##VIDEO ID:6Lz5h7XlrEo## okay thank you all right good evening everyone and welcome to the regular meeting of the Monclair historic preservation Commission on October 17 2024 notice has been given in accordance with the open public meetings act by posting a copy of the notice on the first floor of the municipal building and by sending a copy to the Monclair times The Star Ledger and the Herold news we are also being broadcast live on Monclair Channel 34 and we are being uh streamed on the on the YouTube channel so um without further ad do um could you please Madam uh secretary call the role yes of course uh chair Bennett pres Vice chair Graham here Mr ryet here Mr Rooney here Mr Sweeney is not present uh Mr Juliano here Mr Pierre is also not present uh Mr mixer here miss Floyd here and Miss Bower I'm here and Mr smolan here okay thank you uh next is the uh approval of the September 19th meeting last last month's meeting and I I will have to abstain from and John ryance you were not here last month uh no okay so John and I will abstain from approving the minutes but with any other uh Al uh comments or amendments additions seeing none will somebody make a motion to approve the minutes of September 19th motion to approve second second oh Zena okay all in favor I okay thank you um I as I said I had to we abstained because we weren't here but I noticed on the roll call could you just make sure that you put Miss Bow's name there even if she's not here so we do not have any resolutions to vote on tonight next Point our committee reports minor applications committee met on September 26 application 2024-25 120 Bloomfield Avenue was approved application 202 24-29 Sando at 340 Bloomfield was approved with conditions application 202 24-30 just kidding Iran 507 Bloomfield was approved with conditions 202 24-31 lenb grooming at 12 South Fullerton was approved with conditions we also met on October 10th um application 2024-25 Bloomfield was approved with conditions and 20 24-3 3 3 Tony Tony boy sandwich house at 8 South Fullerton was approved with conditions the out for outreach our Outreach committee um we're going to be involved with a a workshop by the name called research your home's history it's in con conjunction with the New York with the Montclair public library and the Montclair History Center it will be at the Montclair held in the Monclair Library it's going to be on Wednesday October 23rd from 10 to 12 and Saturday October 22nd from 10 to 12 two different sessions anybody that's interested in registering there's some pliers in the back and I believe um zenab you you put it up on the on the website yeah if it should be up by tomorrow morning okay great and and so this is a great opportunity for people in the audience or people at home to what the library will do when you register you give them the address of the uh structure that you're you're researching and they'll pull the old deed and then with our the three entities the commission the Monclair uh History Center and the library you'll be able to see all the resources re research resources that we have for you to uh understand your house who lived there when it was built possibly an architect or if it has any historical significance so if anyone's interested these are on the back um uh chair and the other interesting news is um we did our presentation our uh for preservation Awards on September 5th and I somebody just called me yesterday that preservation New Jersey which is a state entity it's not shipo it's not the State Office of uh historic preservation it's a separate entity but they awarded a preservation award to one of our awarde so the um uh Glen Glenridge Avenue the uh they were awarded an an award for um honorable mention for preservation stewardess which is the for and it's a former St Eric's Church um today we were also John and I and Mike went to uh as part of the uh design Review Committee to uh an on-site uh visit for the uh project that they're working on on Valley Road so we're waiting to hear from that as well and zav was was making some uh inquiries for us so we'll wait for next week thank you um saying that can you bring us up to date on the CLG Grant yes so um we have finalized the signatures on our end uh shipo now has to review and fully execute the grant um the RFP is in the final stages of review with our office and then I'll send it to the HPC chair and vice chair and then uh shipo still has to do a final review so we're getting there so I think we should be able to post in the next few weeks because I was worried that we were behind schedule on that I don't think so because um last year's was uh posted in January oh okay yeah so I think we're ahead of schedule I think we'll be able to okay make it better yeah good and so the people on the education and Outreach we're going to have to think again about uh next year's Grant okay so we'll come up with some ideas I don't remember what time of the year that is due I believe it's due in the spring but I'll early spring yeah and there was another Grant opportunity that came in I don't have all of the details but I will check in with you about it all right um and then just for your knowledge um the CLG program requires that we do an annual report which is due the end of January um and that just rounds up everything that we've done during during the year it's all on files so um um you can look at that and then do we review that in one of like maybe our last meeting of the Year yes because it's a good it it really lets us know what we that we've been working during the year yeah perfect okay um are there any other committees because I I wasn't here last month any any other committees or Outreach or anything no okay so we will go right to public comment is there anyone in the audience that would like to get up and address the um HPC it doesn't necessarily have to be about what is on the agenda tonight but uh something that concerns you so come to the podium oh come come forward yes and it's touch the button is the green light on yes all right um just state your name please and your and your address um my name is Laura Hayes and I live at 132 bellw Avenue okay in Montclair and what what can we do for you um I'm a Montclair resident as you know um and I'm also a parent at Union congregational Nursery School I am here to stand for the preservation of the historic Vincent building at 169 Cooper Avenue which was designated in the mid 1980s as the New Jersey state and National registered Landmark um we as a community have just recently found out that the union Congregational Church has been working on plans to close our school and redevelop the property um we were all shocked and saddened that this would be permitted as the Vincent building is such a unique historic building and a huge important piece to such a historic property in Montclair uh the Cornerstone on that building near where um my child and all the children play and run around daily um and love to do that um proudly to spit proudly displays the year 1956 that's nearly 70 years of history for that building which was originally built as a Sunday school for the church and evolved into the Union Kong preschool for nearly six decades that we know and love today um the Vincent building stylistically matches the church and is lovingly adorned with a plaque on the front that states in honor of Pastor George Clark Vincent 25 years from 1927 to 1952 by actions of the congregation January 25th 1961 it would be a shame to erase this important generational Cornerstone of history in the shortsightedness of re development thank you for your remarks where is this Union Kong on Cooper is there anyone oh yes please hi my name is czy Charan I live at 175 Avenue and I'm also here regarding the v um I'm here to stand for the preservation of montclair's architectural Heritage I became a resident of Montclair 9 years ago and was immediately drawn to the brid architectural and cultural history among many other things the microphone's not on guys thank you thank you um I recently also became aware of modifications that might be made to the Vincent building um that made changed the physical character of that building um I personally consider it one of the most unique buildings among CLA in need of preservation um the Vincent building was built in 1956 and holds historical significance due to its mid-century modern design classic brick exterior and unique Memorial Chapel which was added in 1964 it also has ties to the broader history of the Union Congregational Church which was founded in 1881 I would like to see it included as an individually designed Landmark I cherish having the Vincent building in our neighborhood and would like future generations to enjoy seeing the historic building as I do practically every day and it as it is truly a beautiful building so I thank you for your consideration thank you um so I know this has just hit the uh uh papers or or the internet about this uh and as far as a local Landmark what we can do is maybe give your name to Zab and we can talk uh we have a committee that does landmarking and part of landmarking and uh education and Outreach so possibly we you could see the ramifications of of what that is okay all right thank you anyone else wish to approach uh all right well seeing no no one else public comment is is closed old business I don't believe we have any old business on the agenda okay new business application 2024-25 uh just just a second let me get on my is the green light on button okay um I'll give a an introduction to the application and then we'll ask you to be we'll swear you in okay yes is there anyone else here with you or no I'm here so this is an application as I said 202 24-16 28 carterett Street this is an application for total demolition of historic uh structure um the property is situated on the corner lot at the intersection of carterett street and Parkside the historic garage structure faces North and is accessible from um uh parks side it's a lot of pig here just a second so the subject property is a one and one half story detached two-car garage in the rear yard of a single family house designed in the colonial revival Style with elements of Craftsman's detailing the um the um it h it it has uh it's a two Bay wide structure with a gate a roof clad in Wood shingles like the main house the roof's overhang is supported by narrow pands the garage historic character is defined by its consistent use of materials and roof detailing that complement the main house making it a contributing element to the overall property and the potential Oak historic district the subject property we survey as part of the moncle Wheeler Street noof residential area uh inventory in 2019 where it was identified as a contributing resource to the potential historic [Applause] district uh according to historical uh newspaper accounts 28 Carter Carteret Street had a construction cost of $8,000 and the detached garage portion was granted a setback variance by the Township's Board of adjustment in 1925 the uh subject property aligns with the district's architectural narrative with the design and material pallet consistent with the character of The District making it an important component of the area's historical Fabric and Miss uh gar Gart Gart if you could just identify yourself um and your association with the property yes and then our attorney will swear you in okay uh Kathleen gibart um I've been a resident of Monclair for 42 years my spouse who died to years ago was a resident for 47 years um I'm sorry what else what else did you need you you are the owner of the property I am the owner of the property yes sure raise your right hand uh do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll provide on the application to the commission tonight will be the truth all truth and nothing but the truth I do go ahead okay Miss Gil part you are uh requesting a total demol total demolition of of the SC of this garage structure um we have uh your narrative which you submitted to the HPC in June uh says that the the houses built in 1926 and the garage in 1925 I don't know if that that's what I assumed but I thought that was done that way but I from the research it looks like it was all done in 1925 okay all right and you lived in the in the house since 1983 with your spouse who passed away in 2022 and she moved in 1977 is when they actually okay so what you're maintaining is the garage is in desperate need of replacement through the 47 years that you own the house uh you and your partner replace the roof the garage doors gutters and drains around the perimeter to prevent the flooding and try to repair the rotting wood as much as possible but along with the rotting wood the foundation is cracked and the garage continues to flood it is no longer worth the money or effort to keep repairing the garage it will be more cost efficient environmentally safe and aesthetically pleasing to replace it um my plan as you see as we saw in your proposal to replace the garage with a slightly smaller footprint than the original than the current garage with the variance needed for height I will need a 22 in height variance so we don't that will go to the Zing board what we're what we just do here is whether or not to approve the demolition um the plan your plan is to have a second a small second floor space so you can take your woodworking out of your D dining room and the garage will be the same style and same look as the original garage um and then uh our the documentation that you provided is uh is a uh photographic documentation photographs of the current condition the statement of the need or purpose which I just read for the total demolition um there the uh you you have not there's no document documentation of good faith attempt to sell the building because you want to build on the same uh yeah I I don't have any intention of selling what I'd like to do is just build another garage one that I can that's waterproofed and right well I'm just going through our requirements to just to make sure that you've fulfilled all the everything that we request requested and so you provided a uh a uh I we did not provide original documents Maps drawings or photographs I don't know if you have any of those of the new building or or what I the original we're we're looking at the history of it I I sent the uh survey of the building but and I sent photos that I took of the building the what you're wanting I sent they had the surveys is included in the uh package as well as pictures that I did take of the garage right the survey from from when it was uh for the potential historic district from 2018 I'm just looking to see if you have any other any other documentation that's well there was the structural engineer that's went came to the house on on Tuesday no no no no I'm just trying to document if there's anything older that you that you submitted part of the requ no I'm sorry no no that's okay and then no architectural study of the property archaeological study of the property and then no preservation or Salvage of architectural elements uh because you want to um build you want to replace it yes okay so um I just want to say that again that this was part of the uh 2018 uh survey for proposed historic District which was the oak crof historic district and again that's why you're before us because um as our uh review HPC review Matrix if it's surveyed approval of total demolition has to come before us this and and okay all right so just that you're aware of okay so now you you get to speak and tell us what well I do want to correct a after reading this uh Engineers report and the historic society's report um um I was unaware that I needed to make the new garage exactly like the old garage and I tried to make it that way but so I've changed and added uh cedar shingle so that the actual garage will look exactly like the one that's there uh except it's not the same type of material um you can't get that kind of material now um and it will have that second level floor and that's the only subtract only addition the other thing was they mentioned there wasn't a vapor barrier and I did submit that in there's two separate um I have the construction people and as well as the site prepared who is going to prepare the site and it did include a moisture barrier so that that it is included in the uh preparation of the slab that will the garage will sit on okay I'm sorry do we have that it was all in the packet so is that it's called site prep the site prep and um it was part of the Orin packet and they are including a um let me just see here a frost wall 12in wide concrete cross Frost uh Frost wall as well as a mo moisture barrier is included in the pad that the garage will sit on um the reason I wanted to really go even take up the cement other than it's leaking and I'm finding out from the engineer that it's not really cracked the foundation part only in the seill that is cracked um so that it wouldn't have to necessarily but it needs because of the um grading on on the sides of the house I Fel figured that if I took it all down I could have it graded so that it wouldn't flood and and and put in the drains on the other two sides that I don't have drains on so that was my idea of that okay do you have anything else to add because what we'll do now is we'll open it up to questions okay um if anybody in the audience wants to speak we and then we'll have uh we'll open it up for discussion okay do you have anything else no uh but I just want to get back to the piece of paper that you're referring to because I don't think we have that what we have is um is it this it's not that one no here this is something from Lab structures no that's the actual people that that's the actual people that will be building the garage the other people are the site prep people who work in conjunction with them but it's a separate company that just does foundation work does the grading does laying the the pl the pad for the uh for the uh garage puts the vapor seal in all of that is done by a separate group called site prep which was included in the um did you see that I don't think we didn't see that yeah we don't have that so we have to mark it yeah we'll mark this as an exhibit I don't have this at okay exhibit A1 so I marked on that one because it was my personal one but yeah was all part of the original packet with the um site prep was first the first people that would come in grade it put in the drains put in all that's necessary put the pad and then the construction of the garage okay and I guess before we go any further just for everybody's uh can you just run through the photographs that you I I see that you have the picture of the of the garages faces Parks side the park Anderson Park what's the original garage uh siding with uh replacement doors yes okay and then the side that faces the East to the back of the house faces the West on the property line the property line is very close there do you want to add something well I was going to say that that if you go back to that other picture that was where the grading had a problem if you'll see in the uh Structural Engineers it cannot be the space between that garage and the next person's property is just doesn't even meet code in ter when not current code in terms of that that may I add something else the other structural engineer also said that the seill that it's sitting on is not to it's not 8 in up which is probably why it's flooding so the water is just coming in so to to repair that you'd have to we'd have to cut all the the beams build por cement 8 Ines up and then fix the garage so that that expense alone is more than more than the p that I'm putting in I do I don't think we saw any of that though did you see that no the structural engineers report mentioned well is that the structural engineers report from today from did you just get it today yes yeah I just got it today yes myself okay uh pass around A1 thanks are we asking the question no let's just go through the just for the record A1 is um uh well you'll see what all the items are but there there is a 6 mil uh moisture barrier on there and a frost wall of protection and other things related to uh a new concrete slab uh and sight prep is uh on Lincoln Highway in Gap Pennsylvania so that's Mark day one for the record oh thank you uh is that the last one son this is the back okay also very narrow from the end of the garage to the next person's property okay thank you is that is that that's it okay thank you thank you so just for the record we only got this engineering report today and this the the the township um the engineer the township engineer did has done this report so that that's for the record that that the uh the applicant did not provide a uh an engineering report to us we we asked for it okay um so uh has everyone had a chance to absorb the this Engineers report and we'll begin with asking questions oh John go ahead um chair do you want to ask me about my conversation with the engineer yes please sorry um I know Miss B had a a conversation uh so the reason I requested this report is because you said that the foundation was cracked in your application but you didn't include any interior photographs so it was hard to tell what Foundation meant because I wasn't clear whether you were actually referring to the slab which is not the foundation or the footings around the garage which are generally subsurface they're the foundations so I to have a a conditions report a structural engineer go out there and take a look at it which he did and then after I read it I called him today uh because he also did not include any um photographs of a cracked foundation you've partly cleared this up already but I just want to put on the record was I'm sorry wait till I finish because we can't talk over each other because of the record um uh he only had the seal plate on the west side of the building photo 11 which was in the interior there's a couple little other spaces in photo 7 and 8 but the purpose of those photos is not uh to photograph the interior so I asked him because I thought it was an important Point as to what condition the slab was in and the footings and he said the slab is in very good condition surprisingly good considering the age of the garage um he pointed out that because of the um rainwater entering the property for all the reasons that you've pointed out basically the drainage um and inadequate drainage away from the building uh due due to grading uh problems and limited space uh that the um seill plate has cracked and that's what's in photo 11 as well as perhaps something else um so the only thing I want wanted to bring to the commission's attention based on that other than what I've just said is uh it seems like this is a questionary tail from the setback variance in 1925 that there's been a minimal uh space and therefore inadequate drainage for a long time and uh it's up to you entirely whether you want to Grant the permit or uh deny the permit or impose conditions or whatever you want to do but obviously the drainage has to be solved mhm uh whether the build the structure is kept or a new one's put in because there's no sense putting in a new one and having the same inadequate drainage especially if it's on the same footprint so it's my contribution I agree thank you thank you m Bower John um you answered some of my one of my questions was what was the condition of the slab I didn't see any mention of any foundation in this structural report at all um slabs in good shape you're proposing to do the sighting with cedar shingles with yeah it wasn't on the original but now that I know yes of course it's called that will be uh okay and will they be mitered in the corners of the the garage sometimes they put corner boards and the shingles butt up to the corner boards or do the do the will the shingles be installed the same way they're installed now I don't know don't know okay um I I are are we just I see two I see two list of things here one is a demolition B is the referral for a new garage are we discussing both of these things at the same time or how we how do we the demolition has to be approved or not approve before before you okay any more questions no Steve no question Nick how are how are they building the foundation for the new garage if we were to Grant a demolition permit it's not just going to be a slab on the ground right no it's all written in their site they submit a graphic of that no I don't see a graph I don't have this see did we give them copies of the site prep in the description there's a description of exactly what they're going to do with that okay I see it 36d wall okay yeah that's my only question for now thank you Miss FY and Mr mixer um I just uh can you clarify um why putting adding drainage uh to the side that is uh uh where the water is getting in um how come that wouldn't resolve the problem according to what the engineer told me was that because the seill is on the ground it's not on that side it's not even doesn't have any height so the water's just going to keep coming in from that to that because it needs to have that it needs he says it needs to have that 8 in which is the current I guess the current code 8 in height once it has that barrier the water won't enter in from the from the sill so a question for my more learned colleagues the new plan would resolve that issue uh I don't see the new plan see it on the on the old wall section but he's right normally you wouldn't have the wood you know want wood within 8 in of the ground right so if you have like a garage slab that's at grade they put a little 8 in block or pour the concrete up a little bit higher and the wood sits on there this way it's a monolithic you know block between the grade and the moisture and the inside and there isn't a fix that there is not a fix for the current garage that could replicate T typically when there's a situation like this where the you can see in the photographs the shingles go right down down into the ground so it's pulling in all the moisture and it's rotting is a contractor will go around the perimeter and raise the wood sill by installing an 8 in concrete block on top of the existing slab and you can do a fix around the bottom to raise that up and allow then the grade on the outside to slope away a little bit better and not have that water uh you know just coming right in under the wood sill so that's a fix um but they suggested that was too expensive yes he said it would be very expensive here's my concern about fixing which I've been doing through the years it's 100 years old and I understand 100 years old okay so it's it is historic I understand that I it's I fix it it's 100 years old the more you fix it's not a matter of upkeep it's a matter of repair every year here now what next needs to repair because the rust nails are rusting out of the wood on the inside and coming out which you can always you can see now the wood's Good Wood solid some of it um and I can replace some of that but I'm going to be replacing wood and stuff every single year every you know all the time because it's an old 100y old garage and so we can fix and fix and fix and fix and fix and I'll be be paying for repairs not upkeep repairs probably till I die and that's the reason I felt that it was better to just make it new I can make it look like the old garage and make it serviceable for me and because and make it servical for me so I have a question are you I'm I'm that's all the photographs that you provided and is this is are these the did you have you replaced the the shingles at the bottom of the yes I did in the front of the garage I had that I had that redone no on the side where where the the here this picture are the is that 100 where you say that I haven't replaced any shingles except the front door where the garage door is on the left hand side that was replaced because it actually my daughter hit the garage okay that was replaced but so shingles here that are on this building are original okay so I had the same issue with my garage and I did the I did what John suggested we put you know to keep the footprint and did that and it's and it's fine oh so um it's not just the it's not just the foot I mean that's a major issue I think that that issue we also have we need a whole new roof we'll need which buildings need um and I've reshingled it several times through the years but now it's going to need a whole new roof um some of the underlying supports as you'll see not all of them but some of them are going to have to be replaced um and what are cracked major be uh supports that are coming down some of them will need to be replaced and through the years it will continue to be needing to be replaced and so I'm going to be repairing and have to be repairing with major cost a lot I I have another question M would you do this project if you didn't get the extra 22 in variance so that you could use the upper level probably yes it needs you still you would still replace one way or another the garage need whoever said that needs to be taken care of whoever what said something about you need to take care of the drainage so the drainage needs to be taken care of so there needs to be work on the garage no matter what great but this is an area that experiences flooding often correct excuse me and this is an area where the garage is your street your road experien experiences flooding often it's not a one it's not a actually experienced it more we used to have like Rivers running down our street until the park put in drains across the street and since then we haven't had flooded streets I also put drains in around my inside and the outside of my house and so I no longer have flooding in my house I put drains in front of the garage and the side of the garage where I could and that you know it helped the the flooding but it still floods and then um my I have a question in terms of the what you're proposing to replace it with the window windows are uh are they vinyls in the um plan I I believe they are I can look at the design see what they said but I believe there would now there would now um but yes I believe they are okay so you want to replace it with vinyl windows okay any other questions if if we approve this is a question uh if we approve the demolition do we have control over what is built there or only we can away so there's the referral application for the zoning board variance that you could provide I think some advisory report the whole thing's advisory that's true okay besides the demolition besides the demolition the demolition we have to vote on yes or no okay any other questions no anybody from the public like to ask questions okay so before we go to our uh discussion um Mr smolin could you go over your um report please sure um you received a copy of my review it looked like this great okay so I'll go through uh quickly just the existing garage and then I also have a bunch of questions about the proposed but we'll start with the existing uh it's colonial revival in style it's got some Craftsman um elements to it the garage's historic character is defined by its consistent use of materials and detailing that complement the main house overall this property main house and garage are a contributing uh element to the potential ooft historic district this was surveyed only 5 years ago and determined to be a contributing resource so the ordinance here in mon has a couple uh steps to justify demolition the first is the evaluation of its historic Integrity overall um it's my opinion that the garage retains a high degree of historic architectural integrity and continues to reflect its original purpose which is a place to park Automobiles and its connection to the main house um which is an important element to understanding the historic significance and not only property but the the broader District so my report goes through the seven different elements to evaluate historic Integrity I found all of them to be high except for materials given that some Replacements been done over time I say that's medium to low but I don't think overall that detracts from its original historic uh Integrity the workmanship fairly utilitarian structure didn't have great workmanship to be with still doesn't have great workmanship so that's not really high and lastly um Association the buil the property house garage not really associated with any super important historical figures in Monclair um so that that is low um the next step in montclair's ordinance is related to preservation criteria um there's a couple different different bits to that the first um is its historical architectural cultural and aesthetic significance it's part of the original property it was built if not at the same time within a year of the original House it contributes to its overall aesthetic cultural heritage of the historic district Etc um the use and feasibility of continued use based upon what was originally submitted where there was a representation of a potential cracked foundation I found that the potential for the continued use may be diminished however given the structural engineering report by strands engineering dated a couple days ago October 15th it doesn't sound like there is a cracked foundation it may be a sell plate so I don't actually believe that its continued use is compromised to the degree that my report originally said I agree with you it's a damp garage it's c not a weathertight um structure but few garages really ever are completely WEA weathertight they're meant to be damp damp spaces um just continuing through the rest of the preservation criteria I'll just highlight um its impact of the replacement on the neighborhood's character I think the proposed replacement which we'll get to in a moment um would adversely impact especially the parks side uh streetscape and really begin to diminish the historic Ambi on to that potential historic district so the third and final um Step In montclair's ordinance is related to hardship criteria that the HBC considers in making a determination for demolition so due to the deteriorate condition um of the garage preservation of the subject property might begin to impose an undue burden or hardship on the applicant for its reasonable use that conclusion that I reached in my report was really um strongly relying on the representation that there was a cracked foundation um which again turns out really I don't think to be the case so a lot of what was described related to water infiltration and the other potential structural issues I think are are things that can be solved we talked about some different ways to do that um that are routinely done and I don't believe that it's it's technologically infeasible or burdensome or hardship to rehabilitate the 100y old garage that we're we're talking about this evening so in conclusion um my uh opinion was that the applicant did not adequately substantiate the need to remove the existing garage to demolish it um in its entirety based on the Monclair uh total demolition ordinance um so that's my bit about the existing building I do have questions about the proposed should I hold on those or go right into those um well maybe we can have a discussion on um ex yeah on this first and then go into the uh proposed building all right so we'll start with discussion would would you like to begin um I would like to hear a little bit more from uh our uh board about potential our commission about potential Solutions um I'm not convinced currently that the criteria has been satisfied for total demolition um but I also have some questions about hardship to the applicant um I thought there were some legitimate points raised about fixes but I would like to hear from from our board uh a discussion of um the feasibility of that chair you brought up a a potential solution uh that you yourself implemented um so I would like to hear more from our other colleagues first before commenting further okay we'll go this way um there certainly is a fix that's a lot less expensive I don't buy that it's more expensive than tearing the entire garage down ripping up the existing slab pouring a New Foundation pouring a new slab and building a new garage with windows and new doors as opposed to going around the sill installing concrete block and raising the sill off the ground to deal with the only thing I see is an issue which is the water I realize it doesn't get the applicant to where she wants to get ultimately with a new garage with a space upstairs and St is going up there which is uh she's not going to be able to accomplish if we don't allow the demolition but as far as fixing it um if it's just talking dollars and cents there it's not even close so um ongoing maintenance question I don't know the slab's in good condition Foundation seems to be in good condition you'll be off the ground 8 in so the maintenance goes to painting the cedar shingles maybe repairing the sofits she'd have a new roof anyway uh so um I don't see any hardship in that so can I just those are my comments could I maybe describe what I think how that process might look in more detail so it can be done sequentially I think you would start say on the northwest corner of the garage you'd pull way 5 to 10 ft of shingles up about maybe 12 to 18 in on the outside they'd have to be removed you're exposing the framing on the inside you're then going to have to come in again sequentially you're not like temporarily supporting the garage you're doing a piece by piece cutting out a couple of the framing members up about 8 10 Ines from the existing slab at that point you're then probably drilling into into the slab to install rebar you're grouting that you're putting concrete block on top of that fully grouted on top of that you're putting a piece of pressure treat at 2x6 or whatever it it ends up being 2 by8 to then bear the studs that you cut out earlier that's all taken care of then from the outside you waterproof it so you've dug away a little bit from the foundation so you're applying a you know bitumin or some type of waterproofing membrane on the outside you're reinstalling the shingles at that point and then you move on to the next 5 or 10 ft all around the garage I agree with you though that that doesn't feel like more expensive than um I I don't know how much this totals with the site work that we got tonight but but just describe the other thing you would do which is you would demo the garage come in with a bco rip up the concrete slab rip up tear out the foundation dig a new uh uh excavation around de pour new concrete pour a new not even close pour new slab then you have then you start what we just did in the rehabilitation thing where you're drilling into the slab rebar block up um it's certainly more difficult to do it within the garage sitting on top of you but certainly not impossible Steve um yeah it's very if we could figure out a way for her to put in the space that she wants to have above but that's you can't do that by just replacing you know we're not really replacing the foundation existing Foundation seems to be fine um it's just putting it in to current standards of waterproofing and getting the water away from the building um it's slower than coming in with the backhoe and knocking it down that's one day's work um but in terms of our ordinance so I think we right analyzing in terms of the uh demo ordinance it seems it seems that it's not in a state that would require demolition based on hardship is what I'm driving at um um I do have sympathies for the applicant but in my opinion right now it doesn't I I have not seen the evidence that uh would indicate to me that it uh satisfies the demolition or ordinance so that's and after this discussion I feel more confident in that assessment good yeah I mean I can't really technically State much more than Stephen and Don hav already um I think moisture is the root of the problem I think once this base is reconstructed the right way I think you're to find a lot less maintenance creeping up over the years you're not going to be dealing with the studs swelling and shrinking every year with moisture getting into them they're going to be protected the shingles will hold better um over time it's not going to you're not going to have as much movement anymore throughout the year um on the garage once the moisture is handled um and if the framing itself is in good condition you know additional maintenance maybe another roof at some point but the framing can stay um but yeah I think you know what we're suggesting is the really the root of all the other problems and once that's squared away I think you're going to have a lot less year-to-year maintenance on it when you can keep the water out of it and keep the moisture out of the the main walls of the building so am I allowed to see yes um and what would keep the um knot holes in the actual original wood from falling out of the um wood which is what's happening now in the in the building itself not this not the frame but the wood that's going around I mean again if the structural engineer assessed that the framing is in in decent enough shape and is not unsound I have to go with their their their report on it that if the studs are stable they're stable and would continue to be any other any other comment no not not not I mean aside from technically I mean I don't know if this works for you but could it not be that if you're not able to get the second level I mean does one Bay become if it's nice and dry now your your working area the second level is not the most important part of what I'm doing here I just added that because it would be nice would be something I could work in it's the garage itself that needs to be deal dealt with not necessar we have a second floor or not is is insignificant as far as I'm concerned understood yeah I mean again I think really the the the fix of the base around the entire garage will will go a long way and in upkeeping it for the life of your use of it Miss Floyd so I just have a question um based on what Mr smot said in reference to the materials that were being used to upkeep throughout the years is not of the same it's a subpar material along with historical material that's in there already so if we if we if if she was to take the advice and you know repair the garage are we looking at 10 years 15 years of coming back here and having that same scenario um because obviously the original materials have been compromised in a way this is just uh one aspect and then the other aspect that I was looking at and these are just questions as well um it seems as if it's very close to the other property um I don't I I mean I I don't know if that is you know it seems close like I thought we had to have at least six feet from another I could be wrong about right so when if she was to do the demolition she's taking half of it off which means that it would be then you know in compliance with the spacing between properties I'm just that's oh no are you moving it 6 feet off the property it would be exactly the same space I a little small well it is a little but it's really not signicant signicant so then my only thing with that would be using the you know sub subpar materials and she would continue to do that if she's doing the repairs moving forward um does it compromise the building overall in you know say 10 15 20 years down the line that that that would be my only thought with that when you say subpar materials what do you mean well um you had said that you've done some some repairs on the building throughout the years right and I believe and I could be mistaken about that but um it would not be the same materials that the building was originally made in so it doesn't have the same quality you know um do you understand what I'm saying you know so she's done some selective repairs over time which is which is great that's exactly what you're supposed to do to a historic building I don't know um if if the you know Cedar Cypress whatever she used for the shingles was inferior or not um the comment related to materials was more about the fact that the garage doors have been replaced they're not original they're metal maybe even vinyl um clad but I don't think overall that that detracts to the point where we have a big issue with historic Integrity purely based on that okay that's this picture right um Mr mixer um you know my only comment was indeed about the the metal doors and the and the aesthetic of of you know the consistency of the material um I understand that what we're discussing here is the complete Demolition and so that is a you know that's obviously what brings us to this particular point and not what the future of you know what would be built on the property would look like um because I think that obviously does play a role but from the the need to satisfy um what Mr scholen put in his report too it doesn't appear that it's required from a total demolition perspective but then I think too it's not a question of dollars of how much it costs right it's a matter of um really because if you decide that you want to pay that price um for what it takes to completely remove this from the space and put something new there then I guess that's a personal decision on on your right versus the you know the overall cost of you know taking pieces of this and fixing it as has been suggested previously um but the alternative to complete Demolition and there's several of those um is there a solution um in you know of a of a usable garage space um that could um that could still retain whatever structural Integrity exists today without complete Demolition and that could be you know just just the frame and building you know on top of that but again um maintaining the um historical Integrity of the of the location as well as the fact that it does abut the the um Park and it's a very visible piece of the property um that uh that that does continue with the with the aesthetic of the entire um house to to garage so um in short I I totally understand where where you're coming from for this particular and I just want to make sure that what we're focused on in this discussion is indeed the total demolition versus the other options um as well as uh you know our own you know personal view of what the second part of this is is that's the the the proposed building being built on top of that or at least the replacement um and that's that's my only comment next um I'd like to make a comment on the water issue sure I just wanted to clarify one point um apologies but just on the the discussion of cost is more to determine if not demolition that if you do not demo it is it more of a hardship to the applicant so that's it's it's not really a comparison of cost so much as is there a hardship by not permitting the demolition that that's all I wanted to clarify appr skart um I was thinking about what you were just saying in terms of the water it seems to me if we put a makeshift fix in this garage with blocks and cement and I know you've done that but that's going to be lasting a few years putting in a whole new pad with drainage with that with the the uh 8 in that you need is a complete fix not a temporary fix that in a few years the cement from the in between when they they mortar it it's going to come out I know that that will happen because I had a house in the in the in a lakeh house that that exactly happens to it's looks great and it lasts for a few years but then it starts to erode around where they had to cement it so I'm suggesting that a complete pad with its drainage at the level of the code of where it's supposed to be in terms of height will be addressing fully the problem of water in the garage that's all I to say about water um I I just you gave us a uh proposal for from lap structures um that there's a couple of different um prices here and I I just when we're talking about costs and whether it's a hardship the uh total amount for is is $38,000 and yet the the two guard garage is $29,000 is that a combination I'm not know I don't know what you're looking at so I have to look well we're talking about hardship and and cost and and garage and then there's a cost there was a cost for the pad okay now I I also want to have the gr this uh so I had the guy the man that's doing the concrete the company that's doing the concrete work that's doing the pad would also put a driveway a cement driveway in which is not included because that didn't need to be included but so I figured they could grade it all once once and for all boom boom so that it's all now level to where it's supposed to be and then they put the pad in that's how it goes that's all right I was just trying to get to where what we're talking about hardship and cost so the cost would be the cost of the garage itself the cost of the pad and the cost of the pad and the demolition cost those so they three costs okay so while we're do anyone else have any other thing to uh contribute then do you do you want to speak a little bit to the um the the proposed uh replacement sure um the intention is to park two cars in this garage or up to two car vehicles like car full siiz cars um so I'm looking at page four of the lap structures packet and it's it's titled crosssection showing 20 ft by 166 1610 and this is um I think very problematic for some stuff that forgive me are we talking about the new proposed structure I I do have a question first before we do that do should do we need to make a determination on the demolition well I didn't yeah I didn't know if um question right uh Miss Bower would we need to before discussing that no new proposed structure we can consider it in conjunction with the demo absolutely vote okay I mean you have to take a separate vote on the application for demolition yes but there's nothing to prevent you from looking at what the applicant's proposing okay okay thank you okay so at the base of that um section there are uh 4x4 Runners at 30 in on Center and then perpendicular to that are 2x4 joist 8 in on Center and then there's a 5/8 in plywood floor I do not believe you could park more than a lawn mower on that floor assembly I don't think that that's for part paring a car on it yeah I don't think it's for parking two cars on it so what I think is maybe being contemplated here is is a modification of that section based on the testimony that the applicant provided tonight where that assembly of those three layers from the 4x4s up to the 5/8 plywood is is potentially being discarded and substituted by the slab on grade is that correct yeah that it's not we will not have that wood floor we'll have the cement concrete slab yes okay so I think that's notable for a few reasons one I don't think you're applying for a 1610 height variance because that will be that will result in a structure of a different height than what that section shows lower probably however if um you're looking to solve your water infiltration problem and we're going back to the sight prep quote here from April 29th I do not see and maybe you could point us to where 8 in block or some type of foundation some type of masonry vertical Foundation is being provided I see footings that go down 3 ft 12 in wide and then a essentially a sheet of plastic which is that moisture barrier and then they're pouring 4 in of concrete on that which is bringing a slab up to grade and then it sounds like this um shed structure is being plopped on top of that and there's no vertical waterproofing connecting those two things at least according to this quote in the testimony so far so I think the structures lower I don't think it's waterproofed in the vertical Direction which is where your problems seem to be coming from and that that leaves me a little bit confused I understand that it may sound like Overkill to get a um someone involved to draw what this all looks like comprehensively but I think that's important given that it's affecting the height of the structure quite a bit yeah I I wonder if you could re explain because I'm not sure what you're saying about water vertically coming yeah so the quote um from from site prep about five or six lines down has a oh does someone have exhibit a to get back to her um who has there it [Applause] is so the quote um the quote describes really sequentially how they would build that slap from the bottom 3 ft down up to grade and it starts with the footings that are 36 in deep 12 in wide and then they're putting four to 5 in of crushed stone within that they're essentially pulling a sheet of plastic over that to prevent water from coming up from below and then they're pouring concrete hopefully with with yes wire mesh uh rebar within the concrete and that's just getting done and that brings you to a horizontal level slab yes and then you're modifying the um the the shed the prefabricated shed to then bear directly on that slab there's no vertical masonry element that you can waterproof between your slab that that site prep is doing and this shed that I can't remember the name of the company that La that lap is doing so those two those two elements aren't interfacing with one another right now I imagine they're they're anchor down probably um I hope but there's would hope so too there's there's no waterproofing in the vertical orientation you have no you're ending up with the same detail you're ending up with a wood sill on a concrete SL same exact problem that's what you have right now your the bottom sill of the Interior framing of your garage is sitting right on the concrete slab that's what you're showing us that you're going to be doing in the future so you're not solving that water problem I mean you I have to talk to my site prep guy to see what you know but if you I'm not an it and you put the Block in now the structure is even higher than 1610 so that's a problem for the zoning board or where you're heading for that variance they'd have to account for that 8 in they' take it out of the framing maybe yeah I mean we don't know have an accurate we don't have an ACC it could be two layers of block it could be you know there's a bunch of different things that could be done it sounds like um with the new uh studies that the engineer presented today that there it's opened up more problems um do you feel com would you like to reconsider this with uh with other plans that are more comprehensive that doesn't show to us that it's going to create the same problem you're not mitigating the the water issue with what you're proposing but we understand what you've just given us so are you saying if I can do that then we can go ahead with this or you know what we'd still have to consider it we still it would still have to be reviewed I definitely think that if that needs to be done it needs to be done on the garage if that's going to be if I'm having a new garage I'm certainly going to want to consider what you've just said yes you know I didn't I I'm not a and I'm not a constructional engineer so I or uh construction person so I can't speak to how that would be done what I can speak to is I can talk to site prep about that issue and have them you know deal with that so the site prep that you showed us that what I don't know went this way and that was one p page that which wasn't in we didn't we didn't see that it wasn't in our packet so is that a different is that a different company from what this yes it is it's a company that just does foundation work and uh uh environmental drainage and that sort of thing they happened to the reason I chose them them is because they they have worked in conjunction with the uh lap structure people so they know how to put the the they know how to put the cement slab they know how to attach the garage I don't know all the technical terms for that but I can have them write it up I guess with they how they I thought this was it but if there needs to be more to that then sure well I think I think I I I what do people what do my fellow colleagues what do you think I I don't think we have and just to talk a little bit more about what's being proposed beyond that point [Music] um where's the elevation where's the elevations here there's another sh there you go so I see a drawing here that shows vertical tongue and groove siding and you're saying this would turn into a cedar shingles yes and and and the overhangs that's on the garage now would be there on the new one as well then I see I see also some place where it says sliding windows and then I see double hung Windows being drawn here so I I don't know what we're looking at really yeah I think you need to come back with these questions that we've raised answered um especially with the uh the slab and and uh the way that the two interface the water uh barrier the slab and then the the structure that's on top of it because again the uh as John said the the materials we need we actually need we need to see what we're approving in other words would that require a new um application Miss B or can we table this uh well we you can ask the applicant uh to adjourn it um I guess that your real question is do we need public notice because um she's going to bring back additional plans if if we announce that at this meeting like a future date and public notice might not be required okay yeah but you realize you have to um provide additional plans that satisfy the technical questions that the commission has asked and they need to be on file with the clerk like for instance A1 was supposed to be on file with the clerk at least 10 days before the next public hearing it would be really good to have a witness from your construction company or your site prep company uh to address the technical questions that are being raised I guess my question is uh that information that you needed concerns the new building correct what um what we need to decide what I'm wondering is if you're even going to decide that I'm going to be able to have a new building so to go you know this is it's a fair question yeah it's fair question um chair you can call for a motion if you want oh a motion to deny oh a motion to deny to approve or to approve whatever people want in the motion this this is a problem we have with uh total Demolition and then looking at something that's going to replace it and it's not clear what's going to replace it I would tend to support replacing it if I was convinced that what you were replacing it with match the details and the sofit details and the different framing details of the existing garage I'm not convinced of that now okay okay yep makes sense yeah so do um again do we table this and you come back with those details which would give us a clearer understanding of what you're proposing or do you want us to take a vote we could take a vote now to uh approve or deny and then well chair I would I would also I mean there were many comments from the board that perhaps the existing structure did not satisfy the statute so right to because especially that it appears that the um structural engineer does not think that they it's it's cracked the base is cracked the S that's right that's correct right so if we were to take a vote and deny the application Miss Bower would that require her to submit a new application for demolition if that's what she wanted to she wanted to do that with with additional information all right uh it's your uh chair what would what would you recommend well it seems as though you want this garage built I think it would behoove you to come back with with plans that are you know that we can understand I can do that I I'm just hearing essy from your lawyer who said you can motion to deny so it seems to me that that's where we're at I don't know and if we're going to deny if it's not meeting the criteria then you know I don't know and then my next question would be if you're saying that it can't be demolished does the historical committee have funds then because it's now historical building that we have to keep it at a historical uh perspective are they gonna are you funding that for people to keep their buildings in historical condition well think I think our our I know you're not I'm just I know I understand you're venting now okay so that's fine but I think what we'll do is um let's just do you uh Miss Gard do you agree uh to allow the commission to adjourn this uh to the next meeting or whenever you're ready yes to yes I will all right and but may I add that could I get a list of what I'm supposed to be getting what I'm supposed to get from you for that that would make it a difference and then that would make it easier for me to address well sure I mean what you what the the uh uh the thing that we got tonight that which we didn't see until tonight we didn't get the uh the structural engineers report until today so and this has been I think you you uh you uh was received in the office in June so I mean if you know it's been months that this has been going on um so yeah I mean what do in terms of pieces of paper that you need to resupply to us resubmit is that what you're asking no I I want to know what it is you want what is what are the requ what okay what is a list of things that I need to put on the paper I guess I think there needs to be a conversation between um whatever our technical committee is called sorry don't memorize it all for the different towns uh and her contractors the design I don't think it's design review okay okay okay all right I don't think it's appropriate to ask Miss Gart to translate what she's heard from The Architects here and the Consulting engineer to her contractors and be confident that it's going to come back in a satisfactory form that will allow you to decide whether to approve a demolition or not based on what's being proposed okay so we'll adjourn this yeah she has given you permission to adjourn it you've given us permission no further public notice but we need a date so we'll adjourn it to the next date if you want to adjourn it after that again November November 21st you have to let us know that 21st okay November 21st at 7:30 um you want to call for a public comment on this before does anyone here have any public comment no okay so we'll see you on November 21st and in the meantime we'll be in touch with the with the office you'll be in touch with the office okay yes and and that's where I'll get information about what needed okay great thank you very much okay uh next up is a planning board referral application 2903 one Seymour Plaza it is a minor sight plan for Telecom installation is anyone here to speak to this hello please come forward and um identify yourself and your connection with the project certainly Madam chair um I apologize certainly uh Madam chair members of the commission Council uh for the record Richard Schneider of the law firm of vogle CH Collins and Schneider attorney for New York SM smsa limited partnership uh doing business as Verizon Wireless would it be helpful or do you want me can you raise your hand and and our lawyer will well I'm an attorney oh I'm sorry okay raise your hand anyway I I do have do you have something else here I'm sorry is someone else here that will speak um if necessary I have with me uh Frank kisero the applicant's um architect you want to swear Mr ker serto in if yes if you're going to testify we'll see um ra your right hand right raise your right right hand Mr kisero is the testimony uh you'll provide on the application tonight to the commission going to be the truth all truth and nothing but the truth I do good okay thank you do you have any um images that you're going to show we had submitted them oh no aside anything that'll go on the screen aside from what you've provided yes no you provided the okay so just very briefly and I'll take guidance from the commission and and it's it's Council um I I think famous last words this is hopefully a a simple and straight forward application the application is by Verizon Wireless to construct a wireless communication facility on the property located at one Seymour Plaza the wireless communication facility is pending before the planning board by way of very brief procedural history at one time located proximate to the subject property was what's commonly referred to as a small cell node that was decommissioned uh invoking the need for a replacement wireless communication facility um legally the property is in a Redevelopment Zone which uh did not at the time permit wireless communication facilities um in order to allow wireless communication facilities the applicant together with the property owner uh sought an amendment to the Redevelopment plan to M to permit wireless communication facilities as a permitted use uh that was uh concurred with by the Town Council and ultimately uh the Redevelopment plan was permitted to uh be amended to now permit as a permitted use Wireless Communications presumably recognizing the need to provide wireless communication services to the subject property and surrounding area uh the applicant um during this process which frankly has been a lengthy one had worked extensively with Miss tally and others within the township uh to hopefully arrive at a uh an acceptable design including adherence to recommendations at the time articulated by Miss tally to use this property as compared to others within the redevelop vment zone for the location of the wireless communication facility including adhering to certain recommendations at the time made by Miss tally as to the design of the wireless communication facility which have been substantially complied with there are some technical variances that are required but that uh functionally is a is a matter that will be addressed before the planning board um I I don't know that I need to comment much further relative to the visual impact I think uh in this case the best assessment of the visual impact is your own independent review of the photo simulations that were submitted as part of the application and the only other thing I will add is we acknowledge um receipt of the uh project review report dated October 11th um and uh note uh sure and note um for purposes of the record hour obvious concurrence with the characterization of the facility as one being minimally visible um I have Mr kisero here who has been substantially um involved throughout the whole process to answer any questions uh relating to the design but I again um would uh otherwise rest on the visual analysis and the conclusions contained within your review report okay and and these are the photographs that you that's correct okay so everyone has a copy of this of these do you have a mockup of what is proposed to be there in terms of the yes so if you look at each of the respective photographs Madam chair the you'll notice bear with me a second but if you'll notice on each respective photograph there's an A and A B yes a is the existing condition B is the proposed condition oh okay thank you for that clarification so I I guess as an advocate I would suggest if if you're hard pressed to figure out what changes that's a good thing the the the without going into voluminous detail and recognition of of the time and and the matters behind me the the critical aspect here as you draw on your own experiences throughout the state is that the antennas as reflected in the visuals in the visual analysis are behind a concealment panel so the antennas are I I I would Advocate aesthetically inconsequential it it blends into the building you can't see the antennas and based on the viewscape you're not going to be able to see the equipment that's mounted on the roof based on its location on the roof so okay it's not the antennas that are visible to you they're all behind the conceal what's considered RF concealment materials it allows the signal to be broadcast but effectively mitigates or Shields the visual impact of the antenna okay what is that material that would be that would be a better there you go lot this myself but I'll defer that to Mr Koso for we could s system the material made out of Fass and styr so they two pieces of piece of Styrofoam and sandwich it between two pieces of fber glass the fber glass need texture hit the Buton textured and shaped uh to any texture or shape you want and color so there are some uh metal panel Decora of panels on the building we're going to M mimic those I'm sorry you're going to we're going to mimic those the the metal panels correct on the outside of this styrofoam enclosure okay okay well so we'll open for questions Steve I I finally found before and after oh oh AB guess that's a Nick um I agree with Steve I do not have any questions I was looking at the lower panels the whole time and I thought that it's so concealed that the after photo is the same exact thing until I realized the little additional piece in the top Tower um I have no questions Miss Floyd no questions Mr mixer um just one um there is there was a note that uh one of the antenna has to go a foot above M um I just didn't see that in the representative picture is that which which one of the before and after photos shows the height variant and maybe because I didn't notice it that's a good thing too well it it's just that if you look at the the before and after the the concealment it it exceeds the parit by one foot oh just the conceal does yeah oh okay well the antenna goes up to it so it's only because they have to use a 6t antenna to provide the signal coverage that's one on the C it's really hard to see so for example if you're looking at 4B and you'd have to be straining your just take a look at 4B and you see the white that goes above the top panel so you see how it is just slightly above the parap yep okay that's the one foot deviation and strictly a function of using six- foot antennas thank you Mr gri um not to brag but I found them much quicker than my colleagues um but uh my question is about is actually about maintenance um what uh uh who's responsible how often what are they going to continue to match uh the uh the existing building the existing facade Verizon Wireless is uh responsible for maintaining their their requirements and how often I mean look you know we all see the uh old um Towers throughout town right they deteriorate uh when they're have less use they become you know the maintenance is not always as thorough so is there a plan is there um uh some kind of agreement I mean and will they will they continue to blend in uh the way they do now so generally uh a Verizon technician will visit a site once every four to six weeks do some housekeeping checking make sure everything's working and looking properly but if there is a complaint uh about the way some of the concealment systems uh might look or feed over time in the sun um it would have to be uh someone would have to notify Verizon and I guess as the historic preservation commission one of your recommendations could be to the planning board that variz would be responsible to maintaining those consumer panels throughout the year so that they fade they get changed or or or painted to to match the existing I'm actually the Lea onto the planning board I will be bringing that up uh at that meeting as well um but I just want to check for our purposes uh we have the purview of reviewing the Aesthetics and I want to make sure will the materials for the shield uh fade um or Not Fade uh proportionately to the materials that are there now you said it's fiberglass what's the what's the existing material uh that metal is what we're I guess the I guess would help have you done these type of installations before uh yeah yeah and maintain their their and we've also had conditions placed on our approvals where uh verzin is to maintain a concealment system uh to match the existing buildings throughout the years okay okay those are my questions and I have a question why was this building uh chosen you mentioned that you worked with the planner and I think she thought it was the best property I mean we have a limited geographic area and obviously to for from a radio frequency perspective um I I'll defer to miss tally I think we were on originally one of the other buildings but she made the recommendation want build building East we refer to this as building it was an East Building we were on um and and they referred us to the west building okay I just had I just wondered why why you decided on that um is there anybody any other questions no anybody from the the uh audience like to ask question if not I'll turn it over to Mr smolen and he can discuss his report please great um first it's important to note that what you're attaching these two is not a designated historic structure it's a very recently built property uh that we're all familiar with from just a couple years ago so I can find my review really just the viewpoints three and five in the applicants materials those are the two viewpoints from within the Town Center historic district and in both of those comparative A and B uh viewpoints the proposed addition of these Wireless um communication facility features are minimally visible they're inconspicuous and they are unobtrusive okay thank you so we'll open up for discussion John [Laughter] John um I think this is a pretty good solution as opposed to some other things we've seen where uh this equipment is completely exposed uh so this Blends in and I would support it okay Steve I'm going back over the submission and they're giving me a roof plan that does not match the elevations where roof plan is v66 Corners are you what where are you which one are you referring to um wait a minute um is that the case there's three different locations no there's three I think there's I think there if you look at this here's one no no that's look on the but this this shows different locations too great great what else is that can you can you explain that you can walk yeah um all right does everybody have sheet Z6 of my S plans 36 mhm it's an overall uh enlarged roof PL of the building I'm going to start in the upper right hand corner which is the South corner of the building okay you're all there so in the upper right hand corner the South corner of building you'll see a call out proposed equipment on a 4x12 steel platform that's where the radio cabinets are going we're uh structurally attaching those to the existing masonry stair Penthouse so that's equipment location number one also being attached to that elevator Penthouse but not to exceed the height and also behind concealment system that the facade of that elevator Penthouse is what we call our beta sector it's four antennas if you go counterclockwise I'm sorry clockwise to the north corner of the building you'll see two more sets of four antennas we identify those as Alpha and Gamma those will also be attached to the facade of the building those are the antennas in the concealment system that hides them from your view to extend one foot above the parit and that's uh uh based on a distance between the parit and the existing Windows below and the size of the antennas my RF engineer has specified I need that extra foot so technically you have three sets of four antennas and then a location for the equipment cabinets and is that is that Illustrated in here these photographs um is that what you're talking about EXC yeah so I guess 2B that's what we refer to is the beta sector the one on the elevator pent house right okay and [Music] then is this 3B right that would be a photo simulation of the gamma sector that's the sector that feces North right okay then it turns the corner right and that conceals the alpha sector which now 4 B one which is looks like that's 4 B because 5B again is the elevator P it's number 44 and number 23 Fon sou yeah any other question other question and actually in in 3A that's the existing condition you could see that metal metal paneling system the existing metal paneling system okay so they're all Illustrated in this handout I believe so I didn't create these um that was done by our planner we should have our plan a label we label these alpha beta and gamma sector to make it a little bit more clear right um even though we do have a key map yeah it's at the at the end Frank last page [Applause] so if you look at the last page the key map three photo simulations 3A and 3B you would see the gamma sector right and then photo photo simulations and existing conditions 5 a and 5 be you would be seeing the alpha sector okay thank you is there any other Nick discussion no I don't see uh Mr mixer no and Mr Ry you got swap uh no further uh com answer no further questions for me chair okay so it sounds as though we're generally all in agreement um with the the way that the panels have been uh uh presented to us and the one condition would be the maintenance of the panels the and I and to your point uh before you go you should probably have this uh clear uh terms we'll address that at the planning board yeah yes yes okay any other uh comments no okay thank you very much thank you thank you anything more formal or so we'll follow up with uh just a report that uh includes the comments from tonight that'll go to the planning board and be shared with you thank you yeah when does this go to the planning board December 2nd yeah we oh we have plenty of time and then just a request to the Commissioners if you do not feel you need those plans anymore we'll take them oh sure okay are they for the planning board should I just keep mine yeah you can keep I'll keep um and then anyone else we will take them at the end of the meeting so we don't have to ask for more do you want the this information too yeah the whole P you yeah the whole packet okay but most important the plans yeah right um okay next up is uh planning board referral application 2904 249 Valley Road it's a minor subdivision for two lots Hi how are good so while you're getting um settled in I'll just uh introduce the the uh the application uh as I mentioned this is a um referral to the planning board it is for 249 Valley Road it is a um subdivision the subject property known as the Harrison Homestead is the nucleus of the Irwin Park historic district listed on the state Register of historic places this is for a subdivision that will will divide the property which includes the Harrison Homestead from uh W west to east from Valley Road to Irwin Park Road so um this property as I said is listed on the state Register of historic places in 1986 it showcases a distinctive blend of Farmhouse and italianate Architectural elements including a broad wraparound porch the entrance Door located on the southern elevation uh features subdivided transoms four length double windows cross Gables and closely spaced console Gables below the eaves along with the small Palladium windows in the Attic Peaks the existing house is situated on a slightly elevated position on the western portion of the lot and access VI via a curved uh driveway from Valley Road the lot is boarded by a combination of fences and vegetation the applicant seeks to subdivide the property subject property's lot and build a new house on the Eastern portion fronting Irwin Park Road planning board is considering variances for lot depth and rear yard setback as part of their review of this application and what we are looking at um because it is such a prime um uh structure in the irn park uh historic district we're looking at uh what you intend to intend to do so if you would um identify yourself um and Miss B will yeah okay my name is pile Patel I am a resident here in Montclair right now and I will be the one who is hoping to live in the home that we're trying to build in part of this property uh stepen pler the father-in-law of Miss Patel and my son Dakota pler okay I know most of the members of the board have been here thank you num occasions so um I want to note that we did not receive a planning report for this um and nor did were any photographs submitted for it so I took some photographs this afternoon which our secretary has put up on the on the uh screen right now so this is Irwin Park Road but before um we'll just we why don't you describe what you intend to do with your visuals uh Mr pler needs to be sworn wait oh I thought he was war no you just kept talking oh okay we need to swear you in if you're uh both yeah okay um do you swear or affirm that the testimony you'll provide on the application tonight will be the truth the all truth and nothing but the truth yes I do go ahead okay so describe your project this is the subject lot this is value Road and this is Iran Park Road now I know this very well because for 20 years we lived in this particular lot M at 16 Irwin Park Road uh we moved out of there about two years ago and we live right across the park on Edgemont Road next to the school this um so the application is to subdivide the lot this is the you know historical map from uh I don't know was it 1933 or whatever and it's one of the few Lots on the entire block that's not divided in the middle most of the lotes you can see have all been subdivided at previous time including my bot when we purchased the this lot at 16 irn Park Road it was two lots and I merged the Lots so the only historical lots that were through was the one in question and possibly this one although this does show a potential subdivision line here historically the pattern of development is on irn Park Road the houses face irn Park Road on both sides of the street and they're all relative same distance from the street except for this one lot in question which has a swimming pool in basically the front yard where all the other it's pretty unanimous even the larger Lots the houses are set back at almost the equivalent distance this house in question the historical has some significance it's fairly run down it was a an old neighbor of mine uh an older neighbor and uh and my son and daughter-in-law bought it from his estate it needs a significant amount of work roof rotted wood broken windows uh knob and tube electric and everything else which uh the applicants are proposing to undertake and then sell the house they have no intention of living there the subdivision the resulting subdivision the two lots will be bigger than uh I don't know what they're 14 Lots on the Block the resulting two lots both of them will be bigger than 10 of the existing Lots the reason that it requires a variance is because the subdivision ordinance calls for um the averaging of all the Lots on a block to get the minimum lot size and because you have some very oversized Lots these two and and these are less oversiz then it throws off the average it meets most of the requirements for the subdivision in fact the two lots are larger in area in both width and depth than it's larger than 10 of the existing Lots on the Block so in terms of the pattern of development it fits nicely one might argue that the pool that's in the front yard and I'll show you a few pictures is out of character with the neighborhood it doesn't belong that a house uh along Iran Park Road with the same setbacks as all the other houses on both sides of ir Park Road might be more a suitable development uh Mr pler do we have that or should I Mark that as a no you have it as part of the expert report okay not blown up to the extent all right I I and we the applicant and I as their father-in-law looked at some of the conclusions of the expert and I really don't agree with them it says it's going to alter the historic pattern of development I would beg to differ that it's going to reinforce the existing pattern of development and be much more consistent with it it talks about it's going to compromise the visual and spatial Harmony of the area and it's going to have almost no impacts on the existing house here's some photographs if I may I didn't put them on here's the existing house Mr pler if you're going to speak without the microphone can you use the handheld please oh I'm sorry do we need to mark this as um if you haven't submitted these photographs we'll mark them a m one and why don't you just count them how many there are there's three of them three photographs so this is the aerial view this is aerial view this is the house facing Valley Road and here is Irwin Park the resulting subdivision the only real impact on this house it'll have a much smaller backyard I don't know the trees are blocking it has an enormously large side yard the resulting lot is probably the you know fourth largest lot on the entire block and so it's not it's not troubled for size in fact one might argue that the sidey yard here is a much more usable piece of property than than the thing so you know it's it's very strange when you're walking down Iran Park first of all you don't really see this is taken from Google Maps but you don't really see much or anything of the existing house this is taken from irn Park Road and that's looking at the back you can't really see the pool because it's at grade level and it's it's up a little bit too but yes in theory you'll miss a couple views of the existing house but you really if you walk along IR Park Road you really don't see it's right now it's a yellow house you just don't see a whole lot of it so yes it'll have a very insignificant ific impact in blocking anybody's view which especially in the in the uh summer months and you know for nine months of the year you don't have very much of a view anyway of that here's another view this is the third exhibit however you want to mark it this is from Valley Road from above Valley Road you so you can see where the pool sits the pool is almost in the approximate location of the front of a where a house would be and this is a very large sidey yard that would result so the only impact on this house will be a reduced backyard and some very limited uh uh blocking of a view from Irwin Park Road and probably only in the winter months but like I say every other house on the Block except my old house which was two lots when I purchased it and the next door neighbor whose house does go all the way through now these two houses I want to note that do front Irwin Park that if you say these are the only through Lots these two houses both front Irwin Park Road and because this is a fairly busy you know the intersection of Central and Valley so it's in terms of livability much more appropriate for rear yards this house which is the house in question fronts Valley Road and it's awkward I mean it's awkward it was always awkward to have a pool in basically what is everybody else's front yard area and so so you know it seems just sort of common sense like it makes sense to have a house fronting um Irwin Park Road and it's going to have very little impact it would seem to us and our Consultants on the existing house in fact the applicant is going to make improvements to the house before they sell it they're going to sell it probably either way whether they um get the subdivision or not what I what I can offer is having been there been before you many times here I don't need this do that if the subdivision does get approved with this commission support the applicant is more than happy to come back here for review or anything else you want to do of the new structure they're planning on building in my understanding and they really haven't gotten too far down the road because it's not a reality and they don't want to you know get ahead of themselves it will not be a contemporary structure it was something much more transitional the goal and you know and I don't think you have any issue if this board wants some jurisdiction of of being a partip been in that process okay thank does that conclude your I think so you have any questions well did you show us three pictures or four did you tell me you had four three oh three this is uh this is the view from right from uh and I'll that's a view from irn Park Road taken from the Google Map okay all right so maybe we can refer to the P photographs that I took today the photo from uh Irwin Park Road because I think that um that's the Crux of what we're looking at get um how many photographs on I think I gave I think I there's four photographs there's five five sorry that HPC phot right so that shows okay so that's we're talking about streetscape and the character of the historic district which is as I noted a state registered District this is irn Park Road with the uh uh propos the the lot is to the right could you advance that please yeah and then this where those trees are would be where the lot is the house is to the to the right and uh one of my concerns was the setback of the house the proposed house to irn Park Road because as you pointed out out there's one two you have the map there there's four houses that all have a pretty deep setback um go ahead okay and then that again is the lot of the stairs up to which again you rightly said is the uh swimming pool up on that little plateau and you could see the house in the background and then um this is uh Irwin Park Road uh again but I just wanted to to show the um I guess that's the the the lot is on the that's to the the West yeah cuz that's where the uh the Halloween display is so what your lot what you're proposing would be where those the trees are the the mature tree yeah over there the just to the north of that right there of the Halloween display yes and is is that it yeah and by the way yes there is a large front yard setback but it's the same with all the houses on that lot and the and the proposed lot is as big if not bigger than every other o other uh length of houses so yes is it going to not have the largest backyard yes but it's going to be as big if not bigger than every other house on that block except for the two through Lots so it's you know it's going to be very very consistent with the pattern of development except the existing house on Valley Road it does create uh a smaller backyard but it has a very very large sidey yard we're just going to pass these so that everyone can look at them and then we'll start with questions from the Commissioners and then uh questions from the uh audience if anyone has questions so why don't we start with you sure please Mike no no problem chair thank you um uh the pool is that when was that installed I have no idea is it uh is there any historic significance to it that we're aware of I have no idea okay up in functioning it's I think it's a vyl pool but I don't know I mean cuz it appeared to have I I couldn't really tell pool cover it looks like it has a pool cover but it appears to be um no one's used the pool in at least 10 years in my knowledge it's sort of abandoned it doesn't there's nothing built around it that would appear to be of any what materials around it is it cement is it uh or is there any uh indication that it might be I wonder if there's contamination is that no I'm just wondering if that's a historic structure that we need to consider there no structure other than the pool itself and it doesn't appear to be there's really no surrounding uh you know uh coping or patio area it's it's you know I don't know why I think it's a vinyl pool but I I I remember it being vinyl and I remember there being cement like you know just around the periphery of the PO that was just around the periphery okay I'm just trying to determine if that's a historic structure we need to consider the I remember was also cracking along the edges so which leads me to think that it has not been touched very long which might indicate that it's old right right when did people like houses started building private pools I have no idea I don't know either um I mean I know I mean this is associated with Harrison apples right this uh uh this particular home right I mean I think that part of the New York cider industry which you know was nationally renowned Washington commented on it right so uh the home itself is extremely significant I don't know if the pool necessarily is so the survey that they showing shows a different arrangement of probably from years ago from years ago perhaps it's been shape there there is looks like someone's cut in a square pool into the oh so that was the original design and now it's a square I don't know if it's right predating what's there now I see which would indicate it's not the okay the original I'd be very surprised if any is if it's the original any other questions beside the pool no that I mean there's really no other structure on there um I guess if you were to remove the the um foliage right which is how we're supposed to um uh analyze uh these kinds of applications right without the the tree Escape or the landscape um you would have a pretty fome picture of the home right if there were no vegetation there no vegetation you would have a much better view of the back of the house okay those are those you can see it almost one of the Aerials you can kind of see what it's an attractive older structure yeah and by the way there would be nothing assuming that planning board approval wasn't required there be nothing to stop an applicant or an owner of that home from totally changing the appearance of it this commission only has Authority if it's a planning board or zoning board application it's a simple building permit not requiring variance or a site plan anybody could do anything they wanted with that structure not that we're proposing to I'm just saying you know the applicants proposing to upgrade it um and sort of stabilize it because it's you know and we currently live in a property that's pretty private like we've got trees all around and we love it tucked away like that and I think we'd probably want to mimic something similar here for the same reason well my question is if you're proposing to put a house on that piece um that big I guess it's a pinoke that really tall tree it looks as though that's right in the middle of your building lot so that would go yeah you know what I mean I they just they just and I don't want to be rude and make it seem like we've fought through this we haven't until they get the sub they you know but like I say should this board have an interest in being involved in that I think you and Cody have no issue not at all you know you've been always for me at least when we've we've presented plans uh you've always been very helpful in suggesting I think very positive changes to the some of the things we've done before okay uh Steve the only thing is actually what you're doing is splitting a really nice a question we just question no question John did you have a question I'm sorry I Nick I just one you may kind of touched on it already I mean given the setbacks that you'd be required to conform to on the new lot for the house is it big enough that you would be able to build a house without additional variances given what kind of rooms you want in the house how many of them the other 20 some Lots on both sides of the street you know seem to be very functional you know houses that you know hold their value well so are those the scale that you want to build a new yeah so you know we're hoping for a four Max five bedroom home um and I don't think we need anything fancy necessarily but we have a growing family and we'd like to be able to have the rooms that we need to support that so it's probably a fairly standard size in that sense I think most of the houses you're going to find um on both sides of that block and this is probably more easier to tell you see the set back to the house from this plan but yeah no that's you know they're I don't even know if they're for but they're you know four to six bedroom houses all of them with you know reasonable size front and rear yards and this lot's going to be the same or bigger uh the building lot is going to be same or bigger the lot that the house is on is going to probably be the third or fourth largest lot on the entire block on both sides you know of it so it's the result the house the house is set pretty far back for Valley Road so it's going to have a fairly reduced rear yard but it's going to have a very large front and side yard and it's you can see the resulting Lots going to be wider than most of the Lots on the entire block and I'm sorry just for clarification the four smaller lots that are directly to the to the north those are smaller than the proposed subdivision um these yeah are are they they're 75 ft 90 ft 82 ft and 60 ft width and the proposed subdivision um the existing lot itself let me just get oriented um the existing lot itself is 100 ft okay so yeah it's it's larger than than most of the Lots on both sides of irn Park Road um any other questions Nick no uh Cena no questions at the time Mr mixler um do you I have a question on what you show on this plan here the um so where that L shape where the l-shape the lot line goes across SE the L yeah I think you should have two versions I think this is what you're meaning here this yes does it go across because came in with two versions our preferred version but another version for the planning board to consider if they would prefer it say that again I think in that plan you'll see two versions of the subdivision it's it's one that the applicant preferred and there's another one just in case the planning board preferred it the applicant would rather have the one that they but you know it's should the planning board feel differently are there any anybody wish to speak to this or ask questions no all right so why don't we move on to Mr smolen and your uh sure um so I had the opportunity over the weekend to actually walk around the neighborhood it's a beautiful part of Monclair and it's a very as you've heard important uh building that we're talking about tonight the um my report is based on the survey from the 1980s uh of the property where it was uh identified as a key contributing resource to the Irwin Park historic district it's a farmhouse ATT alate style building uh the first part of my report describes some of the architecturally significant features many of which are visible from uh Valley Road however several are also visible on the east side which is from the Irwin Park uh Frontage I think it's also important to note that the building um given that it was originally a Farmstead and had a essentially command of the whole block originally um is predominantly facing south the front door is oriented perpendicular to to Valley Road um which is I think why it has a little bit more breathing room and offset on that South off the South lot line um much of my report I think relates to the concept of new construction in this historic district which is inherently what would come about from a subdivision I don't believe there have been any significant uh new construction within this historic district in nine decades effectively well there's a house or two on the valley roadside on the corner of uh uh Holland Terrace that you'll see more of a not in keeping with the character there's a couple of those but along irvan Park Road the houses are pretty consistent there's been some very extensive Renovations and additions on some of the larger Lots including the house we formerly lived in but nothing that altered the front facades in any meaningful way but within the very carefully defined Irwin Park historic district which really just stops Slightly North of your property I believe the ones toward Hollander outside of that District boundaries of the of the you're you're near the northern boundary of the historic district and the the newer construction from the 50s I think that you're referencing um are outside of the historic district so um any type of new construction it could be an Ultra Modern structure or it could be an extremely sensitive and thoughtful um building within a historic district is inherently an intrusion uh to the historic district regardless of its style regardless of it regardless of its mass um just the act of building something in 2024 is is an intrusion so the pattern of development which is my third Point um I understand your position I think that this this property in particular given that it is the nucleus of this historic district commands such a large um block with with good reason and it was I think consciously over time subdivided in a way so that you were left with what was and and still is the largest lot in that historic district for the most important house in that historic district the I don't think that's accurate it's not the largest lot in the historic district one of the largest Lots one of the largest yes okay the proximity of the new construction as a result of the subdivis which you can see on the two survey plans I think is very close to the existing building but I think what's more problematic is that given the setbacks of 25 ft off of Irwin Park Road that are dashed on that survey plan you're much closer to Irwin Park Road than the adjacent buildings to the North and the South on that on the west block front to jerwin Park Road you can see in the survey you're beginning to see the adjacent uh 2 and 1 half story frame dwelling on just to be specific here on the um I think this is the alternate plan is at best halfway back from the front footprint of the what's you know dashed as the different setbacks 25 ft from the front six from one side 10 from the other 35 1/2 uh from the rear that really becomes the footprint of this proposed new construction and that's much closer Mr SM I'm sorry but there's no there's been no building lot proposed there has there hasn't so I mean I the applicant hasn't come in with plans for a house with any setbacks so for you to say it's 25 no one's gotten as far as that at all well your survey though has indicated your as of right front yard setback from Irwin Park but that doesn't mean that's what the applicants proposed it certainly doesn't however you could that's what that's what the zoning permits is a 25 ft setback and that's not really in keeping with the setbacks along that Irwin Park Road well that's what the setback is based on is based on the average setback along the adjacent properties it doesn't come from anywhere else that's the zoning code it's not not it's not an inherently exact number it's based on the setbacks of the surrounding properties so if that were the case why is a 25 foot front yard setback identified on the surveys you'd have to ask the surveyor which I did not bring now the applicant's more than happy to have this board have have input and jurisdiction over whatever is proposed two different prop isic the Aver you know it's the average of the two houses on either side so I don't know if the surveyor has it quite he's showing something there but I don't know how Okay accurate understood understood um so part of the reason I visited um the neighborhood and this block specifically was from I looked at that same exact Google Earth image it's almost impossible to see the East uh facade of your building from that Google Earth thing but even going there in person in full foliage today at the end of the summer beginning of the Fall um it's completely um apparent that you can see the East facade of the existing subject property from Irwin Park Road distant sure but it's definitely visible and it's not the type of facade that wasn't thought about it certainly has a lot of historic character defining detail that a proposed building would conceal it's to having been in the structure it's a very new addition in the lower level of that rear of the building it's it's I don't know if it looks original but it's not it's very odd actually from the interior they they did a whole uh less than uh sensitive addition to that structure Bas based on the survey from 1981 we think that addition was from 1885 which would put no indication zero shot it's like doesn't even belong in that house by a lot Landslide like it's awkwardly placed I'll put it that way yeah it's really not in keeping with the character of the rest of the structure it's very it's very low ceilings it's inferior materials it's really really strange and it's the it's the facade at the lower level facing Irwin Park Road so looking at the East Frontage from 100 100 20 ft away it wasn't readily apparent to me that there was an addition from after 1885 tacked on the back of for you to come in and I think if you come inside you you'd be it'd be apparent in a few minutes so the last point I'll just make to answer the vice chair's question is that looking at some satellite uh photos it would seem like that pool was built between uh 197 when it's not present in a satellite picture in 1979 okay that'll conclude my report part so why don't we open it up for discussion now um Mr mixer how about we start with you and what we have to consider again this is the um uh uh uh Irwin Park historic district it's a state uh historic district uh registered this is the the most um the house that they proposed to sell when it is the most significant house that's in that area the oldest one um so the question really becomes whether or not this should be subdivided this current line that's what we're talking about now um so with those you know things in mind what is your opinion on whether or not the subdivision what what we would agree on yep um I from a historic point of view correct I I appreciate that I um I think the the adjacent properties and the size of the current sublots that are visible even from the 1933 plan but also what's what we see here are substantially similar to what's being proposed um you know again we don't we don't have the detail that that uh of what the proposed structure would you know its exact location including setbacks for that but um I don't have a um particular um uh negative response to having it subdivided provided it you know continues along the same path of um of preserving the historic district that particular historic District's um I guess size and and scale of of uh potential subdivision um I I did just have a a question with um for Mr smolen um regarding the um the final comment on your conclusion where it says um in line with the SOI standards is that in reference to the existing building or subject to a new constructed property in the in the sub the subdivision that's in reference to the new construction that would result from the subdivision got it okay um so you said in line with s standards appropriate new construction shall be compatible with size scale and character of the historic property and does not significantly alter its historic setting thus preserving the visual and spatial Harmony of the district so with a subdivision and that in mind you could you could maintain a um historic view of a a new bu build in that property I do agree with what you're saying anything built in 2024 is an intrusion but it's not subject to it's not it isn't not without reason that this that the subdivision could occur well you would inherently be modifying the historic setting of this building as it's existed for 100 years because you're obscuring the view uh you're obscuring the view by building another structure next to it okay that's my commentary thank you m Mr chairperson I'm sorry yes I just I don't be rude but I like to point out to the board that if the property's not subdivided somebody could build a pulled house or a ah HD whatever they're called that you know someone could build another structure you even a garage on this lot mhm um that this board may have a lot less control of it would be an as of right application to the planning board even if it required a site plan it would still be as of right or it could be as of right thank you for pointing that out M Floyd I have no comments Mr Juliano uh I agree with Mr mixer and Mr smallen on deferring points I mean I I agree with you that you're not creating a lot that's less in character with what's around it um I don't think that would diminish the neighborhood or the quality of the neighborhood um again it's an upkeep of the historical fabric it's hard to completely judge without an idea of what's going on that lot you know assuming the subdivision is approved um we'd be interested to see that um and again if the the house itself that's on the other lot on Valley you know if the addition toward the rear of it is not historic or not original I'm less opposed to not having a view of it from Irwin Park anymore um you know if the new lot is within the right size constraints and the house is within you know an acceptable bulk amount so those would be my comments I'm you know more in favor of it than not in favor Steve um I do not like splitting up big Big Lots like this um I think it's most of the historic fabric of this house relies on all the land that's sitting around it um I can see other ways that someone could subdivide this but I don't see the point of subdividing it so so not in favor not in Favor John um I just respond visually to things and I see sort of what I the fabric of this block and it's really more consistent to actually subdivide it and continue the rhythm of the houses along Erland Park um I suspect that views to this house have been minimized over many years it was probably one of the few houses on that block at one time and these other houses have obscured other views of it um and as far as building something new in the historic district well we got some historic districts around here we always got stuff being built new so uh it comes back to what is going to go there and if you're willing to come back to us and work with us and deal with us uh I I would have no problem with this subdivision okay Mike I I tend to have concerns about subdividing historic Lots but I believe the Harrison family is responsible for wanting this large swath of land subdivided uh for additional housing um I think uh the pool being built in the 70s detaches it from you know its Real historic Origins even though it is older than 50 years it's not really connected to the Harrison in any way um if it was built in the 70s I agree subdividing it tends to keep the rhythm of Irwin park and if we're able to look and have input on what's built there I'd be more comfortable as well um I think in general and I I appreciated Mr Juliano's point about the back of the house not being um a true historic structure that you'd be viewing from Irwin Park Road so I think in general I would be supportive of subdividing so those are my comments uh when this first came uh in front of us and I that's why I drove past on Irwin Park Road today um that the uh the wooded land really adds to the landscape of the whole of the whole block I mean even around the bend when you come around the house to the to the to the uh South is on a larger piece of property there there are a lot of trees I think if the tree the the tree that I noted um the really tall must be a a pinoke the the one that's that that you could see that's really beautifully foliaged looks like it's almost right in this it looks like the pool and the tree right in the center of it so obviously the pool has to go and I'm just wondering that unfortunately the tree would have to go um so I think in my opinion as we as I drove by knowing that this was one of the last and your point Steve about it being you know not maybe not quite the largest lot like the one on the on the corner would have would be the largest lot I think there's something to be said was land around a a a house especially in Montclair where everything seems to be built over now in this day and age so I'm I'm curious um I think I would be more prone to go with the subdivision if we knew what the setback was on Irwin Park which but uh we really don't know what it will be from irn Park Road the applicant has offered to let to give the board jurisdiction if it's you know in support of the application assuming it gets approved by the planning board right right it's no there other than the subdivision I don't think there's going to be a it's going to be a difficult uh relationship I think everybody wants the same thing a compatible house that's going to look good on that street and in my experience with the board before it's it's I've been encouraged not to just replicate the old style but to do sort of a more you know modern material and interpretation of that and if if that's still the attitude of the board I think that you know the input will be very useful to the applicant and even in terms of landscaping and setback and everything else MH and we lived on this block for many years and so we have a it's a there's a very specific reason why we want to come back to this block and that definitely plays into our decision for even wanting to do this in the first place so is there very special block in Montclair I mean access oh absolutely by the way and the house itself the existing house is very very special very unusual but very special with that rrap around porch right and views of the pond and the park it's you know right right um sure you know I just um in light of what the applicant had mentioned after I had spoken it is true that if you leave it and they are able to purchase the house we couldn't have any control over what a person would put in there that is very very good point and I think that if we did consider subdivision knowing what the setback would be at least we were able to have control of what went on to the property you know that would kind of match with what we would like to see as a historical architect so so I you know I I would be in support of the subdivision if we knew what the setbacks would be so let me ask a legal question how if if we approve the uh subdivision how uh how much um how much say would we have into uh as a condition how much say would we have into what would be built there in terms of setback size design style can we can is that something that we uh well first of all Mr can give this uh commission jurisdiction but appreciate the offer but you know the applicant can request at the planning board to give this you know it may not the applicant in the planning board may not be able to give the HPC the legal Authority it may you know the planning board may not have that right however the applicant can consent and ask the planning board to memorialize it in a resolution as a condition of a resolution um by the planning board so that's uh except for you uh other people um I think they could if you consent to that condition um refer it back to us for design control not just input I've not seen that done before but I don't see why the planning board could not condition its approval on that if you consented to it it would really I mean we're getting down the road here but it would really be up to the planning board attorney if they could see their way through the applicant I think has no problem consenting to that and working with the board even if if they get the subdivision even if the planning board decides to exclude the condition right I I think that well voluntarily we've come in voluntarily here before and voluntarily can mean whatever we all wanted to mean I mean I think the applicant is very open to the board's input whether it's a requirement of the resolution or not I don't think that's going to change from the applicant standpoint did everybody understand that so we have many applicants that offer to give us jurisdiction guys I we we've done this a lot we I've been here I've personally been here before but my daughter-in-law and son have not but but I I I understand the goal and I think I'm forgetting the subdivion permit building a new structure on this I think the goals are very similar to have something that's going to work well in that neighborhood and what that means has to still be determined but I've come here voluntarily on projects that I was less certain about and the input that I've gotten almost always has been very helpful to us in coming up with a final plan and we've done that voluntarily on any number of projects and you've been very open to giving us your free advice which has been very valuable to us mhm and we're not voting here today right this is all our input to the planning board so we can it's a referral right so we can state that we would only be comfortable with a subdivision given XYZ parameters right we're not absolutely voting on anything tonight anyway so mr's not here but we you know if the applicant as a report of the commission we will inform him and that we need to make it a condition of a potential approval that it comes back here for approval or you know if they if they will do that a condition of what of the subdivision no a condition of of potential approval of the subdivision is that what you just said well it would be a it would be a ition of the resolution should they decide to Grant a subdivision approval that would be the suggestion to the planning board that's what Mr we can't make them do that we can only tell them that this is what the applicant is you know wishes so this is what the HPC is wishing so so the uh generally it sounds as though everyone is in approval of the subdivision if we have control if the planning if the planning board what will uh approves it if a planning board approves the subdivision and that the uh building and the design and the placement and all that comes back to us for further approval for for approval right as um yes it comes back to you for approval of the of the build the next step will really be a probably a building permit yeah the site plan and all and all so well it's with a single family house it's not technically a site plan but but it's something that we have to look at and see oh yeah no no no no so what I technically what document you'll get you're probably going to get building uh permit app appliation the applicant may choose to come in here just to have an informal discussion about the elevation and possibly sighting of the property beforehand before they get too far down the road I I would encourage them to do that as a useful and but we're getting ahead of ourselves if well the subdivision is approved right okay so generally speaking everybody sounds as though with these conditions that this this commission is in would would approve the the the subdivision provided right that the site plan or whatever pertinent document came back to us for review and for input rev review I think we would want would we want I think we'd want input prior to uh yeah my suggestion to the applicant is when they have pimary elevations I mean enough that that they actually and and citing but it's really about more the elevations that they come to the board for an informal discussion whether you do it at a subcommittee or the whole board we could do it in a subcommittee yeah that that they get to you know because yeah I think it'll be very useful exercise but I don't want to jinx the potential thiso right right okay okay so I guess that then um so you don't vote no these are these just whatever we issue uh recommendations to the planning board which you will go to for your next round to see whether or not it they they can agree that it be subdivided what are the boundaries of this the historic district does anybody know you you know what park his director because I I'm I have no I I tried to look it up in in this today but I I tried to find it too but yeah I couldn't find it it was uh okay no it but it does say did and I know that that's the most important house in the in the irn Park oh it's a it's a really yeah yeah and and I have I just want to say that the reason um I really am not in agreement with the subdivision I'm not but I think that the Spectre of it of that lot behind something else going in there which I think it could possibly considering what's going on in Montclair Now is really uh could be devastating to the to the to the area so I think with the reassurance that we'll see what you want to put there uh you know what you're planning to put there and would be uh I I think just much uh better for for everybody could benefit from right right thanks than all right thank you thank you very much is it cold in here I said the same thing nobody agreed with me thank you thank you thank you all right um so our last application of the night sorry it took so long um but we will invite you forward this is another um this is uh application 2906 n Cornell way it's a bulk variance for an addition and these are recommendations going to the zoning board um the property is located on the north side of Corell way the property contains a single family split frame dwelling there's a driveway on the Eastern side there was a picket fence around the rear and a line of mature trees and what the um project description is uh you're proposing to construct a partial second floor plus attic Edition on the west side of the existing split level dwelling the new second floor Edition will contain two bedrooms and two bathrooms the existing chimney will be extended 2 feet above the ridge line other proposed improvements include adding a new front porch with decking below the new second floor Edition the existing rear enclosed porch will be converted into to a breakfast nook uh two new Dormers and a cultured stone bottom will be added to the Westerly side of the house so this property is in the r one family Zone and the applicant is seeking variants from Montclair code 34739 B for the front yard setback on Cornell way the proposed front yard setback with the new addition of the porch and the second floor plus attic is 32 ft where a minimum front yard setback of 50 ft is required the porch is set back 32 ft and the second floor Edition follows the existing setback at the home at 40 ft so welcome if you could please identify yourselves and and your um connection with the project sure my name is Leonard wi trb and my wife and I uh are the recent purchases of the home and um with me is um Chuck melet who is our architect and um Enrique sza who is our uh contractor oh okay okay great so if you just raise your right hand Miss bow will'll SAR you in okay um you swear or about the truth I do do thank you so um could you then proceed with um the project sure description of the project I I'll just I know it's kind of late so I I appreciate everyone's time I'll try to be extremely brief um uh uh my wife and I uh moved to town 27 years ago we first lived on North Mountain Avenue um we then moved to 14 H Drive which is a little I think of Stones Throw it's on the opposite Street uh and about three houses down over 20 years ago we just sold that house this summer and bought this house my wife grew up on Elston Road where her parents still live almost 60 years um you know late so um so my wife and so my wife is uh very connected to the town and and to this street so we know a lot of people on the street and the adjourning neighborhoods uh for many years and over time I guess we've become the older people in the neighborhood um so it's it it's a relatively small house it was originally three bedrooms so we're simply looking to do a couple of things um we're not really changing the footprint of the house at all and we're just trying to add as as you indicated a front porch to make the you know the uh um the entrance way a little more uh appealing and right now there's um the there really is just an attic throughout the whole house and so what we're doing is on half of that attic we're adding Dormers simply for aesthetic reasons for no other purpose and on the other half we we are planning to build over over the great room area to build two bedrooms um to so it's relatively it's a split level house it's has three small bedrooms and so we're just trying to make it more of of of a more what I think a a normal size house so but but there's but we're not changing the footprint we're not moving really walls at all um I think the only thing we're doing is we're trying to uh make some of the windows more attractive I I don't think this house was built uh and it's not been maintained I think we bought it from someone who really was I I don't know if I'm allowed to say this but they were a flipper um so and they didn't really do much to the house to make it more attractive or comfortable so so we're really doing most of that work ourselves um and so the goal is simply uh to make it more attractive and and nicer and more comfortable okay thank you do you have anything to add Mr yeah uh yeah I I would add that um so the addition um that we're proposing is only over a portion of the house within the footprint the only thing that isn't within the footprint is the front B uh porch That's being proposed and the top of the roof Ridge of the addition which would be the highest point is 31 fet above grade um those those are the only facts that I want to be out there uh I would just I guess I would just add in terms of so we we walk our dogs almost every day around from hel drive and Cornell way almost every day so um most of that I think I don't know that any of the houses set back 50 feet from the the the curb so I think and in fact our house is probably set forth further than many of the houses on the street and many of the people either have had P porches or they've added porches over time and so I think that what we're trying to do is more consistent with with all of the houses in the neighborhood um so it's honest if our house is somehow uh you know closer to the street than other houses I think the house on one side of I think at least one side of us the house is the same uh distance and the other house it's substantially uh closer to the curb okay thank you um so we'll start with questions sure um uh how about you John okay uh just looking at the elevations uh here um the new front porch that you're providing you don't think you need a railing there's no railing shown at the the front of that porch but you're about 30 in above the grade there um yeah we don't show railing but obviously the drawings are going to be per code so if finished grade is going to be 30 in then there would be a railing okay so U and just a is there a reason why the M spacing of the windows is different on one side as opposed to the other the the windows that are um the windows that are in the lower the lowest level on the right side if you're looking at the front uh and also above those Windows which is the living space those are existing all of the other windows are proposed new so as far as we know those were original windows that that I just pointed out um what's what's not I'm not sure that answers my question why it doesn't answer your question and it looks like there's these windows have the the way they're divided up they have square panes on the left hand side Square panes at the bottom of a an operable sash it's just a different Arrangement right of yes it's more of a uh uh I would say well that's fine and and I see blank spots at the door I just see a white I can't tell what the door looks like and I see what looks like an awning window on the second floor that's just a solid piece of glass as well you know what I'm going to uh open the drawing for reference the bathroom I was thinking flip the whole thing talking about that yeah sort of jumps out as like the bathtu yeah but sh should still have or something something the only modern talk about why is that to okay here I'll comment more than a question is is that what you're proposing an awning window a solid sheet of glass there no no that that could be um no that that could be a a fixed window actually I guess I'm going to not whether it's an aing or a fixed window but it's it it's not broken up with mutton bars like the rest of the windows should be correct okay aesthetically that that is a lot value added sir okay and the front door I can't tell again you're showing us something so I'm commenting on what we're looking at there's nothing drawn for the front door I don't know if you're keeping the existing front door the existing front door is I would say quite inexpensive and thin inexpensive in so so we're we're planning to buy a a sturdier uh attractive door that doesn't look like you know you're going walking into a glass door or something uh you know in I'm supposed to be asking questions I'm done with questions Steve I really don't have any questions okay Nick um my only question is you for the second floor bathroom going back to that window the kind of blank one without muttons that's a different shape than the rest did you think it all about flipping the bathroom so that the vanity is on the exterior wall and possibly being able to get a regular window there that matches the bedroom windows I understand what the tub being there you're kind of limited to a smaller window higher elevation but if we flip the whole bathroom Orient then it gives you the opportunity to get a window that's a little more consistent an improvement you're talking about having like a fullsize you know window there yeah yeah yeah just just in terms of the front facade right you know it looks like you have these big windows and then you have this little window that's obviously there for a bathroom and we certainly can facing the street we certainly easier could I don't know if it makes sense to make it I don't know if we can make it a half you know of the length just in terms of because then it takes away that whole right it does take away most of that wall but we could we could do that that is something that would work okay that was my only question that's a good one yeah a good one M no questions no questions for me either hi no questions um I getting back to the and I know we're not supposed to design here but it the the the symmetry of on the on the first floor with the existing one with you've got new windows that look like yes sash windows with transoms over over it yes okay so is there a way to reconfigure the windows getting back to that point so that you don't have this you know un symmetrical nonsymmetrical arrangement on that second floor are you talking about doing away with the whatever well no no I'm not talking about doing away just making it more symmetrical so it's in line with if you could get three windows on the second floor I don't know about how tall they are if you get three Windows the same size that'd be an improvement to this facade wouldn't it I agree yeah I think we could do that okay okay um and then those are my questions a small sorry sorry woke me up uh so it's a split level house um which is a very prevalent style in that potential historic district that you're in um I think the technical term for what happened here in the last couple years is is a flipper did a number on it so the the house that that we're left with and and looking at tonight I think really lacks um historic significance because of the just sheer amount of original facade material that's been removed and some of the odd alterations that happened over the past couple years so it's not a um significant historic resource to that potential historic district I do however think that by going for a one and a half to effectively twostory structure um nine Cornell way does become a little bit more imposing it's probably one of the taller structures on that side of the block um which does begin to alter the streetscape I think um maybe if you could just the architect could speak to a little bit more about the proposed materials and how they're compatible with some of the adjacent um older buildings that would be helpful and just how you're um maybe acknowledging the mid-century Suburban aesthetic of that neighborhood uh okay so we we concentrated on nine Cornell when we were you know putting the drawings together but then when your report came back what I did was I walked Cornell I didn't walk the entire uh District but I walked Cornell and I noticed that at least half of the houses on Cornell are as high as 31 ft I was I was surprised um the the two adjacent houses looking at the house the two adjacent houses to the left are as tall as 31 or taller um in terms of the material I if I could just interject so this is a picture of our next door neighbor's house and then our house which is sits lower on the ground so even with the addition our roof line will be significantly lower than their roof line so I think that so it's not as if you're going to walk it's not as if it's a flat level area and you're going to walk past it and our house is the tallest house on the Block and it's not I I forgot which I don't have the number on this house this is this may be the tallest house on the Block which is significantly taller than what our proposed house is so I don't think that you know we're not trying to become the biggest house on the Block and I don't think it will have that feel most of the houses on that block although they may have originally been split level are now twostory houses and on the opposing block Frontage where I think there may even be some single story homes there are a few but but for the majority I I believe that they're of this type or or even full twostory homes there there are there are still there are a few original split levels and can you speak to the materiality that you're proposing or is it genuine um wood siding for example or a composite we're we're we're proposing vinyl um and most of the houses in the neighborhood are vinyl um I noticed looking at older photos of the house probably before it was flipped it was wood um uh shakes or something like that and they may be underneath the house but I think the I think the current siding on the house is aluminum currently so it's not original wood and if it were we would be looking to we would be looking to match it so we're not trying to you know downgrade from the original you know aesthetic but are you proposing to change the whole the entire all the siding correct all the siding will be well half of that house is aluminum and the wood is covered by aluminum half of the other house where flood that the hard plant siding that's we're trying to match the hard just a better oh so I'm so you're not proposing so the uh do we have to SAR in or can somebody oh Wasing okay then can he come to grab a microphone just so you can speak into the microphone for the record sorry so I'm sorry you're are you proposing to Enrique this is Enrique Sosa who is our contractor who has in but and is the light on for the uh yes it is okay great thank you so so the new the the um the siding here that Mr sming was talking about is that new or are you proposing to keep well half half of the on the right side of the house half of it is covered on the wood all siding is covered by aluminum and the other half is done by Hardy um siding Hardy plank siding what color is the Hardy plank siding is uh gray it's gray and the siding on the right is also and the front is um is brand new too it's Hardy plank they did a design on it the white color portion is is Hardy plank mhm so where's so it has basically three sidings the whole house are any of them vinyl both of them are any of the existing sightings vinyl uh no is um is aluminum um the left side is U Hardy plank and the front is the the Hardy too the Hardy boore that's a number and so we would be matching the Hardy Board plank so you're not proposing vinyl it's ctitious siding yeah it's the um you know the hard concrete um s that's what you're installing that's what we're going to install on the second part where we so are you installing any vinyl siding no no vinyl where vinyl where did vinyl come from I I I know that may have been a misspeak that's good because we would not be happy with vinyl so okay so the whole house you're not having half vinyl and have Hardy court it's Hardy Court correct I heard that too except for the brick okay it's Stone culture brick here but stone is there house okay um the the Brick on the right the old part of the house is that brick or is that is that is that brick brick or is that um yes that's brick thin St brick no it's brick brick it's brick and you're proposing to put Stone on top of stone uh no we're keeping that brick staying out oh it doesn't say so on here it says cultured stone which I think might we are we are putting Stone over the brick okay that was the the intent okay I I just because I think uh to Mr smen's point about materiality with the um breast of the neighborhood um you know brick might speak more to the age of of of the house and the and the neighborhood I I think I I can't say definitively but I think most of the houses have more Stone than brick okay well that's probably well I have a question um I see a trim board below the porch that you're adding and then a blank space below that until it Go gets to grade what is that what is it is that a foundation is it a yeah the foundation is there the foundation comes up to that trim board yes and that it's what's stuck out over no that's um the uh composite for exterior it's just the cover the trim board I understand what's below the trim board uh no nothing it's just covering space or covering the is that the foundation coming yes that's the foundation so it's covering the all just to the point about the brick versus the stone I'm just looking at the houses on either side of you and across the street and couple down looks like most of them are brick um some of them are brick if it's helpful I can hand up these pictures and I don't have the exact numbers but this one is on the Block that is Stone and I see I do see Brick and here's this is number 23 uh which has the stone um so if I could just hand those up Mark I don't have definitive you know but I do know so so far I saw two brick and two Stone as other houses on the on from the pictures I have um yeah just looking at Google Maps looks like many of them are stoned I I haven't I me minim of brick I'm not seeing the stone but I'll continue looking and do you have a a a cut sheet for the windows what type of Windows you're using do you have any uh we'll be using on the Anderson Windows andon 400 series 400 series oh okay all right that's good um so we have the siding the windows what are we looking at the the brick um and I just had a question with how that um that proposed new shingle roof that you're running across the um the new front porch how how does that tie into um can't really tell where the here that above the door see that roof goes goes on to the column and ends and is this what you were asking about John this and no talking about below the new porch oh here right there where I'm going to say they should put Stone but we'll get there so okay well it should be the same thing as whatever they're going to put you yeah the base of the building so how how are you finishing how are you how are you contemplating doing finishing that roof that little pent roof that comes that's above the new uh that that is the new porch into the right side of the house it's the left side elevation to read what's going on there but this is a head so it's dying into the side of this so it's oh so comes out it come yeah in there and then comes around are you referring to the left side elevation yeah I'm just I couldn't understand how you were how you were uh doing that but now I I kind of get it all right so what John's point was is that whatever you're using to the right um should be continued for the foundation uh under the uh the porch the new porch and what about the shutters what kind of shutters are you putting are are they are you proposing Shutters on the not on all the windows right well the the the shutters are there are exist the ones on the right half are existing shutters oh they're not here you've got better pictures than I have then [Applause] I mean we were planning to to put the shutters that you know that mirror the neighborhood and so for for this for the design of the house I don't know why you have shutters on part of the house and and what are the shutters what what is the material the shutters you know oh there'll be wood okay all right those are my questions it's kind of not uncommon for split level homes to have shutters in part of the house and not on the other they did that okay I think it's okay actually that character there's no there's no shutters here all right um are any other comments no we just questioned now we're doing comments right now we're doing comments now we're doing comments right all right yes go ahead okay well I think in general I think this is an improvement over what I see in this image here uh I would just do the stone as a base all the way across the facade uh I would uh eliminate that transom window that sort of is sort of standing my eye goes directly to that as opposed to other thing I would try to get three windows that were the same size and um you know I think there's you know when I look at drawings like what are presented there's a lot of details that are always missing such as railings gutters leaders things that are going to go end up on this building it would be nice to be able to see where those things are but I'm going to I'm going to guess that's probably going to get worked out so okay those are my comments Steve I agree with that Gman said um yeah they just standardize the windows somehow and going put on shutters let's find out what they are well the shutters I think are wood well they should be wood they are they will okay okay and Nick I think it's a big Improvement to what's there um I think it makes it look a lot more consistent with the surrounding neighborhood and the existing architecture that's already there um I think a lot of it's going to come down to the right detailing you know making sure the windows have real muttons on them not you know ones that are in between the panes of glass that are outside the glass so it looks authentic U real wood shutters you know ASAC or wood for all the trim and the columns and the railings um and yeah i' work on you know getting that bathroom to work a little better at the second floor to make the front you know three equal Windows across um so that you know your eye doesn't go right to the one oddly shaped window compared to the rest of the house um but other than that you know I think it's a good application I I think front porches are always great additions to houses they look neighborly it kind of softens The Edge between the Street and the lawn and the mass of the house so overall I'm in favor of it good Cena I would agree that just consistency is nice but it's beautiful Improvement yeah and we can address that and I just I know it's late but I'll just comment the first thing we did on hel drive over 20 years ago we put a swing a porch swing in and and everyone seems to love come sitting on our porch and and just sitting there you know so we're looking to replicate that thank you Mr mixer um I just Echo the comments that that were said before too and and um I do appreciate a good porch so yeah I understand that too and I I know that that's a different discussion for the planning board and variant and all the rest but uh um but do uh do appreciate that and I think this is in general an improvement um on what the the current state is so appreciate it thanks Mike yeah I agree it's an uh it is certainly a big Improvement um I don't have an issue you know looking these photos with the stone versus the break uh and I think overall um you know it's uh um you I I I like a good porch too Mr mixer so uh I hope we're invited over on the swing as well but uh overall uh I think it's a nice job thank you yeah and thank you I think what you've done and our suggestions will really make it pop I just caution you I I hope the porch is wide enough I I you know I don't I I know that are I don't know even what no what with depth that's I know do you know what the depth of the porch is yeah I think it's 6 feet um you know we're cognizant of that setback MH yeah and does the the the roof come right over the comes over the whole porch yes yes okay well six Feet's not that big of a porch not as big as our current one but it's it'll do okay well thank you very much and you you've got all of our all the uh recommendations okay so we write these recommendations up and then it'll go to the uh the zoning board correct yes yes okay when is it on for December 4th oh okay see up month okay thank you very much thank you all I appreciate it stay so late address it thank you thank you return your sure all right but wait we haven't we so um the discussion the CLG Grant updates we've already covered that under our uh committee reports um is there any other further discussion for tonight okay haven't said that it's uh 56 to 11 who would like to make a motion to to adjourn move adjourn uh second second all in favor okay see you the next meeting November 21st all right thank you nice work team