##VIDEO ID:Ro_r_XpxZS4## okay all right we'll begin good evening uh this is a regular meeting of the Princeton Zoning Board of adjustment being held electronically via zoom on October 23rd 2024 at 7:30 p.m. pursuant to section 13 of the open public meetings act adequate notice of the time and place of this meeting has been given by prominently posting the sunshine notice of the Princeton Zoning Board of adjustment such notice has been placed on the official bulletin board at the municipal complex and by transmitting a copy of the notice to the Princeton packet town topics the times Trentonian and by filing a copy with the clerk of Princeton on October 18 2024 and has been posted to the municipal website www Princeton n.gov SL meetings pursuant to the extension of the ongoing state of emergency by executive order 292 in accordance with the emergency remote public the the remote public meeting protocol for local public bodies to conduct a public meeting without a physical attendance by members of the public notice that during this extension of the state of emergency all regular and special meetings of the Princeton Zoning Board of adjustment will be held electronically via Zoom was transmitted to the Princeton packet the town topics and the times and was filed with the clerk of Princeton on the 24th day of April 2020 such notices have been placed on the official bulletin board located at the municipal complex and on the Princeton website and are to be maintained throughout the year and by transmitting a copy of same to the Princeton packet town topics the times Trentonian Comcast media and by filing a copy thereof with the cler clerk of Princeton notices have been placed on all window doors of the municipal complex okay L can you call the role please miss Chen here miss Coulson yeah here Mr Floy here Mrs Shriver here Mr tenom Mr Stein here Miss Donna yes chairman coven here thank you okay um I don't have my agenda in front of me what's next applications continuation of 760 Mount Lucas road yeah we we had no resolutions tonight and um so I guess the first Derek would you mind telling us the first one my agenda is not here yes sir it's uh 760 Mount Lucas Road it's a C1 variance request to construct an accessory dwelling unit in related parking within the front yard uh and an exception to required setbacks okay and the case number is what Z what uh 724 d460 okay Z jurisdiction I assume yes sir y good um who is it who's presenting I see the homeowners here Mr Kennedy is uh got his hand raised there he is okay Claudia can you let Ryan in he's on Ryan is on I think Ryan you're muted I I believe I've been let on as Audio Only rather than as a panelist I don't know if I can share my screen this way no I don't think you can here we go okay okay do you uh Mr Kennedy you want to give us kind of a summary of where we're at and I I believe you didn't finish the presentation when we that is correct um thank you Mr chairman members of the board briyan Kennedy from Stevens and Lee for uh Chris and Ronnie here tonight the homeowners at 760 Mount Lucas Road um we've got two uh essentially witnesses that we uh started with last time and we'll kind of finish with we got mostly through our engineering and and homeowner testimony about the site and uh didn't get to our architect uh but we uh appreciate the board sticking an extra couple of minutes um uh late into the night last month to to give us a little bit of feedback to know what other information you might want to see tonight um so if you recall this is a very interesting site topographically with a stream running down the middle uh and a family looking to build an accessory dwelling unit for uh some aging and and uh medical medically needy family members and and trying to figure out where the best place to put it because their home is set so far back and the former Township rule is that essentially anything in front of that back line of the front of the home is the front y front yard setback or excuse me is in the front yard uh despite building something that looks like a house and uh would otherwise respect uh the rules for building uh a primary dwelling requires the front set yard front yard setback variants uh we talked about some of the constraints but our our plan here tonight is to bring back the homeowners we took a few extra photos to talk about a couple of sites that I think board members had questions about and why they wouldn't work so we'd like to walk through that um have our then our uh engineer just do a brief kind of overview of those constraints and then we'll get into the architectural testimony to finally show you guys what what this would actually look like um so uh with I believe everyone had been sworn in last time uh and remains under oath uh if not I'd be happy to have them sworn in again though that's Mr Kennedy I'm not sure if mrina was sworn in because I don't think she testified the last hearing got it so um Marina if you'd like we'll we'll get that out of the way Mr Ben do you swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful um I do thank you all right thank you so much so uh excuse me um so Ronnie and Chris um when we left last time we the board had some questions about uh location and and some of the reasoning for why you were you essentially doing this and why some locations would be appropriate so you know if you could before we go through finish going through our exhibits just want to take a minute to talk uh again about or remind the board about you know what what the plan is here and why uh some of the locations were more problematic than others both physically for the site and with what your plans are for for your family yep sounds good do you want me to jump in here Ryan absolutely go right ahead yes I think um thank you again for everybody the opportunity to come back and and speak to you um s of recap right and Ryan hit on this a little bit I am trying to manage my two aging parents right my my mom is is suffering from Alzheimer's they live on Long Island and so trying to find a way to get them closer to me so I can help with as as things get worse with them is also my aunt my aunt has been living with them and my family since she was a child she was born with disabilities and and is also handicapped and trying to basically Sol for three aging adults that I live on Long Island I don't have any other um direct family members in the Northeast to help with caring for them and when I learned about my wife and I learned about the Adu options here at Princeton it seemed like a no-brainer especially since it's designed for elderly disabled handicapped individuals and that's when we start to pursue you know how that might look on our property and I think what we'll go through here is try to share how we really consider the many different options you I think you'll see that our property is very unique the Topography is is a little bit different but I believe we found a solution that um will have the least impact to our neighbors least impact to the environment um and actually will be a nice addition to the property while being able to help to bring my family together Chris thank you so much um uh Mr they're okay I'd like to reshare our exhibits um uh Miss Casey uh this is essentially a continuation of our last slideshot I don't know if we want to mark it again we did reorder things a bit so I don't know if we want to no 14 I believe right let's just uh yes you're up to slide 14 correct okay so we'll start on 15 uh and uh um so there's nothing that no one is you know we're not um thankfully not changing anything up here um all right here we are hopefully everyone can see my screen there so uh uh Chris and and uh and Ronnie so this is a kind of a marked up site plan with some coloring here and these numbered boxes here represent I guess places you and your architect went out and did some extra investigating and took some photos to kind of explain why some of these places that might on paper seem like developable spots but why why they don't why they aren't working for for your situation so I guess we'll start with with number one and and uh when we rehearse this I don't know if we if I showed you this this slide in between the photos but I thought it' be easier to show each between each one will see this again uh so we can reorient ourselves from the from the photos so guess starting at one just first you know explain a little bit about what this you know this is in relation to obviously this is right next to your existing house yeah so so this is looking at our our front patio towards the road right and then in that area is part is sort of the extended area of which starts with a whole uh zone of trees right and and large trees that then is extremely sloped and and grades quickly down to um that that water structure water main way that goes to our property as well so um that if we were to build there you'd have two challenges one would be the slope that you see now in this picture right you see me there on the right side Ronnie and my wife on the left side and you quickly get a slope that continues both vertically as well as horizontally behind that the the drop off is pretty drastic along with the woodlands that are behind that that then leads down to the front of the property so in the in the bottom right corner that's your you essentially the your front steps or front porch or that lead up to it so yep that's that's correct so you're you're looking basically out my front porch towards the road and then my driveway swerve to the left and then back around up to the street from there got it where your cars parked here this is kind of necessary to help you turn around and and navigate as well to ex yeah yeah exactly we use this once you pull up to the house to back out be able to get out cleanly we use this as a little back out area from the this was from the previous owners that's how they had set it up to get to the property uh next the spot we'll call it two this is kind of maybe the closest to your neighbor um and and their yard in pool but you know we'll yeah talk about that spot here so why you take us through these these photos here yeah so so yeah this this is closest to that property line that that is adjacent to our neighbor's house that first picture you see my that's my wife this is looking up from the driveway up towards our garage so this is a pretty you know sizable sloped sloped area in this space uh and then also fairly wooded this is like the one little window where you can actually see up from that we'll say the mid level of property up to the upper level where the garage is and then if you take from where you are there and look right this is the view of how close you are to the neighbors's property line if we were potentially to put something here um it would be right next to the the neighbor's property uh it would also require the removing of several mature trees and then also be in an area where um is really needed for large trucks to come in and out of our property here and I think that might be tied into to another number you have as well Ryan but it oh no it is this one so yeah so this area it's not a formal um part of our driveway but because of how much our driveway sort of turns twist and goes ups and downs we do need a way for large trucks we do get oil deliveries to be able to come and back out of our driveway and then be able to go back up the driveway towards the street and this area is is key part of them being able to navigate in and out of our property and this the center photo that's your neighbors's house and pool there so you would be kind of if you could fit something here you'd be peering they'd be looking right at you and you'd be peering right down at them this would this would be the closest spot to any any of our neighbors properties right this would be right next door neighbor property over overlooking and so right where this two here where we were just looking that's that area here where you were you're talking about being able to you a truck or delivery truck or oil would they can't really get to you with if they navigate this Cur your curving slope driveway without needing to being able to turn around there exactly otherwise they'd have to try to go backwards back into up the entire swerve of the driveway down and up and back and forth right it sounds like something they can maybe do once if they're lucky without hitting the bridge on their way back we've had multiple Amazon trucks trying to back out and get stuck yes uh next we'll look at spot three here um which uh again why you show us what tell us what're we're looking at here with the SL yeah so spot three you're you're looking at two sides of the same area looking back up towards the house this is part of that that zone in between we'll call that that small stream that runs through the property and then also the home where the where the um driveway curves this area also limited space here because of how steep it is right you see the you seen that first picture looking up from me up to where Ronnie was standing very sloped here and then it also is a heavily wooded land so it would require you know na you know potentially building on something that's very extremely extremely sloped as well as removing again multiple mature trees that are in this space and also having limited options again for potentially large vehicles to navigate pulling in pulling out of there and turning around right I think the the two that I did miss also with any of these options is in order to connect utilities um things like your our sewer connections water connections whatever it might be if we aren't able to somehow now tap into the existing lines which for the sewer would be very difficult we'd have to look at options of drilling under the existing um that that little river water structure we've had to do that in the past for connecting sewer the first time around for our home and I don't think we because of it's a a pump we probably have to redrill again for another you know connecting the rest of these utilities for for the Adu location right right next we'll show the The Chosen area and then some some information about the the front so these are the the possible contenders um in the back and now we'll look at the the the front areas uh again this is the the the chosen location here is that correct yeah so this is this is where our plans currently are designed where you know we felt was again least impact to our neighbors and the environment right you you see in that first picture on the left this is looking from the street towards our property what the what that red line is supposed to represent is essentially um pretty close to the height of the the structure and we'll let Marina get into those details but if I was you know trying to look at what that impact and what You' see from the street it's pretty well hidden because there is you know a little bit of a slope there it is uh close to 50 ft back when you add that right of way uh and then you do have you'll have the shrubs and other Hedges there to to limit the view from the street right got it and then so ultimately the the the Adu is kind of set because the Topography is kind of set down and we'll be quite screened that's correct correct yep and then the right side is uh we we have talked about having a way to turnaround right so pulling in and pulling out we talked about last time is would be difficult from Mount Lucas Road right so having a way to be able to pull into the Adu and then back out and then pull back to to mount Lucas Road without having to back into m Lucas road is what we were trying to to solve for here so you'll see on this right side is looking at our driveway and behind it and I think we might have we we section five we get into this some more but you see this is the angle looking down to the road as well as from of that uh the drop to that showing that'll be a bit hidden in terms of the topography looking down so in on the left photo of this this paved area that's the path along the street that uh the walking path along M uh Mount Lucas and then on the right we're looking at your drive or is that the path again that's my driver that's correct on the right yep and again now we're moving from four to the corner area where we're talking about having that turnaround area yeah push sorry pushed the the wrong wrong Arrow here so apologies all right so what are we looking at here other than a beautiful family yeah so so yeah this is my uh my daughter's and dog as well but this is so this is the area that we were talking about for that turnaround I think there's a there's a few things trying to call out here is um this is pretty close to essentially where we would say we would have a little bit of space so people go back into and then back onto Mount Lucas Road the the trees that you see there are trees um and and I'll probably look to uh to Jim to chime in on on exactly what he calls them but they are built around a a utility uh structure that's there already that were came after the fact we do have a utility structure that was from um prior to to us being around in even prior prior generations to the the home but we do believe from from what we've seen so far that there would be limit limited if any impact to any existing trees or root structure because of this location um as well as the fact that we really do have that that utility structure that is there already and would likely be preventing the impact of any uh roots that are also in that space But I know Jim you might be able to hit on some clarifying items there to call that out excellent so before we get to back to our engineer just kind of recap some of these constraints a bit um certainly happy to have the the homeowners available for any any questions about the site we'll be continuing to talk about that of course but uh this is that's what we have for uh recalling our our homeowners here tonight so Mr sherff it's all right I happy to move to our next witness or if you'd like to pause for questions here it's uh happy to does anyone have any questions or should we wait until lean I think um oh go ahead Michael yeah I think we could wait you know I'm okay waiting till the end I did see earlier that one of the municipal Engineers is here so um Mr Weissman um between him and Derek I may have some questions on you know some of these alternative sites and with the homeowner applicant has represented um and see if they concur or um or have a different view as to something being extremely steep um and and some of um which trees would have to be removed and I mean trees are so I will have questions right um then um Mr kamik if you could um uh say return you never I believe you were pre-qualified and and sworn in last time and uh but perhaps re reintroduce yourself just to remind the the board who you are and and uh welcome you welcome sure back to to the good evening everyone Jim Kamala can show resources I'm the site engineer for the project and you know provided testimony at the last hearing about the orientation of the Adu as well as the drive way and the pullout area um and I think there were some questions at the prior hearing as to trying to provide some additional detail to the other areas say for example at the rear of the site I think Mr Floyd was interested in that um in the vicinity of the existing home so what we did is we took the survey for the property with the topographic Contours which do indicate um how steep the the property is based upon how close those Contours are on the survey map but we added some color for steep slope areas that actually exceed 25% um and you can see if we look at the map towards the rear um and the the driveway in that parking area we have several areas in and around where retaining walls were constructed to provide that um pullout area that uh Chris had spoken to previously for the fuel trucks in that upper leftand corner of the site in between the side property line and the garage um that you also saw in those pictures as well so um when you look at the areas of and again there are slopes that are slightly under 25% or between 20 and 25 but these are exceeding 25% um and you can see around the of the existing dwelling as well as the area in the front of the existing dwelling between the stream and the existing dwelling we have that large patch in the central area of the site basically in the middle of the page um that's heavily wooded and steep slopes now I would point out in that area where the driveway bends significantly um that Ryan is highlighting here that area there is approximately you know 32 by 35 feet for example um and when you spatially take a look at that available area and the areas at the rear of the site and then you look to the front um at the size of the Adu that's proposed as well as the um the access walk at the front and the one parking stall next to the Adu you can see spatially that that that area really there is too limited um then you would get into the closer to the stream Corridor and disturb those wooded areas um and then you can see that along the mount Lucas Frontage when you take a look at the dark green throughout the site which is basically the the treed and wooded areas um you can see a basically that postage stamp area within the front yard um which is pretty much maintained lawn and free of trees and other obstructions and it's also in air areas that um don't have steep slopes in excess of 25% as well so we thought that this picture would be representative of the existing wooded areas in dark green and then the Avail um the remaining areas in white um less the steep slope areas and I think when you also take out the um D regulated stream Corridor and its buffers which is the blue area in the central portion of the site that's also a restricted area um it's at least our view that when you look at on on a whole at all of the the unique characteristics of this property um and the physical characteristics that make other areas difficult to locate the Adu that this really was the ideal uh location up at the front in that open lawn non wooded area that we show on the plan Jim couple just followup questions based on the slope and and necessary curving of the driveway um is would it be possible to to build right up to that driveway or would there need to be some I'll use the word buffer but space in between a curved driveway like this uh and and any kind of structure that would need to be kind of reserved to make sure you know nobody hit it frankly when they were coming up the mountain yeah I mean I think we would need ancillary areas around the perimeter of the Adu in order to in a suitable way grade that in and provide some pedestrian accessibility at that location as well um and if you remember one of the photos that we looked at previously sort of looking up that slope at that open area behind Chris uh and then Ronnie was further behind him at a very small stature in the background that's why we took these photos with them in the photo so that you can see the topographic relief it's pretty significant there and really the the slope in that area is what originally drove the location of the driveway and how that curves around they were able to sort of navigate that steep slope by um having that roundabout in that location to lessen the slope at least to get the driveway in there but I I don't see that as a viable area just due to those spacal constraints thank you um that happy to have our engineer and know we we kind of thought we got through his testimony last time but wanted to bring him back so happy to have him available for any any question maybe Ryan maybe it makes sense to look in the upper right hand corner where the well where the pull out or turnout area is relative to those trees that Chris thank you had testified to um we do have a tree that's off property beyond the property line um we did measure the distance to that pullout area at 24 feet that Ryan is is highlighting here which is at least in our view a substantial distance and we don't see a negative impact um relative to um disturbance of that area uh for that particular tree and to the left of the pullout area we do have a couple 10inch also sugar Maples that have since grown up over the past you know few decades um next to the utility Vault that's located in that area but like Chris said due to the location of that vault which is Illustrated on here by the square next to the stairs or or between the uh the stairs there and the pullout area that really you know would block a large amount of the root structure so even though it says you know it's it's 12 feet and we have several trees in that area we don't see a um a substantial impact um and and and also too we're we're going to be just um locating that pullout area just above the surface of the ground and building it up by maybe a foot or 18 inches in order to negotiate the grade so um at the end of the day you know our thought is that this pullout area would enable the most safe uh the safest condition possible so that Vehicles can exit their property by pulling forward um um and and given Mal Lucas and its orientation as it traverses through the neighborhood you know that's really the ideal situation um would be to pull out in that location and we we feel like it does serve that purpose and and Jim um if one uh it is I think as you said um to to create that you're actually filling rather than cutting into something so um if there were any uh concern you'd be going essentially above it rather than down through them but seem to be a good distance away from those um uh from those canopies but if you were to move this further back into the site does that remain the same or do you then get closer to other trees and and perhaps have even a a more challenging situation to allow that motion because I guess the slope goes from the right of the screen down and you'd have to be kind of can delivered you know even further out as a yeah we would have larger larger retaining walls around the the pullout area to negotiate that grade um and actually at the driveway location it would be a non ideal situation because the driveway is set that's not that's not really changing the existing driveway so um it would be difficult to translate it downhill and certainly we wouldn't want Vehicles backing downhill um in that location if if we could prevent that so that's why we thought that this really is the best and you know from a common sense standpoint the the best solution here and and Jim just as a as a recap from what we what you said last month on on I guess essentially two of the technical variances for this area um two being the width of these two segments here of driveway essentially as you pull into these turnout areas from the main driveway and the other being the distance of this corner to the lot I believe your testimony was that uh where where this was originally shown at 4 and 3/4 feet and five is required that you could dis it could be done so that variance is not necessary and similarly where this distance um here and then along the driveway here as it flares out to both the parking area and the turnaround uh 22 ft is the maximum width allowed um and 25 and 30 was proposed but that those could be accommodated without the variances well is that correct yeah we took a look at that and we can make those slight adjustments to stay under that variance threshold for those two items so essentially with that the the only real variance for this area that is needed um is one on the you know I guess technical assumption that this is a parking space even though it's not intended to be used that way uh that that is within the front yard back is that correct correct cor right thank you um so with with that and Jim thank you for reminding me that we missed the the front the questions on the front um uh certainly happy to have uh U Mr kamalak available for for any questions at this point Our intention would be after uh after him to to go on to the architectural testimony and Designs okay okay I do have a question Steve sure um or or two and it's it's regarding um you know I I know very little about uh topography and what's buildable and you didn't use the word buildable you said it had a 25% slope and I guess my sort of very direct question and I'll probably ask this of uh the engineer wisman for the bur for the municipality is a 25% slope buildable or not buildable well the reason we used that I referenced 25% is because that's 25% is your your threshold when you start to transition into um non-buildable areas person went to the ordinance okay or restricted areas so we just felt like that would be the right Benchmark to use if you're above 25% on a single family um dwelling a lot then those areas would be restricted from you know instruction unless you got a variance in order to do that um and and so that's that's the reason why that threshold was um selected because it is referenced in the ordinance and you know it has some legitimacy relative to preventing erosion and disturbing um slopes steeper than that U from a constructibility standpoint and then a maintenance standpoint going forward okay I I really appreciate that because I just don't have didn't have the knowledge base even about the ordinance related to excess of 25% um so you can build on in excess of 25% if you get a variance and of course I'm assuming so because you 25% yeah yes I'm just trying to get that clarified what it means because I actually don't know what it means and until you explained it sure and I I do appreciate uh that um explanation of that so okay that's my only question really Mr Kennedy proceed oh excuse me board members do you have any other questions before we move on to the next witness okay Mr Kennedy all right thank you um with that I'd like to um uh welcome introduce I suppose uh our our Marina rabina and ask her to briefly give her credential and has been before this board many times uh and uh U for her qualifications and then connection to this project we will accept her as thank you Brien if you want to just briefly uh introduce um what your task was here and and and and um participation in in both helping to choose the location and the design of the Adu good evening um yes um thank you so much for hearing this application this evening and as you can see even though it's a large property it is quite complicated and um I worked closely with um the homeowners and our engineer gy to find the ideal location for the successory dwelling unit which as you could see is not a small task and from my standpoint one additional um a limiting factor that we considered is although everything in front of the house is considered in the front yard we also considered that there is a required front setback and the entire building is located beyond that point I think Ryan you may have the next slide if I'm not mistaken that de oh no okay well we'll we'll demonstrate that on the plans moving forward so our Balancing Act was the real um constraints of the physical proper but also the zoning constraints that are um mandated by ordinance that we try to comply with as many of them as we could um and now as Ryan is showing here we have a view of the 3D model that shows that um view from that pathway as we saw in the photograph where um we are not showing the um Shrubbery screen in the front because um it would would basically block the entire model but um it shows you that it's a um horizontal structure where you will see one story it's a um flat roof structure that presents a low um facade to the street and it will have a lot of um shrubs associated with it and as you get to Peak um you see the little ramp going up to the front right are you able to point cuz I don't think I can point yeah there you go thank you um so where that projects that happens to be beyond the um front set back um so we are balancing between not being too close to the stream the entire building is beyond the set back line and that little portion of the ramp itself protrudes into the setback also oh R could go back for a second it's worth noting that um and again we'll show this on the plan there is a large um setback from the street from the road itself to where the setback is so not only we're within the setback but there's also a large piece of land in front in the public right away so let's skip to the next one again as you could see it's a a one-story structure you could see so in order it's with all the slopes it's it's kind of a substantial ramp so we have to kind of go up turn around go back so that's kind of where where we end up with a extended ramp uh yes thank you so now you could see the ramp from the other side um and again you start to see all of the Contours modeled in this um view where you could this is not a realistic view it's a cross-section but it it gives you the sense that um and Ryan if you could point to the ramp on the right hand side so you see you kind of go up and then you turn around and you go back to get to the front door thank you uh yep and then on the other side we're making use of the slope uh where there would be um Windows facing the stream on the lower portion of the basement but we're fully compliant with um basement regulations uh next slide please oh thank you yeah okay so this is easier to see right here so um as you can see there's a car on the left hand side and then the ramp can you try it yes thank you you kind of go back and then you come forth thank you through the door um and then there's open space and then there's one bedroom and A wilter Accessible bathroom and then the lower level um as Chris described um is a space base that he envisions um would be used for his aunt uh right uh hopefully I didn't miss anything yeah oh this is the this is the one we were looking for yes so as you could see uh that is the setback line so if this was the borrow this wouldn't be an issue because we are compliant with the front setback but we're in a Township so everything in front of the house is considered in the front said back uh and the ramp itself is peeking out and again as you could see it's kind of a balancing act the further away from the street we move the closer to the creek we end up being so just couple of notes Here my end so this this blue line that's the 25 foot setback line now obviously as Marina said anything in front of the house requires this but we wanted to show if if this were the house or a house um and somehow the sizes were flipped that's the compliant line um and what further what we've shown in red is that portion of the ramp or entrance stoop or whatever you'd like to call it that again under neighborhood character um actually would be permitted to to encroach into that line um however technically accessory structures just don't have that but if if either the house were demolished and this were the only structure here or if somehow uh the roles in in life could be reversed and you know the this were to be bigger for example than the the house and that that would be the Adu and this would be the main house um then that would uh our understanding would be that that would be you know essentially permitted and and the as of right location also note that uh this is this site is unique in many ways topography environmentally lots of lots of ways that that make uh design difficult but another way that it is almost unique um possibly fully unique in in Princeton is it doesn't actually have a prevailing front yard setback there's not enough properties around it with structures that would to to calculate one so ultimately if you're looking for other guidance about where a structure should be put there is no you know you you when we asked and and and they did it correctly there there's no you know the result is zero you can't essentially divide by zero uh for the prevailing setback so the the 25t set back that we're showing would be uh the required one If This Were to be the actual home and and again um while the uh technical measurement for an accessory structure would be to the front of this stoop if it were a house you actually wouldn't measure our understanding would be you wouldn't measure it that way under these uh provisions of neighborhood character that understand that you know elements of front porches and Stoops and and cover cover uh you know as as we point out here um are permitted to um essentially go further or closer to to the to the street however um and Marina this is a slide I think you were looking for as well yes thank you we we show that line from the lot line at 25 ft uh but I think it's very important to show and we talked about this a little bit at the end of the hearing um the we hours of the morning last month um that the lot line does not really represent um distance from of the public here it's what's how variances are measured but ultimately there's a lot more line a lot more property between uh what we're talking about and the roads BR want to go through that a little bit Yeah it I think if you zoom in it becomes a little bit more visible because at least on my screen it's a little bit yes there we go much better thank you um so the dark gray is the street and the curb line and then you can see the orange line is the property line where it's approximately where those um kind of shrubs bushes are and then we're set back beyond the 25 foot line but then we have about just as much in front of it so we're effectively in the narrowest spot we're 43 and 1/2 ft away from the road and in sort of the regular it's on the order of you know to the house you know some places it's fit 50 uh so yeah there you go on the right this is the kind of street view that shows where the property line is in relation so we're 25 feet from here back is what we've been talking about all and then it shows some of the screening as well that would hide the and exactly and I think what's also really important to note that the further down if we try to push the um building further down the harder it is to back out because the driveway is steep and then we would be again in the areas that are um tree covered so in this case we're kind of balancing we're beyond the proper um setback line and we could still back out relatively flat I mean as flat as it's going to get on this property um and then turn around and go back facing forward in the safest possible manner so talk about a balancing act here yep um so I think that I am happy to summarize but if anybody else wants to on my team to come back and summarize that um again it looks like a large property and it's absolutely beautiful and it's a lot of interesting things going on we feel that this structure found a really good spot to kind of nestle in which is um very much safer it it doesn't require bringing utilities to the other side of the creek pretty much um any otherc location on this property would also require front variances because as you could see the house is built so far close to the rear property line that pretty much anything and everything would be a variance condition uh let's see so as as you remember if we were to put something near the right hand side property line where there steep slopes and the turnaround for the oil truck we would be right up against the neighbors and we would have to take down mature trees and really kind of ruin that Forest feeling not only for the residents of this property but also for the next door neighbors um let's see did I miss anything I'll be happy uh to to to resmar again I think you I think you've got it though thank you Marina okay all right well if if I miss anything I'm here so so with that you know this now will be the time for us to obviously make our uh architect available uh for any questions that the board or your professionals may have Mr chairman board members any question of the architect okay I I I do have a question um the lower floor this is supposed to be compliant with handicap regulations is it not yes yeah and so the if the lower floor is classified as a basement does that exempt it from the regulations in terms of access it is accessible from the outside so there is no interior connection from um um but it is it could be made accessible from the outside yes see from the patio I mean it looks like there staircases uh yeah there is no interior wheelchair accessible connection you're right absolutely thank you Mr Kennedy I just have a housekeeping question so your exhibit A1 is 37 slides because I'm looking at the b or 36 I'm looking at the bottom of the so uh 36 is thank you 37 uh we didn't I don't expect to get to but if we need to is is a copy of the a full copy of the topographic map um U if any you know if it's needed for questions so we we've we've only uh used 36 uh 36 being thank you thank you okay Mr Kennedy all right um may need to return this uh later when we have more questions discussions but uh U with that I want to thank the board both um you know I know a lot of you came out to um uh to to look at the site to think about this um as you always do U for keeping with us late last night and giving us some feed feedback so we can be uh better able to answer your questions this month than those of you I believe who you know watched the tape so they could participate if if if that was the case apologies if it was not but uh thank you nonetheless for everything you guys do uh here we've got a a homeowner here with it a challenging property um uh the the house was built way in the back so essentially everything here requires um a front yard setback variants to have this structure this has been designed in a way that anyone driving by would think this is just the house and would fully comply if it were just the house with with all of the requirements essentially we believe um uh in in the in the Zone on top of that um there is a generous extra area um in front of the lot line between the right of way the curb line uh and the lot line that provides extra um buffering that along with the trees and shrubs in front really create a situation where uh um a an Adu can be accommodated uh particularly an ADA accessible one uh for uh family members of the homeowners but without any impact uh to the neighborhood or the plan but only with benefits and as we went through the other possible locations they all required had problems in some way and all of which actually required front yard setb setback variances themselves um and the the closest to another spot you know um uh near the garage would have um one be the only one that would have really any impact on a neighbor being kind of perched above uh uh the neighbors's pool uh in a way that didn't quite seem neighborly and would require the removal of uh more mature trees still require that front yard setback variants and unfortunately not really solve anything other than possibly making it impossible for trucks and delivery Vans to get up to the house or the Adu CU that's the one kind of flaish area where uh fuel truck or somebody who can navigate up there and and actually turn around um so with that you know we we thank you for your time I hope you um agree that the the benefits of this um certainly outweigh uh any detriments a reminder that we've been able to um through uh you know stipulated redesign remove many of the variances particularly the technical ones about driveway WID that was two variances and the parking setback from the sidey variance and and perhaps with other conditions you might think that that's you know none of those variances are even needed because it's our position that we don't intend that to be a parking spot just a thing that's the size of a car where someone can K turn out and get out without having to go all the way up the driveway uh to that K uh turnaround area and then back again if you're the the Adu user this is a a sensitive site and we think that our design is quite sensitive to it tucking this in really the only place it could go uh but but that's not a concession it's a it's a the place where this site speaks to and and kind of invites it and by tucking it into this location building it interestingly um in a no very um not impactful way that kind of opens up into um and relates to the stream quar and and kind of builds that like a that walkout basement feature uh into the the slope um is something that is uh both very usable uh for the the the family members who will be living there um and not impactful uh to either neighbors or to anyone really trying to drive by uh to see it and we do hope uh as a as a myself being someone who lives on a fairly busy road that people would never drive by you know uh fast so fast that they would be able to see it but uh unfortunately that is the the way that this road works that you're probably never driving slow enough to to actually um see what's happening here so with that um much appreciated your time and always uh happy to answer any other questions you might have board members any questions of the attorney or the witnesses yes Donna um I'm trying to get a handle on the variances you're still asking for and the variances you're no longer asking for and whether your plans reflect that you don't need those other variances so I guess I'm asking the engineer perhaps well well while he's queuing up do my attempt to summary to summarize uh in Mr bridger's memo there are four items listed item one we do need that's essentially the variance for anything on this site because it's in front of the house needs that variance so the a front yard yes we need that and two the front yard parking setback um while we're not we don't believe that what we've created is a parking spot we are asking for that variance because technically it's the size you know we don't want someone to park there that's not the intention but a car could fit there so I think that makes it a parking spot so with that that K turn area is within the front yard setback okay and you haven't changed anything for that okay corre the other three and four are minor changes that while we haven't redone the plans if if you agree that these other things make sense as a condition we would alter the plan so that those variances are not needed and we are not asking them for them this evening so that's and four we're not requesting okay um and the plans can be redrawn to show that I mean it's it's not correct it's doable and correct yeah I I can just lay in and just say that the side yard setback at 4.75 feet I think that was scaled off the plan by Derek with his best ability to scale it off but the intention was always for it to be 5 feet off to comply so that's a mute point will be 5 feet and then in our slide presentation I analyzed the reduction to the 22 feet on both driveways in red we highlighted that and labeled it so we do did confirm that that does in fact work and it's memorialized on um the slide that we viewed last time just showing the 22 foot wide entrances to the pullout area and to the Adu parking spot okay thank you and and Derek we in does that all sound right to you yeah I mean that's not a big lift okay thanks any other questions from the board okay hearing none um Mr Kennedy we're gonna open this up to the public you want to say anything you haven't said before no just thank you again I did say that before but I'll say that one again thanks okay all right um we're going to open this meeting up to the public um if there's anybody in the audience that would like to speak to this application indicate that by raising your hand at the bottom of the screen and you'll be recognized Claudia have we gotten any one who's indicated they like to speak there are no hands okay we'll give it a couple of seconds here still none okay all right we'll close the public portion of the hearing and again Mr Kennedy we're going to go into executive session but if you'd like to sum up um thank you again um for for your time last month this month I really especially appreciate um that extra few minutes you guys took just to give us a little bit of feedback to help us understand what to bring back that the applicant is very appreciative of of that extra kind of I don't say help but you know discretion so we knew what how best to answer the question you had and that's the kind of thing that honestly I wish uh every board would would do that it saves the applicant a lot of time and and money and helps get a a better product for you guys so um I just want to thank you again for for that little bit of help last month and and hope that uh um you can help this homeowner welcome their extended family uh to their home here in Princeton thanks you're welcome okay board members we are in executive session questions comments discussions or a motion I have a couple couple question Steve yes and really it's um well the first question is of either Derek or Derek Andor or Dan Weissman I saw he was sort of listed earlier um you know in in the memo you asked us to ask about alternative sites I always find that difficult because the technical answers most of us don't have the background to decipher the testimony now you've heard um both you and Dan have heard some comments regarding the sites um the the 25% the um um uh closeness to the neighbor whatever do but do you have any comments on on the information now that's been submitted that pretty much you folks requested no I mean I think it's helpful to see the areas mapped out to demonstrate I mean that's the proof of this case be built somewhere else that complies and I think uh you know you he's correct you can't build under the 25 foot or excuse me the 20 5% steep slopes uh there are the environmental constraints um the trees so I mean that's the proof that's required I think to to address the the positive and negative criteria and you guys have to decide you know whether they've done that or not so I think it's it's it's a good illustration of the challenges on the lot okay and I guess with the 25% um I got to stick with that you have experience on do do people go for a variance and and eventually build on a 25 or greater than 25 I have no idea I I haven't seen any residential houses it's it's okay a residential restriction on on anything really but uh no I haven't seen any on that type of steep slope yeah that helps a lot helps me a lot um one comment if I might um Michael I don't know what the zoning regulations are but we used to live in Los Angeles and in the Hollywood Hills you have amazingly steep uh grades where the engineering is quite complicated but houses are built I have no idea what the zoning requirements are there but technically it's feasible to build on very steep slopes whether it's wise to do it when an earthquake I wouldn't but people do you're yeah exactly right George in the in the West in California there are a lot of homes on steeper slopes but that's the way uh a lot of the land is I have um one more question for Derek um and it's just regarding Dan if you're going to testify I just need to swear you in quickly do you swear from your testimony this evening will be truthful I do thank you thank you uh and sorry Mr Floyd I just uh wanted to just uh bring one point of clarification as we're talking about the steep slopes what the ordinance envisions as a variance for steep slopes is based off Topography of 10 foot intervals so it it doesn't look at um extremely localized steep slopes if if it was a 25% over say a foot or two um it looks for larger areas of of steep slopes um so I haven't reviewed uh in detail the plans that were prepared here tonight um but it does appear that a good amount of the steep slopes that were shown on the exhibit um are 25% slopes When you mention I'm sorry I it's my lack of knowledge the 10 10 foot intervals or whatever M what is that is that just from one height to the next it's a 10 foot height differential so if that that if it's 25% over a 10 foot height differential so you almost look at it as um a 25% would be 10 foot over say 40 feet long and that would be a 25% slope oh yeah so if it was if it was a one foot over four foot that's that wouldn't be considered a steep slope you more look at it a more topographical scale okay thank you um yeah my other question Derek um is just what you're seeing um I was wondering if you can respond are there me have you seen many applications looking to build an Adu in front of the principal building uh I mean there was the one on Valley Road I think that was moved back that's that's the only one I've seen uh you know since I I haven't seen any others at at this point okay and that helps to and I think the only one other one that comes to mind to me were there was a temporary proposal alternative proposal on Ying Street I believe um and and the planning board right right push that I was thinking zoning board but you're correct planning board yep but if they there's no others that's good too thank you yes sir any other questions board members okay um I actually think after looking at all the alternatives for the various areas on the site to build that this is the most logical and least intrusive so I would agree with the engineer the architect the owner and the attorney okay um does someone want to make a motion if I have a few more comments um if no one has anything else to say um they can go before me if somebody does um my my struggle and um there's been a lot of good information tonight that helps me um is is that the Adu ordinance has some principal sort of tenants um one is related to height one is be able you know uh lot size um the Adu is supposed to be behind the main that's and and no one's sort of mentioned that that might be a important tenant of adus now I'm glad to hear that there hasn't been a lot of other initiatives to put adus before the main building um but that's sort of the big issue for me um and the fact that the main building is so far back and that this this site is so hard to manage because of the Topo um I recognize that um you know when we talk front set back we're talking uh front set back from the main building not from the street um alternative sites trees can be replaced um closeness to the rear property line if my rear neighbor Builds an Adu they can build it up to the setback it'll be close to me almost all adus will be um so the closeness to the rear neighbor I think has been overly stressed um I really appreciate uh the clarity um from the engineers on the slopes that has helped me um and those are my basic comments and what has been in my thoughts in the last two meetings of trying to understand this thank you I I don't totally disagree with you on the location of the Adu but in this case I think they've proven that the the site is a difficult one and trying to put the Adu behind the main dwelling would be although maybe compliant and the closest to the neighbor you're right that's just the nature of the Adu but in this case I think it's uh it's justifiable not to do that in my opinion yeah respect your opinion won't won't debate you on the importance of the Adu being behind the front yard that backline well not um I think the site is is very very difficult and as I say now I have a better understanding of slopes topography you know um I I hope a few of the other board members have gain some knowledge and uh yeah I'm ready to move on all right any other questions Michael or no okay board members question or motion I move we accept this proposal with as drawn and not ask them to uh narrow down the driveway or the round spot far board members I just had one question for you um looking through Derek's memo and the testimony uh the applicant has argued that this location the chosen location would mean no removal of mature trees is that a condition the board wants to add similarly I think Mr chimc testified they would protect the critical Zone around nearby trees I don't know if you want that to be a condition um so it's your emotion Stephen I don't know if you want those to be conditions I don't but somebody else get at them if they wanted to I'm ready your motion as it is okay I I when when Stephen when you brought it up initially I didn't quite understand the whole motion can let me repeat it I I uh move for acceptance of The Proposal with the four variances not with just the two but Stephen they're not seeking the four variances anymore was that right I don't I don't I don't want to speak for Mr Kennedy I didn't hear him say that I I heard them say that they were willing to take them off the table if we insisted on it that's what I heard okay well just to clarify Mr K are you looking for two variances or four uh and like what I just heard I think we'd be looking for for four variances um we again we could redesign it to make it work but it is it is not a better design from our perspective to to restrict those pinch points uh and restrict the k- turn area more if the board desire we would make it work but that's not our I'd like to make a comment too Steve if I might and and that is I agree with Michael wholeheartedly about the putting the Adu in front of the house but I think this property is such and the sight lines are such that it really kind of negates all that so that's that's why I'm positively disposed and okay and we have who seconded the motion can I I just want to make a comment on Karen's comment about the trees and the critical root Zone that's not really a a zoning it's not in the zoning code so we can't Grant a variance from that so that'll have to be sorted out when you know the engineering and the plants come in so we could I mean basically we are suggest we're mentioning it in our in our um motion would that trigger the engineer taking a look at that and I mean that's part of this the normal process on this type of compliance review um but you I don't think you can grant a variance for something that's not in your code no difficult okay so we have a motion we have a second uh is there any discussion on the motion okay Claudia can you call a rooll [Music] please miss Chen yes Miss Coulson yes Mr Floy yes Mr Shriver yes Mr Stein yes Miss Donna yes chairman Cohen yes thank you okay good luck and uh thank you for all the information Mr Kennedy yeah the architect the engineer and especially the homeowners good luck thank you so much okay all right so give it a second here we have it our next application is case number Z24 d519 17 Armor Road Block 10.02 L 27 in the R one-b zone Karen are the notices in order they are and the board has jurisdiction to hear the application tonight okay Mr Bridger can you summarize your memo for us yes sir thank you um good evening Linda Lynch or excuse me Lydia Lynch and Paulo Grady are the owners and applicants of 17 Armor Road they're seeking a C2 variance to permit the construction of a rear two-story addition and exception to the required combined side yard setbacks and the maximum permitted length of a sidef facing wall property's in the r1b zone in the former Princeton burrow um it's non-compliant with regard to the required 125 ft lot width the existing is 100 ft and the existing house is non-compliant with regard to the combined side yard or the smaller side yard setback requirement of 10 feet the existing 6.7 um and the combined side yard uh requirements 30 existing is 20 ft and it's uh non-compliant with the required 1.5 to one height to setback on the right side the East Elevation the applicant's proposing a twostory addition to the Western elevation of the subject property and the the floor space will be comprised of a bedroom um the first floor space will be in the second floor space will expand the master bedroom um they need a variance from the combined sidey guard requirement of 30 the proposed is 19.5 and the maximum length of a side facing wall is section 17A 403 um c2a and it's in neighborhood characters 40 feet and their wall um extends past that um 43.3 ft 3 feet um so I think they're going to um the actual dimension scale is out a little longer but that that's what they've set on is at 43.33% G at one time and there when the garage was converted I believe it looks to me also like they added the the little connector between the kitchen and the garage to to allow for a covered and enclosed passageway if that remained the garage and that little addition would not have was not built would we comply setback wise with this yeah I believe so I'm just okay so and and you don't know when all that work was done do you no I don't no okay all right I just wanted to ask because that's s of the same thing appeared when I went out to look at it and looked at the drawings okay all right um okay so who Mr Kennedy you're shaking your head so I assume you're representing the owners right okay please begin all right thank you Mr chairman um again members of the board uh Ryan Kennedy from Stevens Lee uh for the new homeowners uh we've got uh uh lady Lynch here this evening uh and our architect Jeff leer um as Derek said this is an ex pre-existing non-conforming home uh uh Mr chairman I think you have it exactly right we this is a new homeowner who recently purchased the house but our sleuthing into trying to understand how this house came about lines up pretty closely with your assumptions from driving by we looked into gosh if that was the garage how much of it can extend into the sidey setback on that side um it does the story does kind of line up with the existing non-conformity that that was a garage at one point um which could uh under neighborhood character you know Peak out uh that way even into the smaller uh setback um but here this uh new uh addition to pron um uh the size of their family they need another bedroom and the the logical place here is to put it um behind the current one that would allow um one uh the construction of the bedroom and the kind of rearranging of a small second floor Edition as well to kind of expand uh the master bath we we looked at a couple of and we'll show you essentially um other places this could go if you slid it over to comply unfortunately just with connecting to the existing home none of it really worked so we'll we'll show you the the screening um with the neighboring property it is uh quite uh unique um not that there are trees that's not quite unique to a house but the way that these homes were constructed uh were kind of staggered so that um this property is set back uh the one next door where that is closest to this um is set forward so that there's kind of a ying and yang kind of situation uh that makes for uh good setback um conditions uh in addition into the screening a as Mr Bridger kind of noted we're here for Combined sidey setback so the smaller is 10 The Zone contemplates 10 being um acceptable we are um further away from that we'll we'll show you that as well but technically uh this is supposed to be the big side so our nearly 13 ft really should be a bit bigger than that because you have to get to 30 between the two sides and as um you know from driving by or our understanding of the the makeup of how this home came to be um it's likely that a garage was converted on the right side and that garage would have been okay and the more it was converted the more that that became the small side unfortunately and then kind of threw off uh and created the the the existing non-conformity that we're unfortunately stuck with so that's that's the the core variance really is to allow us to build uh a small addition uh for a bedroom here for for this family in the one place that makes sense uh that the setback on that side is already fixed so honoring it or keeping it as is uh makes sense we're also replacing a patio uh so uh there's uh already uh um impervious surface there and a and a hot tub actually so from a um perspective of um proximity to neighbors and activities actually may be a bit of an upgrade to to go from home you know hot tub to home though that we're not familiar with any particular complaints so the homeowner hasn't uh uh isn't aware of any but you know making changing that from a very active outdoor use to to a bedroom um actually is is perhaps a bit of a benefit there is secondly that neighborhood character side wall articulation variance 40 is the maximum length that is permitted we are a little over that about 43 and and and change uh feet we'll show you though that the idea behind sidewall articulation is visual interest one there's a plenty of trees keeping anyone from enjoying any visual interest here but two you'll see that the the way it was designed it does have that in different ways there's different materials being used uh different roof lines the addition doesn't go the whole uh distance and height it is broken up in many different ways that if you could see it and likely you'll see that you can't um it would uh actually be visually interesting and kind of uh broken up in in different ways that are not the traditional physical articulation uh way so um with that we'll have two witnesses uh this evening perhaps uh Lydia and and Jeff our architect could be uh sworn in now and we can get their testimony if they can unmute themselves this Lynch I oh there you go uh do you both swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful I do yes do thank you all right uh with that we have our uh again I I'll note the screen will say 14 slides um one of them is thank you and one of them is something uh I don't think we expect to show uh so I'll say it's 13 unless there's a uh um a need to show a 14th one all right so that will be exhibit A1 okay that's all right to share my screen I'll I'll do that and and and ask Miss Lynch if you could introduce yourself uh and uh give the board the the the quick story of the the need for your extra bedroom here and uh what you've done with uh uh Mr fler to to to look at this and you know your connection here to the Princeton community so welcome thanks very much Ryan and thanks to everyone on the board for giving us the time I just want to say tonight I'm not at home tonight because my best friend has just arrived from Ireland and I've had to go into New York to collect her and I've found a building which seems to be the quietest but it's not completely quiet um so I have moved here from Boston I'm originally from Ireland I moved here from Boston um in the summer I was recruited to be a professor at the University professor of molecular biology and um we bought the house in April we moved in in June um we have three children but the the house has only got three bedrooms and so we would like to build a fourth bedroom so that each child can have their own bedroom and just want to say um I absolutely love living in Princeton so far and it's by far the most beautiful place I've ever lived ran you're muted Ryan thank you so much sorry about that um uh so miss L thank you so much um uh if you could I know you're new to the to Princeton but just uh I'll take you through a few slides here just to orient the board uh this uh this first one's the zoning map that blue arrow points to your uh new to you home on 17 armor yeah all right right and then as we kind of scroll in from uh Arrow map I guess you uh that blue boxes is where the house is and that's Route 206 uh kind of highlighted below you yes and I guess the road that you're quite familiar with to get to to work every every day yeah yeah I walk that road uh as we get a little closer in you can see the the neighborhood view here uh with Elm kind of shown uh to the top left and then again uh uh 206 kind of at at the bottom that's your house in in blue there with the green pin yes all right and then uh lastly again before we switch over to architect um just if you could give us you know kind of a few words here um I think on the right shows the basic sketch plan of the current house uh it does show as as the chairman showed that what probably was a garage that kind of eak towards the neighbor on the other side uh but then show the um uh green being the outline of the current house and this arrow pointing to where you know the logical place for you to put this uh uh new bedroom and and I guess on the left one of our first of a couple attempts to to show the both the positioning of the your neighboring home that's closest and and the trees nearby anything um I think maybe the next slide will be better to to show that but ultimately there's a a lot of screening in between your uh your house and uh and in your neighboring house yes yeah there's lots of trees on on either side so next on slide six I think these are photos of the current hot tub and Patio that you plan to build over um again has this gotten a lot of use and uh um any any kind of interaction issues with it being you know too close to the neighboring uh property or you know visible or anything like that no it's actually further away from the the neighboring property because as you mentioned they're closer to the road got it and we can't see the their guard or anything so with that I don't know if there's any questions for the the homeowner but uh um we' like to next would go have the architect kind of start going through the the program but happy to have Miss Lynch available for any any questions that um the board may have okay thank you you want to wear or we swore the architect in um I believe Mr fler has testified before us before yes I've actually I think I've been in last four meetings okay I knew you look familiar okay so we will accept you as a as an expert thank you thank you so much Mr chairman uh so Jeff uh slide seven here we've got the kind of the existing um house here with the setbacks line but why to just briefly give the board you know what what you were asked to do here and what constraints you had to deal with right well the program was to add a fourth bedroom um and we explored adding on the second floor over the old garage um but this was the most logical place on the site to add the bedroom um didn't increase lock coverage um and it it's in the backyard and this didn't block views from the back of the house block views from other rooms um so to build the uh the first floor addition we had to uh eliminate a closet that contained a hot water heater to gain access to the new bedroom that'll be built over the hot tub patio area all right um moving apologies to slide eight here blue arrow shows the the patio area that's being converted to um excuse me um to the small Edition and that's kind of highlighted in blue on the first floor and the second floor and if you could I know um the first it was very clear to me the first floor is going to be that new bedroom just talk a little bit about the second floor I know there's so the so the second floor was um we took the opportunity to build over this first floor addition to expand the um primary Suite bathroom to uh include a bathtub as well as a balcony looking out at the backyard and so uh I can hear some of those uh the rear elevation and the side elevation which is the most I'll say interesting and I don't mean from a perspective of it being visually interesting though I do mean that too I guess but the this is would be the the part that's closest to the closest neighbor is would be this bottom left elevation is that right right so on on the second floor there was existing shed Dormers in the uh primary sweep bathroom um so we continue those Dormers as well as projected the uh the Gable end roof um we stepped back at the second floor for the balcony um to break up that facade um we're also maintaining the um Dormer end fascia um fascia boards sorry rake boards um to break up the facade um there's also the first floor has brick that existing area and then the upper area is the The Clapper siding so we we we looked a little bit about what it would mean to take this and move it over to be compliant and while that would you know create some new impervious area and and not make a you kind of create this like dead zone um it also would have the problem I suppose of not really being able to connect well with the the certainly the bathroom on the upstairs so the yellow is that kind of area that uh where you have to kind of line up the new construction with the the the the dmer and and Eaves to have some place to actually um you know connect that's correct it it would also block the the view from the existing um rooms on the first floor and second floor and it the uh while it's while is it a it is a story for the the bathroom on the second floor I believe the ceiling Heights are are not quite uh you know they count as floor area but not full ceiling Heights right want to that's correct yeah it's more of an attic space than a than a traditional second floor and the red lines here are shown that that's the setback we required to to meet the combined 30 foot you know this is we're essentially respecting in keeping with the existing setback uh from the neighboring property which is uh much more than the minimum 10 required but again to get to the Min to the 30 foot combined because of the six feet essentially that the old garage was in the other side you you end up with this is where the compliant line would be right um so this slide 11 here is meant to kind of talk a little bit about the articulation variance so that red line shows where 40 feet would be and where you'd have to step back um to to meet that requirement but but you know just talk through again you know some of the I'll say visual interest elements that you've got here that you know maybe it's not a full technical substitute for articulation but that um give the visual interest and and break up the space yeah we we have the uh the Dormer shed roof and then we have the The Rake boards on the existing house and then the the different materials between the addition and the existing house as well as the the balcony um setback at the second floor um and if if if we did only go about the the 40 ft we would have a bedroom that's a little bit less than 9 ft deep so as from the closet yeah for the last few feet of it you're right yeah yeah and then here again just a reminder of the photo from the you know essentially across location where this will be built perhaps showing the you know that Gable again it is a story but you know that attic like space that's being extended ended with the uh Dormer and that U you know the the current roof line that's being uh extended and then uh Jeff I guess this on the right is is a overhead this is the Armor Road to the left here um showing the location of the house the current patio where the um addition will go and then to try to show the relation to the house next door uh interestingly if you were to try to go above the old garage on the other side or or anything in that area you'd be much closer um to a neighbor than you would be here is that right that's correct yes yeah apologies for for coughing out everyone but um with that uh if there's any questions for our architect happy to to to have him available now board members uh can you take your screen down Mr Kennedy um board members any questions of the architect Mr Kennedy can you take your screen then thank you um okay so there are no questions of the architect Michael did you want to say something no okay um all right um I was out there I looked at it today I walked along that sidey yard there is a very very dense screen uh adjacent to the house and it's uh so I was concerned about the imposition this would be on the adjacent house and I don't see any um I do like the fact that the 43 feet is to the end of the first floor portion and the that additional three feet is only um for the 43 feet is to the first floor and that uh that steps down and the balcony in the back is not covered so that opens it up a little bit more all right um Mr Kennedy do you have anything else no just again I want to thank the board for considering this um as as always happens with with the challenges of existing home layouts you the and kind of trying to modernize a bit for a a growing uh family to right size the home we they we we do our best and I I think uh the architect here did it a nice job of respecting uh the neighbor doing this in the least obtrusive way um and ultimately um it is a a cork with the combined setbacks particularly where what what should be the big side is the small side so we are you know should the what had this remained the big the small side at 10 feet we comply and then some with the setback um it's the The Quirk of how the house was uh kind of developed through the years that that caused us uh to get here and uh with that limitation um we we feel that this this design is the best way to to get this without any um significant detriment really to to the neighbors but to allow it to be modernized so with that again thank you so much okay um all right I'm gonna if there are any no other questions of the architect or the owner or the attorney I'm going to open this up to the public uh if anybody would like to speak on behalf of this application please indicate that by clicking on the raise your hand button at the bottom of the screen Claudia has anybody indicated they'd like to speak to this application there are no hands okay give it a couple of seconds here okay we'll close the public portion of the hearing once again Mr Kennedy please sum up again thank you so much um hopefully with the the the screening the the the lack of um new impervious coverage again we're removing a patio essentially to build this um uh and and removing a outdoor pool which may have not to say was a nuisance But ultimately probably a lot more impactful than a than a bedroom would be on any kind of neighbor so from a from a perspective of of um dealing with the neighbors are any negative detriment I think you should her or be comfortable that there there isn't uh any to be had here uh and the the benefits certainly uh Al way that's and again on the the sidewall articulation uh that's a a tough one as always it it's the idea is to create that visual interest for neighboring property we we believe we have it here um and and that combined with the screening results in a situation that um is going to be of no no negative impact to to the neighbors or the The Zone plan so with that again thank you so much for your time here tonight okay you're welcome all right um board members we're going into executive session now do anybody have any comments any discussion we should have or if not if someone would like to make a motion yeah um I the the elevations and the articulation that you see uh that you will see um in real life is I think is acceptable the the plan made it appear that it it it might not be um you know when you just see that it all aligns but I think in reality with the balcony and looking at the Gable end of the house um it's acceptable and I would move to approve it thank you any other comments questions okay somebody'd like to make a motion yeah I moved to it okay um do we have a second I'll second thank you is there any discussion of the motion before we vote on it okay Claudia can you please call the rooll Miss Chen yes Miss Coulson yes Mr Floy yes Mr Shriver yes Mr Stein yes Miss Donna yes chairman Cohen yes thank you okay thank you very much I walk by this house every evening okay um our next case is coming up I have to recuse myself and Mr shriber will take over I'll see you all next month Steve thank you Steve uh we'll take a five minute break and reconvene at 9:15 e e e e for for I think we're all back is that correct we're still being recorded So the next case is file number Z24 d471 Karen are we in order you're muted Baron you're muted the noticing is in order and the board has jurisdiction tonight thank you very much Derek would you like to summarize your memorandum yes sir thank you um good evening an application has been filed with a Princeton Zoning Board of adjustment by 12-16 Witherspoon Holdings LLC seeking minor site plan approval conditional use authorization and D relief for a deviation from a conditional use standard and bulk variance relief to convert the second floor of a joint occupancy building from a residential to a non-residential use and to install a detached walk-in refrigerator in the existing parking lot behind the uh building at 1216 Witherspoon the subject properties located within the central business district it's comprised of 22 Acres um it contains two joint occupancy buildings at front on Witherspoon Street and a sixs space parking lot towards the rear with vehicle access to Palmer Square um 1214 Witherspoon is a one two and three story structure currently occupied by small roll coffee on the first floor and Residences above and 14 and a half to 16 wither spoon street is a one two and three story structure currently occupied by arley's raol blend on the first floor with offices and Residences above 16 weather spoon was most recently occupied by kilwin on the first floor but is currently vacant um the site contains a pedestrian alley uh toward the southern end of the site between the structure at 12 Witherspoon and the rear structures running on nassal as well as a trash compactor adjacent to the parking lot in the rear sites bordered uh by the nassal in on Palmer Square to the we the West in business and mixed uses to the north south and wither spoon Street to the east the site was before the planning board in December 14 2017 for reconstruction of uh 14-16 Witherspoon included the construction of a six Bas parking lot um there were several variances proposed uh the addition required three parking spaces um they were given a variance for that there was parking setbacks where 4 foot was required Z was proposed and there was open space uh for residential uses where 60 square feet per unit uh was required and none was proposed um there was a loading dock variant where one is required and none was proposed and then there was a a reduction in the parking stall size from 9 by9 to 8 by 17 and there was finally a a side yard setback reduction from uh where 12 feet is required and five was proposed along the north line at 16 Witherspoon the applicant is now seeking minor sight plan approval to convert the second floor of 16 Witherspoon from two residential units to a non-residential use for a seating area associated with a first floor bake reuse the applicant is proposing to construct a 12T X 16t walk-in freezer box in the parking lot at the rear which will remove two parking spaces the applicant has requested waivers from the below checklist items and staff has no objection to the granting of these waivers uh item a5b which is a fire protection narrative item A9 F an archaeological and historical site survey an a9g an archaeological and historic sites construction protocol and a9h uh which is delineated historic protection area or pre-mapped historic protection area I will also add that um historic preservation did look at this application however since there weren't any exterior changes visible from the public right away they did not review it um the property is located within the CB Zone um and the the proposed application requires a conditional use uh authorization and a D3 variance from a deviation from the conditional use standards and bulk variances uh Des described here in uh section 17A 307 permits the construction of part of a residential portion of a joint occupancy building to a non-residential as a conditional use provided that the following conditions are met no structural alterations or other constructions should create a new non-compliance or increase the degree of non-compliance the same number of parking spaces shall be provided for such conversions as are now required for new construction of similar buildings such built parking spaces may be must be provided in accordance with the provisions of 17A 388 and said spaces may not be provided by a waiver pursuant to 178 389 the floor area ratio for the non-resident portion of the structure after the proposed con verion shall not exceed one and a half 1.5% and then the case of conversion to a joint occupancy building at least 20 square feet of uh usable open space shall be provided for each hitable room um the rest of these really standards are not applicable to the uh this case um and then in general the board should consider the criteria set forth in section 17A 208 for conditional use standards um as follows uses listed as a conditional use in a particular District may be permitted by the planning board or zoning board or actually planning board only after it is determined that the proposed development complies with the conditions and standards set forth elsewhere in this chapter for the location and operations of such use and with the following specifications in standards a that all proposed structures equipment or materials should be readily accessible for fire and police protection B that the proposed use should be of such location size and character that in general it will be in harmony with the appropriate and orderly development of the district in which it is proposed to be situated and will not significantly impact the environment in an Environ in an adverse way and will not be detrimental to the orderly development of adjacent properties in accordance with the zoning classification of said properties and see that in addition to the specifications and standards set forth in this section in the case of conversion of a residential building existing in existence on November 19th 1968 to a joint occup building or the conversion of a part of that residential portion to a joint occupancy building or office or other non-residential use the following criteria shall be met one that the portion of the structure to be converted to a non-residential use shall be located above the remaining shall not be located above the remaining residential uses instead structure if said residential use by the nature of its operation can be considered detrimental to the residential loose which is not an issue here and that no floor may be used for both residential and business uses unless a separate entrance hallway or stairway provides direct access to each use and that the non-residential use by the nature of its operation will not be detrimental to the uh residential use um the rest of it just calls for a site plan which is uh why we're here today and we get to the variance section of this application it's a D3 variance in accordance with njsa 40 colon 55 d-7 D3 um the proposed conditionally use for the conversion a residential portion of the joint occupancy building at 16 Witherspoon to a non-residential use does not meet the uh condition specified in section 17A 307b that the same number of parking spaces shall be provided for such conversions as are now required for construction of similar buildings such parking shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of 17A 388 and uh the said spaces may not be satisfied by a waiver pursuant to section 178 389 the conversion of the two dwelling units on the second floor uh which equates to 1570 Square ft um of eating and drinking required four parking spaces the previous approval required three spaces the applicant is providing four total parking spaces as two are being eliminated with the uh installation of that freezer um the D3 variants can only be granted by the affirmative vote of at least five members um there's some bulk variances associated with the application um the installation of the walk-in freezer box increases the required building coverage in excess of the 60% requirement to 62 um the side yard setback requirements 12 for the freezer and one is proposed and then um the parking section um 17A 316a um the addition um of the uh conversion of the space requires a parking vase variance and they're removing two spaces um that's kind of a synopsis of my memo I'm going to just go over a couple sta comments um under the floor plans relation of proposed structure to the environment the floor plans provider with the applicant indicate um a 15 by7 foot walk-in freezer is proposed in the basement of 16 Witherspoon the applicant should advise you know by the necessity for two walk-in freezers for the proposed restaurant use um and then we ask that the applicant address the sound um levels of the freezer from 10 p.m. to 7: a.m. which will be controlled to meet the standard set forth in NJ ac7 semicolon 29 and then uh just a housekeeping matter on the signature block of sheet one of the site plans uh shall be revised to be reflect approved by the Zoning Board of adjustment as a minor site development that's a brief synopsis of the application I have with me tonight Dan Weissman the uh Municipal land use engineer and I also have Justin um blco the director of planning for the town he's provided a memo to this uh Pace as well um but I thought you could ask them some questions if not we could go directly into the applicants uh presentation so I'm here for questions too if you have any be glad to answer them thank you thank you Derek that's a mouthful we want to make sure we all understand what we're doing do we have any questions for Derek or for b or do I guess any questions if not let's go on into the presentation who's uh re representing the applicant Gary forner representing the applicant 126 Witherspoon Holdings LLC um I have one other person if you could admit him as a panelist that's Carlos Rodriguez our planner um everyone else has already been admitted I believe um then the other thing I wanted to note it appears that there are six eligible members to vote this evening um am am I correct in that first of all yes okay so the way I I I gather there's one I obviously um um Steve Cohen had to recuse himself and I gather there's one member of the board that's absent this evening um what I'd like to do with the board's permission is I'd like to proceed with the testimony but have the right if we feel that we need to to carry this to a subsequent hearing if necessary to get a full compliment of the board since as was noted we need five affirmative vote for the conditional use variance if that's acceptable we'll proceed accordingly Mr forner just just to point out to you that in doing that that would mean at the next meeting that you still need a full compliment and you would also need uh the absent member to listen to the tape of tonight's meeting absolutely all of that is understood yeah we can't guarantee sure that all members can be there at the next meeting usually everybody makes every effort to do that same thing with the member who was absent tonight we can't promise and it would be our hope that we get sufficient feedback from the board this evening that we're comfortable going to a vote this evening um that would be the ideal um scenario so uh why don't we proceed accordingly I'm going to summarize the application um um Derek did a a wonderful job in in going through the application we're just going to summarize this a little bit differently so hopefully a little bit more clarity um this is 12-16 Witherspoon it's essentially three buildings there's only one building in question in this particular case it's the building that was previously occupied on the first floor by kilwin um we are looking to to repurpose that building um so the first floor is vacant um and what we would like to do is put shise in the first and some additional seating for shise on the second floor of of that building but the the uh objective here is to repurpose and obviously put that building to productive reuse which is consistent with the goals of trying to you know make a Wither spoon and downtown Princeton uh as vibrant as as is reasonably possible um was indicated we do need uh a conditional use variance I think the focus on that is with regard to uh two parking spaces um there's one clarification I need to make the there's not two freezers that are being proposed in the basement is a refrigerator um there's not enough space to put the freezer um inside the building so what we have done is we've proposed a standalone freezer um um in the rear of the building um the purpose of that freezer is to have a more efficient operation that requires fewer deliveries so what's going to happen with the freezer is they're going to parbake or pre-bake if you would um some of the bake Goods offsite at their location in Hamilton and they're going to bring that to this site and there most of that is and that's going to be loaded into the freezer some of the Fresh Products are going to be obviously in the refrigerator um so what it what allowed to do as opposed to having de daily or multiple trips it has less frequent trips into the property in order to deliver the product and the product will be there and available to them in the freezer um obviously there's some internal um uh renovations to this building um however the external uh improvements are relatively minimal uh the primary Improvement is indicated is that we're proposing a uh Standalone freezer to the exterior of of the building there was a comment made with regard to sound levels we're not sure that there's an attenuation that's required but if there is uh we will do what we need to do in order to um um uh to attenuate or insulate the uh the sound from from that particular site uh we do need a couple of bulk variances one is a setback um um for one feet where 10 feet is required that again is for that freezer um to put in a location where it's going to have the Le least impact it does require us to eliminate the two parking spaces which is the reason primary reason for the conditional use variants um as you probably are well aware um Princeton had commissioned a parking study in in downtown area and found that there's more than enough parking in in in downtown Princeton um but rather uh need to manage the parking a little bit differently and more efficiently and it actually recommends that the parking requirements in the zone that is the subject of this application um be reduced to the greatest extent possible in other words you know have a more efficient use of of parking in Downtown Princeton so as to uh enhance the development the vibrancy um and the uh the use and and have an efficient location for for parking so we we had previously gotten relief so that we would have the four Park Pard me six parking spaces that were there uh we will we are proposing to reduce it as necessary to provide for the freezers so there'll be four parking spaces in the rear of the building um with access off of Palmer Square all of that is existing we're just making that minor change um there's another uh variance for building coverage uh 62% where 60 is permitted um that again is there's a small piece of that freezer that is on going to be located in an area that is um currently not impervious um and then parking is technically a bulk variance but I would argue that that's subsumed in the conditional use variance there have been a number of variance have been granted it was indicated by Derek in 2017 so what this application is about is about trying to repurpose a building keep the vibrancy um um of the downtown at least as relates to this building um and have a a good well-known user um um be able to occupy this building and continue to be an asset to uh to Princeton uh with that unless there's any questions or comments from the board I will introduce our first witness I have one question is that public parking are those four spots public parking no they're not they're they're they're hidden behind the building um you wouldn't even know that they were there uh they're typically um uh for employee parking thank you you're welcome any other questions for Mr B okay you want to go ahead and have your SW if we can have Jeff RoR sworn do you want to swear them all all at once or or do you want to do so we can do also it's Cliff horer Jeffrey RoR and Pete golden um so Pete is not Pete is a representative of the the applicant um Pete may be available to answer questions we don't anticipate him affirmatively testifying but if you want to swear him in just so you have that taken care of that would be uh fine so we have um Cliff Herer um Carlos Rodriguez course Pete golden and Jeff RoR Al righty uh and do all of you I think you're muted Mr Golden um do all of you swear or affirm your testimony this evening will be truthful I do thank you okay with that I'd like to introduce Jeff RoR Jeff if you would please first of all state your name and spell it um for the record uh it's Jeffrey RoR r i c h t r and if you can please describe your educational professional background sure uh a Bachelor of Science and civil engineering from Val preo University um professional engineer in the state of New Jersey as well as a planner uh I've been a professional engineer for going on 40 years I've represented numerous boards throughout the state provided testimony uh similar to this and in larger projects uh throughout the state of New Jersey we'll accept you as an expert thank you Jeff uh the plans that are subject of the application this evening were prepared by you or under your supervision that's correct um if you would I think probably now is a good time to show um your uh your your site plans and then I'll ask you to um go through that with the board in terms of what has been proposed Mr forner do you want to Mark any of the um plans that Mr RoR is going to testify regarding as exhibits so we are going to show some of the plans um that at as exhibits you tell me if you would like to these These are Jeff everything you're going to show at this point were part of the submissions with the application yeah yes the site plan and the archit I'll have the architectural plans part of the application yeah I think we would prefer to mark them as exhibits so I don't you want to make them Collective exhibits or how you'd like to describe them why why don't we mark them as we as we present them so it's clear to the board okay we're not seeing it yet Jeff yeah okay a second here sure not used to doing this on a small screen do it come through yet no not yet we just have a black oh there it is okay please describe to us what we're looking at now and confirm that this is the plans that were submitted to the board as part of this application yes this is uh I uh zoomed in to the portion of the minor site plan but this is the minor site plan that I prepared for the site sheet one of three uh last revised July 18th of 24 okay this is the site okay so um dereck's provided a between Dereck and Gary for the bear with me a second Jeff sure for the record we'll mark this as A1 that's F okay if you can walk us through the plan a little more stay there right so wither wither spoon is to the right here um that the dark the gray shaded areas are adjacent buildings uh to the site um this is 12 is right in here 12 Withers spoon U this is the 1214 rather there's a little Alleyway here there's an Alleyway here this one's blocked off um and this is 14 18.5 16 is here and then this is 16 Witherspoon this is what the application is about tonight um currently there's the six parking spaces to the rear 1 two 3 four up against the rear building and there's two over in this area that face the this building here uh this is the proposed freezer that we're proposing um I think it's 12 by 16 12 foot by 16 foot freezer and it leaves access through here 7even foot off 7.4 off the building to get into this Alleyway if you will here that goes into a door to this building uh there's existing storm water underground here that was built as part of the prior uh project um we've also got back here we've got dumpsters in this location a trash compactor here that's loaded from the front there's another dumpster over here uh there's some stairways uh up to the dumpster here and there's a stairway that is adjacent building in this area here this is the alleyway and there's an easement through here to get out to Palmer square and this is where people access this area currently um and there's a HVAC equipment is in in this area here so as indicated um we aren't proposing any changes to the exterior of the building itself uh and we're not proposing any signs if if we any signage in the future we would conform to the ordinance requirement or reappear before the board uh for a variance if needed um and then just to to clarify for the freezer as uh Gary had indicated the proposed external walk-in freezer in the parking lot here uh will be used for storage of pre-baked um partially baked goods these Frozen goods are pre-baked or partially baked offsite and delivered to the proposed Bakery there there isn't sufficient room in existing walk-in freezer inside the building so that's what this freezer is going to be used for clarification Jeff the the walk-in is well there's a uh right there's a refrigerator in the building um the product stored in the exterior uh is stored in there until it's brought into the bakery where it's completed uh the exterior freezer as Gary had indicated will reduce the need for multiple truck van deliveries to the site um which currently is on a daily basis uh they would anticipate with the new freezer to cut that down to two to three times a week they would be able to um you know reduce the amount of trips to improve the circulation in the back parking lot and in the neighborhood here um the walk-in refrigerator in the basement will hold fresh Pro product uh for use in Furnishing finishing pastries as well as sandwiches and salad production we'll also will be used as staging area for pastry items that that are in various stages of production uh as Gary indicated will comply with Jeff you cut out there a little bit at least on my end for the proposed walk-in freezer can you hear me is that better I can I can hear you now I don't know if it's just cutting out on my end but but your your last senters too were choppy okay so I go back uh we we'll comply with the relevant noise regulations for the walk-in freezer as Gary had indicated uh there was a question about uh bicycle parking uh for the site it's my understanding the residents currently bring their bikes into their Apartments um there are some bikes that are parked uh on on some of the uh u-shaped ballards if you will now uh we we would propose to provide some parking along the rear of 16 Witherspoon here might be able to put some of the U type uh uh bicycle um racks in here so you can park a bike on either side of the U so like an upside down U uh attached to the uh pavement Jeff you're proposing that there'd be part um um bike racks on on the site where you just indicated um previously theoretically they were supposed to put it in the basement but that proved to be impractical so when this occupant purchased it and is brought to our t you're proposing the bike racks um to the exterior of the building uh in a location that you think is suitable for that purpose correct that's the only area in the back there that uh that actually there's it's actually a little wider there and there would be room enough room to get the bikes into that area Okay um uh the Fire Marshall had just one comment concerning uh a door uh to make opening outwards uh we would comply with that recommendation uh the proposed structure the equipment and materials uh will be readily accessible for fire and police protection it's noted the Fire official did not express any uh access concerns uh in his review memo um and it's basically remaining unchanged from the existing from the condition that it currently exists um as I indicated there is a storm water system in the back parking lot underground storm water runoff from the walk-in freezer will be directed to the existing on-site storm water management facilities the freezer is being placed predominantly over existing impervious surface the freezer will add approximately 60 square feet of additional impervious surface which will not significantly impact existing storm water management facilities um then the uh there was a uh comment to investigate possibly reloc ating uh the uh the trash compactor um as you can see from the site or if you've been to the site it's very tight back there um and the compactor was actually relocated at one time in the past to provide better access uh for the collection vehicles um so it doesn't uh it's and there plus there's stairs to the adjacent building in that area so it's not really practical to move it uh further out into the driveway or closer to the building um so we would prefer to just leave it in the location that is that it is because it's currently working and uh feel that that's the best location for it at this point um and as uh Derek indicated we would provide the corrected signature blocks on line one as requested by uh Mr Weissman and I think the variances have been spelled out several times so I'm not sure I need to go over that again okay and we'll have Carlos obviously D address the the variance further as part of his testimony correct um I have nothing further of Mr RoR at this time uh obviously subject to any questions from the board or the public uh if not I'll introduce our next witness any questions do you think um you'll be able to design covered bike parking I I think the Practical answer answer to that is we're not proposing covered bike parking it would add to the F but we think that the location immediately adjacent to the building is is suitable for that purpose again it's a very tight sight in the rear of it you know what what apparently what they they testified to historically is they would do in the basement but as our people will tell you it's just impractical people aren't using it because it is Impractical to for them to park bikes in the basement otherwise we we would do so um so we're proposing just some um um um some open um bik racks in the rear of the building in that location any other questions bar you want to keep going Steve yes I do excuse me I just leco has his hand raised sorry to interrupt no not a problem and Karen I think you'll need to swear me in first I do uh Mr leco do you swear from your testimony this evening will be truthful yes I do thank you thank you uh and sorry to cut in uh but I just wanted to follow up uh with the clarification um Mr forner said uh theoretically there had to be covered bike parking in the basement but that actually was a condition of the 17 approval you know condition C says covered bicycle parking shall be provided to the rear of the buildings or in the basement um so I just want the board to be aware uh that that sh and that's and that's a and that's a good point because technically I guess what we're doing is asking the board to modify that condition because although you know what what the way they provided or at least the way we understood that they were providing it in the past by saying they'd be parked in the basement but either there's no space or you have space that's not easily accessible through the building through a um um what are those doors bco doors or the like and um uh and so rather than tell you that they'll Park in the basement which we don't think is ever realistically going to happen uh we're just providing the uh the the above ground so I guess to to your point Justin we're technically asking the board to modify that condition yep that's correct thank you thank you well I asked it yep thank you um if there's no further questions I'll introduce our next witness Cliff Warner good evening Cliff if you would please describe your educational professional background uh I'm uh graduate of NGIT Bachelor of architecture I've been licensed 25 years we'll accept you we'll accept you as an expert okay um Jeff can you put up his plans yes and then I'll ask you Mr Horner you're the project the arch detective record is that correct correct thank you so while you're doing this and I'll ask um Cliff to identify it um but A2 will be the architectural plans okay yes all right where' it go so as as Jeff's bringing that up um as he mentioned there'll be no changes to the exterior the front doors will remain the same into the commercial space and into the residential units above U but we're going to completely renovate the first floor there'll be new display cases um small amount of seating at the front uh a new kitchen area in the back and uh dishwashing but the the main change to the floor plan's going to be adding the stair to the access the second floor and to access the the new basement which will be dug out you able to get those up chff yeah I was just having a hard time getting it to come up on the screen you see it it looks like it's loading it's loading there you go come through yet not yet technolog is wonderful when it [Music] works I had it open but when I went to the screen it wasn't on the open things it's it's easier with two screens you can move stuff around we're still seeing a black screen that's interesting says sh it's got the green box around it nope it does say we're viewing your screen but there's no there's no plan up there no okay je if this keeps up you're going to have to lose your title as the technological wizard I'm not the technological wizard um all right let me uh when you stop sharing it and try it again yeah if it would just come up on my screen oh there it is share about now still not showing it's black screen it's still like it looked like it was about to you could see the message that you were sharing your screen and then it went to Black yeah why did it do that because I have the green outline around around it I may try to do mine Jeff yeah well me stop you want to try well let me let me load mine first I I didn't have it set up to to to to be shared so that's odd right one more time you can see your cursor moving that's interesting it says you're sharing it says you are sharing okay I'm GNA I I have it up now let me see if I can share it stop okay now are you guys seeing a plan yes good okay um first of all Cliff if you can identify these plans uh the first plan is uh just a key plan just shown the three properties these are the first of all it's the the plan set were was that which was submitted to the board as part of the application correct and it consists of how many many pages three and uh so we'll mark that collectively if that's all right with you Karen we'll mark that as A3 A3 or A2 oh I'm sorry A2 you're right okay um I'm gonna go down because I assume you want to testify from this plan Cliff yes okay so this plan shows the existing conditions um the plan to the left is the second floor with the two apartments uh plan in the center is the first floor um which was the kilwin space and uh plan on the right is the existing basement which is very low at this point so if you can go to the next plan so this plan uh we'll start with the plan in the center again um the from the outside it'll stay the same the entrance doors will remain um the the area to the right in the center is the display cases and the point of service um right behind that is the new stair to access the second floor and um the basement uh out at the front along the windows be a small amount of seating um the back left hand side will be a new ADA Bathroom uh and then behind the stairs is a new kitchen and a new dishwashing area uh when you go up the stairs um there'll be two types of seating there'll be General seating in the front and in the back will be for small groups like birthday parties office parties that those type of things um there'll be two new bathrooms on the second floor and a staff servant station and at the back is a new egress door um that used to go to the fire escape it'll still go to the fire escape but it it rather than the window we're going to put it at door and we'll do the um swinging the door out and up against the building as the Fire Marshall had mentioned uh going to the plan on the right um when you go down the stairs into the basement we're going to excavate that down um enough to get the larger walk-in uh refrigerator for um the Fresh Products and then right next to it is a prep kitchen um the space in the rear will stay to same that's mechanical um and and a stair up through a bco in the floor of the first floor okay so that so the the major change here is the second floor is going to be converted from residential to commercial correct correct and be used in conjunction with Shay e which is going to be on the first floor correct okay um I think that was it was there anything I think that really was all you had um are there any questions uh or comments from the board if there are none oh go ahead all right keep going okay I'd like now to call um Carlos Rodriguez Carlo already been sworn in yep Carlos if you would please describe your educational professional background can you make me a little bigger oh hold on let me stop sharing my screen unless you need one of these pictures I I don't okay there you go hopefully you're seen now there we go that way people can is that Machu Pichu in the back I'm sorry is that Machu Pichu in the back no taan okay different pyramid gotcha um Carlos if you would please describe your educational professional background sure so I have a master's in city and Regional planning from uh the blowstein school at Rutter where I also taught for many years I've been a licensed professional planner in New Jersey for over 35 years I'm a past president of the American Planning Association New Jersey chapter and a member of the College of fellows of the American Institute of certified planners and the editor of the 2018 edition of the complete guide to planning and New Jersey I think we can accept you as a expert thank you Carlos you've um had the opportunity to review the uh application been submitted in support of this application I have and the plans that have been submitted to the board and discussed this evening I have you've had an opportunity to review the relevant portions of the ordinance and the master plan I have and uh you've heard the testimony here this evening I have uh with that if you would please um um walk us through the variances that are being proposed and the justification for Relief okay so as was mentioned earlier the application requires a D3 conditional use variants to allow the conversion of the residential use to a non-residential use the second floor of the proposed Baker while reducing the number of on-site parking spaces from six to four it is the number it's the reduction in the parking spaces from six to four that triggers the need for the V for the C3 variant not the use itself um and then there are some as was discussed some additional C or bulk variances um some which were grandfathered by the planning board back in 2017 some of which are new now as I'm sure you're well aware use variances according to the municipal land use law shall be granted only in particular cases and for special reasons without causing substantial detriment to the public good and without substantially impairing the intent and purpose of the Zone plan and the zoning ordinance but conditional use variant are different from other D variances there is case law that has definitively established that all D variances are not cut from the same cloth nor they do they require the same proofs including the enhanced proofs first established in the medich case which were sub subsequently codified into the law in a case known as Coventry Square the Court held that the positive criteria in a conditional use variance is established if the applicant can demonstrate that the site continues to be an appropriate site for the conditional use not withstanding the deviations from one or more conditions imposed by the ordinance and in a subsequent case known as the TSI East Brunswick the the New Jersey Supreme Court reaffirmed ired the kentry Square Doctrine and confirmed that the enhanced burden of proof does not apply to conditional use variances so in light of this I would argue that the provisions in the former burrow zoning code that govern conditional uses are in fact largely Obsolete and don't reflect this jurist Prudence The recently adopted master plan which I'll talk about later pointedly considers the entire zoning Cod for the downtown including its conditional use provisions to be largely obsolete okay so the the question then is does the site continue to be an appropriate site for the conditional use the three buildings in question are located in the heart of the CB District or Central business district we're mixed and by District I mean both zoning district and and CBD in the conventional sense where mixed use buildings such as propose are both permitted and encouraged and the Town's new master plan is quite explicit in this regard the three buildings in question and we're we were only talking about modifications to one but they really come as a package are part of a closely a close snit and highly valued historic Urban fabric that actually predates the adoption of any zoning and so as such I would argue that the site continues to be appropriate for the proposed uses in addition and specifically with respect to the parking issue the town Commission in 2017 a rather extensive parking study of the downtown and surrounding areas and um Gary's already stolen some of my thunder on this but well when you have good stuff Carlos I'm I'm I'm likely to take it so yeah no problem so um the study was prepared by a firm called Nelson niggard which is a well respected National Parking consulting firm and it concluded that downtown Princeton does not have a parking problem it has a parking management problem specifically that study comments that parking issues often hinder development plans that might otherwise further enhance a Town's vibrant urban center one of the primary purposes of this study therefore is to identify opportunities to remove parking requirements as a barrier to desirable forms of development and investment the parking study found that within its study area there were 1,633 on street parking spaces and 5,392 off street parking spaces for a grant total of 7,025 parking spaces a study goes on to state that aggregate demand and Supply measures based on an extensive set of field surveys reveal consistently high levels of excess capacity excess capacity even during times of Peak parking demand now the parking study under in the section under recommendations urges es the town to update the zoning code to reduce barriers to wanted forms of investment while helping to make parking resources more flexible and resilient to change and there were a whole series of of recommendations which I won't go into as to how the town could get more mileage out of the existing uh inventory of parking what they call the management side of parking now while it is not the jurisdiction of this zoning board to amend the zoning to implement this recommendation granting the required variance will be entirely consistent with the recommendations of this study so if you agree with me and this is an open question that I put to you if you agree with me that the application presumptively satisfies the positive criteria for the reasons that I stated I will move on to address the negative criteria and if not I can provide a recitation of the usual purposes from the municipal land use law to justify the D3 variants that is for the record Carlos can you just mention those briefly sure let's see I'd start with purpose a which is where everybody starts to guide the appropriate use or development of all lands in the state in a manner which will promote the public health safety morals and general welfare I'm not sure we're promoting the morals here but we're promoting the general welfare uh um purpose C to provide adequate light air in open space I think this project does exactly that purpose e to promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations that will contribute to the well-being of persons neighborhoods communities and re and regions this project is going to help Revitalize further Revitalize a a section of Withers Spin Street and fill an empty storefront purpose J to promote the conservation of historic sites and districts so this is a historic district these are historic buildings and they're going to be the interior of them at least that one target building is going to be substantially improved the basement which I understand is has a very low ceiling and a dirt floor is going to be substantially improved and the um the the second floor space is going to be substantially improved but in summon substance Carlos this is going to be able to uh repurpose the uh the building that's now vacant put into uh productive reuse correct that's correct I think that's probably enough on the on the on the municipal and this law don't you agree uh I'm good as long as the board has no further questions or or or items they wish to discuss in that regard so then um addressing the negative criteria let's start with the master plan now now the 2023 master plan and re-examination Report contains a series of principles and recommendations that are pertinent to the case at hand under land use goal number four the master plan urges the town to provide greater opportunities for economic development by expanding permitted uses within the downtown commercial and mixed use districts that reflect the future direction of the market under Mobility goal number 16 the master plan urges the town to optimize the usage of existing parking capacity particularly in the downtown under the land use plan goal number 14 the master plan urges the town to reduce off street parking requirements to the greatest extent possible the master plan also urges the town to reduce or eliminate minimum open space requirements to allow for buildings similar to existing ones and to reduce minimum yard requirements so that provision that required 20 square feet of open space for every residential unit which was uh waved back in 2017 that's what they're referring to here and under mobility and just to be clear Carlos in fact we're reducing the requirement for the open space um based upon the reduction of the residential units correct that's also true that's also true and under Mobility go number 46 the master plan urges the town to amend the zoning code to minimize or remove minimum parking requirements and EST Lish maximum parking requirements maximum parking requirements in other in other words the master plan is urging the town to do away with selected aspects of what is essentially an obsolete zoning framework that if strictly implemented would cause serious damage to the downtown in other areas and would have all sorts of undesirable impacts on the fabric of the community just to drive home this point I would remind the board that if the current parking requirements were strictly applied to these three properties and their uses they would require 30 off- street parking spaces which would in turn require the demolition of at least one of these historic buildings and no one wants to see that happen and Carlos just to for belts and suspenders there the board previously granted um variance relief for the number of parking spaces we're only changing that by two the that was just just interrupt that was the planning board correct Carri yes that's correct that would have been the planning board okay that that is that was the planning board exactly now um with respect to the still on the negative criteria with respect to substantial detriment to the zoning plan I I cannot argue that granting this conditional use variance will not in some very small way undermine the Integrity of certain provisions of the current zoning ordinance or at the very least not implement or effectuate those Provisions but as I just mentioned that is precisely what the new master plan is calling for and until such a time as the zoning code is amended it falls on this board to provide applicants with the needed relief to prevent unwanted outcomes that would the themselves undermine the intent of the master plan the master plan has directly challenged the validity of certain aspects of the current zoning code and so I would argue that this proof in this specific comment in this specific context is not really valid and then finally no substantial detriment to the surrounding neighborhood the application will repurpose an existing vacant space and put it towards a productive use it will bring a highquality business to that location and further animate Witherspoon Street the deliveries which we already talked about to both the existing businesses in the other two buildings and the new business and the building in question will continue to take place from the rear of the property without disturbing The Pedestrian oriented Street stape along the front the proposed walk-in freezer and the other cooling equipment will reduce as also mentioned the frequency of deliveries and therefore reduce the presence of delivery trucks in the area while optimizing business operations the increase in coverage from 60% to 62% which is inevitable uh if the freezer is to be installed I would characterize as trivial and well justified by the by the benefits derived from the addition of the freezer so in my opinion this application satisfies all the required proofs and I believe it should be approved bar I think you I think you've covered the bases um subject to any questions or comments from the board um I I think we've addressed the various comments that are in the reports from the board's professionals but if there's anything else that you would like us to go through in that regard I'm more than happy to do so um but otherwise I think we're pretty much done and obviously you're going to open it to the public as well we have a couple questions Gary Eve go ahead yeah uh right now how many car parking spots are there you probably said this already but just I see that there are four expected six there are six spaces so there will and in the future you will be four they have four that's right and who parks in those spaces now that's not that's not customers that's Andor employees whoever gets their first I I not the one to answer but I can jump in it's it's allocated to the employees to the managers of the commercial businesses and the the buildings there and just just could I just interrupt you for a second Pete just to be clear since we haven't had you testify can you just tell us your relationship to the applicant um I am on behalf of the applicant 1216 Witherspoon um my role as vice president and director of operations for Shero which is a sister company um to 1216 Witherspoon and also Genesis Hospitality which will be the operator at 16 Witherspoon on the first floor uh I oversee the the maintenance and construction of of everything that we handle uh for our businesses um I I work hand inand with the owner and I work hand inand with our Hospitality team um and we're we've been working with the architect and Engineers um to come up with the concept here to relocate our Bakery into this location at 16 Witherspoon uh which is a vacant space that we have now so just now just to be responsive um um and and make clear how are those spaces going to be used so the parking spaces there's uh one allocated a Small World Cafe there's one allocated which is in 14 Witherspoon small world cafes and 12 Witherspoon there'll be one allocated towards uh the 16 Witherspoon retail location and then there's one allocated towards uh 8084 Nassau which we share the alley with and they're they're for the management or employees to use so everyone who'll be using those parking spaces will be familiar with the rear of the building and how to access those parking spaces just this is a practical matter it doesn't seem like you are going to need less spaces but um it's just an observation on my part well I think I think it's fair to say that the applicant will require fewer parking spaces but a it allows us to to put the building to productive reuse in a in an operation that works well for this particular site but also as um Carlos had testified to extensively um the intent of both that study and the master plan wants to rely upon it and make better use of the extensive um parking opportunities in downtown Princeton having more than enough uh as opposed to um um you know in the rear of the buildings that are not immediately accessible uh or or easily accessible it strikes me that that study was done eight years ago and then a lot has changed on Witherspoon in terms of density of of um business business there understood are there other other questions Michael yeah um I think I I want to direct the question to Derek if I could um Carlos Rodriguez mentioned that if the implay zoning and um I understand it already has the approved six use Park but if the the the the code um prior to the planning board action the computation would be 30 parking spaces is that computed on both square footage on the retail and how's that computed uh let me I have to go back to the old memo uh from that case but it it was 20 or 30 spaces was based on the various uses in there um Jeff can you go through that and help us on it yeah there's a calculation on on the site plan it's based on as Derek said it's based on the uses the residential uses and then the commercial uses um based on the ordinance requirements now I guess what I'm looking at is the second floor plans they're they're going to be 40 seating capacity for 48 people can you address that and just is that correct okay so we already got you got approval from the planning board to only have six parking spaces from a possible 30 and now your presentation is reducing it from that meager six to four just to prove that like yeah that's that's not a question just statement I just want to make sure I'm I'm looking at this right well you're certainly looking at it correctly that there's a reduction in the parking spaces but again um based upon the study and based upon the master plan uh there's more than enough parking spaces and the recommendation was to reduce the on-site parking requirements uh to the greatest possible but the master plan intent has been complied with when it was reduced from 30 to six I think a a further argument get for that is not plausible uh Michael if I could jump in real quick I I don't believe in that 2017 approval that there was a variance request to go from the 30 to the six so I'm not sure if Mr Rodriguez was saying you know if this site was built today uh it would require 30 which would essentially be you know half or or most of the site as you might see somewhere else I could be wrong about that but I don't believe it's uh they came in and asked for essentially 24 space reduction a few years ago and are asking for more now um I I think I think to your point Justin it was a pre-existing nonon forming yes um as would almost everything in downtown Princeton be and so we're only asking for relief from two parking spaces in that regard yep and in 2017 there was no relief from the parking requirement because of that pre-existing non-conforming is my understanding but Justin looking through the resolution there's no that it doesn't address that as far as I can see correct or exactly and that's why it's my uh you know based on that I imagine it was considered a pre-existing non-conforming I would agree with that okay okay any other questions George yeah is a a question I guess to miss Casey uh the argument that was put forth by Mr Rodriguez that if the new Master Plan recommends changes in the zoning ordinance that haven't yet happened that that should nevertheless be mitigate any negative uh considerations when somebody applies for a variance as a general principle I'd like your comment on that and what the municipal land yard the municipal land use Law requires as a standard is that for any variance right we've got the positive criteria and the negative negative criteria means that there would be no substantial detriment to both the zoning plan the zoning ordinances uh master plan uh as well as no substantial detriment to the surrounding neighborhood or the public Hood so uh I believe what the applicant is arguing is that based on the new updated master plan yes uh this variance for parking would be consistent with the master plan it would not be detrimental in terms of what the master plan is recommending now the other aspects of the substantial detriment would be is it detrimental quote to the public good uh it's reducing parking the applicant is saying well that's not public parking that's parking for um uh I guess the management of different businesses uh all directly adjacent there so they're saying it it's not affecting public parking because it's not allowed for public parking um I don't know if in the previous planning board approval again I don't think there was any reference to what that parking was going to be used for there just isn't any um discussion about the parking well no wait a minute hold on a actually in the part approval it's they're finding 14 the planning board okay the planning were concluded that with the need for parking spaces in the downtown area the number of spaces on the site should be maximon so the board required that the size of stalls be reduced so as to improve maneuverability so I I think that's the only discussion in the original or or the the approval from the planning board that talks about parking so I don't know if that addressed your question Jeff could you in in light of that that comment can you show us the parking configuration now and the potential conflicts with the the vehicles that we're we're removing on the site plan yeah if it works is it part of your plan set yeah the plan should shows the six parking spots and the in the freezer boxes over the two at the end so the functioning of the four spaces is the same as it is today the two at the end you just pulled straight into and those will be eliminated by the freezer box yeah the plan I'm looking at doesn't show the six but I thought there was a potential conflict between pulling out of those two parking spaces um and uh and and the for that remains so that it would impact um it would improve improve maneuverability much has been indicated in the prior resolution Jeff I don't know if you think your screen is being shared but again we got a black screen it's that's something not working it worked before I can't bring it up but um yeah the four spots are angled up against the building to the rear and the other two are straight in um there's no the Box isn't going to impact maneuverability to those four spots because it's beyond the angle of those parking spaces Gary just a question the prior resolution from the planning board oh okay it finds there'll be sufficient room to maneuver Vehicles particularly with reduction the size of the Stalls and the persons who will use the parking area will be residents and employees familiar with it um I don't know then if the planning board believed that people that that people living in the apartments were going to use the parking spaces do they have parking that's provided with their um with their unit so the way I read that is it could be you know either the the um um residents or or the employees but Pete um have are there any parking spaces that are designated for residents I would imagine not no there is not most of the residents are college students and they have bicycles and walk to classes or skateboards or skateboards scooters okay any other questions at this point yes Donna yeah real quick you told us what the four remaining spots would be used for who's losing the two spots whose spots were they were those right now there's two spots that are allocated towards our 80 we own 8084 Nassau Street which is on the other side of the alley so we had two spots that were allocated to that so we kind of share our managers kind of share those spots so it would be one it'd be those would be our spots we'd still have one for arley's we'd still have for Small World Cafe we'd have one for the manager at the bakery at 16 and then there' still be an additional spot for the people at 8 84 Nassau the manager of that location got it other questions yeah I I do um when I look at this plan it it looks like uh even those existing angled spots as are shown now um the maneuverability would be tough is this actually functioning um as a a a full utilized lot right now um it it it appears very tight but does it does it work as it is it it works presently as it is uh it's been that way for we took ownership in 2021 I think it's been that way prior to that um it is tight um we do have you know it's it's kind of a back of a house so we've got the dumpsters and the trash compactor um but you know it does work you we do have to maneuver in and out um you know if someone's got a car blocked if they're making a delivery and someone needs to leave you know it it's been working we work with the people to make sure that you know it's functional and people can get it in out okay and then this freezer it comes in it's it's it's a single unit that gets um it can pull into this um around uh you know these existing buildings and whatever uh V it comes in yeah so the freezer box will be set you know we're going to put a pad in where the par two parking spaces are that's what we're proposing and there would be a like a an entry door a man door that the deliveries could go from the parking lot they could wheel it right into the freezer and then our the staff at 16 Witherspoon can take the product out of the freezer and then go in the back alley and bring it to the store when they need it um for that day or for that morning so Jeff the vehicles that that are going to do deliveries of a site particularly for the freezer are going to be Vans and small box trucks that's correct y okay and then the free deliver now sorry go ahead and they they deliver back there now so okay and the freezer itself when that gets brought in that all all that's going to fit through the space available yeah they're just gonna have to be careful it comes in components comes in panels okay and you okay anything else Bernice anyone else uh Mr chairman I have a question Justin who's said oh J go ahead thank you and this is for Mr RoR um you mentioned earlier that um you uh could place those U racks for bicycle uh parking along the rear of the building um do you have any idea either you know realistically or ballpark of how many you might be able to fit we might be able to fit I look today maybe two or two definitely two but possibly three which could provide four to six parking spots for bikes okay gotcha thank you anything else for now there's nothing else that I have I don't know if there's any more board members more Gary go ahead Donna um a question about the freezer um the decibel levels uh it it looks like they're not meeting the requirements how do you get the decibal level down or do you well there there's actually two two possibilities in that regard one is there's there's um there's there's background noise in in that area and it's very possible that that's not going to add any noise any appreciable noise it's also to um um to Residential Properties and the only Residential Properties in close proximity is the actual residents on this site but there there are ways to put in um um noise attenuating um um screening or insulation that would achieve that objective so how we're going to do it we remain to be seen but we'll make sure that it fully complies and it runs 247 obviously well it's like any other freezer turns on turns off you know periodically depending you know as the temperature lowers so obviously it's going to be on more in the summer than it is going to be in the winter for instance got it okay thanks all right Gary you want to proceed or you done uh we're done as far as the testimony goes um you know what I'd really love to do at this point well I I guess you've got to open it up to the public before we proceed in any any other regard we do you can do a summary state if you want to at this point could I could I withhold that because I want to see you know and perhaps get some feedback from the board as you know you know there's only six eligible members to vote and we may wish to hold it over to the next meeting um so you know if you open it to the public and maybe we get some feedback from the board um before my final statement then then we can decide how best to proceed okay thank you uh we will now open it for public comment uh if lay in the public still with us you like to make a comment please raise your hand CL do you see anyone no no one we only have one person left public so um okay we'll close the public comment section uh we go back to you Gary now can still withhold I we can't take a straw vote so I'm not exactly sure can't take a straw boat but you can ask the board for their comments and um you know so we get a sense of whether or not you know it makes sense to hold it over okay uh so we will now go into executive session uh any comments or motions to proceed I'll make a I'll make I'll tell you how I feel I the parking doesn't particularly bother me because I think it's that's not much anyhow but the thing that that I find concerning that hasn't been brought up is in a town that we are fighting like crazy to find affordable housing for some reason willing to take out at least minut and and I guess that has planning board doesn't care about that and I I guess we don't either but at least it just seems to me that it's a curiosity that we're willing to do that so readily I'm I am disposed to approve this plan um because I think it does some downtown community uh I don't think you can make an argument to those of us who live in Princeton that have too much parking um I just don't think it's I don't think we would ever buy that argument but you know I I do understand what you're saying and I understand what the studies say but we come to anyhow so I'm I'm disposed to other comments the freezer is to me just huge um and and I'm just wondering if anyone has any kind of perspective on this is this a normal item that is placed in a parking lot is so I what I will say to you it's not unusual to place um a a freezer and a parking lot obviously when you have you know tight sites and you're trying to you know put properties into productive reuse you've got a maximize use the space that you have so there are other sites that that do exist that do have you know facil fa ities that are outside that's the way the only way we can make this site operate well um and function the way it's intended and and so that's why we proposed it that way we've certainly looked at all the different possibilities including putting in the basement just not enough room for it in the basement to uh um to to accommodate this as far as the freezer goes I'll I'll defer to Pete uh probably you're the best one but I would imagine this is you know pretty comparable to a typical walk-in freezer so we're not doing anything exceptional in that regard Pete is can you provide some um you know some elucidate that in any way yeah so currently you know we own we own and operate Shay Le Princeton on five Palmer Square East or West and uh we don't own that facility we we have walk-in boxes in the basement that are about 200 feet away in the basement and we have to make at least two deliveries a day maybe three deliveries a day to that location to be able to stock that store to keep up with the the volume that that store does so that's the here at this location there's no room in the basement where Shay Le they have a network of tunnels underneath their space to be able to put a walk-in box at this location um we just don't have the space so that's why we're proposing to put the walk-in box the freezer outside so that our delivery guy can reduce the amount of trips they can bring up product and then as the store hasn't need it they'll take it to the inside and heat it up and warm it up for that for that morning instead of having our delivery guys make three trips a day to Princeton to restock the the shelves we just felt that this was you know less traffic in the area and a more effective use um for the operation and if you can't put the freezer in that location what happens to this uh use I I don't think we could put the bakery in this location we couldn't we couldn't operate without the freezer we need we need to walk in freezer that holds a lot of product how big is freezers now in in shayy the ones in Princeton it's an 8 by 16 how about the one in the lamberville store uh lamberville store has two um that we fit inside the space because again we're landlocked there there's no parking behind us and that's they're both 8 by8 so there's a basically 8 by 16 there as well so you're thinking the four extra feet gives you what you need for for Less delivery trucks yeah I mean plus the the spaces you know the parking spaces are only so wide so you know if we could shorten up we could shorten up the walk-in freezer a little bit but we're not we're still going to lose two parking spaces as it's proposed there wouldn't be enough space to get a single car back there yeah no I'm just questioning whether or not so basically you're talking about four extra feet and so my question is does that get you to where there's deliveries yes yes yeah we're hoping to do it once a day um we're we'd really love to get it down so it's only maybe two or three times a week but at least you know once a day for the Frozen Goods as opposed to several trips a day yeah we've got we've got three delivery vans that that so our product the majority of our products made in Hamilton we have three delivery vans that that Circle throughout the day so we're trying to limit and reduce did the amount of vehicles that we send into downtown Princeton um to restock the store and keep product in the store um it gets really hard at the holidays and special events to keep product in the store I'm not sure if anyone on the board has been to our location in Princeton but you know it's a small location um and it seems like it's pretty popular and people like to frequent it and it's hard to keep product there because we just don't have the space to replenish it as quickly as we need are you GNA keep that other space unfortunately we don't own the location um the other location so that's we're proposing to relocate that over to this location um and add a add our bread store to it as well so it'll be a combined location similar to what we have in Shay Le lamberville it'll be that concept is what we're proposing I know that was my question so the other store will go won't be here no it yeah it's we're our lease is up next spring um so that's why we're trying to get the approvals to get you know okay get going so before the lease expires and we don't have Shay Ley and Princeton other questions D derker anybody from the town do we have any problem with them running outdoor electrical equipment to plug into the freezer I mean they' have to follow the building code um and you had asked earlier about if there were any s similar situation in town there I think back in the 90s before my time here uh Jack Morrison got a variance to put a walk-in refrigerator behind the blueo grill on Pine Street so that's another area where tight space and uh you know I'm sure they have to run the electric line and conduits and all that stuff but it'll be done according the code yeah I don't think they're uncommon Don they're not outo thanks other questions other comments other um yeah my comment would be that I I can support this as well I think as much as uh the town is looking to um have affordable housing I I think we're also needing to um promote uh attract businesses um to exactly uh that part of town and uh vacant space is is um a detriment um so I think overall uh I you know support this despite the the loss of the two parking spaces and in the uh and if it's any consolation there's actually another location in town where we are in fact proposing affordable housing additional housing as well as some affordable housing and we're trying to pursue that as well um and and so you know perhaps that that gives you a little more of a comfort level um we're obviously trying to repurpose different buildings that that to make them make sense and work for not only the the owner of the property but for the the town as well thanks Bice uh Eve uh I just want to say a little bit more about why I brought up the parking um question and I'm I'm going to talk fast because my battery is on nine so I might have to disappear as soon as I make my comments and come back but um I the I just I don't I guess this is not really zoning is perview but I do see a difference between whether or not there's a need for more parking when it has to do with people who are coming into town people who are shopping and employees and it doesn't sound like any I don't know how many employees there there will be but it sounds like all of them will have to either walk some distance to wherever their car is is or maybe use a bike that's been snowed on at times or rained on at times because it doesn't seem like there's any there's no there's no provision for that kind of parking and that's probably a humanitarian issue not a zoning issue but it's just it's why I brought that it's largely why I brought that up thank you any other comments anybody want to propose a motion well I think that under the circumstances and tell me Pete if you're wrong if I'm wrong I think we want to you know hold us over to the next meeting make sure we or at least hope to have a full compliment of the board and ask the the one member that's absent to uh to read the uh the transcript uh or not the transcript listen to the audio um and perhaps hold that um Pete that makes sense to you yeah that that'll work for me we're getting it's getting late so I know D do we have room at the next meeting oh yeah I mean it's still in fux uh we'll carry this case if that's the board's wish when would that next meeting be isn't it November 13th November 13th yep y long as it's not a Friday I think I'll be good never no I'm Friday the 13th never mind I'm just double checking my calendar but I imagine that's yeah that should be fine is our team available on the 13th okay I'm not and I'm not available well if we could you know I I'll ask the rest of our witnesses to come back but as far as Jeff goes in fact frankly I could ask for the record to be closed is to all of ours with the exception of any additional questions that may may arise between now and then um if that's okay with the board then we'll proceed even if Jeff can't be there on the 13th okay uh just just just one question um if well all right because if you have a you have a new you have a a board member who didn't participate tonight if that board member has questions and to address them you need more testimony then closing the record tonight isn't helpful is it well we're going to bring everyone back with the exception of Jeff Jeff do you have someone that can cover that that's familiar with it oh Carlos you're also not available I'm not available well the next meeting after that is not have somebody if we need be Gary I'll just be out of the country i w here well the next meeting then after that would be December 11th that's a Wednesday as well it's earlier in the month though because of the uh holidays and might I suggest asking if the board members that are here right now are also going to be at either or both of those meetings you know well that that that's why I had raised that question originally to say we can't promise hope everybody will be here but we can't promise that everybody will what if we put it on the 13th if there's questions we can't answer we'll we'll have to you know take the risk at that point in time um but um you know we're we're to be perfectly blunt we're losing valuable time for vacant space that we're hoping to repurpose and that's why we've been trying to move this matter forward um so maybe if I could ask you to put us on November 13th um Carlos may not be able to be here but you know every now and again I pretend I've got a planner's license so um um and if Jeff can have someone um hear from his office to cover any questions that we may have um perhaps we can do that on November 13th and see if we can get this done all right board members any other comments on that so this will be carried and the applicant will not be required to um do any further noticing since we're announcing tonight that it's being car carried to the November 13th hearing and and just for the record Karen can you confirm that the board has had jurisdiction and that the notices were uh appr I thought I I I did say that at the beginning but I'll confirm again yes you know what we were in transition being um elevated to two panelist so I hadn't heard that got it thank you okay um so just for the record it'll reschedule or carried to November 13th at 7:30 um pm. no further notice will be provided all right d that Derek that works for you yes sir okay I do appreciate everyone's time this evening thank you um that ends this meeting uh we'll see you on the 13 thank you thank you thank you weird Jer