all right can we call this meeting to order uh can we take a roll please fny roll call please here herei here here herei herei okay St rise for the salute flag please pledge allegiance to the flag the United States of America to The Republic it stands one nation under God indivisible justice for all the notice requirements of the open public meeting law for this meeting have been satisfied a copy of the notice having been sent to the asur park press the coaster and filed in the office of Township Clerk on July 2 1st 2024 sorry I'm marking up my uh emergency notes there's an emergency uh door through the courtroom doors in the back and two exits over here and then there's two exits in the back of the room policy is no smoking so please do not smoke anything here board policy no new cases will be started after 10 p.m. no new testimony taken after 10:30 p.m. in addition the applicant will be limited to 45 minutes of testimony all meetings will be video and audio taped and shown on the Township's oce Township of oceans Community cable channel channel 22 on verz and FiOS channel 77 on cable vision all cell phones must be turned off if you need to make a call please make your call outside of the meeting room please take a moment now to silence all mobile devices minutes for adoption we have January 18th 2024 and May 16th 2024 can we call I'm sure we all weren't here for the same what you could do is just do an all in favor and then we'll say except for who do so uh uh so uh all those in favor of adopting the minutes for January 18th 2024 and May 16th 2024 say I I those opposed the eyes have it resolution memorialization um Hannah Boyce 904 grassme Avenue Ocean Township block 87 lot 9 margerie hamway 232 Overbrook Avenue block 22 lot 31 Lewis and Jacqueline Massy 500 r ronning Avenue block 40 lot 16 Samuel habber 507 Stafa street block 67 Lot 8 okay um those are all the same meeting night so okay to vote those different all those in favor of adopting them those resolution say I I I I those opposed eyes have it finally the synagogue of eligible on that one was eligible on that who was who was okay we only need one to you only need one to memorialize so you have three okay right one two three four yeah that's for f okay and all those in favor of moralizing the resolution synagogue of Oakhurst one B Avenue block 12.02 lot one please say I I hi I those opposed you nice have it I think everybody was El that way okay I was in the back for the room that day but you're in the back of the room yeah I came in late sorry to you didn't vote on that appliation okay um Martinez is being carried to the next meeting right so the following are the uh are the last two cases on tonight also going to the 18th of July Samantha Martinez 500 bound road block 39.0 7.01 on this one is that being carried with notice without notice without notice seing to okay oh that's revised no I didn't get that one okay no I didn't get it either we didn't get it so oh seeking to oh so you want to carry Martinez right we're carrying um Samantha Martinez 500 bound road block 3901 lot 07 along with the sixth and seventh cases listed on tonight's agenda I aat Services LLC 1700 Highway 35 and uh as well as 1418 Highway 35 those cases will be carried to Jan or J July 18th 2024 all of them without further notice correct is Martin is going to re notice was there a defect in their notice so they were going to re notice so the the the billboard cases basically are carried without notice the and Martini says the notice or what was the notice on was defective okay so yes so they're going to Ren notice the they're going to have to R notice Martinez will R notice the you is it it did they notice they're going to be both of those will be carried without new notice okay they noticed they Ren noticed for for last month this no this month oh this month okay so we carry it so they need no more notice correct they've noticed for this meeting was was a up you want you want to re notice it so they noticed for last month they then they were carried from last month to this month now they're going to be carried again without notice it's it's really up to the board anybody have any comments okay without do notice that's that's fine we we do it for other people I've seen it done many times and and but they had gone on again or forg on again off again so we did require a new notice for the May meeting They carried from May to June now they're carrying it June to July so I think you got to indicate to them if they don't appear July require a new notice so those are the sixth and seventh cases that are on the agenda for this evening if you're here to watch uh the cases that had to do with Billboards that will not be heard tonight it'll be heard on July 18th 2024 okay we're on to new cases for this evening uh first case Ryan Grove and Amanda SEI I'm sorry if I mispronounced that name 238 Overbrook Avenue block 22 lot 33 you here you come on up Miss can you tell me how to properly pronounce your name Sim Sim all right everyone get okay uh Mr Gro before you sit down and M Nei can you stand up please uh raise your right hands if you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay thank you very much have a seat a d yeah okay this is what continuation D2 yeah continuation not performing use oh it's actually it's a unusual one it's a really a D1 it's a modification of the D1 okay so it's whatever any event it's a d variance yes a d variance means you need F this is different than a majority of the board deciding you need five affirmative votes so that we have six people here and if you get four to two you lose understand okay our maximum amount of Voters are seven um there are evenings we have eight nine 10 people with our alternates and you can get a full seven vote tonight the maximum vote you can get is six so it's your decision whether or not to proceed tonight or carry it to another date we could proceed please I do have another question we did have a prior hearing on this and were all the members of the board present at that hearing or are we starting over again I believe we're starting over we're starting over again it's Revis plans new plans new reports okay and new notice new notice oh okay oh okay okay the other the other application withdrawn and replaced okay okay okay good thank you okay could we start with you two talk talking to us about what you're doing and and what what you need from us and then we'll turn over to our experts to to let us know what they think yeah great um the house is just really not in the best condition right now we're just looking to do a remodel of it so not not adding anything just changing the exterior do you know what's what's what's the reason that we need to what are we voting on tonight um is there what's what are you trying to do that are kind of against the existing policies or rules I believe it's just a pre um a non-conforming existing structure so we're just looking to remodel that okay are you doing any additions no additions um so we did it is a multifam so we did do the front house we completely remodeled that and now we're just looking to do it to the second portion of it and we do have pictures if you want to see back house correct okay you're not you're not adding anything not adding anything no it's just a gut and uh it is in the flood zone correct yes that's correct okay I should say it marked packet right uh Jim you want to let us know it's an unusual situation so I'll try and explain it as best as I can to the board the site got a D D1 variance a use variance back in 1984 I believe it was to allow one unit in the front building and a unit and the garage in the back sometime between now and 1984 a prior owner of the site converted the front building to two units and then a subsequent owner came in with an application to the board for two units in the front and one unit in the back in the middle of that application covid hit the applicant's attorney was one of the first people in New Jersey to die from Co and the thing got totally confusing and just fell through the cracks and these lovely young people bought it since then what they have done is my understanding and confirmed you you've converted the front building back to a one family correct yes and now they want to do a one bedroom in the rear so that you still have two units which is approved by D variant in 1984 now there's a court case that explains that when you have it's there's two situations if you have a use that's pre-existing non-conforming meaning it wasn't created by variants but it was predated the zoning and you're expanding it or changing it you need what's called a D2 variance which is for expansion of a pre-existing non-conforming use and there's a court case that says this type of situation doesn't fit that this type of situation is a situation where the special reasons which have to be Grant granted for a D1 variance have already been approved and the applicant only needs to show that the there is no substantial negative of impact to what they're doing to change the site but the the special reasons for the D1 variants already exist and that that case is poo I've had the unfortunate experience of explaining that case in detail to the Jackson Township zoning board only to find out the judge that wrote the decision was on the board and thank God he agreed with that so so I I know the case very well so basically what what has to be done here to look at this site and see whether or not what's being done will have any substantial negative impact on the surrounding area I've looked at it the the applicant has been very Cooperative done everything I've wanted so I don't have a problem at all with what they're doing I think they really the application that I understand it what the report says is this is the old report the old report you had new report no no that's February 14th is the yeah yeah that's the old report okay that's the only report the only no old no didn't you do another report no there wasn't another one okay you looked at it and said because changes they're making don't change you you had just said that in 1984 there were approved for front house and a garage apartment yes someone illegally turned it into a two family in front yes and and one in the back they've reconverted the front to a one right but now they're asking for three units no they're asking for two units no no where's no what they have a one family in the front what are they doing in the back one apartment one apartment one family in the back well you okay okay okay your report says with a second story apartment at the rear of the property into a one-bedroom apartment with kitchen living room and storage and a one-bedroom bath on the second floor that's yeah that's all one it's all one unit all one unit now they have changed it to where all the living SPAC is on the second floor because it's in aone at the request so when I looked at that I said I couldn't see couldn't see writing a new report just for that one I Mis sounded like it was I can understand it yeah still two units yes and it's probably one less bedroom than that was previously approved also so they have so it's a little it's a little bit complicated because it's not the type of thing that normally comes before a boards but basically what you have to do is look at the negative criteria and if you you feel that there's no substantial negative impact then you can approve the the application Mr matl yes um so I also did not write an updated report however we did get revised plans um so a little background the when the uh application was first made I wrote a report uh that indicated that the uh proposed improvements to the back house which were first and second floor Renovations uh needed to comply with the flood damage prevention ordinance um because the the structure is in the flood zone the H and it it is a substantial Improvement uh to the that structure it would have had to have been raised uh or you couldn't have any livable space on the first floor so the applicants went back and looked at that uh they've revised their plan so that there is no livable space on the first floor it's only on the second floor so they don't have to raise their house they've also up uh updated the utility locations so that the utilities uh mechanical equipment is above the flood elevation as well so they do comply with the the ordinance um and that essentially takes care of everything in my report um I I don't really have any any issues with what they're proposing now okay thank you uh you mentioned you had pictures we have pictures in our packet let's show and you see are these the same ones you're speaking about um I just have pictures of what we did to the front house to kind of show the improvements that we're looking to do um I'm not sure we need to okay they did a very nice job on the front house uh the back house will meet will match the front house right yes anybody have any questions questions questions from the public make a motion to close a public hearing motion to close the public hearing second all in favor or no we have to do a roll call for that one yes yes yes yes yes yes I'll move for positive resolution are you guys keeping up over there yes yes yes yes yes yes congratulations Good Luck Good Luck thank you everyone thank you just to check I think we need to submit new permits then or are we okay all right next time okay all right thank you so much thank you next case is Amber and Austin Pap 1604 North wanasa Drive block 118 lot 13 applicant proposes to construct a two-story rear addition to the dwelling maximum lot coverage of the building is 25% lot area permitted 27.6 is proposed hello raise your right hand do you affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes thank you you have a seat would you like to tell us briefly why you're here what what you're doing yes so we are looking to add two feet to the back of our house um a few reasons we have a growing family two young boys the house the previous owner it was a second home for them we live there full-time um so there wasn't really any storage um there was no garage no basement so the additional two feet will just we try not to extend it all but the two feet will really allow to have a kitchen that we could see all of us together the plans also include right now the washer dryer for our 4-year-old son is in the closet of his bedroom we had the carbon monoxide alarm go off um and the fire department came out they let us know that whatever they did there with the washer dryer is enough to code at risk of carbon monoxide leaking so the plans also include moving that to its own laundry room to make sure that everything is up to code um and then there's also which we just didn't realize um there is the plans also just asked for there's a playhouse that on the survey is noted as a shed um it's a playhouse for our kids we didn't realize that would take up lot coverage being a playhouse so that was just our ignorance in that matter okay and uh actually here it says your the existing is 27.6 and you're going to 29.2 so you have a small lot to begin with um I'm venturing to guess right and will probably tell us that pry yeah and it is taken up to um I think quite a bit we have a covered front porch that goes around the front of the house over to the side a little bit so that takes up a lot of our lot coverage Jim um basically the the lot conforms believe it or not but there's actually two lots involved with the application there's the subject lot where the house is on and then the lot across the street that fronts on theal lake and quite frankly if you include the areas of both Lots the coverage would conform y so I think they really meet the intent of the ordinance and the other thing is the house is not that large the problem with the coverage is that there's a very very big porch compared to the size of the house and really the master plan talked about relaxing zoning standards for front porches and I think that's really that's something the board can look at here so I'm I just I don't have a problem with the application I think it really meets the intent of the ordinance Bennett uh yeah I don't have any engineering concerns anybody have any questions in past on houses with the two lots facing the lake usually ask for a derestriction that they can't build on the the lake Frontage other than a pathway or yeah there's there's a dock and and a and steps there I that's okay but we don't want any sheds or we have no intention there's nothing there we have no inent no I agree but we in the past we've required that that okay we know the lot number of that survey 21 what 2011 21 21 21 is across so would you be open to that would you be open to that restriction on the yes we Street probably have to come back here if you're going to build something on it um and I didn't the playhouse are you going to leave the playhouse or we're we're hoping to leave the playhouse but um we we didn't know uh in the one of the emails that came back just about the setback with the playhouse um and that if a variance were to be approved that if we we would um remodel it or move it when our kids grow out of it the intention is it's going to come down basically what I said in my report is if if it can if it can't be moved if it's difficult to move it leave it there and then if it's replaced has to be put in a conforming location which the board has done on other applications and it's so small I don't have a problem at all with that sound good it's kind of normal what we will grow out of it faster than I think they're almost there grow out of it and then you'll want to keep stuff in it so so keep it real it'll be a real sh keep it and then if you have to replace it just put it in the right spot I'll do so no questions any questions from the public any comments from the public motion to close the public hearing motion to close the publicar second yes yes yes yes yes yes have motion for a positive resolution motion for a positive resolution second yes yes yes yes yes yes okay thank you very much you'll get in touch this week right with them sorry you'll get in touch with them this week thank you good luck thank you so much thank you so much next case is Daniel Noak five derby lane block 374 lot six Zone R3 sir did I pronounce your name correctly no yes very good uh do you right hand do you swear swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth yes right thank you very much sir could you let us know what's going on yeah we put a shed on our property with an overhang for seating uh below it um we thought we were in compliance um we applied for a permit um but due to our misunderstanding between area and roof area that puts us over the 150 square ft um hence needing the setback requirements um but the shed is already constructed on the property okay uh it say there a shed with um seating it's an overhang seating below for seating does I go to the pool yeah there is a pool yeah Jim what do you got okay yeah the the shed itself the solid portion with the enclosed portion of the shed is less than 150 square ft the ordinance says where you have an except structure that's over 150 square ft you have to meet the setback requirements of the principal structure if you didn't have the overhang it would be conforming but but they do have the overhang that increases the size of the shed to approximately 290 Square ft uh from 122 Square ft so technically there's a variance necessary it's supposed to supposed to comply with the rear yard setback of the Zone which is 40 ft and it's at 15 ft 9 15.9 ft um I looked at the site I actually don't live that far from the site I live about a quarter mile so I know I know the neighborhood very well and the site has very very heavy screening along the real property line so that you the neighbors behind can't possibly see the the the shed or or the uh over overhang area and that's one of the primary reasons for that is for that requirement is the visual impact I mean they could take the the covering off that at that open covered area off and just have the shed it would be fully conforming and people could still sit there and and talk and everything so it's not a matter of the activity being annoy the neighbors any more than if that weren't there so I I don't have a big problem with it um the one problem I did have is that the as built grading plan shows the side fence sending approximately foot onto the adjacent lot one and it also encroaches on a sanitary sewer easement and so I think that's something that needs to be discussed and maybe Ben can talk about that a little bit more also but o overall I don't have a problem with it and it's important to understand too it's hard when you get as a board here you want to be an enforcement group if somebody builds something without the proper permits whether they think they're doing it right or not you really have to look at the application as would you approve this if it wasn't built and I I think that's the way you've got to look at this as the board to and like I said If This Were to come before the board and hadn't been built I I wouldn't have a big problem with it okay Ben uh yeah so the the only uh comment in my report was uh asking for clarification if the prior zoning approval included the patio underneath the overhang just to see if there was any additional new impervious surface that was constructed um that wasn't previously approved um with regards to the sanitary sewer easement uh you know typically if you have um a residential lot with an easement on it like that uh basically if you put anything of you know construct anything in the easement the town or the sewage Authority has the right to come in and remove anything that's on there to you know get to the SE the sewers if they need to maintain the sewer if there's a a project to replace the sewer anything like that uh so that that is the only thing that that would be um I guess in question with with the the fence um as long as the applicant understands that if he constructs a fence in the easement that it is subject to being removable removed at any time by the municipality what about the fact that it's not on this property well that that's a different that's probably more Mark's Mark's perview than than Ben's yeah well can you clarify which fence there's a fence running it's the fence on your side proper fence that juts um I mean we've kind of gone over it with our neighbors um they're okay with it they've seen it um there's already um an existing fence um previous to when we bought the house that extends into their fence so assuming on their property as well their fence is I think a foot on their property or less let let's explain it to the board let's go back to your question was there any answer oh I'm sorry no uh so was the was the new was the impervious surface under the overhang previously on your plan and and approved yes that was approved on the the pool uh permit so there was no added impervious coverage okay all the the concrete was all uh approved did we have to approve the pool yes did came no it was and the if that concrete area was approved it's more than 10 ft from the property line so that would have been conforming yeah okay yeah I was confused by the uh okay yeah sorry there was wasn't a variance right got the township did so can you just clarify I did you say that the fence that's on the easement was there when you moved in I'm confused no there there was a fence that kind of fences in our backyard we put a secondary fence around our pool we put a pool in last year and we have a a small child who's three and a a dog so we put a second pool fence in our backyard to for safety that's not the fence at issue is that correct correct I believe the the one foot of that fence cuz it comes up to our neighbor's fence and it seems like our neighbor's fence is a foot onto their property ah so your neighbor has a fence you built a fence right up to it their fence is a half foot or foot on their property yeah I don't know you didn't leave a foot between because why would somebody do that right and we spoken with him and he said yeah our fence is you know 8 in on our property but they were okay with that the this piece right here it's only the piece that overhangs the property okay so the overhang on the shed is what got you here um right Chim it's just the overhang yes that's right the overhang he could cut the overhang off and be in compliance and still have a fire pit right there and and 30 people little Mountain whatever okay any question or just a sitting area yeah with you know table and chairs and any questions I I don't really have an issue with it you said it's more of a site issue and the way I look at it you can't even if you took it out you're not going to see it regardless if it's there or not there see yeah from the street it really wouldn't affect it all that blocked from the street because it's behind behind the shed that's shed like a cabana or is it a no Tool Shed it's storage set is there any electric no okay there's no electric and there's no Plumbing no is it built in place or is it prefab Dro down it was built in place so we couldn't really easily move it with a truck or or anything um no electric no Plumbing but not making a cabana right yeah yeah right no it's a conrete slab was approved the concrete slab was approved and yes Mr matl you have no concern with the fence I just want to clarify this it's no it's it's a the it's a common occurrence for a fence to be in an ease like I said it's subject to removal at any time and if and if it has to be replaced it's at the owner's expense yeah I was just going to say that you understand that if the Sewer Authority has to remove that the onus is on you to replace it not yes yeah we understand yeah and there was an existing fence that I believe is also there as well as our neighbor's fence um we're aware of that was the refence permit when you put the fence up or not uh it was part of the pool permit so that was approved so I don't know if it was put up in the wrong location oversight um or yeah yeah okay defense company probably came out just replaced okay they just replace any questions from the public just any comments from the public have a motion we can't approve offense on the neighbor's property have no right to approve offense on the neighbor's property but we're not approving the is that part of this application it's not part of the application but we know about it we know now know about it so it's not part of the that's an Enforcement issue yeah for for code Code Enforcement do you want to reir to code enforcement I would prefer it to be addressed now well we can't address board can't address it we can't address it because we don't the neighbor would have to be involved okay um I guess the what we could do is a condition of approval I don't know if they're going to go this far is require them to get an easement from the neighbor for the fence um I think you're complicated not comfortable with that that's that's up to the board but if you don't want to move the fence we've done that before yeah yeah I me don't doesn't don't don't we normally I mean not we as a body but the township can have the have the homeowner just get a letter from their neighbor right I don't know if they do that we did it before we required someone to get an easement get an EAS he said a letter we required to as lawyers we don't right we don't do letters we don't do letters we do easement um the the issue is when they submitted the as Bill to the pool they should have picked that yeah okay may the permit people should have caught this and we we shouldn't be doing this after the fact that that's that's on town for but they're in front of us and we're an arm of municipality find a solution it's okayu that's ridiculous because the there's when the permit people they should have caught that okay but they and and we shouldn't be S you know making them very easy solution though and it's here why bury our heads in the sand and ignore it I think it's a really smart idea to address something that we found that was missed it's not a big deal no the the issue is the permit people should have caught it but they didn't not really because it have been correctly on the permit no but there's an inspection there should have been an as built though that showed where it was Mr Steinberg what goes into getting an easement from your neighbor you have to have a legal description of the area of the easement so you need the surveyor to set that up in it meets and Bounds and you have to do a document called e deed of easement which we go from the neighbors to them giving them the right to use that area that's on the neighbor's land and leave the fence where it's at because they're actually using the land of the neighbor by stretching the fence over it's they're including the neighbor's land as part of their usage it's really easy it's not no it's not terribly difficult but it is an effort and re spend the money some professionalism was the neighbor noticed about this meeting yeah yeah neighbor is your neighbor here our neighbor is not here our neighbor is fine with the fence and the and the shed I mean I mean the flip side of it is somebody puts a a fence up on their own property two feet in and the neighbor is now cutting that grass for the rest of Eternity do they demand e i it is let's let's go back it is what it is we know what the problem is we can do one of two things three things we can require an easement for the fence we could do nothing or we can ask Kate to tell the the uh code enforcement department that this exists and somebody didn't pick it up and would they proceed with it let them put the ball in their court and let it go if we say they need an easement the neighbor could tell him you know what I don't want one it's okay well if you're going to make it a condition of approval we're gonna have to have it understand so I'd rather give him the approval for what he came here for because I like people coming to get permits and doing the right thing and then not get caught up in other things he's here Colleen can come well that's true but well we we did but you got it you got it for the shed I understand you got it for the shed and you didn't count the overhang I would suggest I think it's perfectly reasonable to to advise Cod that we Grant if you're going to Grant this variance and least it seems that the fence is not in the appropriate location per the pool construction permit and let them if they want to do something they'll do it if they don't want to do something then you've taken some effort yep but not the extreme effort that's fine as long as we we acknowledge that it exists and we do something instead of doing nothing I'm fine with that with that Kate now okay I'm not gonna put that in the resolution sorry Kate no I thinken somebody in construction should know if there's as buil submitted tell Kate so sorry Colleen and Kate they passed it over and maybe they they're fine with it I know Kate's did you get a CFO for the pool yeah well you get a close or what a ceric of approval uh not yet it'sing so so that's why was the pool permit closed out yet not yet that's why it hasn't been picked up up yet so it's going to be picked up anyway on the as can I ask you a question so we don't have to do six fence around like the back of the property is that was that already there before the pool yes yes we had a complying pool fence we put a secondary fence um just for Extra Protection I think we could get rid of that the fence that we're talking about pre predates the this the pool it was not part of his pool application the only uh fence that was installed that technically goes into the neighbor's property is the fence in line with the um the shed that tees into the existing fence do you guys understand that se 350 ft of fence that was always there that nobody cared about and we're talking about a foot 12 in of new fence I say let Colleen worry about it yeah I agree not our I don't want let's move on okay motion to close the public hearing motion to close the public hearing second I'll move for positive res oh sorry go ahead accept the application yes yes yes yes yes yes can I do it now I'll move for positive resolution on the overhang second yes yes yes yes yes yes thank you very much thank you all thank you for your time thank you Jason not the right way to word it there okay our next case Wayne Marcy 1902 South wanasa Drive Ocean Block 132 lot 7 R5 Zone was that the one we just did no another overhang okay um day of overs Mr Marcy yes raise your hand SW do you swear for to tell the truth the whole truth yes okay thank you very much my wife is here hello uh Miss Marcy are you going to be testifying as well yes you well affirm to tell the truth hold you yes thank you all right Mr and Mrs Marcy can you let us know um why you're here this evening yes um so we as part of a um overhaul of our backyard uh for which we've gotten permits with a for a pool and outside kitchen and so forth um part of that is a shed oversized shed or future hopefully pool house um and that will not have a kitchen or bathroom or anything it's just for storage and we want to change in there what have you but um it doesn't meet the uh the the side and rear setbacks Al yeah it's also non-conforming it's 12 by 22 okay so we're here to see your approval for a variance for that all right Jim yeah it's another one of these unusual situations I the ordinance because this shed is over 150 square F feet in area requires it to be comply with a side and rear yard setbacks of the zone and the shed is set set back uh 10.33 ft from the side and uh the side yard setback is required to be 12 ft so it's a little bit short and it's set back 10.46 feet from the rear yard and 30 ft is required so it's clearly non-conforming however I I did a little bit of playing around with it because I looked at it and just something bothered me about it and they can actually put two separate sheds on the site that that are less than 150 square ft and have basically the same square footage that they're proposing here and have them 5T from the property lines and conform fully conform and I look at that I say what what they're doing makes more sense functionally and aesthetically than having two separate sheds 5et from the property line so I don't have a big problem with it okay who writes all these rules in town Jim some guy that wrote the ordinance I Bennett um so my letter is dated May 29th and a revised plan was submitted on I believe June uh 7th and the revised plan addresses my comments in my uh May 29th letter uh one thing that was noted in the response letter from the applicants engineer is that uh to address my second comment about the season water should be provided on the plans they provided a general note about the type of soil that exists on site and that the seasonal high water table is typically 80 in or or more from the surface and the applicant agrees that this could be confirmed by test bits which I would recommend uh as a condition um and uh that's the only thing that that I have to comment on so the condition is to uh verify the seasonal high water table with test pits test bits pits PSS test pits um and if a problem and I have to address it to your satisfaction yes and right the storm water management will should comply with to my satisfaction and we do have Mr clent here in case he needed to verify anything or change anything is the shed installed already no we didn't want to okay buy it before you okay gave us the okay so it's different refresh Sor we've done a lot of we had a ranch we went up we went back all through Claire knows us well uh so we try and do it with permits and variances and so forth so appreciate it I'm sure do you have any um questions about what the engineer was talking about uh no Doug Doug explained to us and what we would do and yes does anybody have any questions anybody have any questions U I'll just tell you if you get the test pits done give them to your pool contractor because that'll avoid them having to make changes later which will cost you I'll tell you that from experience I was going to ask that can we just group that together so that just taking one time thank you thank you any questions from the public any comments from the public do we have a motion on motion to close public hearing second yes yes yes yes yes yes you motion for AOS of resolution on motion I'll second get the wall yes yes yes yes yes yes very good thank you very much thank you so much thank you no I've just become Rob Riner okay have a good evening everyone Jim thank you very much Jim last but not least we have EFM 138 Mammoth LLC 138 Mammoth Road Block 25.15 Lot 36 in the R4 Zone have Mr Brodsky yes good evening Mr chair members of the board Rick Brodsky uh with the law firm of ancel grim and Aaron on have of the applicant um this is a d variant yes and we have 1 2 3 four 5 six yes I'm aware we're g to uh we're going to proceed and uh we'll see how it goes okay thank you yeah service in order Mr seinberg great okay um Mr chair members of the board uh the application before you this evening pertains to the property that's located at 138 Mammoth Road it's an existing uh twostory frame dwelling two family uh residential home with two residential units uh that is the existing uh uh condition of the property um speaking of the condition you know the there there is let's say a good deal of deferred maintenance uh associated with this property part of the application uh the applicants AC ired this property a couple of years ago um the applicants also are developing that new development right next door um uh the Oakhurst Estates and so um the what's proposed as part of the application is uh to sort of recapture some space that's dead space over the garage incorporated into the uh existing two units um you know upgrade aesthetically uh the design and appearance uh and exterior of the existing home uh uh reconfigure some some driveways which actually result in reducing uh coverage on the site um and uh and uh just basically upgrade the property it's it's it's it's in an the reason that there's a d variance associated with the application is because it's it is an existing two family in a in a in a single family Zone um the uh so what what ends up uh being proposed as part of the application uh is to increase uh the bedroom bedroom count and uh increase nominally the square footage of each of the units uh there's also a a proposal for a shed uh to be uh um constructed or or installed in the backyard um which requires some variance relief as well um and there is uh parking in the front yard which is again an existing condition um but we need the variance because we're reconfiguring and relocating the driveways um and uh so that's basically basically sort of the the upshot of of The Proposal um I have with me this this evening three Witnesses I got the uh uh the project manager landscape architect Dave bash um I have our architect Brian Fitzgerald and then I also have our professional planner uh Andy Janu um uh and of course the uh the owners are here as well uh Joseph Epstein uh and Don Epstein uh as needed so what I'd like to do um uh unless the board has any questions is have Mr B come up and start his testimony and we'll go from there Y and there he is Mr B you swear airm to tell the truth I do okay we remember you you've been here many times but you still don't know how to M work the microphone there we go Dave we practiced that come on 40 years I still you have hair when we start I haven't been working on this application that long so Mark are we are we marking uh exhibits uh what submitted already did we Mark or justed a packet yeah and these are in the packet Yes except these are colored colored versions of the property survey and okay so is the packet A1 packet is B1 B1 B1 is the board packet which includes all your submissions to date okay this would be uh A1 yeah and Dave why don't you describe the two the two exhibits that you're going to be referring to okay the one that I've put up on easel is the copy of the survey of property uh dated uh March 7th 2024 depicting the existing property conditions the property is located on the west side of Mammoth Road approx o imately 300 ft South of West Lincoln Avenue the property contains one I'm sorry contains two structures the one dwelling and it also contains an existing shed located off the Northwest side of the the existing structure property has two curb cuts out on the Mammoth Road one on the North one on the South Side uh each of those driveways serves the separate units we refer to them as Unit A and Unit B um with uh very shall we say unstructured parking layout mostly of gravel and stone driveway um the property located in the R4 Zone with all the the structures conforming to the setback requirements front side and rear setback however the existing condition of the driveways are non-conforming as they're required to to be 10 ft from the side property lines and in fact they the edges of the driveways fall exactly on the property line or there's an area of unclear title between the subject property in the property of the South and our driveway Edge falls again at zero feet along the edge of that area of of title concern are those existing I'm sorry those are existing this is the existing condition of of the site the next exhibit is a colored copy of the plot plan and Landscape plan yes this will be A2 for the record and what's that dated da it's dated uh March 7th 2024 with a revised date of May 24th 2024 May May 24th 2024 all right let's walk through that one now okay the design change to the building I just do a quick uh both access points to the the principal structure are located near the Southeastern end of the Eastern facade for Clarity shall we say uh the applicant is proposing to relocate one of the entrances further north so you have a distinct okay Unit A is one side Unit B is the other side the driveways are proposed to be improved rather than relying on Stone we're going to pave the driveways but considering the shall we say the the traffic volume of Mammoth Road we're providing turnaround areas so all vehicles can exit out onto the highway head first with clear visibility up both directions for safety purposes we're also proposing that each of the proposed units actually sorry each of the existing units be provided their own storage shed each of the storage sheds are 10 x 10 or 100 square fet so they are under the 150 foot threshold and they are located 5 feet off 5 and2 ft off the side and near property lines where 5T is permitted except on the second shed the second shed is required to comply with the setbacks of the principal structure so although it complies with the side setback it does not comply with the rear setback spacing from the spacing from the principal building right correct the the yeah the second shed call it the the the North Western shed would be required to be located 35 ft off the Western property line which puts it in the middle of the yard correct so in order to shall we say maintain the character of the look of of uh of single residential dwelling we held that standard for both The Sheds to provide both units as equal outdoor recreation areas we are also proposing uh some Street trees to be installed along m road and we are also providing uh trash can Corrals near the head of each driveway for each unit that's the Su to total of those improvements uh let me just give you some coverage information the building coverage because again we include not only the overhangs but uh porches and sheds the building coverage is actually increasing by only 167 square fet and we're proposing 200 square feet of sheds so the principal structure is actually being reduced in size in roof area even though the overall project is asking for 167 squ ft of additional building coverage but that still Falls well below the 25% permitted building coverage where as proposed it would be 10.38% based upon the uh ordinance number 2454 which was passed in uh February of this year which changed from the old percentage of buildable lot area to percentage of total lot area where 25% of the total lot area is permitted building coverage right now and again we're only proposing 10.38% same on impervious surface coverage where it used the the requirement used to be 90% of the buildable lot area it now goes to 65% of the total lot area and we're only at 3.52% the total lot are so okay we are far below the coverage thresholds established and recently established and Dave did you have an opportunity I know you did to review uh uh cma's report uh Ben's report dated June 14 yes I have any any issue with anything uh pretty pretty concise report um I think we just had to address the curb yeah we're the current Northern driveway is lined with concrete curb stops wheel stops we're proposing to remove all of those but we're not proposing to line the proposed driveways with concrete curving so we would look for a clarification on that that we are not proposing any new curve on the subject property and the height of the fence was just a typographic mislabel of the fence detail we will correct that are you doing it any new aprons or or curb in the RightWay or anything no we're not we're looking to minimize any disturbance out in in the county right away yeah I I have to clar correct my report it references uh the township requirements for and a Township Road opening permit but onic road is a county road so any any work in the county right away would require a County Road opening permit okay and actually let me add one more is I understand one of the variances that we're seeking relief for parents or design waiver I'm not sure which is parking within a front yard area um because only single family homes are exempt from that requirement and this is not a single yeah that is one of the elements of relief um questions for Mr bash the um both of those driveways were were permitted they were allowed to go into those locations in the first place I cannot tell you the history of those driveway openings what what I see from the 1984 resolution which I don't think I was here time this was declared for existing nonconforming use okay yes um at that time so they existed they existed and nothing's been changed since then it was common right at one point right to have the driveways right there on the property to the South what is right there on the uh there's a single family home there's but right next to the driveway is there a driveway yeah oh right next to the driveway the the home I believe is actually thank you it looks like a driveway there did we did we Mark that exhibit as A1 A1 and A2 it's on there A2 is is the one I somebody Mark yeah Dave just just actually yeah write on 619 stock market was stock market's a driveway closed to my kids were my kids were all from work a driveway right next to okay now we have A3 on the board Dave can you identify that for the record A3 is anal photographed by sounding devel right across the m road is I'm sorry I don't remember what the current name is I know it is the country States country oh the other one also runs along almost parallel with our existing Southern driveway and Dave for the record if you could just Mark that A3 if you could just Mark that A3 and I see it's dated June 14 24th any other questions for Mr bash any questions for Mr B right now or do we want hear from our planners our planner and professionals and then maybe we'll revisit Mr Vash is that okay with you of course yeah Council Ron Ron rardon for the record uh um did you have our planning letter of June 17th or were you going to wait for your plan well was going to have our planner address great but I just one thing since we have um you know this this you were sworn in the beginning I need to be sworn in okay you're you're under up you're sworn in sure we do that at the reorganization meeting have aop have we need to swear in okay okay do you swear to tell the truth or affirm to tell the truth the whole truth I do your name and your position with the to Ronald Reardon REI n r TN CME Associates I'm here as the conflict planner tonight uh representing the board um just a really it just is more a comment and guidance to the board because for this particular um witness d2s are kind of an odd duck because doesn't really the the the the proofs don't really relate to any other of the D's the the decision I have on on our footnote on page seven Burbage came out prior to the Coventry Square decision which I'm sure you've heard and everything else for height and density were built off Coventry this one Falls right in the middle but I think the Burbage case really focuses in on Aesthetics and how Aesthetics how uh an improvement of Aesthetics can benefit uh benefit the the uh the neighborhood so basically how they put it um appearance Aesthetics and compatibility of the use in the neighborhood become uniquely significant and make a distinction that the enhanced burden I I'll wait for the Planner on that I don't want to steal this thunder but basically Aesthetics are a driving force and it's not really for the for the benefit of the residents how's it going to benefit the area and on your Landscaping point and such yep and and we have our architect here as well that's my general guidance and you know I would focus your questions on that because uh I drove by there tonight I'm sure that it'll look a lot better than having the dumpsters out there right now that that that that they're there yeah it's um and and because the site is open now I have you know things like lanscaping and we'll let the architect do do that so it's wide open now it sounds like they're you know putting in some buffering techniques yeah Mr mattick uh I I don't really have any other questions or comments um Mr uh addressed my report and I I don't think there's anything else that I have for him actually just one thing Council are technical comments for Mr B's plans sure are there any issues there that you can't comply because you addressed a lot of them I I have a lot of cross outs which I like because that means uh there's less to talk about exactly to your I didn't believe there were any okay well we still have time if there are maybe you can come back later on but I don't want to put you on the spot right thank you any questions Mr B okay okay Mr Fitzgerald okay if we could have Mr Fitzgerald swor Mr do you swear affirm to tell the truth the whole truth I do okay okay Brian if you would just real brief if you'd give the board the benefit of your background and experience as an architect here in New Jersey uh licensed architect in New Jersey been licensed for at least 10 years been on my own practice for at least eight uh work in surrounding towns mostly um higher end residential and commercial stuff in the area I've been doing it for quite some time okay thank you thanks first time here first time absolutely welcome your dad spent a lot of time in this room dad spent a lot of time in here but um okay okay um Brian if you would um just you you prepared the architectural plans that were submitted as part of the application right that the board members have in their packet I did correct okay can you talk about and and uh you know consistent with the comments we just heard just talk about the um from an architectural perspective the aesthetic improvements that are proposed as part of the application sure absolutely um the existing building is a two unit we're calling it a two-unit building unit a unit B um the existing Unit A consists of 1,930 square feet and Unit B I'm sorry currently consists of 1,59 sare ft and Unit B consists of 1,725 square ft we are7 1,725 we're looking to basically you know take a building that's been kind of neglected over the years not kind of fitting to the area anymore in terms of what's being developed and going on and make it a nicer structure proposing moving in both units A and B any bedrooms off the first floor to the second floor making it just a more traditional living space on the first floor and then you know placing a a nicer master suite and four additional bedrooms in both units A and B on the second floor again trying to create a nice space that a family would come in and want to you know fit in the area with what's going on with some of the Country Day States and and some of the other homes in the area um the existing Unit A is four bedrooms two bath Unit B is four bedrooms 1.5 baths we're increasing both units A and B to five bedrooms Unit A having two and a half basss and Unit B having two and a half baths to more positively affect the architectural elev especially the street elevation uh M Mr Bes you know mentioned the existing entries are closest together in the two units it's kind of confusing with building how do you use it so you know we kind of stretch those entrances out tried to you know use nicer materials use quality stuff to kind of make it look like a nicer two family you know structure with two separate entrances um we paid attention to you know all four facades not just the front but you know in terms of using materials and stones and and and you know providing a little bit of detail and Contour to the facade without extending out the footprint of the building um we think we just kind of created something nice and fitting definitely an improvement to the existing building we think improves the area as well as a whole and as you mentioned um despite all of these improvements there's no there's no um uh expansion proposed for with respect to the existing footprint correct correct exting footprint of the building is going to remain there is some expansion uh in Unit A on the second floor only but again that just extends out over the back in the back correct back left corner over the existing kitchen so the building footprint as a whole is not changing we're just trying to utilize uh some of the existing space in a nicer fashion okay and then just talk a minute about Dave B mentioned but the sheds that are being proposed those are for storage sure you know because again Unit B doesn't have a basement um the existing garage is being used as kind of like the building maintenance area and uh unit A's uh basement is limited at best um obviously you got a family coming in here right you have kids with bikes stuff that they just kind of need to use to to to live and survive um you know without having that stuff strewn all about uh kind of keep it neat and organized in the sheds and were those sheds visible uh no from mouth Road not that I'm right right and and have you thought about the materials yet for the sheds um I think we we'd kind of match obviously the building right uh once we get into it we'll kind of determine materials whether it's you know going to be a a vinyl siding or some type of party backer gotta board something like that um any questions for Mr Fitzgerald what's the size of that shed I believe it's a 10 by 10 100 ft yeah yeah what makes it and probably from Mr what makes the or Ron the second shed has to be further away from the rear no you're only pered one accessory structure in the zone okay when you get two and you have to have the setback to the building as opposed to the 5T the 5T you treat it almost like principl set back if there two if there two one one you're good right and that's that's written in a single family residential Zone we've got this pre-existing two family which is why it it's a little different uh would who would be best to answer uh Landscaping sorry Mr landscape architect put your landscape architect um I thought you referenced somebody else so that's why I didn't ask this question before when it comes to the landscape and and will there be buffering that to Shield the driveways or anything like that we are we are proposing on the oh should on the Southeast side of the Southern driveway so Dave you're referring to A2 right referring to A2 we are proposing a HED R between our reconstructed driveway and the driveway of the single family uh residence to the to the South to the north that's actually the detention Basin for the foreset uh so we were not proposing any additional screening along there um we are proposing Street trees and to further accentuate [Music] not that one clear it's his hey there [Laughter] reot I'd like to say that happens all the time that's never happened before sorry so to ACC accentuate the separation between the two new building entrances we're proposing a 4 foot high fence with Landscaping on materials on both sides again just to provide that additional visual aesthetic and separation of the two entrance points to the building um on the heels of Aesthetics and the purpose I'd like to see some trees lining the actual driveways there's just so much cement I'm staring at there and to put more trees on the property maybe just some like small pear trees some like very small simple dog Woods down them I I know they're not a lot of money I just did them on mine but it would look so nice and add to the Aesthetics and the purpose of the variants would your client be amenable to that Rick would you ask so let me make sure I understand so so um you're talking finding the side of the driveway is maybe three down each one just to a put some more trees on the property cuz I think it could use it and to add to the purpose of the variant at being Aesthetics put some trees down um either side of of the driveway so you're talking about the is that the northern driveway that one Northern one yeah we have to plan things maybe if you somewhere on the other one also there's just a lot of of driveway there a lot of cement I'm staring at and because I'd like to see more trees anyway gotta I didn't see you could talk to your client and see if he'd be amenable to that I also want to know if you have plans for light post at the end of the driveway just to alert people that there are two driveways there a safety feature perhaps we are not currently proposing light posts um Dave Dave do you have any ideas of um how to uh address Miss litman's concerns on something that would look yeah better my client isn't going to like my answer but I I agree that maybe three or four right additional shade trees not the smaller trees like dogwoods but just shade trees that placed along the south side of the northern driveway would actually provide a a shadow onto the driveway to reduce the heat signature of the driveway you just added a bigger expense than I did I was I was trying to work with you and make it much less he just added a bigger him already it's coming out of his Fe so that would be on the inner side of the each driveway it would be well there there isn't room on the south side of South driveway so it'd be putting them on the south side of North driveway and and then one or two on the I'm fine if you do see shade trees I'm just looking to add some more trees to the property I'd rather see trees there then your client pay it into the fund I I'd rather the trees and the aesthetic that was already built in or part of the aesthetic that was already built in is the restoration of a large part of that front area from the gravel driveway and the this uh unkempt nature into a lawn so there will be lot more green there now we're reducing coverage overall I understand yeah but no we here Mark didn't we make a we meaning the town make a change that when they were when when somebody is redoing an existing driveway it doesn't going to didn't require a variance that's a question for Jim actually because I thought Jim did it four or five years ago because we had a number of applications where somebody was redoing a driveway was right along the side because it was the older style and it they're improving the driveway but they still had to come here yeah there was a change I exactly this is a total reconfiguration of the driveway because you have parking spaces yes designated parking spaces well they they going to back out on M Road no we we've provided for turnaround areas uh for each for each driver that's a safety feature so that's a more rational use in in coming in and out of the out of the fac out of the property now it's a little scattered shot so to speak right I mean they they head out head first today but they also have access to much larger area of the front lawn in which to turn yeah so we're defining providing a defined structure to the driveway and the Motions that we're expecting the the and that's not only going to benefit the the residents but if someone has an Amazon delivery if they have guests this is a very busy road that this reconfiguration will lead to um you know easier access I agree totally well I'm just I mean since you're the engineer I I want to have you up here to to and you don't have curbs you said there's no curbs we're not we're not lining our driveways with curb it's just going to be like a normal residential single family residential driver way asphalt pavement with the runoff running off out into the lawn and Miss let ask for lights I just thought maybe light post at the end of the driveway I don't know if you answer that one I just indicate yeah there I'm I'm not sure we put the money into the trees I'm fine I'm not sure I'm not sure light post would not interfere with the driving along exactly exactly that that's kind of a tricky curve that may bother you so so if the tree if they're going to they're going to add trees I guess that could if that's a condition of approval it could work with the with cme's office and right on the planting because obviously you're not going to sketch it out tonight no no I got three or four shade trees on the south side of the north driveway and one or two on the north side of the South driveway correct subject to types and placement of of the our planner being paid for my day out of your salary not mine anything else for Mr bash or Mr um uh for our architect if not we'll have Mr Chan you step forward thank Youk sure I'm assuming we have no questions from the the public you could ask there any questions public either oh yeah no any questions thank you good evening okay Andy I know you've testified here before but can we put your uh credentials on the record real quick sir should be sworn or Y yeah that would help and be sworn raise your right hand firm swear to tell the truth the whole truth I do thank you very much could you just state your name for the record Andrew Janu j n i w for the record I am a professional planner in the state of New Jersey as well as a member of the American Institute of certified planners have a bachelor's and master's degree in civil engineering from the New Jersey Institute of Technology currently serving as the planner for Freehold burrow the burough of carterett in the township of Livingston been appointed by Governor Murphy to the State Board of Professional planners and I've been practicing uh for about 25 years very first case I ever presented was here very good thank you thank you five years um Andy if you would just um walk the board through what you were asked to review what you did review you're certainly so in preparation for this evening I reviewed your ordinances your master plan the correspondence that uh has come back and forth from CME uh as well as been to the site and uh reviewed the context of the neighborhood if you will I just put the aerial back up so the property is B3 A3 excuse me property is outlined in yellow and it's an existing condition um and as the architect and Mr BRZ indicated the property is in in a state of disrepair needs renovation um there is new construction going on directly to the north uh and directly across the street I have the name there's a uh Camp a special needs Camp directly across the street Rising Treetops at oakst I believe is the name of it um but then directly to the South you also have single family homes and you see the driveways are all oriented towards the lot lines it's just the development pattern along Mammoth Road that's been there for a very long time um this evening we're looking for variance relief for this uh pre-existing non-conforming two family house to be renovated and to be expanded with an additional bedroom in each unit uh the property is in the R4 District which permits single family homes we are also seeking bulk variances for parking located in the front yard because this is a two family home not a one family home the exemption does not apply to us a location of a secondary accessory structure in the rear yard which would be the second uh shed that we're proposing in order to give each a 10x10 storage facility I believe there's a waiver uh for uh sight Lighting on building mounted fixtures as opposed to pole mounted fixtures then we have some existing non-conformities that'll remain including the the two curb cuts the location of the curb cuts at the proximity to the lot lines uh as well as the setback of the existing shed that's on the property um and looking at this from the D from the D variance uh perspective um as was indicated the the D2 variance does not fall under the medich criteria and the Coventry criteria came somewhat afterwards um but uh you planner tonight is absolutely correct the Burbage case really kind of hits on point with the D2 variants the Burbage case dealt with a uh was a salvage facility in a residential neighborhood that was expanding and in fact they did substantial Landscaping along the frontage in order to better Shield that property in order to get the uh permits to expand the Salvage facility that's why Burbage is on point it talks about improving the Aesthetics for something that's a pre-existing non-conformity and by by having that aesthetic Improvement it better Blends within the neighborhood um this is a residential neighborhood this is a residential use this lot is three times the size for the R4 zone so when we're looking at this from a pure planning gross density perspective um the site can certainly accommodate it because they anticipate one family per 10,000 square ft in this Zone you have 30,000 square ft here so when we're looking at that that we're not over taxing the facility uh in fact the existing improvements on this lot are skewed uh substantially off the road they they align with the other homes along Mammoth so you have long driveways to the rear and yet with all the improvements that we're making with the additional landscaping and the reconfiguration of the driveways we are still re overall reducing by a small percentage uh the overall coverage on the site the intent here is to make two distinct entries to the property to do some beautification to the exterior of the property to bring it more to Modern standards and to provide some additional landscape and we've just agreed to additional Landscaping on the along the driveways to further the beautification of it but there will be screening along the driveway uh along with to the one neighbor there'll be a screening in the middle of the property to better Define each unit um as well as the street trees excuse me and now the trees along the driveway so aesthetically it will be a significant Improvement to what you see there today um the area is zoned residentially so you will have two families there have been traditionally two family uh living here on this property so it's very much consistent with the neighborhood pattern and the historic utilization of the property when we look at this in terms of the D2 variants um certainly believe that the Aesthetics uh provide us the positive criteria the justification for that when we look at the negative criteria I really don't see any because this property's operated as a two two family home for many many years it's not moving we're not changing the footprint we're adding some additional storage facilities for the property so that it can function better we're better defining it we're adding safety features uh along turnarounds within the property so it'll not only function better but it'll look better and I think when we look at the D variance on balance uh we certainly can approve that with respect to the bulk variances we look to see whether we're creating something that's a better zoning alternative um and we have to balance that the balance test under the C2 criteria has essentially three prongs that the application relates to a specific piece of property it does that the purposes of the municipal land use law would be Advanced by a deviation from the zoning ordinance and I believe there are three uh for the [Applause] record bear with [Applause] me uh under the municipal land use saww which are the special reasons or the or the per public purposes uh for granting a variant e is to promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concent concentrations that'll contribute to the well-being of persons neighborhoods communities regions and the preservation of the environment again the density has been established on this lot as two families uh it is an oversized lot we're not over taxing what the Zone plan anticipates in terms of density where's 10,000 minimum we have 30,000 square fet so I think we're on point with that I is to promote a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design and Arrangement that goes to the heart of the Burbage test uh we are creating something that's certainly more desirable visually than what's there today it'll be a significant visual Improvement and it will better blend within the neighborhood as well as be better screened from Mammoth Road and finally m is to encourage the coordination of various public and private procedures and activities shaping Land Development with a view of lessening the cost of such development into the more efficient use of land again we have infrastructure that's already here it's on an existing roadway we have a building that's already here we're not expanding the footprint we're improving the the building it is an offic use of land it is not something that we're going to demolish create trash and the like it's a renovation of an existing structure to more modern standards so I absolutely think we're on point um and I'd like to just uh mention the master plan because when we're balancing the bulk variances uh we'll have to discuss your Zone plan and your master plan which was uh recently updated in 2023 uh had some very poignant comments it reads it is inevitable that the future Land Development in the township will consist of the EXP expansion of Andor Redevelopment of existing development developed properties the primary change in land use should be in the form of a responsive ongoing socioeconomic and environmental changes that will impact the types and intensities of land uses within existing land use categories these changes include but not limited to the changing attitudes towards the use and enjoyment of Residential Properties resulting largely from the continuation of stay-at-home practices during Co P the co pandemic and resulting the need for the expansion of residential space and accessory uses including front porches outdoor facilities patios pools outdoor living space in general the increasing practice of employers to allow and encourage office employees to work at home rather than a central office which decreases demand for administrative office space and increases the Need For Work office space to accommodate work atome policies and employers essentially what we're doing here is creating more livable space within it we're creating the bedrooms that will provide for those facilities for that people that do work at home to have work space within the home um and I think we're absolutely on point with the purposes of your master plan uh which brings us to the third prong of the positive criteria that the benefits of the deviation outweigh any detriment the benefits of of all these deviations are clear we have an existing uh configuration of a lot that we're improving we're not substantially changing it but we will be screening it better we will be making it more aesthetically pleasing creating safety features for the driveway with a turnaround internalized um I do believe that the benefits here are substantial with respect to the negative criteria you have to show that the variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good again when we look at the detriments to the public good we look at what I call the nuisance factors are we increasing traffic are we increasing noise are we increasing trash runoff this isn't improved a lot it is going to decrease the overall coverage it'll be aesthetically improved uh we're not essentially increasing the intensity of the operation it'll maintain be maintained as a two family house better configured for modern living with additional safety features and aesthetic features and finally the variant will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and zoning ordinance um I it was important to read that portion of your master plan in because I think it's very much on point with what's being accomplished here today we're efficiently expanding the home uh using the existing footprint creating livable space on the second floor bringing it to Modern standards so when we look at this on balance I do believe these variances can be granted and that the property will be substantially upgraded and welcomed by the community and anded you reviewed um Don report correct I did um I we hit everything was there anything anything in there that needed to be addressed or you had a question about or we had issue no I didn't have any questions um Ron any issues uh no no issues it's going to be one about trash you mentioned trash there in the is an open-ended question just uh a couple things what um your professional experience what's the implied density in this Zone uh it is a single family home on 10,000 square F feet so one dwelling unit for every 10,000 square fet correct and we got a 30,000 fo so we have two dwelling units on 15,000 than what is contemplated in the plan that's right so hypothetically if someone wants to come in and you know they were going to subdivide this and they you could have three three 10,000 ft Lots here I mentioned gross density yes that's absolutely on point okay um and I think I had mentioned that there may be a variance related to trash and I think I just was saying you should just demonstrate that you comply I and that really may be an engineering question um item D on page eight that there's um and that kind of cross references about garbage and it about the uh shall be held in containers and stored not to become a nuisance we've provided for two trash uh corals at the head of each driveway one at the Southwest end of the Southern driveway and the other is at the North West and of the northeastern side of the building okay and I think those have been added after with the details because I think we mentioned that and we just didn't get to cross that out on our letter so you're testifying that that that that variance is not needed you're going to comply with the with the placement of coral the site plan I have shows the two Corrals okay so basically on page seven just so you know if this is approved here that application may require the following waiver it starts on page six it's not needed your testimony is that you don't need that waiver that's correct cor okay all right so I like to make life easy for Council if he's writing resolutions I don't really have anything I think you hit hit the points I just wanted to clarify about the density because sometimes we it's like trying to make it you know comparing Apples to Apples and so well what is contemplated in the plan well the less you know it's actually providing less density that's right and that's why the the property can handle the reconfigured driveways and the turnarounds without needing any coverage variances because and what I've seen at least from the architectural plans it's going to be attractive and you're not going to come in and look at and say hey that's a two family home it kind of would you say it Blends in with the neighborhood oh absolutely absolutely thank you well it may be for Mr Jan for for really for Ron your um uh your notes mention um fence height am I looking at I believe that a typo on the plan that we've changed we're not seeking anything for it might have been Ben oh I'm sorry yeah that's okay the the plane calls out four foot high fence and the detail calls out six foot yep okay thank you detail change um Mr bash address that in sorry got the second page of the wrong memo So Satisfied minor comment not I don't know who really will answer the question but should just be a condition of approval the zoning official just asked if there's any AC condensers proposed and they should be shown on the site plan and just make sure they're conform with zoning require you know setback requirements yes we we will figure that it's just in our letter I just want to make sure it's noted that it's got a any other questions any questions from the public we have a motion to close a public hearing motion to close a second a Mr that's all I have at the moment the owners are here um if the board has any questions of them but um if not you know you've heard the testimony existing home right it's existing two family significant upgrades being proposed um and you know the idea is that to to make it consistent with Modern Family Life for two families uh reconfiguring the bedrooms as to the location um and adding a bedroom for to be conducive for family to be conducive for family members sometimes one or two working from home the world we live in these days so so um in the event of an approval uh the applicants who bought this property a few years ago you know um there's significant amount of investment going into the property and I think it's be reflected in the aesthetic improvements that the town great thank you for that I jumped the gun a little bit but we do have a motion now to close the public Hearing in a second yes yes yes yes yes yes will someone offer for a positive resolution I'll offer for a positive resolution a second yes yes yes yes yes lki yes thank you Mr chairman thank you thank you very much thank you good luck to you thank we have a motion to close uh the meeting motion to close all opposed all in favor hi