or there you're using you're using the ability to build on your lot based on having ATT okay that's why your building coverage is what it is okay so you get a percentage of the lot so you have a benefit on your lot right now because you're over by 500 square feet than the actual yeah the area is all appropri account so if if you remove the payment and put grass over there that that would be impervious coverage that's not building coverage the physical plan okay um that you're you're getting benefit of the fact you oversized lot I mean I could be Ved otherwise believe me but I'm just merely saying that from a C1 or C2 perspective I struggle with it to be asking for 4% barents I would have loved to come and ask for 5% he convinced me otherwise just being honest this is the fifth iteration of the plans the first one was so egregious he rightfully pulled us back so I'm like I said it's always better ask what you need versus what you want so you mentioned that it's fet one ft that you take back it will give back 26 and a half sare foot area so which means it is the the front fall of the proposed Edition uh is a little bit over 26 feet wide and so a one foot reduction length of that space would give you something a hair more than 26 square feet of of reduced building cover 26 Square F reduction would basically reflect the value that is yeah that's that is the family room space any further questions then I will close the publiction of this so folks what are your thoughts I think sometimes as a board we get caught up in the numbers particularly when there are like these really small numbers and I agree with what you said about the front yard setback and that we're not going to really no one's to really perceive that one foot I I have to be honest I kind of feel that way for the building coverage as well um I think that you know the the the applicants are not seeking to not down this house and you know rebuild it like it's located in this particular um location on the property so they are working within kind of those you know confines of where it is um I don't have I don't have such a problem with it I mean listen if you wanted to get rid of it I wouldn't complain I wouldn't argue but I I don't I don't have a huge problem with it so just my thoughts I'm curious what the rest of the thanks I'm coming out the same you know 50 ft is long enough and deep enough and a feet here or there would make a difference and if that 28 ft at the back I think it gives you functionality what you're looking for um I think it's it's fine to keep it from my point of view I could be supportive because the numbers are not that large that's what I I'll go the other side um if it's just so minor I mean you could take the four variances and knock it right down to two and you would have probably everybody just jump on it that's just the thought again I mean not that I don't like ruling on things but uh it's nice but if you can get a clean resolution so to speak and bring it to us that's kind of what I look for um again I agree with the with what everyone said but it's imperceptible the foot is nothing I agree it's uh and also depending on how they met me that the foot could actually be less but um I can go either way and I think like Fe you can definitely reduce it and if the furniture is that important to you you probably show it in the floor pan already and I just see it prob you have space to reduce just one and it will make the number looks a lot better so I'll make the deal here uh you're count vs um I think at the end of the day here I think since you are set back already at 50 feet U I like said I don't think the one fits going to be perceptible I like the fact it's coming foot closer no but at the end of the day I don't really have an issue with that um you know I always say that you know it's always better to ask you what you need versus what you want I think you've got this package down to really what you need um you know do I like seeing a 0.14% variances no because to me that's not trying like that's sort of like okay but I get it um you you sprint off the corner of the house it's give you a little more storage so you know at the end of the day I I would be supportive of it as as it's as app so with that I'm assuming you e okay true uh they would like to to go ahead and have the a vote based on what is is presented here very well um I have Motion in this case um I will move to approve a second Joseph corfield yes shrew her yes yes yes yes yes good luck with the project thank you app the last one is is also to last application yeah I I got mix up I forgot the other one [Music] danett anything that was mared announ that we have to announce um calendar 39 9824 uh 33 South Fountain Road in Milburn will be carried toob October 7th with no further notice that can I have a second in favor