All right. Good evening everybody. Uh thank you for coming out tonight on a cold night. This is a regular meeting of the Allenale land use board at which formal action will be taken on the items listed on the agenda and upon any other matters which may properly come before the land use board. The requirements of the Open
Public Meetings Act have been satisfied through the posting on the public bulletin board in the municipal building and on the burough website and by publication in the record on January 13, 2025 with copies being sent to the Ridgewood News and the Herald News. Certain agenda items will be open to the
public for comment andor testimony. The board will advise the public when such matters are open for their comment andor testimony. Okay. Uh before we get into it, can we uh all rise to salute the flag, please? Pledge allegiance to the flag United
States and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. >> Okay, please. >> Vice Chairwoman Bergen,
>> board member Wala is absent. Board member Petrino >> here. >> Board member Guggliero is absent. Councilman Yakarino >> here. >> Board member Dallow >> here. >> Chairman Siko >> here. >> Mayor Wasinski >> here.
>> Board member Butler >> here. >> Alternate Ki is absent. Next on our agenda, please are the approval of the minutes from the October 15, 2025 regular meeting. I reviewed them. Looked okay to me. Any comments,
questions on the meeting notes as presented. Okay, seeing none, may I have a motion, please, to accept? >> Make a motion to accept. >> And may I have a second, please? >> Second. >> Thank you, >> Vice Chairwoman Bergen. Board member Petrino,
>> yes. >> Board member Dallow, >> yes. >> Chairman Crico, >> yes. >> Board member Butler, >> yes. >> Yes. >> Right. Moving on to the resolutions of the last meeting. Um, the first is
application file number 2025-12, resolution number 25-25. The applicant is Michael Maul and Dana Marino 246 Park Avenue 2206 lot 7 and the application was to
construction of an attached deck >> council. >> Yes. Thank you Mr. Chair. >> So this application was in a sense an amendment from a prior approval granted by the board which was a more ambitious and larger scale development project. the applicant to turn to the board and
conceded to abandoning that prior project in lie of the proposal which was approved by the board last month for construction of a deck in the rear yard area which was but more limited relief than the prior approval. The applicant agreed that the prior approval would be abandoned which would require the
applicant to return to the board in the future and prosecute that case a new should they wish to ever build on what was previously prepared by their their scrier of record and originally approved by the board. of this approval supplants and replaces the initial approval simply
for the deck construction of the rear yard and we made sure that the understood. >> We did on the record and the applicant confirmed on the record that he understood that one replaces the other. They cannot both live side by side.
>> Sir, any comments, questions on the resolutions and the detail that council just provided? Okay, seeing none, can I have a motion to accept the resolution, please? >> I'll make a motion to accept. And can I
have a second? >> One more. >> Vice Chairwoman Bergen, >> yes. >> Board member Petrino, >> yes. >> Board member Dallow, >> yes. >> Chairman Crico, >> yes. >> Board member Butler,
>> yes. Moving on. Next uh resolution is application file number 2025-13. Resolution 25-26. The applicant is James and Dana Bole at
415 Canterbury Drive, block 410 block 3, and the application was the addition of a renovation of existing single family residents seeking relief of rear yard setback pursuant to 270-P4. Council, I'll turn it back over to you again. >> Thank you. So, not too dissimilar from
the prior approval granted last month. This too is an application that was a return to the board following a prior approval grant in 2022 for an addition to the single family residential dwelling. This approval was uh lesser in scope, lesser in square footage, lesser in relief overall. So, it was
effectively a lesser included application than the board previously approved. The board granted this application. downward adjusted delta of square footage was about 400 square feet downward adjusted from the prior approval. This two is an application where you can only build one or the other. The law is relatively clear if
you cannot build both of your approvals harmoniously. One is abandoned. The current one the later ones of France and super sweet prior. So, similar to the Mal Marino application, this one is one where the applicants will have to build out upon the 2025 approval if they have
to act on their resolution grant by this board. That's okay. That's okay. All right. Members, any questions, comments on the resolution? >> Okay. If I have a motion to accept.
>> Make a motion to accept. >> I'll second. Thank you. >> Orman Bergen. >> Board member Petrino. >> Yes. >> Board member Dallow. >> Yes. >> Chairman SO. >> Yes. >> Board member Butler. >> Yes.
>> Next on our agenda is the public hearings. We have two applications before the board. Um the applicant 2025-06 which shows 310 Eastale Avenue. Are you are you representing them?
>> Yes, you are. Okay. What I'd like to do is because you were here before and we're anticipating that your testimony is going to be relatively short. >> Yes, that's correct. >> I would like to change the agenda. All
due respect to the youngs, this should be very fast. Okay. And then you'll have the meat of the uh of the meeting. Okay. So, gentlemen, if you'd be so fine. >> Okay. Chairman, I would like to add though that uh Miss Lee Song is currently on the way. So if the board
could like we hear from Miss Lis on directly as well she currently should be a part of I don't anticipate moving her testimony unless the board is question. >> I think this is more of a legal amendment council. I think we'll be fine with with just you offering your
property to the board and if there's a hiccup we can you know hold and and move forward after the other application but I think based on what I reviewed it should be just you being able to answer any of the questions that come up this evening. >> Perfect. Thank you. Yeah, that's I'm in full agreement with that because that's
again why. Thank you, Chris. Okay, please. So, >> you can go there or you can move the speaker to the table, wherever you're comfortable. >> Thank you. months ago essentially
record Mr. against legal advisers here on behalf of the applicator capital also on behalf of his principal sole principal uh himself essentially what's come to rise as we mentioned two
months ago you were approved for some fact and during the course of construction what has come to pass is on u the onset of of demolitionist and we discovered a certain structural issue with regard to the right side setback
that seemed to impact a number of the foundation walls. Essentially, what was discovered was that the cement block was not adhered to the foundation. What we needed to do was actually bring down all of the walls. Now, the actual footprint of the
building, the foundation itself, the subfloor, the floor, the floor joist, all of that has remained intact. All we essentially had to do was bring all the walls down uh to properly uh reinforce the structure of the building. Now the
remainder of the character of the of the building remains intact as what we're seeking from the board today is an amendment to the resolution that's previously granted simply adding another variance to the right side road set act in addition to the left side it's effect just in case the board were to deem this
a sufficient destruction without having to go into that test of course um you know as opposed to going through the likely testimonies to take the proof as they've submitted in that the itself advances the purposes of the municipal land use.
>> Okay, Mr. Chairman, for what it's worth, I had a chance to speak to Mr. Rodriguez a number of times on this before this submission as well as Mr. Hackett and I I think that this could have probably gone either way with with administrative consideration. You know, Mr. Hackett in abundance of caution thought that a return to the board was um more proper
given that there could be an exacerbation of relief. I did not disagree with that, nor do Mr. Rodriguez. That's what brings them back here before us this evening. But but it's effectively um something that I could see uh having been any given day of the week potentially a field change approved because of the non-exacerbation
of the relief. It's it's hyper technical more than anything. >> Chairman add the exact character of this project commissioner fair the character remains the same. It's going to be a beautiful politics all that's really changing here of some
of the facets of construction that's all it's only to further enhance the building and to ensure that it's safe and secure over the next years. There was no overall design. None. None whatsoever.
>> The existing walls are being built in the same location as they >> correct. There's no stash of footprints. Uh nothing exceeds the bounds as they were previously. >> Were there any changes required to the detail of how that wall was going to be
fastened and reinforced since it was not originally intended to be touched? My understanding is that it's going to be reinforced rebar into the foundation and so new cement blocks to be put in and then reinforced directly into the foundations where you can withstand the
support of a second story and then scoop. >> So there's there's not going to be any change. Uh the height will remain the same, the wall will remain in the same location at this it looks like it's just to
reestablish the structural integrity of that wall. That's absolutely correct. >> Just so I understand, how much of the house was demoed? 50%, 60%. >> We're roughly, I believe, uh, we're probably in the realm of somewhere in
the 60 70% mark. >> Okay. uh just because we brought down everything except for you know some of the interior all the exterior had to go and roof had to I had to go clearly kind of brought down the studs and then we just taking apart the the uh exterior walls as well
>> and not changing the foundation >> not changing the foundation not changing the floor joist not changing the subfloor and the layouts remained exactly the same exactly as our outline none of the floor plans are being changed nothing it's going to be built
exactly as described Anybody else? no area out. >> Okay. >> I really had much more to add other than uh you know the cons I guess the concern
was that we existing inform and remove so he had the authority or not to grant some relief for that and was indicated by by
caution everyone need to come back from what I can tell looking at the fans you know everything is going to go back together just like we thought it was going to go back together it's just more >> or rephrasing what you said everything is going back the way that we assumed it
except for this exception >> nearly everything is going back >> okay That's fair. That's fair. Okay, I'm satisfied. Anybody else? Okay. Um, comments from the public.
Okay. Seeing none, I bring it back to the board. Um, >> yeah. Resolution. >> So, so, so the board would be voting on Yeah, the board will be voting on an amendment to the prior application, which might have been been June that you were here, >> I believe. >> Um, I've got it as well. Um, I know I
wasn't here that night. I know I was on on the the Brady Munch camera. Yeah. So I think I think I was in North Carolina. So I think it might have been June, but at any rate >> 12 >> bank 12. Okay. So this would be an amendment to the board granted. We would we'll adopt a new resolution Chris for this. We send it to you. But uh I don't
think it's going to hold you up in the interim as you move forward with your your ongoing construction. Um yeah, the board will be voting on an amendment to the prior approval to grant any enhanced relief occasion by the reconstruction of details in the field that were not contemplated during the course of the
prior 2025. Any questions on what council just told us? Okay. But I have a motion to accept given what council just detailed for us and the revisions of the resolution.
>> Thank you. Who was that? >> Okay, thank you. And then it was Melissa. >> Frank. >> Okay. Vice Chairwoman Bergen. >> Yes. >> Board member Patrino. >> Yes.
>> Board member Dallow. >> Yes. >> Chairman Crico. >> Yes. >> Mayor Wisinski. >> Board member Butler. >> Yes. Linda, do you need me to vote as well? >> I don't think you voted on the original application, did you?
>> I don't recall. I could abstain from this then in that case. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Why would Mr. Hack indicate that he wanted to stop working? Anything unless Mr. Freeman has any issues legally speaking? I I don't think there's any folks down there in good faith
consistent with the plans and this is an odd nuance that surfaces every now and then. Thank you. Very nice. Thank you again. Thank you for your time to
thank you very much for the application 634 the application is addition to an existing split level home on the second floor rear family room covered porch and an open air roof
pursuance 270-37A 3 and 270-64. Thank you for coming in. Swear all three of you folks in at the same time and then we can go through who we have here. So you can just start your testimony. So you folks at the moment please all raise your right hand. You
are swear you all swear or testimony you're about to provide the truth nothing but the truth. Yes. Thank you. If we could just go one after the other folks if you could just state your name spell your last name by an address for the record. last name L
CS I CS principal engineer Associates of Church Street New Jersey is K of 63 event. >> Thank you.
>> Your license remains current in a good standing in the state of New Jersey through tonight, I assume. >> Yes. PE license number 32444, professional planner license number 3736. you testifying about capacities tonight? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Very good.
>> All right. Um, tell us tell us who's Okay. Tell us tell us what you want to do, why you're here, please. Thank you. It's just a, you know, brief overview. We all have your plans and photos taken. >> So, and I we've been um part of for 23
years and we're looking to uh renovate a home. So we're looking to do an addition which will consist of a new break room and cover deck for families and gatherings and the second floor edition will be used as a main master bedroom and study book space.
Uh we plan on replacing our current wood shapes with new vinyl siding but we'll retain the red brick facing. Um and the color of the vinyl sign will be a mutual pallet doing nothing different which will complement the red brick of the front house uh front stairs sleeping
tube with respect to proposed exterior lighting and mechanical equipment. Um lighting will be installed around the house for security aesthetics such as wall sconces by entrances lights for security path lights for walkways and uh
ceiling or pendant lights for cover areas. That's what um in addition uh when travel equipment it's going to be installed will be a gas generator outside and um two beachback compressors also
and there was a question from Mr. green one about landscaping and tree removal. Um, two beach trees by the right side of the house that was need to be removed. Um, and then if you're not going to remove any other trees
and the walkway across the housing will also be just to clarify on the these two compressors. We have one existing. So, we're going to replace the existing dofage and then add another one as part
of the second floor. >> And just to clarify, all those mechanicals are indicated on exhibit A3, which is the FL plan. Uh, and they're to the rear of the home, totally, you know,
out of sight. Uh subject property is uh lot 15 block 1904 63 present avenue. Um it is a 19,652 square ft uh property in the in a 25,000
square foot um zone. that the lot is undersized but it is the property is in compment with the floor area ratio. Um exhibit A1 and I've taken the liberty to pre-marked the exhibits and provide an
exhibit list >> that that's very helpful and I thank you for that. Um just for the record sake identify it by name as you're going through these. Exhibit A1 is an existing conditions uh survey shows the footprint of a home and you can see one of the
features this peculiar feature of these properties is that the home is either parallel to the sidelines or radial to the curve of Crescent Bend. The home is cocked which is what brings us before this board. I'll have an
exhibit uh exhibit A6 which is a land use analysis which if the home was built in a conventional location not twisted um we would not be doing uh but that is the uh circumstance. The home this
property was subdivided in 1958. Uh the home was built in 1959 1960. So it is uh 65 years old. um and they wish and these wish to update it. Uh I believe it's in
your packet but exhibit A4 uh are photographs of the existing uh split level home and they get pictures you know it's a classic 1959 split level and uh those are exhibit A4 are
photographs from May 22nd 2025 so they're certainly up to date. Um exhibit A3 is the prime exhibit with the architectural title plan block 15 block
1904 Kai Grace young it is dated 6205 last revised 73025 is the location zone board applications and exhibit A4 the photographs are uh
pended to exhibit A3 and it details of the existing footprint of the home which I'm tracing with my pointer as well. There's a a covered porch out to the back. Um there is uh
that the proposed expansion is overlapping that covered porch will be removed and a new cover porch to the rear of the home. Highlighted on exhibit A3 are the required building uh setbacks
um and as well as the 21.7 ft enhance setback in ratio to the floor area of the home. Um the existing setback to the corner of the building is
currently 18.4 four again due to the twist of the home. Exhibit A6 titled land use analysis uh shows the property
and if the existing and proposed footprint was built in a conventional location, you can see it fits very nicely in this in the required setbacks. Um and the right hand side of exhibit A6
I've highlighted or shaded the required setback the permitted building envelope is the white space with the footprint. If this and this is the the essential C1 hardship with this property is that for
whatever reason in 1959 um the home was built at an angle brings us here today. The existing sideyard setback uh to the back corner of the existing
home is 18.4 ft. So, it's currently over the 20 foot minimum setback or the 21.7 hand setback and due to the peculiar angle of the home when the addition is
built the back corner of it has a side set back of 1526 hence requiring um a variance which brings us to the board. Again, I emphasize
that's all a result of the orientation or the location of the existing home footprint that when you extend the home in a logical perpendicular parallel uh manner, you bump into the uh
over the setback. That is the essence of this applications. Um as stated by uh Mr. John associated improvements the driveway would be repaved uh front walkway reconstructed.
Exhibit exhibit A3 to plot plan indicates all the roof leaders will be upgraded. All that roof runoff would be directed to a sheepish pit in the front yard. uh
we have provided uh storm water management calculation in that regard. Um I believe they bee uh proper. Uh in Mr. Breland's um report he recommends that uh connecting an overflow from the
seage pit to a catch basin. This property does have a benefit of the catch basin directly in front. um that can be accommodated uh certainly if permitted. There is a drainage easement along the westerly
side with a storm drain in it running from the roadway catch basin. Another element is its application since that is a 15 foot wide
uh range ement dating back to 1959. If we put a conventional sophet at that back corner that as call it the pinch point the sophet will encroach by 8 in into the drainage.
Um, it's up in the air with plenty of clearances if the town needed to uh access this rail easement for maintenance purposes that stop it. Um, which is the back side. It's this
corner. You know, there's plenty of clearance. It's a second story. It does not prohibit access of of equipment. uh the fact the two beach trees that uh are to are proposed to be removed would
actually improve the access uh to that municipal drainage easement if the town needed to um access it. Um the architecturals uh are exhibit 85 by uh Harry Goldstein
who actually has a specialty in renovating these classic 1959 um split levels which is which is always a challenge. Uh but it again it is a family room uh out the back a second
story a full second story edition which is we are exacerbating the existing nonconforming sideyard variance another reason we're before the board uh but exhibit A5 uh
are the architecturals by uh Harry Folstein architect but it's basically a second sto full seconds story edition on one half of the house, a family room to the rear
of the home, which is this box here, and then a covered porch uh in the rear yard of the home. Um that really the sum of the applications and again from a planning perspective
the hardship that's putting us before is the orientation and location of the home. If it was in a conventional location we would not see here. I see you have the generators and all that towards the back in the new
>> Yes, they're to the rear of the family room um on site. >> Do you know why the original house was built not square? Any idea is even >> it's it's peculiar. Uh
perhaps it was an error. >> Okay. And that's why we do foundation location surveys today. um this could be the reason but it was the foundation that when they became aware of it um yeah it's it's peculiar.
That's >> Did you look at, you know, since the sideyard said back sliding scale based on the square footage of the house and you know what you're adding to it, did you look at um what you could add and still make it compliant
>> because the without the addition the existing is compliant, right? >> Yeah. Well, the the existing due to the orientation of the home, the existing corner is over the setback line that that
corner has an 18.4. So, it's 1.6 ft off the minimum 20 foot study yard setback. >> Okay. You can see the architect did he did put a jog, you know, in a normal circumstance
and right off the corner the architect did put a jog in the design um through these constraints. So that was looked at. >> Yeah, I was just trying to I know the existing
um was over that 20 foot. those periods of just to see like, oh, we couldn't have a family room because it would only be 10 ft deep, you know? >> Yeah. The family room would be significantly the family room and the flow of the interior space would be
complacent. Architect absolutely looked at that. But he did. You can see this jog. It cost you more to build that jog and pull it in than if you built it in line with the house and have more floor
space. So that was definitely taken into consideration. >> How much is that in what's that dimension? >> I'm looking at the master. I'm looking here. Two and a half. Good job. >> Two and a half. Okay.
>> So, >> what about moving it over so you're not within you look at that >> further to the left? minded goal would be that has a severely adverse impact on the interior when
everything lines up here. There's this is the kitchen area. Uh there's a 2 and 1/2t job. Uh and the kitchen of course ideally flows into the family room. If you shift the entire won't want call it
this entire box um uh that that creates some real architectural room construction problems and this has also has to be balanced with the roof lines. Okay. So the
challenge here is balancing the interior space with the property lines, the setbacks and the roof lines which are always that is you know that is a challenge
with the um and window locations also. So if you move this box to the right, this is a family room. There's a 2 and 1/2t job. It has an adverse impact on the interior
space. You can see this this peak then covers this window, you know, and it goes kind of a domino effect. >> And the two trees that you're talking about pulling down are just off that 2 and 1/2t job. I actually they're to the
immediate right of the existing corner. They're in the municipal brain engagement. Um second story. >> Yeah. Yeah, they'll help. >> Thanks.
>> These are not part of the file pack. We just have to mark them for records. We'll mark these collectively as A7s. you could describe that. >> So, um >> these are marked as they're actually screens, but this is um >> looking at the beach trees from the back
of the back of the house. >> Okay. >> And then these are the beach trees from the right side by a sec. I'm going to mark this up. That's fine. >> Those are photos.
>> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Thank you. >> But he named the property that the addition of the last three months. See,
>> I guess I didn't really understand what the hardship was besides I guess some of the cosmetics. >> Well, the the hardship is the location and the peculiar orient location of the home.
So, >> that was existing. >> That was existing. Yes. >> So, what is the new hardship? Well, it's when the home is extended perpendicular to the rear wall of the uh existing home and
you converge on to the sideyards. If this home was that's exhibit A6, the landing py analysis. If this was home, a conventional location,
did we? >> Yeah. >> Easily. >> I think we got where we gohead. >> We got that point. And that's that's creating the hardship. The orientation, the rotation of the home is creating the hardship which
brings >> But you're feeling your structure. So I don't know if that's relevant. Okay. Excuse me. You You're encroaching on the property lines with the new structure >> on the setback
and set off the right hand property. >> Yes. >> Did I understand it correctly? It's like you're approaching further on that property. >> Yes. The current the current building is 18.4 deep. When the proposed family rooms are
extended, it'll be 15.6 ft from the side property line over the 20ft sideyard setback or the enhanced 21.7 ft side setback. >> I think what we're trying to get to is that you're coming for us to say, "Okay,
we want to build this and you're going to make a situation worse by putting it where you're putting it." So, as the board customarily does, okay, we look at what's being presented and what alternatives are potential.
Okay. And one of the things that I'm looking at here is that the whole box, for lack of a better word, was moved towards looking at this towards the left of the house. Yes. and even settled in where it says this existing concrete
reconstruction expand paper patio over and down then you wouldn't you wouldn't be making this 184 worse by going 156 again I'm not an architect so I can't really talk to flows and think I I'm going to let you go please
>> I noticed something which I think has an effect on what we're talking about is on the these architecture plans that are really hard to read because they're so small but it looks like where you have the 18 foot4 coming off and you're saying that's the existing step back.
But on the architectural plans where it shows the new basement foundation, it looks like it you're make you're making it pushing it back a new or additional in fact 4T. So really
the existing won't be 18.4 that would be the new and the existing was further. Do you want to come see this plan? So this existing basement plan what again drawings I can't read they don't say what's new >> larger versions of things but
>> this appears to be the existing foundation wall and so you're building out this new foundation here so you're which align with the existing so this which I think is 4 feet you're coming out so this is where the existing
foundation was so that would be the existing setback that that yes that is exists except like right right >> no it would be right here saying four feet in >> well the existing right there at the corner
>> I understand but it's not aligning with the architecture so which one is correct the larger It is only >> Yeah, that would be great. I mean,
I don't know. Oh, this has a lot more to it. So, yeah, existing 8 inch concrete block wall. You're building out a new one 4 ft that aligns with the existing. So, it doesn't >> understood. But your plan shows this as
existing. This corner is existing but this ensures it is new. >> Existing corners here and 18. >> Okay. So then it's going to make being the setback worse because we're at an angle actually
worse is this back corner here. >> They still meet up a great show. So you're saying you think your plan you think this um
so this 18 ft so what is your plan showing? >> Yeah actually this is the Yes. >> The existing condition here 18.4 is to the existing corn here.
>> Okay. So then so then your plan is going to come out another four feet and do this. the critical >> about the worst case situation was here uh where it's 15.6
>> yeah I mean look at it it's almost the same honestly it it could be even worse I'm not sure >> yeah we didn't identify that >> but again we have this converging we have these this is a straight line foundation we have this convergence to
156 ft Yeah, we just I mean we'll need to have >> Yeah. make it worse. >> We need to see it confirmed in planned you know effects accurate.
>> The other issue you're going to have is that an asb plan was recommended post approval. So if we don't line up to the leaf and the setbacks, it's you're back here just like the last applicant was. So you guys are building a new basement too underneath.
Is it going to function >> and it's going to be it's going to be question >> that's that's I would say slide open that's yeah this is the that's the show It's just something
you're an engineer and a minor. Yes, that's what you said in the beginning. That's not >> while you're discussing speak with the young. >> Oh yeah. Yeah. Please. the week lost the recording.
I think we lost the record right now. recent plans. >> Yeah, I mean they're out they're out of the room. >> Yeah, they're out of the room. We're not trying to look at their their larger plans. We're not making any substantive decisions. You could stay on the record if you like, but we could also go off. >> I'm afraid if I shut this Well, actually, I can probably shut off this
sound, right? >> Easy enough. >> Yeah, Linda, I would just mute it. >> I might be able to do that from here. >> Yeah, I could do it from here. Linda, do you want me to do that? Yeah, tell me where you're
>> there. I just muted you. And then when you're ready to unmute in the upper right hand corner where it says mic, you can uh unmute Okay, we're back, Tyler. >> Okay, I'm here. >> Good. Okay. >> Okay. We are we are listening to the
board's comments. We would like to solute the comments, absorb them, and come back. >> Okay. >> You have additional comments. So, if they don't come back again, >> we go through. We're going to go through
if if it's okay, we're going to go through Michael's checklist, pull out any other statements. This way when you come back, it's more efficient. Okay, we did hear some information
about something that heard about. Right. So >> yeah, just something that you mentioned that sometimes
want to hear more sheets for for them to submit or something of the light details and then the location of sources or something. I mean I don't generally speaking wall lighting should be down past
probably be in the stop. We understand no one wants an LED spotlight. We understand. >> Yeah. >> I think you just locate them for Mr. Green as to where they'll be and what the lighting details from. The question could be easy enough light source this way to really confirm their satisfaction
that it won't be impact offsite properties. on this >> item 4.5. We just noted that the training agreement and you know if it was to be approved that we would suggest maybe
you know the some of the underground piping is located you know just over the line and we connect in it and it would put an overflow into in the location.
I don't think that creates necessarily issues but some kind of things on how they address. That would be something that we would
look for to kind of clear some gap. enter and that was something done outside of the uh we did get calculations. It looked like the calculations were based primarily on the change in impurities
coverage not necessarily run off area. >> So what we like to do is look at it in both perspectives. You want to make sure that the drainage is designed to handle the increase in runoff flow. Also, it's not going to bow due to small rain
events because the area goes into it is too large for the entire famil that that has been allowed before. I don't seem to be a lot and it looked like there was some underground piping
connected to that case where >> unknown >> unknown >> 1959 >> then you know we point that out because if for some reason you know they're connected to some kind of existing
21 management system. We don't want to negatively impact the business positions and you know create the need that providing those required to provide. But sometimes that's something that we
find out during construction. So talk about the older fuel. Um as we typically do with homes of this age as part of the improvement, we would recommend the utility connections best up as necess
which isn't shown here on the plan, but we generally like to have the sewer line TV. make sure that there's notifications with the suits or configurations and the you know the water service
jurisdiction. So and they may investigate it just to advise everyone that it's importing here.
And I do have to say that um this is obviously this isn't Tor's first clock plan that he's done in town. We and applaud the comments and and request that we would build a 30 minute rest.
But I think our perspective looking anticipating women the one issue is probably going to be reevaluating capital. And if I remember correctly, you guys
are almost at the bottom of the hill. Yeah. >> And then there's a um building. There's a small Isn't there a break between Is there a small drainage area between you and Guardian Angel?
>> There's like a Wall between us and Guardian Angel. Does >> that sometimes still work with water? No. Okay. might be the next trying to do.
Okay. Uh one I just I just want to reiterate one thing that that that Michael just said. Trust something. Have your cigar check. >> Okay. There's people in the neighborhood that doesn't deal with that.
>> Okay. I'm personally giving you advice. Okay. Um All right. >> There was no meetings. >> There is a December meeting. >> Yes, December 10th.
>> I'm sorry. We We still have some luxury though, but yes, there is a December meeting, but hang on. That's a second. >> I um if you guys are going to I guess update or or do anything with a site plan, I just want to know if there's going to be any proposed uh planting
within that easement and or possibly a fence. If there was, if you could kindly locate where that's going to happen so that we could look at the work is going to happen over that 15inch RCP.
know of our discussion. We were not thinking of putting fence up there. I mean, our neighbor has >> um >> barber fightings, you know. >> Yeah. >> Not that you can't think about it. It'd be nice to know. >> No, we are not making up.
>> Okay. >> Sorry. So, just to be clear, do we need to say we are not doing it on the plan because >> I don't know. I'll refer to Mike. I don't know that you have to say you're not doing it, but if you were going to >> do plant things of any sorts. It'd be nice to know what you're doing in that
area because as Mr. Freman pointed out, uh you would enter into a home harmless because if something had to be done to the pipe from the that the burrow would be responsible for those plants would effectively be your responsibility.
>> So just so yeah, it's clear. That's all. >> Mhm. >> I just had written the notes on myself and maybe I'm being a little too far here, but those beach trees or when those beach trees come down like I'm kind of maybe I'm directing this to see those come down. Are they close to that
type that there might be issues as they come down? But you don't know until you pull them out kind of deal. >> Yeah. I mean Yeah. I mean it I think it said that they were 10 in roughly 10 inch caliber. >> That should be
>> Yeah. And if you look at the picture I mean although it says huge survey each it looks like a huge >> like a big hedge. >> Yeah. The big hedge mean obviously those have to come down otherwise into the as we have it right
now. I have to trim it every single year. I guess maybe just the last thing I >> found who what do you have under far your experience roughly 3,000 pieces
less so I mean burn county soils is only as service 5,000 ft that was less outside but for some reason is extremely 30s
by any other comments from the >> All right. Um, do you have any questions for us? >> In December. >> Okay. There's nobody here in the audience, so I'm not opening up open the public to something here.
>> I'm just question that. Is that your fancy >> actually like that? >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> The 246 ones. >> Okay.
How many copies you think? >> Everybody up here. >> What do we know? Middle say 12. >> 10 is good. >> 10 is good. >> I thought the original packets we had we had to use second.
>> But the second sub will be the same thing as the first we did. Um they're only eight. >> All of us are already by 11. >> Oh, was she saying the very first? >> No, >> this was this is live packet. >> That's just
you need the architecture. >> Both sides arise. >> Maybe maybe architect. >> Yes, >> because it can even be posted up there. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So
>> good. >> You want the paper? >> I'm sorry. >> You want 10 copies of the fulls size paper? >> Yes. >> Yes. As well as a PDF. The archived. >> Yes. >> To your question. Linda, where are we in Senate? Please.
>> We're good. Let's try the date again. >> December 10th. >> Must be 10 days in advance. >> Yes. >> But you but you got a couple speaks up.
Oh no. >> Yeah. So for purpose of carry that meeting and and what that really does is it preserves your notice. You don't have to notice again to go public. >> No you would not make an announcement this evening that the board if they're inclined to make a motion carry December
10th. >> Did you not be prepared to continue that night? that evening, you could send a letter into the board to Linda. We ask to be carried to the next available meeting. We can go on the records that night and carry you again to a new date certain provided we have our 2026
calendar already established. This way you don't have to worry about noticing again. This would be the effect of the continue notice the announcement. We have a do have one other quick question that we
>> it's not so we just >> we want to make sure >> about the building. >> Okay. >> All right. That's all. >> Um
Okay. If we didn't we didn't go through the meeting to try and keep this thing moving forward. We're going to we're going to discuss these dates after you guys are taught. But excuse me, we're projecting January to be the 14th. >> Okay. >> Okay.
>> So, December 10th, >> December 10th >> of January 14th >> or January 14th >> and just in case February. Okay. Okay. But all of us will >> Okay. >> Okay. Any other questions?
Okay. So, I need a Can I just have a voice to move it? Okay. I just need a a yay or nay voice um to move this to or to carry it to our next meeting. >> Thank you. Do I have a second? >> I'll second.
>> Okay. All in favor? Hi. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Hi. >> Thank you. Okay. So, Karen, >> you don't have to notice if you can get before us in December. If not, January. Okay.
um the rest of the world might be open questions. >> So, um I think that's it. Do you have any other things? >> All right. Yeah, I need mice. >> You need what? Okay. So, what do you
need? So, we need >> I don't need the pictures of the PD pictures. with you guys. >> We need one set of Is that the ones that have more? Yeah, we're holding on to these. >> Yeah, we'll hold on to Thank you.
>> Okay. Um All right. If uh you have no further questions. Thank you. >> Happy Thank you. Happy Thanksgiving. >> I have these two. >> Oh, those are >> No, I don't take any of that.
>> So, so TBR, you marked those. Were those I got the sense that some of those were part of your initial I'm sorry to see this distance of the paper, but would those mocked up in the initial filing or were those just marked as exhibits for reference tonight for ease of your presentation? Are those the same things you had filed?
You know, A1 through A6? >> Yes, >> they were identical. So, this was essentially for ease of presentation. >> Yes. >> Identif. That's what I thought. >> You can retain those in that case. >> We'll keep A7. >> Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you for coming.
>> That's two boys. Okay. Um, >> you know, I'm just >> There was only like one set. Were those items A136 all part of the filed packets with the board or No. >> Yes, that I took it from the transmitter
letter. >> Okay. same documents not mocked up six >> the one where you show them if you didn't move >> us >> so in other words thinking >> t we're thinking the packet that you provide to us or was provided to us
whomever did it here >> we did not buy copy that was an exhibit for two >> so whatever you presented this evening that was not identical to something that was formally filed please leave it with Linda this evening as an exhibit for our retention we've already got 7. It sounds
like there might be others that were not in the business packet. I'm working off of digital. So by the board members, please leave the paper copies to the extent to you. I confirm that they are different or new. And now you have to go with
Got it. where the discuss somehow perfect. Thank you very much. All right, we good. Right. Um, I skipped over this purposely just to bring this along. Next on our agenda is discussion of uh dates for
2026. Um, Linda puts this together with making sure that it was not conflicting with holidays and schools etc etc. Um, is there any discussion of
the dates as laid out here? Okay. Can I have >> Thank you. >> You, too. Um, okay. So, can I have a I guess I need a motion to come back. Thank you, sir. And can I have a second? >> Second. >> Thank you.
>> Second, Craig. >> Craig. All in favor? >> I >> I No. Thank you. All right, that's done. U mayor, just I'll give you a call for a second. There anything? >> No. Um the only thing I'd just update
everybody on, we're still um in our um battle, if you will, with fair share housing. So we've had two conversations with the judge. The next one is to the um Wednesday before Thanksgiving. Um so we're hoping that we can come to some type of agreement, but they're, you
know, pushing for pretty high density. Um so um and we have that saddle that I've been telling everybody about that wants to use our infrastructure because they put all of their and they put food for all of their fair housing on the border. So, we're trying to figure out
if that deal is coming into >> and I noticed something about the Rosa property that doesn't >> sure it does that potentially use our reliance. Yeah, that got Yeah, I think I don't know if it got approved. >> No, I don't think it did.
>> That affects four units. >> Okay. Well, calculations right now. >> Any other questions, comments from the board? Okay, open up the public for comments. Seeing none, I bring it back
everybody. Happy Thanksgiving. Thanks for hanging out. Thank you for everything and enjoy it with your families. Motion to uh end the meeting. Have a >> motion. Thank you. Second. Second. All >> in favor? I I
>> All right, everybody. Thank you. Thanks for your time. Good night everyone.