##VIDEO ID:rn1bUb_swOU## Advocate notice of this meeting was provided in New Jersey Harold it was also posted on the spoted township website and its bulletin board in accordance with all provisions of the open public meetings act also uh no new applications after 9:30 p.m. will be heard and we adjourn at 10 pm. sharp practice of this board to salute the flag please rise and join us pledge allegiance to the flag United States of America to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and Glenn before should we have the roll call before the new members or no because we want to give them credit for being here tonight Mr chairman so right at this uh time our board Attorney Glenn Keat will be swearing in new alternate and also uh alternates in the past will be sworn in as full board members all right so I think what I'll do is I'll ask you to Fe after me but we'll do it all together so I got one from [Music] Landon best friend Michael that's it right just the three yes Michael that's it for us so I'm gonna ask you to raise your right hands and then repeat after me I state your name I do solemly swear swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of the state of New Jersey and the constitution of the state of New Jersey that I will bear true faith and allegiance that I will bear true faith and ALG Ali to the same to the governments to the same to the governments established in the United States established in the United States and in this state and in this state under the authority of the people under the authority of the people and that I will faithfully and that I'll faithfully impartially impartially and justly and justly perform all the duties perform all the duties of the sparta Township Zoning Board of adjustment of the sparta Township Zoning Board of adjustment ACC to the best of my ability according to the best of my ability so help so help me congratulations congratulations Landon Jennifer and Michael up to three Michaels on the board now thank you you got a sign Glen it's all yours Mr chairman thank you Glenn before we go over the items on the agenda tonight we have a reorganization of this board and I will turn that over to our board Attorney Glenn ke to proceed all right nobody reminds Minds me acting as a temporary chairman until uh Ken kicks me and says I'll take over now but okay so uh I think to move it along and unless there's an objection on any of the positions I'm going to ask for a motion to nominate second and then ask that we cast a unanimous ballot if if there's any controversy then we'll do it a different way and you can say no I don't want to do it on that one but that'll save that'll save us 10 or 15 minutes okay all right so like to open up the floor for uh nominations for the position of chair of the sparta Township zoning Board of adjustment for this coming year I'll make a motion to nominate Kenneth Lori is there a second second somebody uh can we cast the unanimous vote all those in favor please signify by saying I I I any opposition I don't know whether to congratulate you Ken or thank you board members for your support I appreciate it thank you all right nominations for the election of Vice chair I make that nomination Glenn for Mike leandi second can we kiss the unanimous ball all those in favor please signify by saying I I Michael congratulations congratulations Michael uh appointment of attorney I make that motion Mr Glenn ke for board attorney I'll second that can we cast that as unanimous he yes with fear intrepidation hi favor I I I thank you very much I appreciate that it's really nice being in Sparta uh nominations for the position of board engineer I make that nomination for Mr David Simmons second yes the unanimous ballot all those in favor please signify by saying I I congratulations Davey thank you very much nominations for the position of uh board secretary I make that nomination Marissa Ferraro I'll second that C the unanimous vote all those in favor please signify by saying I I congratulations mariss thank you uh now we have a resolution appointment of professionals do they have a copy of that resolution yeah everybody got a copy all right so we just need a motion in a second I guess to adopt that resolution I'll make the motion I I'll make the second please all right think you ought to do this by no that's all right all those in favor of the resolution please signify by saying I I I I I okay appointment of official Publications I believe we're going with the the New Jersey Harold the Sunday Harold and the Sunday Harold happen Sparta too for the digital happen Sparta does the digital also right okay and they're the same Publications as what the governing body did I don't know if the government body did the two New Jersey Harolds but they did do the tap in swarter well they had to do another one so they probably did at least one of them Mr chairman right yeah okay so um is there a motion to accept that they'll move second second all in favor signify by saying I I I uh motion to accept the schedule of meeting dates which I think were attached to your packet they're attached to the emails I sent to every or the email even made it better it's electronic so motion to to accept all the dates so moved and that included the first date in 2026 right yes I have a cop feel like that's all right I I trust us just one note Mercy you had mentioned something about November 26 yeah it says om or changes du to Holiday I always I kept it on there but is that for you want to just strike that off want to strike that then just keep it for one date for yes okay all right so we have a motion I'll make the motion Blen for that I'll second that all those in favor please signify by saying I I I uh chairman lry I think I'm retired now thank you Glenn I appreciate it just to go over the items on the agenda before we start the um um hearing this sport will have a review and Adoption of our annual report and then the public hearing the applications 1924 Charles Warner and application 1324 Steve cashen will be moved up to be heard first and second the John Meli Roco culo applications 3-23 and 4-23 will be heard after the other first two now has this board had the time to review the annual report and if so any comments or questions about it for the public we had received 19 new applications in 2024 and one from 2019 and one from 2022 and six from 2023 we had no interpretations no applications withdrawn we had one application denied we had 18 applications approved we have seven applications pending we had no applications dismissed without prejudice and we had one appeal and again any board members now who have any comments and suggestions for the planning board and Town Council on any issues no one Noe I have a few for the uh Town Council and planning board we hopefully will be some uh given some guidance with the adus accessory dwelling units lying word granny shacks and that's been an issue in a lot of different towns and states in regards to properties that have quite a few acres and then the owners are putting up small granny Shacks accessory dwelling units to live in and there's nothing in the ordinance right now addressing that in this town so it's not if it's when it's going to happen and hopefully the planning board and Town Council can have some guidance or ordinances in the future so it'll make our job a little bit easier before they come before this board also for 247 digital Advertising Signs they're not allowed at this point variances are necessary but if there's again some type of guidance or more stringent ordinances to address these potential digital Advertising Signs that are coming before this board also I think it's a zoning issue not a ordinance issue or planning board issue I've been seeing a lot of these feather they call them feather advertising Banner signs that a lot of these businesses are putting out in front of their businesses Subway in the post office area they have the big green signs of flashing and flying across from the Burke liquor store and I know they're not permitted and also the bards the concrete bar in front of businesses certain businesses now are covering them up with cardboard advertising around the circular bards that could be a safety issue and plus that's not allowed so again I think that's a zoning department issue and hopefully our enforcement individual can start clamping down on this before it gets out of hand in this town and that's all I have to say anyone else one um Mr chairman if if that in fact is your recommendation I think does everybody agree with what your chairman just said and could that be incorporated into something that's sent to the governing body as part of your annual report yes everyone agrees thank you thank you everyone so I think I think you ought to just prepare something we can look at it if you need help or whatever okay but you have Ken's comments and it appears that the whole board agreed to send it on they can do what they want with it but at least they understand that the board looked and that was the recommendations thank you now to the public hearing for the applications application 6-19 7 oh we didn't do roll call yet we didn't we never did the r a great job know who's here now but we want to do a roll call roll call please Marissa Jennifer Paha here Michael jic here Richard larua here Michael Leoni here loner here Michael Steinberg here chairman Kenneth Larry here Glenn kees here thank you now to the public hearing the application 619 711 for extension of time will be carried to February 12th meeting app application 12-24 suss County charter school for D variance will also be carried to the February 12th 2025 meeting with Reen notice and the application 13-23 D Anderson for D variance will also be carried to the February 12th meeting with re notice Mr chairman what order do you want those to be set because I have a conflict on the uh charter school so you're going to do that one first so you person I believe who was the individual here the last time to Alison Allison yeah and actually you could Allison is going to continue on as conflicts Council right correct oh so that's in the resolution appointment of professionals I don't know whether it is maybe bison in in the resolution for appointment of professionals yes he was all right good so why don't we just make why don't we make a motion to have her appointed as conflict Council for the year I make that motion to appoint Allison hubt for conflict attorney for the year 2025 for this board second all those all in favor please I I beautiful thank you now she's official yes we just have a a um in terms of the application in terms of who will be heard first removing the John rosu Fu application to last tonight and we're here the first application 13-24 Steve cashen for C variant and after that application we'll hear 19-24 Charles Warner for C variant so Mr cashion are you here sir please come forward okay that's there make sure you speak uh clearly and and loudly directly into the microphone it's a state requirement before you sit down yes sir s put your right hand up y do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth the proceedings before the board tonight to help you guide I do what is your name sir Ste and you're the applicant correct all right now sit and then work the microphone like a nightclub singer all right here we go I'm here can how can we help you um so I was um applying for a variance to get an extension to my deck done filled out all the paperwork hopefully followed all the rules and um you should have it in front of you am I hoping I have a few reasons um I'd like to build a deck as well that might not be on there but I don't want to speak if I don't need to um so basic you want me to talk about the we just give yeah sure it's a it's going to be a 170t deck um I have an existing deck off the front of my house um this deck would be going off uh if you're looking at the house it'll attach to the existing deck and go to the right side of the house and around uh around on the front of the house or on the right side of the house it's um coming about 4 feet off of the front of the house it's going to be 4 by 20 and then it's going to wrap around the back the side of the house about I think it's 9 by 10 so it's only coming four feet off the front of the house so it's a small catwalk so I could walk to the side of the deck I'm not I don't you know I know I'm I think I'm over the um what do you call that the front set the front setback 35 fet by a few feet I think that's why I'm here um I'm not looking to build a front deck it's just a catwalk to get to De side deck and the reason why we want it is because my deck has 13 stairs that are really Steep and they go into the driveway um you know I have elderly parents that come over I'll eventually be old and um if we can bump it out to the side I can get two to three steps and we'll be in the yard um so it's kind of a safety thing as well also I have uh two daughters and my wife and myself will have four cars parked in the driveway it's a fourcc car driveway and when we're parked the car is literally right up against the existing stairs so you have to kind of finagle around the car to even get up the steps it's not uh ideal for elderly and I don't like to park in the street because we're on a blind corner so there's I we don't park in the street at all I don't know if I'm helping my case if I'm Hing it but uh it's a small deck it's nothing astronomically big I think it's about 13 steps down right now and if I can go get bump it out to the side it's going to be two or three steps which would be a lot easier to get it on the deck didn't have any uh other testimony Mr cashion uh uh no no I hope I didn't hurt myself there I'll now have our board engineer Mr David Simmons go over his report David please Mr just before Dave does let me swear him in for the year so we don't have to swear him in again as a okay David do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth and proceedings before the board tonight and for the rest of this calendar year so help you God I do so help me God and David you're a licensed professional engineer and your licenses are valid and you've been an engineer for the for the board for a long time Li professional engineer land surveyor and professional planner thank you everything's valid and meliss just indicate in the minutes that Dave was sworn in tonight and that way nobody can challenge it in the future okay thanks David no problem go ahead David sure Mr chairman just referring to the report our office prepared dated December 11th 2024 uh basically as Mr cashion just mentioned he's proposing about 170 square feet of deck on the front and right hand side of his existing dwelling uh with regards to the Zone it's in the R3 Zone and I pointed out four variances that were involved uh the first is for the front yard setback 35 foot minimum is required and 28.2 ft is proposed uh the rear yard setback 35 ft is required excuse me 14.9 fet is provided that's a variance but it's an existing condition not increased by this application with regards to lot area in the R3 Zone 14,000 squ foot minimum is required the existing lot by scaling is approximately 8,839 Square ft again it's undersized but it's an existing condition not caused by this application and with regards to the rear yard setback for the deck 35 ft minimums required and it's by scaling I came up with 31 ft so that's a variance of a situation um with regards to utilities I checked on the plans with regards to water sewer and the electric uh I did not find any conflict with the proposed deck improvements with regards to storm drainage as we've talked about many times the township pass an ordinance 21-2 that for projects before the board that increase the impervious coverage by more than 500 square feet there is requirement that provide storm water mitigation again as Mr cashion mentioned his deck is 170 square ft Which is less than the 500 so no mitigation is required with regards to the architectural plans that were provided I just point out that and if the board approves the application it'll be a requirement I'm sure the construction official uh the railing height that he's proposing and the spacing between the uprights to make sure it's less than 4 in for child safety and what have you there was no environmental impact statement provided but I don't see any environmental issues based on my field inspection when I was out there and again uh as our normal practice of the board is and as built planned by the applicants licensed land surveyor upon completion to make sure if the board grants the variances that they adhere to that the only other item I not notice when Mr cashion sent over a copy thank you of the full survey um as you stand in Long View Road on the northeasterly or left side of the property the existing bump out of your driveway does encroach onto the neighboring lot 17 uh by about 2 feet according to this uh that's not caused or exactly related to the deck that's being involved but if it could get an easement from the neighbor or remove the part of the encroachment that would be the preferable solution here now that it's before the board and that's my entire report Mr chairman thank you David I don't know if this helps me at all but my neighbor knew about the driveway and he knew I was I was just cutting out the part so we could fit more cars in the driveway instead of parking on the street but I can get whatever you guys need 100% in easement or whatever you need I will that would be the best way to clean it up well allow him to keep doing what he's doing with the neighbor and it appears that it's not a problem so right yeah if you could get an easement okay as long as that's up that's up to the board that that'll be a condition in terms if we approve the application then I just will open the board's uh questions Marissa if you're so kind Jennifer Paha no questions Michael joic no questions Rich laufa no questions Michael leandi no thank thank you l teneri no questions Michael Steinberg no questions chairman Kenneth Larry just uh just one uh Mr cashen you will not enclose this deck correct oh no absolutely not and what about lighting and and lighting either no you'll accept that as conditions upon potential approval sure okay yeah whatever you need I'll now open the hearing to the public if anyone in the public has any questions or comments and on this application please come forward see no one in the public has any questions we turn it to the board no other questions board will entertain a motion approving the application yeah Mr chairman I'll make a motion to have the board attorney draft a resolution approving application number 13-24 for Steven cashion block 315 lot 16 at 9 long VI Road seeking SE variances for a front yard setback of 28.2 feet where a minimum of 35 ft is required a rear yard setback for the deck of 31 ft where a minimum of 35 ft is required um in some existing non-conforming variances one for a rear yard setback of 14.9 Ft or a minimum of 35 as required and a lot area of 8,829 squ Ft where a minimum of 14,000 ft is required um with conditions that we obtain an easement as outlined by Mr Simmons have a licensed New Jersey survey or prepare an as built plan Ure that the height of the proposed railing spacing and spindles confirm to all applicable codes and adherence to other stipulations laid out in Mr Simmons's report and then just one addendum to that Michael that according to all plans and testimony of course submitted here tonight sure yep agree thank you and also that the deck not be covered and there be no lighting to the deck agree thank you I have a second please I'll second that any discussion and that was land and that had to Second Marissa I got it we're going to be naming the board members that do the seconds Etc because the individual that's doing the minutes she doesn't get clear that's fine feedback from each member so I'll just make that announcement I thank you uh please call the uh Ro jennif faha Michael jic Yes Rula Rua yes Michael Lei yes lenet s yes chairman Karry yes congratulations your application been approved would you like to wave your right to a written resolution thank you um I don't know what that means our board attorney our board attorney will explain it to G tell you what you can do is if anybody wanted to appeal this decision okay they could appeal it by waving your right you can begin working on getting your deck finished up and everything else you don't have to wait uh roughly 45 to 60 days get it you don't have any objetives here if I were sitting next to you I would say you're absolutely I'm recommending that you wave your right thank you sir I will do that thank you chair let contain a motion so moved second please second Marissa please call the rooll Jennifer Paha here yes Michael jovic Yes Richard Lara yes Michael Lei yes Len tener yes chairman Kenneth Larry Yes again congratulations and good luck thank you very much appreciate it next application 19-24 Charles Warner for C VAR please come forward mind if I Shar pictures with you to let's get everyone this the applicants want in First Glen if you don't mind let us take care of a few things first um would you both raise your right hands please do you both swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the proceedings before the board tonight's help you God we always start with the ladies who are youin Burke I'm an architect I'm sorry kin Burke Corin Burke okay and you sir my name is Chuck or Charles Warner the owner of the home okay let me um let me just coren have you appeared before this board before not this year though uh just briefly State your qualifications by whom are you employed I'll help you by whom are you employed I'm self-employed okay and where's your office in on okay and your licensed professional architect in the state of New Jersey and your business is routinely preparing applications such as this and you've been accepted before this board and other boards in the state of New Jersey and your license is valid as of tonight that satisfactory Mr chairman for me it is rest of the board too yes all right thank you okay it's all yours sir how can we help you and make sure you speak clearly and directly into the microphone please my name is Chuck or Charles Warner I am the owner of the home at 322 Westshore Trail very grateful for all your service Mr Keats your tenure as board chair tonight I thought was very efficient in that 30 second or so that you had to serve but thank you everybody Mr War just one there's uh just one moment there's no one here from Lake Mohawk correct Mike do you live in Lake Mohawk I do not and no one else all right proceed can I share these three pictures give them to our board attorney please you only have one copy of each sir all right so this is going to be marked as A1 and A1 what you just handed me is what picture one is an aerial photograph of the property at 322 Westshore Trail picture two is the front of the house where we are applying for a variance to raise the roof and picture three is the rear of the house did you take these pictures I did are they enhanced they are not no artificial intelligence no sir no artificial stupidity that I can't promise but as far as my intention concerned no stupid so they accurately depict what's out there yes sir okay great proceed um I bought U my home in April of 2022 and I provided the the pictures because I think it gives an overview of what you see in the survey um the house was built about 90 years ago in the neighborhood with similar lot sizes 80 ft wide 92 ft from the lake to the street right away um I make that distinction because that of course is my property line but then there is also another 15 ft of landscape F fenced utility area which generally is maintained by me the property owner between the property line and the pave Street we're Zone owned in a R3 with the current zoning requir requiring 35 ft from the structure to the lake and 35 ft from the structure to the front property line the existing home is only 292 ft from the front property line our proposed plan is to keep the current foot footprint of the house and only to raise an existing roof height the height limit is 35 ft and we are way under that with the proposal of having us completed at 27 feet when we submitted the building permits in mid October we understood or I understood that our project was flagged for not meeting the front setback of 35 ft that that was the primary issue this is triggered to the township directing us to request three variances one is the current 29 feet 29 and2 ft from the front property line stays the same but we want to raise the roofs of the ceiling that is a maximum height of 5'10 in in the upstairs of my house can be up to a usable distance of 7 ft or 8 feet that that's all we're really asking the variance two is currently there's 36 ft from the lake to the back of the house where the log wall is and we want to put a balcony of 3 ft that comes from those log walls out over the existing deck that's already there 15 ft that stretches out towards the lake and then the third variance is that we would like to have Eaves of 2 to 3 feet there's already Eaves in most of those areas for about a foot but the sun is very intense as well as the snow and the rain and it'll help shield from that Lake Mohawk Country Club approved my plan back in March I believe of 2023 um because there was no change of footprint and I provided that letter from Sabina Watson the engineer for the club but since Sparta Township has requested me to have a variance that triggers a policy within Lake Mohawk to say the Board of Trustees must hear my case so since I just found that out in December I'm scheduled for January 27th to be heard by the Board of Trustees and what I'm requesting tonight is a conditional approval based on their approval which I'm very confident will happen to approve these plans um Ken I think it's your turn okay this is my second time working this is my second time working on this property uh the previous owner had me uh come out to design a much larger Edition uh for them and they decided to move instead that it would just be easier and um so when I came to work on it again I was pleased that the scale was going to be brought even smaller than uh the previous one um if I could give you pictures that's a little hard to see living room these are all the same y all right this is going to be marked as A2 and it's a series of three pictures marked 11 12 and 13 you can see the living room which which which picture you referring to middle one the middle picture is just talk slow cuz they're working their way down the end closer to the microphone because it's a requirement from the state we have a recording that can be you can you can see the middle picture is the original log living room it's just beautiful has uh log Rafters and so that was like a no touch space um and that is on the left side of the house as you're looking from Westshore Trail um so that whole side we didn't want to touch because to put an addition behind it uh like the previous owners had wanted it was tough uh to make it look good and to not be so tall and overpowering so we stayed to the right and again that that triggers a little bit of a variance in the front yard um but again nothing that we did up there um one side starts at 4 feet 8 another side starts at like 5 feet eight we're trying to keep the addition as small as possible so that anyone driving by would could assume that maybe it had been that way the whole time um so that was very important to us uh to keep the scale down as much as possible um and as my client had said he gets a lot of sun in the back of his house he works from home and so that was one reason why we wanted the balcony with the overhang to help Shield some of that sun we would have liked to have gone out even further uh you know to try to to Stave off the blinding light that can come in but we tried to keep that to a minimum as well um as you can see that the property is very impervious so we couldn't put the addition anywhere else because of the impervious coverage already there and the septic system that's there so the only thing we really could do is go up um and as he stated before there is a very small uh bedroom and bathroom up there currently it's a little deceiving in the picture I think all the way to the right those doors doors are only like 5 foot tall that's not a standard door um so for a little kid it's fine but for an adult it's pretty cramped up there so we're only asking for an additional 534 square feet to get a proper bathroom proper bedroom and a a Library working area um so we only raised the ridge eight or nine feet and again did what we could do uh to try to keep it as much in keeping with Lake Mohawk as possible and I we did other designs so this wasn't like this was our first design and that's what we came up with to try to step it back five feet from the road uh would have made it very difficult to get two rooms up there and we also tried to keep the existing stairs it's log um we didn't want to wreck the character uh just a couple other things um to address Mr Simmons questions um one is the Wallner we'll have David go over the report from uh his report from start to finish when you're completed with your testimony okay um and then maybe I I need not say this but there is a wall on on the west side of the property that encroaches a foot or so onto my neighbor's yard and I take responsibility for that we've had that discussion um we've identified on the survey um some the HVAC the water the lake drains um and the second floor it is just myself and my significant other that live in the home our three kids are in California there's no intention to turn it into an additional bedroom as Ken said I work from home a lot and I'm not a smoker but I want to be able to sit on the balcony once in a while smoke a cigar and look at the lake so that's important to me thank you you're welcome any other testimony Karen one last thing oh it had been on the right hand side of the house had been a garage many many many years ago that had since been converted to living space so to try to go up with a second floor there it looks a little odd so that's why I added that little canopy um it's not structural it's not you know that sticks obviously further into the front yard but it was more an aesthetic to make it look um better all right does that include your testimony yes sir thank you okay thank you well Marissa will open it to David Simmons our board engineer yes Mr chairman uh referring to the report our office prepared dated December 2nd 2024 um as Mr Warner indicated what the proposed improvements are to the existing dwelling with regards to the variances what I identified was for the front yard setback in the R3 Zone as they indicated before 35 ft minimum is required 29 1 12 ft exists to the house 26 1/2 ft is proposed to the roof for a variance for the rear yard setback again 35 ft minimum is required 36 ft to the addition but 33.2 ft to the overhang for a variance uh with regards to the left side setback side yard setback 8T minimum is required 6.8 ft is existing not caused by this application but it's an existing variant situation same with the lot area 14,000 ft minimum required 8581 Square ft provided but again that's a variance existing condition the prvious coverage as it was indicated before 25% maximum is allowed 45.6% is an existing condition variance again not caused by this particular applicant and finally for a rear yard setep back to the deck 35 ft minimum required 32.7 ft to the balcony is the variance involved uh one question as far as HVAC systems are there any new hva systems going to be exterior to the dwelling yes and I identified that on an updated survey marking it on the west side of the home between the wall of the house and the sidewalk it's only a twoot by 3 foot I think system that would service that upstairs area okay and I just pointed out for information existing conditions as shown on the survey pre prepared by Morgan engineering and surveying there is an existing Boat House along the shoreline of Lake Mohawk partially over on the shoreline onto the Waters of Lake Mohawk and the existing dock that extends into Lake Mohawk that's an existing condition not caused or part of this application variance um there was a note on the survey plan about a rock wall that crosses over the common property line between uh Mr Warner's property and adjacent lot 152 um is there an existing in place for that as far as maintenance goes no not that either one of us know my neighbor and myself so basically each neighbor just takes care of the wall that's on their property I I talked about it with my neighbor and I agreed that I should be the one taking care of that wall that that it Services my property more than his it's somewhat of a retaining wall with the septic system there and drop down to his property and yard and that sort of thing so I I take responsible so you're responsible for it and there were great shown but the piping was added to the survey that you provided additional information to yes and we talked about portions of the existing wall along the the wall and fence on the Westerly side of the property uh encroaches on to that may be the wall you were talking about I was referring before to the uh wall the rock wall down at the bottom oh yeah we I I don't have much to tell you about that um we've just each taken care of our own part but whatever's on your recently my neighbor two houses overbought that house and is renovating that property as she you'll get to meet her soon um as a total project with both houses so we haven't really approached that but we'll we'll each share and taking care of that is it fair to say whatever portion of the wall the rock wall down closest to the call it the easterly corner of the property whatever is on your property you'll take care of and vice versa for your neighbor yes sir okay then with regards to utilities uh again they're served by the Township water system the septic system is shown in the front yard and the pole for the electric comes off of Westshore Trail uh in this particular instance there's no real expansion of the footprint so there's no 500 squ ft or more of additional impervious so there's no storm water mitigation required by way of ordinates 21-2 U the existing dwelling is shown as having three bedrooms and that's the way you're going to keep it correct yes sir okay and I believe Mr Warner correct me if I'm wrong you've indicated that the library quote unquote on the second floor will not be used as a bedroom yes sir okay there wasn't any Eis provided for the application because it's basically just a vertical expansion I've listed some various uh agency approvals that Mr Warner will have to get approval from and if board grants approval for the application as always I recommend an asilt plan be prepared by a surveyor that's my report Mr chairman thank you David Marissa would you please call on the board members for their questions and or comments Jennifer Paha no questions Michael jic no questions Richard larua just want quick question the plan that was approved by savine Watson last year is that the plan we're looking at today it yes sir just so when the board sees it and Lake m board sees it we're all talking the same plan exactly the same that's all no no question Michael leandi no questions thanks L tener no questions Michael Steinberg no questions chairman Kenneth Larry I just quick one Mr War you won't be covering the deck at all correct no okay thank you I'll know I'll now open the hearing to the public if anyone's in the public has any questions or comments please come forward seeing no one in the public has any questions or comments it comes back to the board okay the board will entertain a motion approving Charles Warner application yeah Mr chairman I'll make a motion have the board attorney draft a resolution approving application number 19-24 for Charles Warner block 4001 lot 151 at 322 Westshore Trail seeking SE variant 4 front yard setb of 29.5 ft for the house and 26.5 ft for the roof where 35 ft is required a rear yard setback for the house overhang of 33.2 Ft where 35 ft is required um a rear yard setback for the overhang balcony of 32.7 Ft where a minimum of 35 ft is required and then some existing non-conforming variances the left yard setback of 6.8 ft where 8 ft minimum is required um a lot area of 8581 square ft where a minimum of 14,000 squ ft required and the impervious coverage of 45.6% where a 25% maximum is permitted um with some conditions that we have an approval granted by the lmgc Board of Trustees at the next meeting meeting uh responsibility for the maintenance of the shared retaining wall that's on the neighbors's portion of the property is by applicant responsibility for maintenance of the shared rock wall on property on this property will be by applicant asilt plans be submitted deck will not be covered and adherence to stipulations laid out in Mr Simmons's report according to all plans exhibits and testimony presented here tonight thank you Mike do we have a second please I'll second Landon has the second Marissa please call the rooll Jennifer vaha yes Michael jic Yes Richard larua yes Michael Lei yes Lena tener yes chairman Kenneth Larry yes congratulations the applications been approved would you like to wave your everybody gets he's voting today he all dressed up one two three four five six seven everybody gets the vote okay Michael Steinberg yes nicely done Mr Warner would you like to wave your right to written resolution I would cherl entertain a motion moving that second so moved oh sorry all right that was the two mics Marissa okay please call the rooll Jennifer Paha yes Michael josephic Yes Richard larua yes Michael Lei yes Len teneri yes Michael Steinberg yes yes chairman K Larry yes okay good luck thank you very much for this and for your service really appreciate thank you we appreciate that I I thought I made sure that he oh I got guys are having thought I am applications 3-23 and 4-2 are we hearing both applications at once or not would you like to hear it how you like what do you think councelor you still have this board functions so I would say you figure out how you can do it expeditiously with while at the same time providing all of the information necessary why we do both at the same that would be just fine all right application uh DH 3-23 and 4-23 John melli Roco C fulu for C variances on block 324 block 326 Lots 2 three four five and five six seven and eight please come forward good evening ladies and gentlemen uh my name is Harold P cook III I'm representing the applicant in this matter uh we have two witnesses other than the applicant who may or may not testify and we have John Montero our engineer and we have Peter St our professional planner uh these are variance applications for two vacant Lots they're neighboring lots and uh the characteristics are the same relative to each lot we're seeking C variances for both their undersized Lots so if we could start with our engineer if you're so kind sir do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth in the proceedings before the board tonight's help you guide I do and what might your name be sure so legal name is Giovani G IO v n ni last name manilo m a n i l IO and I'm president with Mana design uh with a mailing address of 62 r Street in Somerville New Jersey you're a licensed professional engineer in the state of New Jersey I currently am correct and by whom are you employed I'm employed by Mana design and uh do you regularly prepare applications before boards I do and have you been accepted as a licensed professional engineer before those boards I have and is your license valid as of tonight good standing cor chairman he's all yours thank you uh thank you Glenn how can we help you all right so Mr chairman we have two applications zba 03 23 and zba 0423 and uh the first one is block 32 004 it's Lots 2 three four and five and the second one is block 320006 lot 5 six and 7 and since the filing of the application we have acquired lot eight since our undersized Lots we sent out the notices to a joining Property Owners well whether or not theyd want to sell and lot8 was on the Block 32006 side that's correct okay and uh as a result the owner of that uh lot desired to sell the lot size was 94 by 100 as this application progressed my client purchased it and then that became part of application uh 0 4-23 so would you uh go through your exhibits and uh show the dimensions I'm not sure where the board prefers me to put up the exhibits I know public as well that corner you don't have an easel with you I do let's get the easel going yep which side wherever the chairman says you wanted to keep it in order I'll I'll ask then that you proceed with application 0323 first then go to 0423 so it' be uh 5-13 elmro first okay and then 2-8 elmro I'm going to be sharing the same exhibits giovan can you please take that microphone over to where you are maybe make sure he doesn't got it nice everybody can see good all right perfect can the public see that also maybe no problem so as you guys move I'm just going to reference it so this is going to be I guess A1 and it's entitled uh 513 Elm Road and 28 Elm Road aerial exhibit uh with today's date uh so it's an aerial exhibit of the general vicinity uh with the properties outlined um let me just switch my order here I had the other application going first but try to do both of them at the same time uh so on the screen to the north is uh block 324 Lots 5 9 11 and 13 um and to the um I guess bottom of the page is um 2 to8 Elm which is block 32006 Lots 5 6 7 and 8 uh so I'll start with the um property to the top of the page which is um known as 5 through 13 Elm Road uh that portion of the that parcel consists of four lots that are undersized um lot uh five is 5,000 ft lot 6 is 4,000 ft lot 7 is 6,000 ft and Lot 8 is 4,000 ft they all Frontage on Elm Road U between Deerfield and Washington Drive uh the lot slopes um from left to right if you're looking down on the page with approximate drop in elevation of 6 feet uh the lots are currently vacant uh with just some remnants of old stone walls uh currently Elm Road is unimproved uh with por consisting of gravel and then there's a small portion um it looks like it's part of a driveway for this property here that is paved um there are several uh pre-existing non-conformities on the Lots um one being lot area all the lots are less than 25,000 sare F feet where 25,000 feet is required in the R2 Zone all right well let's let's make this easy those four lots are being combined right correct so what's the total square footage of the four Lots all right cuz we don't care about the four Lots anymore keep it quick and and to the point all right so part of The Proposal is to merge all the Lots together um the Lots will be um rectangular in size about 190 by 100 uh ft with a total area of 19,000 Square ft uh still under sized but um closer to the 25,000 requirement uh the merger will also bring the um conformance to lot Frontage and lot width now that they'll be fully conforming uh for those two uh there is no building envelope on the site um and I'll go to my next exhibit uh since the lot is only 100 ft deep and there's a requirement for a 50ft rear yard and a 50ft front yard uh essentially there is no building envelope uh so this is A2 it's entitled 5 to 13 Elm Road and 2 to8 Elm Road uh site rending with today's date it's a color rendition of the uh site plant that were Pro provided to the board and it's hard hard to see right here but this line right here represents the setac line so that's where the front and rear yard setbacks meet uh applicant is proposing to build a two story uh dwelling with no basement uh shown here in brown with an attached twocc car garage uh there will be a room for uh four vehicles two in the driveway two in the garage um and the dwelling will also have a small small wraparound um covered porch along the front here and a small little landing and a step that comes out the back um as far as variances that we are seeking tonight we are seeking relief for lot area as mentioned earlier uh front yard set back as there is no envelope we are requesting a 20ft uh front yard setback where 50 ft is required and in the rear yard we are requesting a uh 31.9 ft setback to the structure and it's uh 27.9 ft to the rear steps where 50 ft is required again we position the house uh essentially uh Central from uh top to to bottom um and we are complying with the remainder of the bulk requirements as far as uh Building height uh impervious coverage um and everything to that effect uh the site will be serviced by an on-site septic Disposal system a private well I will be on propane and there is Electric in the vicinity which will be brought to the site s uh we are proposing a dryway dryw to mitigate these storm water improvements I know Mr Simmons had some um comments in his report and obviously we'll work with your professionals and making sure that he uh we satisfy the dry uh drainage requirements per the town ordinance um additionally in uh Mr Simmons's report he had uh requested that the uh Elm Road be uh improved uh per rsis standards be paved um and just given the um scope of the project of two single family houses um and that these are the only two houses that actually front on Elm Road um and low traffic and to try to limit the amount of impervious and storm water uh the applicant is proposing to uh improve Elm Road but but widening it to 20 ft which would be sufficient for um emergency Personnel fire trucks uh but to have it a gravel surface instead of a pave surface uh which is not too uncommon in that development it is a a private Road even though it's a public RightWay um and I believe there's other streets in that area uh if I remember correctly that that do have gravel for for um the road surface um so I believe that would be a request for a variance as well well just hold on let's make sure we get the record sh sure that's a variance but there's also section 3536 we right for emergency access and a planet Are so it's a double it's it's a double form of relief right David yes okay okay and that that concludes my my testimony on the upper lot um I'll go over to the uh lower lot at this point unless you want to stop for the review we wait till you complete your testimony okay go on all right um it's going to be essentially the same testimony but a little little bit different in numbers I'm not going to go over the existing Lots um but there are several non-conformities um two of them which will be eliminated by merging the Lots um so we are compliant now with lot area a lot area of 2,490 Ft is proposed where 25,000 ft is uh required uh and we will also be in conformance with lot width along Elm Road uh but by the acquisition of Lot 8 we do now have a lot with um variant along Washington Drive and that is 95.5 ft um is proposed or existing we're 25 ft is required for a corner lot and we do comply with the lot Frontage at this point as well um again similar to the house um shown here uh the the house on um 2 to8 is essentially the same dwelling mirrored um twostory uh four bedroom three and a half bath house um with a small covered uh wraparound porch um this one does have a a bigger gray difference so there is a stairs and landing in the rear um there is a discrepancy between our plans and architectual plans um our plans are the ones that will be governing uh the stairs will go parallel uh to the back wall of the dwelling not perpendicular uh relief that's being U requested on this application or this yeah this application is the lot withth as mentioned earlier 95.5 five versus 125 uh front yard setback of 18.8 where 50 ft is required a rear yard setback of 20 ft to the dwelling 17.2 feet to the stairs where 50 ft is requ uh required um I I failed to mention there there is no building envelope on this lot as well actually this lot is 90 ft uh 91 ft along this side 100t on this side when you do the 50 Foot for the front and rear yard the the setbacks actually cross over each other so there's a a Gore of 10 ft there uh so there was a mistake on our PL I think we labeled the setbacks incorrectly uh but this line that's closer to Elm Road is actually the rear yard setback and the one that's on the rear is actually the front yard setback just for the record the applicant brought this lot to conformance with respect to lotary bying lot that is correct uh again uh there is a driveway being proposed uh two-car uh wide driveway uh ample room for four vehicles uh same septic Disposal system for uh this lot a private well propane um and electric and there will be a dry well located approximately right here to mitigate any storm water and again we'll work with your professionals to comply with the storm water ordinance um I didn't mention but uh there will be AC heating AC uh that will be located on the side of the dwelling uh on the side that's I guess uh has the larger open space so um if you're looking on the plan it's both on the right side of the plan and again the same improvements that we are doing uh to elmro for the lot across the street we're doing for for um Lots two through eight elro and that concludes my testimony anything else you want to add at this time not not with this witness uh Mr chairman we do have Mr St okay you can call Mr St Mr St come up St if you'd raise your right hand and believe Mr ke you to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth and proceedings before the board tonight you guys I will and I do and you shall and I shall and your name is Peter St s c k employed by uh self-employed and and you've been doing this for a couple of years uh I guess over 40 years now licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey yes and my license is still in effect and you've appeared I think in Sparta on other occasions have you not that's correct just not in a while I only call come when I'm called is that all right than thank you Glenn thank you Mr St L for him tonight please proceed Mr St you were engaged by the applicant in this matter yes and based upon that engagement did you prepare a report and some handouts I prepared some handouts right and an outline correct that you're going to use yeah the outline is for us for okay um uh I separated I have two sets of exhibits one for each of the applications but you'll see there's some reproduction in them so um I'm going leave three that I'll give to the audience January 5th and consist five pages so this is one packet and this is the second packet that's correct so I can mark this one it's in your P did you already hand these in there were email to meint them out Forint them out for the board Council Council we already have them so they're on the record you want them marked or uh no they're part of the record uh if the board wants them for review as he presents his testimony our copies are probably clearer than Peters okay I'm gonna give him back I will U thank you Mr St someone in the audience take one hey Pete could I have ours are in black and white right no they're in uh Pete could I have one of each all right py didn't give me color get one for me too because I don't see Peter you're gonna have to walk back and bring another setup because my partner in crime year okay so these these these are two sets and oh you did kiss Thank you so I probably should identify uh what they are Mr St if you want to use the microphone too if you're so kind okay so um there's one that's labeled uh Lots 234 five 234 and five 5-13 Elm grow Elm Road on the upper right hand side did you want to mark that separately no okay just just testify going to start with you're going to start with that one okay in the same order that that your engineer testif so on the first page I have a portion of the zoning map you see that this is in the center of a a an R2 Zone which is known as the sparta Lake private Lake Community the right hand side is a portion of the tax maps uh the second page shows a 2020 uh satellite photograph where I've outlined the subject four lots that are now assembled and show the approximate location of the proposed dwelling uh the next page uh which is P3 in the upper right hand corner has uh two photographs of uh Elm Road the upper one is looking uh south from Deerfield Road and the lower one is looking North from Washington Drive they were taken by me on January 3rd of uh this year and I believe they accurately depict existing conditions the next page uh are photographs of the houses that are approximate to the proposed uh house and there are again these photographs were taken on January 3rd of this year I'm just gonna just for the record I think it's January 5th buddy unless I'm looking at the wrong one the the exhibit was prepared on January 5th but the photos were taken on January 3rd I said correctly good catch but false uh so I showed the photographs of the houses that are in the area and on the upper right hand corner uh you'll see the direction of uh the the camera when I took the photographs the last page uh is kind of a rendition of the variances that are needed and uh as indicated uh this lot is substandard in size although the applicant has uh assembled a number of lots it's still under 25,000 Square ft um as indicated because the depth is only 100 ft uh once you extract the front minimum setback and the rear minimum setback uh there's no buildable area on the lot uh so these are uh variance items that I just mentioned lot area um and front and rear yard setback um we do need uh relief because of we are not proposing to fully improve the street um as the board is aware this is a low traveled Street there's no one that really uses it now because the two houses on either end are Corner lots that front on other streets uh houses tend to produce 10.1 trips per per day so we're talking a low volume of streets but in addition to the rsis relief uh we need relief from section d35 and d36 of the M Ban's law that says when you have a when you want a building permit on a lot on a street that's not fully improved uh we have to demonstrate that it's reasonable to have emergency vehicles um get there let me switch to the other uh exhibit and this has uh Lots five six seven and eight referenced and the address of 2-8 Elm Grove Elm Road uh on the upper right hand corner first page is the same except it shows uh the location of this other uh site second page and I'm going to uh because I have a policy of making a mistake every once in a while uh this the second page shows a building envelope that is very narrow and in fact there is no building envelope because the front and rear setbacks overlap so there's zero square footage that you can build anything on this property the third page is a the same photograph that we've already seen that shows the character of Elm Road fourth Fair uh page has photos of the closest dwellings and these were also taken by me on January 3rd of this year and accurately depict existing conditions and the uh end page um talks about the variances again there's an error in that there's no that that blue area should be in the middle should be erased because there's no portion of this property that uh is buildable uh once you extract the setbacks but it shows the relief that we are seeking from the front and rear yard setbacks and the width uh is 95.5 uhet in Le of the 125 ft so uh with that as background let me just as quickly as I can go through my testimony um these are um vacant uh lots have never been built upon uh they the the as assembled they're regular in shape um but as indicated the applicant has made an effort to acquire additional land in one case uh he has reached the 25,000 ft minimum area but in the other case case um he is not um the area has a whole mixture of U differ size Lots as is uh somewhat Apparent from the first page of the exhibits um some of the roads are uh there are no sidewalks in the areas the board is familiar but some of the roads uh do have Paving some have curving uh this Road Elm Road as you go uh further to the North toward um uh it continues as a gravel road even though there are houses that are that are reached in there so there is a a mixture of some streets uh that have pavement other streets that uh do not have pavement um as part of my analysis I looked at your master plan the last comprehensive master plan I believe was 1984 um there's a recent more recent reexamination report but this was in a um Watershed and Woodlands planning area that recommended it kind of Blended two zones together it recommended medium density Lots from 14,000 to 20,000 Square fet uh and because it had that range we actually comply with the minimum uh lot size at least in the master plan uh so we need need front and rear setback variances for both lots and the reason is one of hardship um if you strictly apply your standards uh you can't build anything on the lots and the applicant deserves reasonable use of the property the houses that are proposed are reasonable in size um I believe that the setbacks that are proposed are U are reasonable uh again the applicant has accomplished a public Purpose By assembling substandard Lots which is a good thing uh but additional lands uh cannot be assembled either because they're already developed and would cause other uh variances uh from the adjacent properties uh the the nub of this application in terms of um uh how the board should review it is how much do you want the road improved Elm Road um if if you fully improve it the answer is you're going to take down more trees you're going to have more storm water run off um the applicant would like to keep it as a gravel Street would like to do a 20 foot wide um cartway uh which the rsis uh accommodates for low volume streets that are under I think 500 trips per day again uh these two houses are going to produce maybe 20 trips per day um and they'll be split in both directions potentially so I guess the the tradeoff the balancing part of this so back to the beginning uh I think the dimensional variances that are needed are uh justified by reasons of the classic C1 hardship practical difficulties um because this is the character of the area I think that a house can be placed on each lot uh without detriment to the public good without impairment to the Zone plan and zoning ordinance the last item that of relief is how much should we improve the street and if you add hard surface pavement while it's easier to maintain there's more storm water runoff uh the section of the street that's by these houses are relatively L level so you're not going to have it like some streets in the area have steep slopes and you certainly want to pave those so you don't uh have the gravel washed off uh but the tradeoff here is one of Aesthetics because it's a wooded area if we have to widen it uh we're going to take down more trees uh we believe that a gravel surface surface is in character with the area and and uh would still accommodate reasonable use by the occupants of the houses and uh reasonable accessibility by uh police and fire vehicles uh the end Mr St one question y the applicant proposed dwellings are they compatible with the other existing dwellings in the area as well as the size of they're certainly compatible uh there's a whole wide range of styles of buildings and in my opinion they're uh compatible uh with the area I think the the architecture is handsome that is proposed but there is no pattern in the area uh and this is not like on a row of houses where it's going to look out of you can compare it with other houses these houses are going to be kind of hidden in the woods so I think that uh you know diminishes the compatibility issue but in my opinion they're certainly comfortable sized houses I think they fit within the neighborhood and I I do think uh and are compatible with the size of lots too yes would that complete your testimony this testimony thank you any other testimony you want to add or that's it okay thank you David would you be ready with your reports if you're so kind yes sir Mr chairman uh starting with application number 0323 which is block 324 tax Lots 23 4 and 5 first uh the report we prepared was dated excuse me August 25th 2023 um as the applicant indicated their plans and going over to page two of our report we are in the R2 Zone and I agree with the variances that were discussed as far as the front yard setback 50 ft minimum required the proposing 20 ft uh rear yard 50 ft minimum they're proposing 31.9 uh 28 ft to the stairs is what I scaled but it was represented tonight that it' be 27.9 correct calculated so those are the variances uh along with the lot area 25,000 square foot minimum uh 19,000 provided for a variance um we also point out there's a planning variance as far as uh Elm Road is a private road in this area so maintaining access to it for emergency and response Vehicles is uh Paramount uh with regards to storm drainage uh they are exceeding 500 square fet so by the Township's ordinance 21-02 in this case uh they are providing mitigation for uh the improvements on the lot with a dry well there's some seasonable high water table possibly and some soil testing permeability testing and what have you will have to be done to make sure that the design that the applicant is proposing will function as intended so that would have to be done and we made a couple other requirements uh as far as changing a solid color cover instead of a gray on top to minimize excess water going into the dryw so it doesn't become over taxed uh none of this includes the proposed impervious cover on Elm Road which I'll get to in just a minute uh with regards to the architectural plans they did indicate on both this application and number 0423 that yes there will be an hbac unit on the exterior of the building but it'll be on the side as I understand the testimony with the larger sidey yard so it won't impact any of the neighbors or cause any other issues um with regards to utilities they're talking about a new well for each one of the Lots new septic system which will be subject to approval by the County Health Department uh with regards to area utilities I just wanted to make sure it was clear that the power company and the other utility companies may have to extend their utility lines back to these proposed dwellings so if the board approves it my belief would be that this applicant would be responsible for all costs associated with bringing those utilities to the property it's not anything involving the township where the utility companies they'd have to work that out to bring that to the pro subject properties um with with regards to Elm Road um we've had in other municipalities I don't know if we've had it here in this board for a while but if we've had in other municipalities with regards to dwellings being constructed on private load roads like this one of the major things in addition to the rsis requirements is maintenance responsibilities and who's going to maintain this in other municipalities uh just as a suggestion for the board and the board attorney can comment on this they've actually filed in the deed of uh conveyance to get it in the chain of title that the road if the board was to approve this on Elm Road is a private road and the township of Sparta would have no responsibility for maintenance of that road the reason they do that in other municipalities is because uh while this particular applicant is here tonight hearing all the discussions and knows what the what the situation is if you get to the second or third owner down the chain of title over a period of time and they want to uh relieve themselves of maintaining this road they might come to the municipality and say when are you going to plow my road and the answer is look in the deed that's filed in the chain of title so it's not something that they weren't aware of if they had a closing on this and had a title search they'd be aware of it so that's how other municipalities have handled it in these slate communities that's something I'd suggest that the board consider if they're willing to Grant this the other thing I'm concerned about is um if you look at the map that was on the exhibit that Mr St prepared which is very helpful uh if you look at page page two uh basically there's an existing dwelling at the on the corner lot if you will of Deerfield Road and elmro and while they have Frontage on Deerfield Road when I made my field inspection many months ago uh my recollection is that that corner lot the access to their driveway and garage in the back does come off of Elm Road and if you look at the if you look at the photographs on page three and I'm looking at the top one it says Elm Road looking south from Deerfield Road you can see where that's paved basically uh short distance to basically we're off to the right just behind that tree that's on the right hand side a driveway that goes to that house on that corner now my assumption is and perhaps if someone here from the public will comment on it I don't know uh that that particular property owner maintains that section of the driveway by the same token if you look at the other end of Elm Road down at the intersection with Washington Drive there's an existing dwelling on lot three and again if you go back to page three you'll see where it's basically oil and stone or combination of oil and stone Millions pavement whatever uh but it's not gravel uh that goes up from Washington Drive uh to the driveway off of Elm Road to the house on that lot again my assumption is and again the current property owner of that lot may be here and may comment on it during the public session but my assumption is because it's a private road they maintain that section plowing and what have you now with that background um what I've seen happen when you've got other Lots in a Lake Community like this where you've got in this case it could be four Lots on Elm Road there is usually a request by the board to get a maintenance agreement as far as who's going to share in the cost of maintaining this road not only the snow plowing but repair and replacement of wearing surfaces and that type of thing the other thing that enters into Elm Road is uh if it's not constructed as a through Road you've got a situation where if they've got a private contractor coming to snowplow the road in the middle of the winter and basically he plows down to where the two proposed houses are on these two subject properties uh where is it going to turn around now all of a sudden you're plowing in the night in the middle of the winter and you have a situation you don't have a cold theck you don't have the rights necessarily to go in one of the existing driveways so there's got to be a situation where or there could be a situation where one of the existing Property Owners on the corners say I don't want you turning around in my my driveway now what is the snowplow driver supposed to do U the option there is to literally back up but that's not the greatest situation in the world either in this particular case so when I looked at this and I I do commend the applicant for buying that lot8 for getting that taken care of and that basically took off all the Lots all the way down to the corner with Washington Street you've got a situation where if you did construct uh the roadway all the way through so that the snow plow could come through that culdesac issue almost becomes a mo point because it could plow through to Washington Street which I stand correctly but I believe was also paved so they could take care of that situation in that way so I don't know and maybe Marissa could help us if they got a report from the fire department on this application no all right that's one of the key things we want to make sure that the fire department is comfortable uh with who's going to maintain this regardless of what the construction of the road is is no matter what it is it's got to be maintained because in the winter time if there's ice and snow and you can't stop the truck on there it's not safe to get through so maintenance is a key threshold issue on this particular application in my opinion so that's on Elm Road then just continuing a little bit further in the report um there wasn't a separate Eis uh provided for this again I didn't see any Wetlands or any issues like that on the subject property I did make mention of the various uh approvals that would be required at the very minimum and as usual we request an as built upon completion of the project if the board approves it so that in fact uh you can verify that the variances if the board decides to grant them we're adhere to now just switching over to the next report that I did on application number 0423 U Lots 567 and 8 lock 3206 6 that report was updated to May 20th 2024 again mainly because the applicant purchased the additional Lot 8 which I commend them for that was very good uh with regards to the zoning as the applicant indicated they're very similar uh variances where where the proposing 50 ft front yard is required 18.8 ft uh is they're proposing which needs a variance rear yard 50ft minimum required 20 ft minimum or 20 ft rather is what they're proposing for a variance and again with the lot width on 95.5 ft on Washington Drive where 125 ft is required as's a variance and with regards to the rear stairs where I had scaled it off as 16 ft uh the applicant calculated 17.2 feet so I stand corrected on that one uh we as Mr ke pointed out they're ultimately going to need plus a planning variance just like to the other side of the street um in this particular case um there's a planning variance needed and there'll be a deed needed to consolidate Lots 5 six seven and 8 one thing I didn't mention and I just occurred to me as I'm looking at Mr st's exhibit again if the applicant is application is approved by the board since now that they've acquired Lot number eight uh they basically have a corner lot as far as the intersection of elm and Washington Drive uh what I'd suggest on that corner site triangle easement on that corner uh so that that's taken care of because they did get down to the intersection uh with regards to storm drainage again they are proposing on this lot a dry well and the similar comments from the previous report as far as making a couple uh modifications to the design for a solid cover versus a grate and the manhole structures the permeability and soil testing to make sure we don't have a high seasonable high water table that's going to interfere with the proper operation and again they didn't provide any uh mitigation for storm water U on Elm Drive we talked about the HVAC units that's not an issue and we they corrected on the record the steps coming out being parallel to the building new well and new septic are proposed and again once again basically the same comments the aerial utilities whatever is required to operating and obtain a CO for the house they'll have to pay to run those Utilities in if they don't run down into this unimproved section of Road uh we talked about Elm Road plans both from a construction standpoint and also maintenance responsibilities and I listed the various agencies that are involved as far as at a minimum getting approvals for and again it's repetitive I know but it's basically just for the record on this application and as Bill of this particular site as well so those are my reports Mr chairman thank you for those detailed reports David yes sir appreciate it y M Maris will you please call upon the board members for any questions and comments please sure Jennifer Paha uh the only question I had I was just curious if you take that Elm Road and make it to the 20 foot width that you're talking about for the rsis does that change the setbacks is that road going to have to be widened to the point where it's infringing on the front property line uh no so the right away with stay the same width just the cart way width would be widen within the right away thank you no more questions Michael jic yeah a few questions um regarding the road right now it's proposed to be gravel and you're not expanding the width right uh we are expanding the width you are expanding the width okay um how many trees are going to be pulled down from that um I have to look at my plans I don't have it in front of me but I get you that that number that you me minute okay that' be um and while you're getting that number I will ask my next question or I'll just wait then just trying to understand if we're doing a big deforestation here or just one or two no it's more than one one or two but um you look I don't know if you have a set of plans in front of you uh so so on the lower lot uh 2 to8 actually majority of trees it's hard to see here but the majority of trees are right here there are trees in the area of the the dwelling as well um so total number trees moved uh 19 on the site and then there's 1 two three four within the RightWay for the road widening that's for the lower one um the number for upper lot as well uh say approximately 30 on the upper lot again it's just the trees that are within the area of the footprint of the building the driveway and the septic and drivew well thank you but we're we're keeping any trees that we can Mike while you run while you're run that subject ask a question sure running the the power lines in cable lines in the overhead lines U the utilities will put poles in in the RightWay uh that's what's assumes right now there is a pole right here where my light is laser pointer uh so it's very uh close to the the one lot um they most likely need to run another pole uh somewhere in the middle here as well and they but they'll be managed and owned by the utility it's not going to be the the homeowners are going to own those responsibilities for those polls no typically that's the utility company those putting those poles up those overhead lines are they going to require any clear cutting of trees on both sides of the uh that I I I couldn't tell you it'll be up to the I think so no so it's it's really up to you utility company of where they locate the poles and what trees or um but there's really not much within the RightWay as far as trees so if they're running from here like I said we're already removing I believe four trees on this side um I can't imagine that there'll be you know multitude of trees beinged for all right goe all right um back to my questions uh I know there's some testimony about the house being compatible with the community um I guess in terms of the way the house looks but what about in terms terms of setbacks are the setbacks for these homes kind of compatible with the community as well um I haven't done a an inventory of all the Lots I mean you can see the house that's to the I guess north of lot uh 2 to eight you can see it's actually closer to elro than than our lot is well it's just one house yeah um but a majority of lots are undersized um so if I had to venture to guess I would say majority of them have setback uh deficiencies cor okay and um let's see my last question uh maybe this is on the plans and but I would just like some confirmation I know in this area this community this Lake Community there's been some controversy in the past about what a front door is and where the front doors are in the houses is are these houses going to have a front door that works for Ingress and egress that actually face El uh so I'm not the architect but looking at the architectural elevations they do have a front door that faces Elm Street good all right question Michael that's all I have thank you oh sorry Landon you can oh I'm sorry um Rich Lupa yeah I just had one other question I didn't notice on your C I think you mentioned that you're going to have propane for heat source and again this has with truck deliveries and everything I didn't notice where on your site plans where you showed the propane tanks if they're going to be above ground underground uh size of them yeah we did not not show them on the on the plans I'm not sure if that fin ter termination has been made um obviously if there is a requirement for the ordinance we'll comply with the ordinance as far as location and size okay distances from other utilities okay it should be shown right David yes thank you that's all we can show them on the revised plans for compliance if if that's okay with the board okay that's that's it Michael leandi hey um just one quick one I think I'm looking for a little historical context I'm looking at both of these blocks and and really the entirety of the surrounding community on the on the tax map here and it's littered with all these small postage stamp Lots um that are clearly not buildable I don't know if this document is is slightly outdated if there's any precedent for combining Lots like this to create a buildable lot but it it appears and just you know off the top of my head I don't have any kind of benefit of historical knowledge here that it was not intended for homes to buil on be built on these smaller smaller lots that are you know in between a lot of the the larger quote unquote I guess guess buildable Lots can you guys just speak to that and provide a little color as to why we think that is or if we've got some historical knowledge here that we can share for the benefit of the board um just I don't have any historical information I'm not sure if the applicant has any knowledge when he purchase the Lots Peter do you know any of the answers in your research um this has been Boulder Community and it's Ty make sure we're picking up on microphone please this is uh an older Late Community and uh in the early days people didn't pay so much attention to minimum lot sizes for septic disposal so what I suspect is the case here is that these Lots were uh they they may predate the zoning ordinance but the answer is I've uh in my experience in older Lake communities you'll often find 25 foot wide lots that can be assembled uh over time and it is a problem because your zoning ordinance has been uh has a 25,000 foot minimum lot size uh and again that's for health and safety reasons in many cases because they're on septic systems so you're correct I I suspect these Lots were certainly legally established at at one time time when this Lake Community was established there have been some Assemblies of lots over time but there is a high number of substandard lots uh the benefit here is the applicant has made an effort to assemble as much land as he can in one case we now meet the minimum lot size and the other case were 19,000 ft² not that much under so uh we're doing a good thing but the answer is we're not not going to solve the problem that there are a lot of isolated undersized lots that um are going to be a problem when someone tries to build on it any applicant that goes before you has to at least as we have done tried to assemble it with other properties but if if someone has an undersized lot where the abing lots are developed uh you're stuck with it and there's no deed restrictions or anything like that that you guys are aware of we're not aware of any deed restrictions all right thank you Landon tener yeah just some questions thank you for bringing that up about the undersized Lots because I was just curious about that as well when you're looking at the general area it seems to be kind of shocking to see the different sizes when we're looking at this is a traditional R2 Zone when we look at our other zones um if I could just um when I did look at this I looked at the Lots in the area that were that were assembled and give you an example uh on Forest Road there are lots 13 14 and 15 have been assembled so it it it it's worse than it is on the tax map but uh when I looked at the ownership pattern there there three lots that were assembled there on Forest so there are people that have assembled some Lots but they're not shown on the tax man certainly and and no one knows for sure why this was originally designed in in this record this fashion kind of matching some of our other Lake communities in in town is there I didn't look at this one but what happens if you had if you had your original attorney dick DS may he rest in peace here he would say that somebody came out took a piece of paper and I think council's probably aware of this somebody came out took a piece of paper sketched out lots and and they were all 25 by whatever and they thought they were going to put houses on them and they thought they could pop a garbage can in the ground and that would be the septic and so it went and and the Lots sometimes were sold on matchbook covers I mean parsipany has a whole bunch of these down there so this this is probably one of those I forget whether it's a section help me section four something subdivision that didn't get approval it predated and it's here and now what you try and do is just what you all are talking about you try and do assemblies and try and get the best deal possible and something that conforms as they sold Lots with a newspaper subscription County to who was the Mirror newspaper in New York and they had the miror holding in in Mars County if you bought your subscription to a newspaper you would get a lot today you get a lottery ticket I appreciate all of that uh historical context and my final question is that the current application is is not connecting the road all the way to um is that Washington Drive Elm Road is that what the current application is uh well there will be a continuous path from Deerfield to Washington Drive uh so there is I'm not sure if it's really a a road or a driveway um you could I guess how it's kind of looks on all the the parcel Maps we have it's as if these roads are are fluid is that what is the The Proposal it will be fluid from one side to the other side so right now there is kind of a gap between the two right that's a narrow uh I would say more of a trail than a a roadway uh so we are going to take that portion and widen it to 20 feet and to connect the two sides great that's all my questions Michael Steinberg yeah I actually have uh two two possibly three questions and I think Landon kind of hit all one of them there so I know you talked about uh widening El Road on this one um based off of what I can see here are you looking at extending it as well to get closer to Washington uh so as you can see here um this dark shaded gray is what we're doing as far as improvements uh so it's hard to see but approximately half of this right now is is gravel um and we're going to extend it to be 20 ft wide and like I said we're going to meet the existing paved um portion right here and there's an actual uh this portion right here is gravel right now uh so it will connect to two sides okay so essentially it's going to extend for all intents and purposes down to the end of lot eight in 32 yeah so once that is constructed a vehicle go from Deerfield to Washington okay corre um to that point then on here is there a thought around why the house is being placed where it is in lot five then versus lot eight on there because otherwise if you put it in lot eight theoretically you could have a little bit more clearance on the front and the back end might be negligible but uh as far as left to right so yeah well no more like you know on the like the way it's laid out there it's on the left side versus like all the way on the right side correct so yep so the reason for that is that this this lot actually has a significant um drop in in grade for one side to the other side I believe from this corner to this corner it's approximately uh 30 ft uh so we had placed it on the high side where it's a little flatter uh so that's why it's located there uh this lot on the other hand is um is actually relatively uh level it's only a six foot drop from one end to the other end and again we like to put it towards the high end if we can site okay all the questions I have okay chairman canar board members covered my questions to a te so thank you all that's a first thanks mik okay I'll open the hearing to the public who have comments and questions please come forward and Mr um Mr St if you're so kind to uh have the microphone you can stay there by by the microphone please and please give your name and address to the board secretary uh my name is Pam Jones I own the property of 37 Washington Drive it's at the bottom of elm um my question you want to swear into Glenn I think that'll save time and it'll make it easier on Miss Jones so you raise your right hand do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth the proceedings before the board tonight's help you got I do okay P go my question is the septic how far does their septic have to be from my well uh I believe it's 50 ft we didn't do the septic design uh but uh there is a plan um that was submitted let's stay with the question how far does it well have to be separated from a septic I think Mr Simmons is going to tell you 50 feet yes all right so I was correct yeah I'm not a septic engineer we that's why we we subed it out we just took you off the hook Mr Simmons just affirmed it thank you Mr Simmons because my well is very close to elmro I would tell you Miss Jones subject to Mr Simmons coming across and strangling me that they can't put anything in that encroaches upon that because there are certain County and and Township Board of Health requirements that maintain the distances is that correct David that that's correct and and if this application was approved um as noted in my report one of the things they have to get for each one of these applications is County Health Department for the well and septic and as part of that application process they have to show where the wells are on the adjoining pieces of property and verify that the distance from the well to the septic that they're proposing meets their requirements be 50 or 100 feet whatever it might be they have to meet the County Health Department requirements my second question would be on the widening of the road and the putting in of the utility poles would that go on my property uh no so none of the improvements will be within the property everything will be within the right away correct thank thank you you're welcome anyone else please come forward please give your name and address to the secretary hi Jessica dagostino 12 Elm Road Jessica how do you spell dagostino like the store in the city I'm not related to not related to them capital D apostrophe Capital AG g o s t i n o you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth who proceedings before the board tonight's help you gu I do thank you go ahead jica so um I don't even know where to start and I appreciate all of your questions um and I apologize for my facial expressions as this was going on tonight um I am the one that sees the backwards house uh from my kitchen window so that's where my property is um I do have questions about um the house being placed too close to my house number one uh um why don't we stay with one which house are you talk which lot are you talking about um I believe it would be that one that's my house right there um so my house my driveway a little bit of property and a lot of woods um that's one question because I have uh where my well is and where my well pump is um I am I have a family member Anita Deo who is with susex County health inspection um and she said it was 100t it had to be I actually spoke to her today um so that's a concern of mine and also for Pam um also and respectively has have any of you driven through that area in any recent time just I have not okay so that road um Elm Road has gone all the way through since I've been there for 17 years um um it was it is not covered in grapple the town last year repaved all of the the roads that are not paper roads um Glenn marowski who I'm sure most of you know um offered to have them pour the milling and then he pressed it out onto the paper roads so there is uh pavement or Milling pressed down onto the road now before that it was gravel or dirt um over the past 5 years my son who is now 15 has cut down many trees that have fallen from those two properties across the roads so I've had many people pull into my driveway see that they can't get through and turn around and go back now UPS Amazon local traffic ourselves we can get through uh so there is traffic there um it's just uh it's there's no Rock um also I do I really have an issue with it being so close to my house um if it's 50 feet it's 50 feet but if they want to build it closer I'm not happy about that so Bonnie would you like to respond to a Jessica comments and so forth yeah so as far as distance from your house actually uh we are not asking for Relief on the sidey guard setback uh per the code 15 ft is required um and that that's what is being proved on the side yard uh adj to your house uh so that is in compliance we're not building it closer than we're allowed to okay just want to make sure of that um I would uh appreciate if this was looked into more um I thank you very much um before anything is approved just leave it at that thank you for your time all right you're welcome anyone else in the public have any comments or questions on this application please come forward Jenny Derek's taing to Sparta you have your hand raised already Danny you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth and proceedings before the board tonight's help you got I do okay it was referenced that the property that the proposed dwellings are within in uh the keeping with the neighborhood but there's been I don't see or the public doesn't have a copy of any renderings of the proposed dwellings do we have those do you have those oh have you seen them oh usually they go to the um the zoning and planning office to look at plans and so forth once they're submitted by the uh applicant they're all public record correct yes so architectural plans were submitted for both properties they weren't they're not public if we don't the public doesn't see them that's all I'm saying now they would have to open I we have them here if you want to see them but they were submit as part of the application yeah they I have them they got them to our office but they they're not for the public to see they she would have to do an open request if she wanted to see them okay all right um we have them right here though they're the same ones we had gotten last year right want do that last year okay thank you um one other question uh the there is discussion about the road having to be improved whatever the status of the road is right now it's it's admitted that it's not a complete Road by the applicant is there any concern that the uh Lake Community organization has to have some input on that the sparta lake has a community and HOA sort of configuration is anyone here to to comment on that in the public from the L they're not not will you is the applicant I'm John melli you SW John did we swear you in no no you didn't John do you swear to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth and the proceedings before the board tonight help you God yes I do go ahead sir so um wellow uh prior to prior to purchasing these properties I I purchased these from a gentleman and and if I'm going off track here he had he bought these properties in 1981 so I tried to familiarize myself and I is I think Fred Turner is still the uh sparter Association president I don't know down there and I've reached out to him um and he doesn't he he pretty much said the same thing that you guys said that you'd have to change the deed more likely and have responsibility of that road so that's really all I know um okay all right all right thank you anyone else in the public seeing no one else in the public it's now closed to the public and back to the board for any other questions comments from board members professionals before we Mr chairman uh if I may um I still think the maintenance issue issue uh has quite frankly not been addressed and just so there's a little more information added to the history in the sparta Lakes area uh several decades ago uh our office worked with the township on some of the roads that are paved there was a a program that went around to improve those roads curve them and pave them and what have you not all the roads just some of them for example Lake Shore Drive and some Deerfield Drive I believe was on uh that type of thing so the thing of it is with with a road like this you've got as the one lady brought up uh to make sure that title Whoever has the title The Lake Association whatever entity it might be they'd be in agreement with whatever improvements would be made I really think you should get a report from the fire department to get their input on the safety aspects of what they can negotiate with the road and I think it's really important uh to have it established in addition to what I suggested before about the fact that recording in the chain of title that these aren't Township roads and the township has no responsibility for the maintenance who does have the maintenance responsibility and who's going to share the costs whether it's a gravel road there's going to be issues with uh repairing and maintaining grading and rolling a gravel road there's going to be maintenance over time with a paved road but it's going to be somebody's maintenance responsibility it's going to invol involve dollars of cost and I really would recommend to the board that that issue be resolved um and all the parties that are going to be party to that maintenance agreement be identified and there be an agreement reached and I would welcome any input from the board attorney exactly how that could be set up well I agree with you 100% on everything you mentioned David and Glenn I we we do this with Dave didn't just pull the rabbit out of the Hat we we do this all the time in towns matter of fact I was thinking I think back before when Larry Palmer was representing we had a couple of applications like this before you guys back in the 80s so I think the question is Dave um is this sufficiently vetted that the board could take action subject to them getting I I think everything you suggested should happen uh do we need to carry it or can it be something that you would get involved in and Corey is the township attor uh engineer and I would get involved as the attorney and we come up with the maintenance agreements and everything else there's nothing you guys don't see these but we see them all the time when you get up into into the hills of Sussex County just this is fairly common pretty sure Dave we've had this in in the past once or twice when Wilbur was chairman I remember it wouldn't surprise me it wouldn't surprise me we've had it a few times so I would feel more comfortable with um all you uh professionals getting involved and so forth and working out with the uh with the neighbors before we even take a vote on it tonight that's the way I feel I don't know how the rest of the board feels there's a few too many loose ends here I would agree I would also like to see that report from the fire department as well so I think I think I think you just sealed the direction we're going buddy so I think I think what we could do is carry it get it over to the fire department you get the information in to to David and to me and we can start looking at it we can carry it for a month or if you need you know two months it doesn't make any difference Council yeah we our offices are used to dealing with it I think Landon is right the fire department should look my suspicion quite frankly is if you actually look at it out there and Dave you correct me if I'm wrong we've given out building permits in this area now whether I my guess is it was not on so much Elm but there might have been something on Washington Drive and stuff so the roads have been deemed you know safe for firefighting and other Emergency Equipment but we're extending it out kind of so we just need to get our arms around the the final picture I guess and I and I would suspect that the input that the fire department and Emergency Services would have would help guide that decision towards the final construction of the road too yes everyone in an agreeance then we just have to come up with a potential carry date like the attorney was saying in a month or two why don't we carry it a month if we are not far enough long then we'll ask for another month after that okay fine February 12 next meeting right yes February 12 all right great thank you all you all right so for the record the two app you want to do this Ken you want me to do go ahead excuse me for the record two applications that were submitted uh by the applicant which are identified as uh ZB 323 melli U for 5-13 Elm Road and ZB 4-23 uh 2-8 elmro are going to be carried to uh the February 12 12th hearing no further public notice being required uh tonight was the first night again Dave that this was deemed complete is that accurate or inaccurate I think that's inaccurate I thought so too because I thought this one's been kind of sailing along a little bit yeah you'll grant us an we'll wave any extension necessary thank you and that's on the record we get a little we get a little froggy up here about getting into February with the snow flying and stuff so I was more concerned about February happening and than having to maybe run to March all right thank you thank you ladies you're welcome yes sir excuse me anyone else in the audience have any questions or comments on items not on the agenda tonight Aral plans are available the architectural are available I seen no one has any other let me interrupt a second please take your exhibits so we don't have a chance to lose them I was saying before they're available which the architectural plans and Stu are available yeah there I I don't know what the thing is about you should be able to go in and look at an if it's part of the plans but it's not if you're not certified on the list that plans aren't public only if you were on the list notice if not they would have do open request we never I never we'll talk about that okay car entertain a motion Jing the meeting tonight so move second second all in favor thank you the same just fig out there that was excellent so there's no