Perfect. Thank you. Okay. Sorry, we're a few minutes late, everyone. Um, we're going to call to order tonight's uh meeting of the Township of Bernard Zoning Board of Adjustment. The first item on the agenda is the flag salute. So, if you can stand, please stand with us.
To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all. In accordance with the requirement of the open public meeting law, notice of
this meeting of the board of adjustment of the township of Bernards was posted on the bulletin board in the reception hall of the municipal building in Collier Lane, Basking Ridge, New Jersey. It was also mailed to the Bernardsville News, Whippony, New Jersey, the Courier News in Bridgewater, New Jersey. And it
was also filed with the township clerk all on January 9th of this year. And it was mailed electronically to all those people who had requested individual notice. The following procedure has been adopted by the Bernard's Township Zoning Board of Adjustment. There will be no new cases heard tonight after 10 p.m.
and no new testimony heard after 10:30 p.m. tonight. Miss Son, can you do a roll call for us? Sure. Chair of Engineers here. Miss Bowman here. Missichi here. Miss Popar here. Miss Silver here.
Miss Trap here. Mr. Warner here. Mr. Quinn here. Mr. Schl here. For the record, Miss Layman is present. Great. Thank you. I think we had a few people who expressed that they were not able to make it tonight. And Mr.
I'll move that they be excused. Thank you, Miss Fiji. I'll second that. Thank you, Miss. All in favor? I. Next is the approval of resolutions that were circulated in advance of tonight's meeting.
Oh, the first one was minutes. Sorry. Thank you, Miss Lman. Um, the first one is the approval of minutes from our September 3rd uh 2025 regular session meeting. Does anyone have any comments or edits on those minutes? or a motion to approve as drafted.
Madam chair, I'll make a motion to approve as drafted. Thank you, Miss Felman. I'll second. Thank you, Mr. Fichi. And that's an all in favor vote. All in favor? I I. Anyone against?
Good. We're good. Um, now we're up to the approval of resolutions. The first one was Madden, uh, ZB25016. Any comments or edits on that resolution or a motion to approve as drafted? I'll make a motion to approve as drafted.
Thank you, Miss Popar. I'll second. Thank you, Miss the only one not eligible to vote on the resolutions, all three are M. Miss Padichi, yes. Miss Bowman, yes.
Miss Popar, yes. Miss Silver, yes. Chairman Engineer, yes. Thank you. Thank you. The next resolution is 6B, which was Ross ZB25020. Comments, edits, or motions on that resolution.
I'll make a motion to approve as drafted. Thank you, Miss Bman. I'll second. Thank you, Miss Pear. Miss Padichi, yes. Miss Bowman, yes. Miss Par. Yes. Miss Silver. Yes.
Chair of Engineers. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Next is 6C Chhataraj uh ZB25018. Comments, edits, or motions on that resolution, please. I make a motion to approve as drafted.
Thank you, Miss Bowman. I'll second the motion. Thank you, Miss Padichi. Miss Padichi, yes. Miss Bowman, yes. Miss Popar, yes. Miss Silver, yes. Chairwoman Engineers, yes. Thank you.
And then the last resolution was our resolution adopting the 2024 zoning board of adjustment annual report and recommendations. Madam Chair, that's a deja vu all over again. It is. But we had a little mishap with the
voting, but everyone is qualified to vote this evening. So motion second and a roll vote. Hopefully it'll turn out equally. Yeah. Second time's the charm. Yes. I'll make a motion to approve as drafted. Thank you. I'll second the motion.
Yes. I'll give that one to Miss Poptart because that's all I have. Okay. Thank you. Miss Fichi, yes. Miss Bowman, yes. Miss Pocket, yes. Miss Silver, yes. Miss Trev, yes. Chairwoman engineers, yes. Thank you.
Thank you. And I have this for you, Miss Lim. I just don't want to forget to give you. Um, next on the agenda is the completeness of public hearing for 7A Chowry ZB25014. Madam chair, if I may, I think this is
on the uh I did have an opportunity to review the notice for this matter. Found the content to be sufficient. Found it to be timely served, certified mail, and published both on July 17. Uh that was at least 10 days prior to the August 6 original hearing date, at which time we
carried that this matter without further notice to September 3rd. And then on September 3rd, we again carried the matter without further notice. uh to this evening, October 8th. Uh so the board continues to have jurisdiction to hear decide the matter this evening. And
I turn it back to you, Madam Chair. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Warner. Mr. Chowry, we made it. That's great. Well, Mr. Since you will be appearing and you have any witnesses? Yes, we have an architect uh Fred Isia who will be
testifying as well. Okay, regarding the details, I swear you both in with the chair's permission as well as our board professionals. If you'll all raise your right hand, please do all four of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Thank you all four. Back to you, Madam
Chair. Thank you very much. And just for the board, I I think there were updated plans. I just want to make sure that everybody's looking at the most recent set of plans because I believe there were several changes since the original set went in. Is that correct? Yes, correct. Okay.
Okay. Do you want to tell us why you're uh why you're here tonight? Well, madam chairman and members of the board, my name is Muhammad Ali Shadri. Uh, I currently reside at 177 West Oak Street where I moved about 3 years ago,
but I've lived in town more than 48 and a2 years and have decided that this is my home and I wish to improve this house so that it could be used by me, by my children, and my grandchildren.
Uh so in the process of reviewing the previous application I was lucky to have another architect look at the proposals and with the suggestions that uh were made uh I decided to make some changes
and I'm now uh before you uh to seek two variances. uh one would be regarding the uh lot coverage and the other one would be the front yard setback. Now the details of the measurements and the plans and
everything uh are going to be addressed by by the architect rather than me trying to do it all. Uh I'd rather have the professionals handle that part of it. Um, I would just like to uh say that it is my desire to uh uh comply with all
of the requirements and in fact you notice that we have I've taken aggressive steps to reduce the coverage uh and the new coverage that's shown uh on the survey. We decided to do the survey to make sure that you have the latest information that you can rely
upon from a professional. And um so the reason for the lot coverage uh over the 20% really goes back to a number of factors because my lot is such that you know we have a side entrance driveway and that usually requires more space
more more coverage. Uh we also have a slope um you know sloping uh of the lot itself and that meant that you really couldn't put a driveway from the end you know to reduce the coverage from the front because it would require huge
retaining walls and and so forth. It's almost like a eight foot drop from the top to the bottom and therefore uh I'm sorry from the top of the driveway to the bottom of the driveway for no from the top of my lot. Top of the lot. Top of the lot to the to the bottom of the you know to to my next nextdoor
neighbor. Yes. Um so that that says one of the you know reasons and I know that this is a very busy road and you don't want to be able to back you don't want to be backing out of the street. you want to be able to come out easily to be able to make a U-turn and uh easily access the road. Uh
the traffic is increased. In fact, the the planning our master plan notes the need for and has had discussions discusses about circulation plans and even possibly proposing a uh traffic
signal at West Oak Street and Marty Road. Uh so for safety reasons you know as I said you know that additional um coverage is required. Um I would be happy to answer any question that you have for me but I would like to rely on
my uh architect to answer the question on technical basis but I would like to share something with you. I did some research while we were preparing um for this meeting and I wanted to note the
point that this street uh obviously has very many different types of homes built over many many different years. So you have a very diverse housing stock uh with different characteristics and so forth. And we also did some research on
finding out you know the frontage and and so forth. So I have summarized that in a in a couple of spreadsheets if I could share them with you without going into the details. I'll give them to you if you have any questions. We'll be glad to to talk about that. The the point of
that was to just show that there are number of homes that are non-performing because of you know when they were built and you know what the conditions were at the time and even in fact you know because the zoning didn't change until 1937. So since then a number of changes uh in
the zone zoning took place and in fact I know a number of the changes significant changes were made in 2006 and I must admit that I was on the township committee at the time and I must have voted for that. So uh but that's desirable in the sense that our
community has grown our population has grown from you know very small number uh to about 27,000 people now and therefore we need to accommodate the needs for uh the people who uh want to have a high quality of life and and safe conditions
you know to do live. So if I may I would like to just share this with you. Um I have a copy for each member and also for the professionals and uh I also have a copy of the display that ar is going to use uh which will be
the technical side of it. So if you could if you could give one to our board secretary so she can the official copies and Mr. Dr. uh
yeah we just want to know which one we're going to have one exhibit A1 how many do you have all together I have three one exhibit is the two spreadsheets okay is happen a good copy the um it's a two page it's a two page
okay and we'll mark would you like us to mark that A1 A1 okay and then the second exhibit is actually print out of the the exhibit that the architect is going to use. But I want to make a larger copy for your So that would be exhibit A2.
Exhibit two. Okay. So we only have two because the first one's a two page. Correct. Yes. Okay. And the board secretary get one of the A2s. We can pass them down so you can keep going. Sure.
Okay. So as you will see in this summary uh there are only two key points to make. One is that you know given when the houses were built and what the zoning requirements were at the time uh
the the setbacks uh vary and we find that several of the homes you know have non-conforming conditions. uh so I am requesting uh small variance uh in the setback and as I said the technical details would be
addressed by by the architect so it is not unusual uh the other point is that uh the improvements I'm trying to make to the house uh it was a Cape card for a long time and uh I used to actually rent it to
people so about three years ago after my wife had passed away and I had to move from the other house. I decided to use this as my residence and uh now for long-term living I felt it was important for me to make it suitable for my grandchildren and children to be able to
use it as well. So, I've added uh some features to it uh which I think will add to the housing stock in terms of the quality of what we wish to have in this town and um uh have space for for my use
and and and for my family. Uh so, as I said, the technical detail will be discussed by the architect, but before he comes, uh I'll be glad to answer any questions that you might have. Um sure. Thank you for the um
did you talk to any of your neighbors about the um yes variances that you're seeking and absolutely yes I went door to door to everyone and uh any concerns I I know of no concern that anyone
expressed uh you know what I was requesting uh for the now there is a small change by the way in the setback only because initially I wanted to move the wall on the first floor, but my architect said that's not a good idea. So, it's better for you to leave it as
is. So, instead of that 14in move of the wall of the front on the first floor, we are only seeking variance on the second floor, there is an uh intrusion into the setback. So, that's encroachment into the setback and that's what the variance is for. So, as I said, none of the
neighbors expressed any any concerns that I am aware of. Yeah. And um and I went not only on Oak Street but also on William Street as well. And uh I think you had earlier mentioned that there was an 8 foot you think differential between the slope of your property from high to low. Do you have
any water problems currently? No, we do not. As a matter of fact, I've taken quite a few steps to actually control the water water flow. We have two seps that I have put in. Uh one to take the roof drain for almost a quarter of the of the roof and and the other one
is uh you know further down at at toward to towards the end of the property. Uh and I the water that comes in from the right behind my house it can go into the driveway and go into the seage pit and that's about a 6x 6 by 3 ft at least at
least 3 ft deep. uh that that takes. So that's how we trying to control, you know, the the flow of the water. I've also added, you know, more of a like a a drain uh in in the at the very top of the lot uh and in a swale so that the
water is directed to the front going onto the street. Um do we have I'm sorry, is it doctor or mister? Dr. Alish. Yeah, I happen to be a PhD economist. I'm not a not a medicine. Um I I have a first doctorate. So they call
me Steve. Please call me Ali. That's fine. That's the best we can. That's how everybody. That's everybody in town knows me as Ali. And that Ali is fine. Yeah, absolutely. Sorry. Thank you so much. Doctor is good. Um are there additional questions? We may ask you more questions.
Absolutely. I'll be happy to come back. Just see if there's any questions at this time. I have a couple of questions. Sure. Um, is the garage newly added or was that part of the original footprint? Garage was there in the original print. The original.
Yes. Yes. So, the addition that you're putting on is is on top of the garage. Yes. Correct. Um, I see that it has started already. When did you start the I we got the permit actually originally when I didn't feel I needed a variance. I wasn't very, you know, doing anything.
So I went I got a permit and I mentioned that permit in my previous application is uh 2040404 I believe is the number and so under which we were we started the work and then we uh as I said discussing these
options about whether I move the front wall or do something different uh we decided to sort of put a pause on it and so they built the framing over the first floor you know along the first floor over the garage uh and start building the deck, but they didn't finish it. Uh,
so we decided we wait until this meeting, get the okay for everything, including the the lot coverage and everything else that's involved so that we can go full speed ahead and hopefully before the winter, uh, we can at least put a roof on. Yes.
So, the addition of the garage, um, is that part of the setback issue or is it No, no. Setback is only the front. It actually the second floor, right? Only the front yard set is only the front. We have no issue on the sideyard uh setbacks. Yeah. Steps back,
correct? Yes. And Mr. SL, you agreed that the permits that he have currently, he has permits currently permits to to add the second floor on top of the existing first floor because that's all conforming within the setbacks,
right? Uh the issue the front yard set back here is now he wants to bump out the forwardmost facade an extra two feet which will line up with the with a portion of the facade of the first floor
um which is non-conforming pre-existing but that extra two feet bump out it's like two feet by about 50ome feet wide will extend over the front yard setback and that is But that's the variance
related to the building. So if I if I understand if I may so I understand uh correctly Dave then because the first floor was a pre-existing setback deviation no variance required. Correct. But uh once
he moved in but with the the second floor two feet that was uh created the need for the deviation even though it is set back less. I'm sorry. It is set back more than the front stoop, but it's still within the 40 foot uh minimum
setback required. Right. The entire front stoop is non-conforming within the setback and then a portion of pre-existing legally grandfathered non-conforming. A portion of the first floor is in the setback. The permit that he has under
construction now does not come all the way out to that. Correct. the first floor that's in the setback. Now he wants to bring that second floor to the same point as the first floor which is an extra two feet and that that puts it in the front yard.
And and if I may add the reason for doing that and upon some advice from my architects was that I wanted the house in the front to look more straight rather than going in and out. Uh there's a section that sticks out and then you have set back and then my next section
also is set back actually almost uh 15 20 feet. Uh so I I wanted at least the main part of the house where the front door is to be nice and straight because I've added stone to to beautify the uh you know the front which many homes on
that street actually have also. And so that was the main reason for for doing that. And it does give me a better space on the second floor. this the size the width of the room uh allows me to actually have a more meaningful uh space on the second floor. So that was the
advantage of it. So the first floor of the house is 2. Is that a portion of it? It would have been 14 in I believe was the number that I first the house is the house is projected in the front.
There's two wings that sit back. There's a front projection. Correct. That front projection is step. Part of that front projection is 40 ft. Part of that front projection is about 38, right? 38. Smaller portion of the projection is 38T
back. So he's just bringing the the rest of that front projection even. So the worst case is right. Right. Just imagine was there. Right. And I know you made some other changes and we're only looking at your new changes, but I did see that the amount of maximum lot coverage from
your initial request is actually lower. Yes. In this one. Can you describe what constituted that change? Well, we uh we had a a walkway in the back from my patio. I reduced the size of the patio in the back and I took out
the walk completely and just left the steps so that you could just go from the you know grass to the to to the the walk on on the grass and also I took portion of my driveway out to make sure that you know I could get as close as possible to 20% but I made it out only about 20
point 21104 and one of the considerations is that um what it does not show right now is for example uh you know a if I put a generator or if a future owner may want to add a generator we need a pad for
that uh so something like that I'm willing to add a few more feet if you would allow me to uh to you know go maybe 21 a.5% or 21 and a quarter% whatever they're so just give me a little more room so that that can be done without having to come back to the
board that's one consideration I think part of it is that they got a new survey so I I think they were given it their best guess early on. Now they've done an actual survey which identifies everything. So right certainty to that
okay and I I noticed Mr. Quinn's comment that I have to make a commitment that whatever you approve I have to live by and I will he makes that to to every I can guarantee that you're special but everybody's special. Everybody cautionary tale from Mr.
Right. I appreciate it. So if I can um you did mention about putting in possibly a generator you've had for that. Do you have central air that that is going to be something? Actually my uh at this point my uh inclination is to
follow uh an example where uh we had another project where I worked in a used split units instead of using a big you know I really personally don't feel comfortable with hot air to be honest because of the dustiness that comes in. So I felt let's see if we could do
something with you know these split units and I believe there are very efficient split units that uh that we can use. So that's part of my uh plan is to do that. So not requiring a generator. Uh so the generator might be something that would be required. So for
example, one of the things I'm thinking of is doing a shingle uh shingles with solar characteristic like I say Tesla sells shingle uh roofs. Uh they have a backup battery instead of a generator. So that's one of the considerations that
we are considering. And it these shingles actually look pretty much exactly the whole house will be like uniform. The in fact the roof in the front you will see on the south uh would be very uniform. There'll be one section set back with the garage and the one on the right also but in the center will
all be the same. Uh and it gives us enough uh I think for that. So I'm looking at all those options. So two things the mini split and generator two different things. The mini splits usually don't require pads. They're not an AC pad. usually elevated
because they throw condensate there and they freeze in the winter time because they create heat. So they usually don't require Right. Right. Right. The generator is something What is the generator pad? Is that like 6 by6? What is that? Do you know? And it could be our architect know what
the pad is for a generator? For his size of house 4 by six. 4 by six. Do you want to amend your application to I would be willing to mend that. Yes, please. Can I can I also ask um so that you're making sure you're getting the right
coverage? Sure. Uh the one foot block wall that you have in the back, did that count towards there's the the retaining wall? Yeah. Yes, that is included I believe in the coverage included in your
Yes. Yeah, he Yeah, he checked it carefully. Yes. Okay. Do any other questions for Dr. Chowry or should we hear from the architect? Okay. Oh yes, let's do that.
Are there are there any questions for Dr. Chowry? He may be back up at this time by the public. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I think you should be telling me your name and business address for the record. Okay. My name is Fared uh Ismael. I'm a
registered architect. Um my business address is 224 West 35th Street, New York, New York 1. And I live in Burnersville. And uh do you have a license? Are you
are you a licensed architect in good standing in the state of New Jersey? Yes. And what just uh have you ever testified as an before either before as an architect before land in the state of New Jersey
or a court in the state of New Jersey. Yes, in do in New York. Do my bad. Okay. And uh zoning board or planning board? I don't have a board. That's okay. It's not a test. Um
zoning. Zoning. Zoning word. Okay. All right. for used variants for Oh, that's okay. The record shop. What was the work that that um the record shop in Dover that
they sell used records, the the vinyls? I forgot the name. That's okay. That that that would be too much of us to ask. Okay. Okay. Well, yes, we'll we'll accept as an expert in architecture. you can proceed with both factual and expert
testing. So please hear the mic or bring it with you. with regard to the front setback. Yes. The portion of the building here
um which is onethird of the center of the front facade that is set back at 38 ft. The remaining portion which is maybe 20 feet is still not at 40 feet. It's 14
inches in that is as is as built I mean existing condition. Now what we're trying to do is number one add a second floor above the because uh can we have the drawing?
Yeah. I want to put the elevation. Yeah, that would be helpful. He's going to put it up on the screen. Okay. And you can put the existing elevation on the screen so everybody can see.
You get to use all our fancy stuff now. And and I just want to be clear when you're saying it's 14 in in you're meaning you're you're saying it's 14 in short of 40 ft. No, it's 14 in beyond the 38T. So it will be 8 in
shy of 40 foot setback. So the the entire front facade is non-compliant as is. And the previous application they wanted to move the um
the first floor 14 in in that has now been abandoned because of you know you'd need a new foundation wall for that and nobody's doing that. It's only the overhang above the first floor, 20 foot portion of the facade that's going to
align with the rest of the front facade. And there's a number of reasons for that. Number one is we can't put a canopy in. You can't put anything to shield the front door from weather. So
if you have heavy rain or or snow or whatever, you can't really enter at a flat completely flat front uh you know where the entrance door is. So you want some kind of cover and since it's already non-compliant, you can't put anything in front of it. That's one
reason. At least he'll have 14 in. I mean, he's very skinny person, so you can fit under it. That's one reason. Second reason, I have solar shingles on my house. It is the best thing invented since sliced
bread because it looks beautiful and it works and it's made by Tesla. Um his house is perfectly located for between you know sunrise and sunset to have a vast area of the new roof since
he's redoing the roof to be covered by that. Now, for that, having a stepped roof is is is more complicated. It it would be very good if it was one line, and it's much easier to install those that they look like a shingle roof. The shingles are a little bigger, and
they're um they're very appealing. So, that's one of the things that he's going to consider. We haven't gotten a a quote. So he he hasn't decided if he's doing it or not. But changing the shapes of the roof from previous application
which had a lot of dormers into this one straight line was also partially because of that because this is facing south. The front of the building is facing south will get the most sun. That's kind of another reason why
he could have stepped for south. would be not appealing and it would create complications with future solar roof would he decide to get that. So that's that's the second reason. The third reason is um having this extra 14 in
actually works with the rest of the layout on the second floor by being able to create a small office behind the the um what do we call it now? Primary bedroom. Um and that kind of also works.
If I take that 14 in away, then I have to change a lot of things. So for a for a number of those reasons, it it is a very good uh idea to have that 14 in allowed to be built. Um
now with regard to the lot coverage, um the previous survey which is 1987 Um that
just for the record that's that was a document that was submitted with previously more than 10 days in advance of this evening. It doesn't have to be marked as an exhibit. You could just reference uh please the last revised date. might be
is that September 24, 2025 last revised is the date on what you're putting up now September 24th, 2025. There are two surveys side by side on the cover sheet, right? One of them is 1987 survey. The other
one is 2025 survey and that is a September date I believe right 100 A1 A1 so if you look at those two surveys side by side
it's it's there as well but I'm just for comparison purposes between these two surveys there's a lot of things that are not on From the 1987 survey, for example, there's no pathway between the
steps and the driveway. There's no retaining walls. There's there's a lot of things missing. So, the increase I I don't know if they were not there, but I would assume there was some kind of pathway between the driveway and uh
house. You wouldn't work walk in the mud even back then. There was something there just didn't make it onto the survey. So, uh, the retaining wall was there. It didn't make it onto the survey back then because I think back then they didn't account for retaining walls for lot
coverage or for impervious coverage, they they didn't make it into those calculations. So, the increase that even if it it's much less than a,000 square feet, it's 500 some somewhat square feet, but the real increase is probably
half of it. if if there was a pathway on that survey, if there was a retaining wall on that survey. So that's not so much. Now, um the new survey, the the the the calculations that you have at 21.04%.
Are based on the the surveyor issued their AutoCAD files to us and we calculated it based on the AutoCAD software. There is a drawing that shows in color and there is an exhibit if you
want to distribute it. Uh um a handout that shows each element in its respective part of that. Bear with me one sec. One at a time. We I think we're up to A3 now.
Yes, that's correct. Please give one to engineer as well. It's It's a larger copy of what you're holding, David. It's already on the plan. It's already on the plan. It's already on the plan. No harm in calling it A3.
So, we did not measure anything at the side. I myself didn't measure anything. We based it on the surveyor's AutoCAD file. Yes, sir. I just want to make sure and the microphone working. So,
I had a couple of questions uh just to make sure that the numbers work out on your proposed and these are all added up. I I checked them. On your proposed, you've got 1711, which is the old number here. Um it does it doesn't seem to include that. Also, I
doesn't seem to include what the he's got the in the proposed uh building footprint, he's got 1781 and in his chart, he's got 1711. doesn't seem to existing was 1711, right? Proposed is 171.
No, you've got proposed 1781. This is what I'm trying to figure out. So, you got this is the number I couldn't square. No, because this the the greenhouse is separate. No, the greenhouse is is separate. It's here. So, I I just want to make sure these numbers are all right because if I add
64, I still I don't get 1781. So, again, it matters now because Right. So here now we get the slate walk the survey that is surveyor number. You're going to work it all out for me. I'm just going to point out the areas where we want to make sure we get clarification. The slate walkway has got
173 here. The drawing shows 130. Now this new exhibit shows 145. So because previously it combined the stair and this in in that drawing and then
we've further separated in colorcoded categories so we can like this would be the so this number 4208 I'm I'm you understand I'm trying to come up with it that's all based on this roster which
doesn't match these labels or is so you I want to make sure these numbers if you add up all of these numbers on your labels you'll get 4208 on this all of these additional labels will come up to this that is this should be
this and you still have 1781 here versus 17 it is 171 that's so that's just a yes a typo yes this this should be 1711 as shown here because that's the patch it's the same Nothing changed,
right? Where's your sec? Where's your 19 foot addition? Is that on here? 19 square foot does not add to improve only on the second floor and it's already above the existing porch. Right. But your your porch is still 80 pre and post. Are
you comfortable with these numbers? Are you following along with these numbers? I think some of the numbers aren't there to represent lot coverage of confusion. They're just there to state the fact like that second floor number that probably shouldn't be on this plan. This plan should only all the numbers that you show individually on the plan
should probably sync up with the numbers you have in the list. And for example, that second story addition number. Yeah, that should. It's not on the list, which makes sense, right? Okay. So, that's good. So, the slate walk number, we've got three different numbers. We're okay that
your number 173 is is what we're using. Not 145, not 130. 16 plus a portion of that. It was just calculated differently in that table. Okay. So 171 plus All right. I mean it's uh I just want to
make sure we're comfortable with this number 4208 again because of the imper situation. Well, plus we're going to add 24 to that. I've got 4232. Now can I ask a question though while you're looking at that? Yeah. You have the paved patio in the back that's 332 ft
and then you have the steps of the patio. Are those steps over top of what's already I know I had that circled too like should that be counted? Should it be counted in the in the existing because in the existing it's clearly
because it's the whatever you see in colored hatch. So you see the yellow hatch that is the number of 332 ft and then 20 ft is separate for the stair. So the 330 doesn't include
Yes. Doesn't include doesn't include the 20. But I'm asking if it if it needs to be in addition. So if the 20 square feet that equals the steps is over top of the patio already exists. The p patio already exists. Correct.
Correct. the stairs over top of the paved patio. No, at least they're separate. It looks like they're separate. It's a separate They're over the block wall. They're over the block wall. Yeah. Is there is there is there pavers on
is the fact that you can't have two layers of impervious coverage? It's either impervious once or or so what's underneath the stairs if that's paved already and then you have the stairs over top of it. Pavers under the stair stairs.
I don't think there are pavers under the stair. There are pavers. Yeah, there are pavers under you have the retaining wall coming out of the house from under the kitchen the kitchen wall. Yeah. Okay. Okay. There's stone on it and then there are pavers. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. It's covered. In fact, you just pointed out
and the steps from the deck are the ones that you're looking at to be over pavement, right? So, the steps Yeah. from the deck over the pavement. Be over pavement. So, then it's counted twice is what? So you don't need to count that 20 square feet, correct?
Uh no, it's we we have cut that 20 out of the patio and called it a stair for this schematic. It's counted once because otherwise if I don't count them, I'm just going the number on the on the patio would have been 352 instead of
332. Yes, this is 332. It would be 352. I understand what you're saying. So, I was trying to help you out. I have a question.
You were talking about the front entry and having a roof over the entry. Are you planning that? because that doesn't show on these plans. It's just going to be flat. The second room comes over.
Okay. So, it just flat with the rest of the house here. Right. Th This is set back 14 in. Sir, for the record, the stone the uh people some people will have to follow it. Um you're pointing to what
document, what date, and what page? Uh A201 uh 924 2025 drawings there. Uh page seven of seven. Right. Elevations looks like proposed elevations. Okay.
So proposed south front elevation. That that's fine. Now explain what you want them to explain. Please speak directionally so that someone reading it would understand what you're saying. Okay. Yeah. So in the front this first floor portion of
the wall which is about 20 foot wide and 8t tall is set back and that's the original condition. That's how it was built. 14 in further from the street than this portion of the wall. This
portion of the wall is at 38 center portion. Correct. This is the center of the house. This uh kitchen side, the west side is further set back another 8 ft. The garage is further set
back more than 10 ft beyond the 40ft line. Um, so this is the only portion of the house that uh is in the setback in the front setback requirement by 2 ft
here and by 8 in here and we're keeping the first floor as is. But because we're building a second floor above it, this would also now be in a new non-complying condition of two feet. And this is going to be the same
new non-compliant condition. You say this or here second floor the second floor south elevation of the proposed I think confusing me is your east side elevation which is the right side of the house. So you're looking at the garage
and the front of the house bumps out. You don't show that step. Yeah. You because you can't see you can't see it from beyond. You can't see. No, it's just one. It's one line because the east side of the
south elevation, east app, is already there. So, it's only where you're showing on the front piece where the show that's where it set the whole thing. Nope, that doesn't show it. Yeah, this is where you would have seen
it. If you go to page six of 7 A200 uh existing west elevation you would see it on the west elevation how how the original is All right. So, that's there.
I think it also helps to look at the actual pictures of the house itself. Yeah. What's bumping out? That's not I think I got lost in somewhere in the presentation, but are you still
requesting the same amount of coverage that's shown in this form F that says you're asking? Yes. 21.04. Did that did that get increased at some point? Yeah, I I got by the generator pad 21.16.
Okay. And that was because of that generator request, Genie. Yeah, it was 4 by6 feet. So, an additional 24 ft. 24.16. Okay. Okay. Thank you.
Okay. So, do you have more um testimony or should we uh just address some of the comments in Mr. Slides? Yes, please. I did you get a copy of Mr. Slice memo? Yes. Good.
And uh copy of Mr. Quinn's Dave, you want to go to number six? Referring to my memo dated October 2nd, 2025. Uh the comments one through five are are factual. Um, comment number six having
to do with the lot coverage. I believe those items have been resolved with exhibit A 2 and three. Uh, uh, as we've already gone through that stuff. Um, number seven, uh, the applicant
needs to agree that the, uh, the proposed deck will remain an open deck. In other words, not covered or walled in or enclosed in by any means. Because if it was not, it would count as lot coverage. And We have an affirmative stipulation on the record. Thank you.
Um number eight is a is a pretty much a standard condition. Um the applicant should confirm that any proposed exterior lighting or existing exterior lighting uh will be directed downward or otherwise shielded so that glare and direct light or reflection will not be a
nuisance to adjoining properties. Yes, absolutely. Thank you. Um, number nine, uh, do you propose to remove any trees or have you removed any trees as part of this project? We've added eight new trees. I don't intend to move any existing trees.
Okay. Have you removed any already? No. No. Okay. Then are there any trees in the work area? I know it's already under construction, but one of the points are no trees. You're protecting any existing trees.
been adding trucks and green giants all over the place. Um, and that's fine with me as far as number nine. Uh, and number 10, just a correction on the plans uh on sheet A 100. The there's a couple scales that
are not correct and the uh the street name is not correct. That should be a simple fix. It's been fixed on the digital version that you've received, but we didn't have when the when their plans come into the for construction permit. Just tidy that up.
The digital version that you have has that already fixed. Yeah. Thank you. That was all I had. Okay. Thank you, Mr. S. And then Mr. Quinn, I think you your comments uh we may have addressed already with your calculations. I had three. Pervy's cover we talked
about at nauseium the cover sheet corrections that Dave just mentioned and just the advisory I mean we have an as bill basically that the surveys and as bill showing us what other than the generator now the property's going to look like so
yeah so with regard to impervious coverage yeah so the impervious coverage obviously we spent a lot of time on that so just be very mindful of all those calculations okay we'll double check everything again before we file for permit. Yeah, they will be corrected in the
final document that we submit to the ver department. Yeah. And just so we're clear now that we have a full understanding of the plans, the the patio and the driveway that was all there when you purchased the house, have you added anything? Well, the patio in the back used to be
concrete, old concrete that was all broken up and everything, so I put papers. So that that's the difference uh in that but everything else is the same. Yes, the drive will be there. Any other questions?
Just wondering if there's a need for um water any water quality control not quality control but catching directing. Well, I mean again this they're 28 28 square feet now 232 square
feet over what their impervious cover would be. So they're a minor development. They're all total impervious cover is below the thousand square foot threshold but we normally look to whatever is excess to try to address that. Here we have very
little bit of excess and it's they've cut back on it. So, I didn't think to comment to make them address it. I noticed though that your driveway, you have a drain at the very back edge of that. Where does that go, Ollie? That goes into the seage pit that I
described is 6x6 by 3 ft deep. So, they have a seepage pit that's not shown on here. So, they already have some sort of water management already addressed on there. And again, the what they're talking about now, the final numbers are pretty pretty minor in terms of storm water
management. Anything that you have now, right, will be a benefit. And your driveway the way it is now allows you to back out. So you can come out facing forward. That's right. Because it is a tough Yeah. Just on the when you see the front
of the driveway, I have enough space to be able to go in and then back out and come out facing front facing the street coming out rather than backing into it. And also coming out of the garage, we have left enough room. So this from the second garage for example I can back out
and then come straight out. Yeah. No it it's workable. And his garage is also set back. Yes. About 50 ft away. So that's an extra area that is additional impervious coverage. That wouldn't have wouldn't have been
there if you had a front-facing garage which Yeah. No, you need to. This is much prettier because it's a sidefacing garage and you don't have two garage doors and you know opening into the street. Did you get a copy of the uh environmental commission report?
Yes, we did. And I agree with all those. Do you agree to all the points that are listed there? Yes. Yes, I did. you speak to any of your neighbors? Are they favorless or As I said, my neighbors are willing to come and support me, but as I said, they have young child, so I look, it's up to
you if you want to come. Uh, but no, I I have not heard any complaints. I said, I literally spoke to everyone except maybe two families on William Street that I couldn't find. Uh, and uh, no one had any objections. Okay. Yeah. Do we have any additional questions at
this time from the board or the architect? Are there any questions from the public? uh based upon the testimony that we heard from the architect. I don't see Do you have any questions? Do you are there any comments from the U
public for against this application? I don't see any. Do you have anything else for us or do you want to turn it over to the board at this time? Doctor, I appreciate the time that you have devoted to this and uh I do not really
have anything else to add. Uh I would certainly uh appreciate uh the approval for the two requests that we are making uh so that I can get the work done in time. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Madam Chair, if you want the two-minute
tea up, uh the uh applicant is seeking two bulk variances. Front yard setback 38 ft to the uh second floor addition whereas 40 max minimum is required and the lot coverage is now at 216%
uh uh requested uh versus 20% maximum permitted. Those are the two variances. All the conditions stipulated to by or on behalf of the applicant were those set forth in the reports of our engineer, our planner and our environmental commission. I did not have
any other stipulated two conditions nor were any requested. So would be a majority four out of six if I did my math correct. Yeah, I think that's right. Okay. Does anyone want to kick us off here? Um any
uh comments uh for deliberation or a motion on this application? Thank you, Miss Par. Thank you. Um I would I would see this as both a C1 and a C2 variance. Um I think the C1 is because of the slightly undersized lot.
Um C2 is the non-conforming location of the existing house making it to put a second story edition on it without stepping the addition back. Um, I don't I I think this is it's going to look beautiful in the neighborhood. It's
going to improve the street facade. I personally in favor of it and I would make a motion to approve this application and to the words right and to deem the application complete and direct the
board attorney to draft a resolution memorializing the decision to grant the relief requested by the applicants subject to the conditions stipulated by the applicants and additional stipulations. Thank you, Miss Pear.
I would second the motion, Miss Silver. Yes, that Thank you, Miss Silver. Okay, Madichi. Yes. Miss Bowman. Yes. Miss Par. Yes. Miss Silver.
Yes. Miss Trap. Yes. Chair of Engineers. Yes. Thank you. Good luck. Good luck, Dr. Charlie. Good luck. Okay, our next um case is the completeness of public hearing for Namini. Hope I'm saying that correctly.
ZB25023. Did I say that correctly? Okay, come on up. Please just give us a second to get all your paperwork done. Madam Chair, if I may, I did have an opportunity to review the content of the notice. Uh, found it to be sufficient,
found it to be timely served. Uh, the certified mailing was September 19th. uh publications September 25th, both at least 10 days prior to this evening. So, the board does have jurisdiction to hear and decide the application tonight. And
I'll swear in our applicants and our board professionals with your permission. Do you have any other witnesses other than yourselves? No. Okay. No requirement. Please raise your right hand. Do all of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
I do. I do. Thank you. Back to you, madam. Thank you very much. So, we're here for a new swimming pool, I say. Is that right? We are. We are new residents. We purchased a home. I'm sorry. I do need to get your name and address for the record, even though we could probably guess.
Sorry. Uh Ashley Namini, my husband. Troy Namini, 291 Douglas Road, Far Hills, New Jersey, 07931. Great. So, you want to tell us why you're here? We have your application in front of us. Why don't you tell us? So,
um, we purchased a home in November of 2024, uh, with an existing swimming pool, um, that we were made aware was, um, not repairable, damaged, broken. Um, so, uh, in the efforts of safety and
recreational use, uh, we wanted to basically replace the existing pool with a new pool. Um, upon submitting permits to the town, we learned of the ordinance that requires the swimming pool to be behind the adjacent dwellings rear building line.
We see that I I heard it's uh I heard it's your favorite favorite ordinance. That's rumor on the street from my research. But um yeah, so there's an existing swimming pool currently. We are making modifications to the size because it's a
fiberglass pool and we're we're switching to gunnite. Um so although the pool volume is increasing, we've worked to decrease the pool deck area uh which basically decreases the coverage from 8.31%
currently to 8.27%. Um I think the only variance requirement that we have is that one ordinance. Um although we're new, we haven't met those neighbors, unfortunately. Um but they are about 200 feet from the pool right
now. Um there are, you know, tree line at the property property line. Um we have some trees in the in the pool area. Um so it's about 200 feet um to the west. Is that right? Lot 15.
Uh it's lot 17. Lot 17 is about 200. Yes. So So to the east, lot 17. Um, I believe those neighbors purchased five or six years ago, so the pool was existing when they purchased. I haven't heard from the neighbors that we have
been able to meet. I haven't heard any issues. They wished us the best with tonight. Um, said the pool's been there for 20 years and they hope to get it back up and running so they can come over for a barbecue. So, um, yeah. Um, you know, we we did um our our
our pool contractor couldn't be here tonight, which is why you're stuck with me. Um but you know we we did explore you know there there's um existing infrastructure adjacent to the pool. There's a pool house. Um so you know moving the pool location an additional
175 ft really isn't an option. We're trying to keep the existing fence. Um are you touching the pool house at all? You making any changes to that? No changes. Um just the pool deck and the pool. We're keeping the fence line the same. So, we're really trying to
minimize the impact um to the work. Um let's see. Um can you adjust the um can it be seen? Can the pool be seen from either of your neighbors on 15 or 17, do you think?
So 15 it cannot be seen. There's like pretty dense property line with trees. 17 we have trees. There's actually an opening in the tree line at the property line. It looks like there's two stumps there. There was trees. So, we actually went to a nursery this weekend and we have plans to talk to them. It's our
property line, the Trees ROM, to replace them. Just basically put some new trees there. Okay. So, you agreed to put some degree of screening, some adequate screen screening. Correct. We we're going to put two new trees on the property line uh where basically there was and at some point
with the previous owners, you know, unfortunately they they didn't make it. Okay. Um now there are two two and a half trees within the pool fence line. So um we did receive the demo permit
um and the uh I'm going to butcher this ther union soil conservation district um not applicable response. So the demo has proceeded. So the pools uh the trees that are there are very close to the
existing pool. So we brought out an arburist tree company and said hey take a look at these things. They said the chances are these are not going to survive. We said okay we will plant um arborites along the fence line. So basically the three two and one smaller
one that are there in the pictures that you'll see are going to have to come down but we're going to replace them. So, we'll we'll basically put something very comparable um along that um you know side of the fence so that it'll mimic what was basically there before.
Okay. This is on the side to lot. Lot 17. Lot 17. Yeah. And the pictures that are in your application, did you take these? Um they're actually the listing photos. Oh, there. Yeah, we got lucky. So, I used the
listing photos. So, um I did not take them, but um Do they represent essentially what the property looks like now? No, they proceeded with demo once we got the permit because they had an opening. So basically we've got the silt fence, we've got the construction fence, um, and we have no fiberglass pool now. And
basically it's subgrade, so it's pretty stoned the entire area right now. The existing pool looks like it's only like 8 ft wide. So, yeah, with fiberglass pools, you're limited because they they truck them in one piece and a crane offloads it.
I would say they're not as commonly installed unless you're trying to install a smaller pool, which is why we're going to move to the gunnite. Um, it looks like a lab. Exactly. We're We're trying to have a bunch of tiny humans need a little bit more space than 8 feet wide. So,
did you need a copy of Mr. memo. I did. A quick look at it. Make sure we address everything. We started with number three. Might have addressed. We did address number three. I think we covered number three. Y
we don't if I may, Madam Chair, we don't need to um have that subject to your review and approval or do we? Uh it' be subject to review and approval. Engineering department. Okay. put everything on engineering. Okay, I'll be involved in some way. I'm sure
you Okay, we didn't ask about the lighting, but in his comment number four or side, I'm not sure if you want to address your memo. Sorry. Uh lighting, no um won't be any glare, direct light, or reflection. Yes. So, at this point, we don't plan on
changing. We have lanterns out there and stuff that's on the pool house. We don't plan on putting any new lighting other than in the footprint of the pool. Um, but I think like I said, the trees that we're going to add and the existing tree line would, you know, mitigate any of those potential concerns with the neighbors.
And you were to go, you would ensure that it absolutely were directed or otherwise shielded. Yes. Thank you. The uh comment number five, well, I guess there is a note on the planet that says no trees will be removed. Testimony has corrected that and we went over
that. And you have sill fence to u keep contractors out of sil fence is attached to the current metal fence that is our pool permanent pool fence right now. Yep. Um number six. So there's a set of control measures that's already been
approved. Yep. Yeah. I don't I I don't know that I included that. I don't know if I had it, but I do have the Yeah. You'll um they'll ask you for that in the engineering department. Okay. And it will be subject to engineering department review. I know you have a soil erosion sediment control plan.
It's just that the soil conservation district doesn't need to approve it, right? The engineering department will. Got it. So, and that may, assuming it's an approval, that may appear as a condition of the approval, notwithstanding the fact that you're sort of halfway home on it. Okay.
And my last comment number seven, regarding the Environmental Commission's best management uh practices for um pool district water discharge. You read those. I did. Yeah, the pool was empty when we bought the house because it wasn't in use. And you know, from what I
understand, any maintenance that we have to do on our future pool, right? If you have to drain it for repairs, they bring in a temporary facility so that you don't have to pay for another few truckloads of water, you pump it into the temporary blowup and then they pump it back in the pool. So, I I talked to
someone about that. So, to the extent it would apply, you would comply with the environmental requirement be necessary. Yes. Thank you. That's okay. Thank you, Mr. SL and Mr. Quinn. Um, I I just had one comment. Ashley called
me in a paddic about it. She was trying to sort it out what it was. And I see this a lot. The limited disturbance. It's very tight to the pool. The guy drew it. And it it happens a lot. And you're right under the 5,000 square feet. But he's got it set up for soil
conservation district approve. He's got all the notes on it. But I knew what was going to happen is exactly what happened. They said you're exempt because you're not at the 5,000 square foot. So, you're already underway. You've got your exemption. As Dave said, you'll still have to deal with the township. They want to fencing your
tracking path that jurisdiction will be with the township, not with so conservation district. Got it. We're prepared to do whatever my second on there. It's been addressed. We never do that. We never disregard. Um, did you get a copy also of the
environmental um, commission report? I did. Yes. Did you um, have any issue with their comments? I think they had three comments on I do not. I I have a call out to my pool contractor just to make sure that he has no issue, but I don't believe we have any issues with complying with those
three comments. If I may, Mr. Uh Tom, the uh the uh recommendation from the Environmental Commission is for a current LOI, letter of interpretation on wetlands. Is that uh would you have an
opinion on that? I don't know why it's necessary. They It's It's an entirely fenced in area. It's already disturbed. I don't really understand the need for it. It's a recommendation. Would it be your opinion that the recommendation be
imposed as a condition or stipulated to if the applicant did not want to. That would be my opinion. I'll share I think that was shared with the make their own decision. Thank you very much. Thank you.
Best practice discharge best. Um are there uh questions from the board on this application? Are there any questions from the public on the testimony that we've heard? Are there any comments from the public on
this application? Okay. Do you have anything else for us? You want to turn it over to us at this time? Oh, we're done. Thank you so much for your time. If only we attorneys gave such succinct summations.
Has to be proportionate. The um I'm sorry. The uh I teed up. Yes. Uh the uh well, it's pretty teed up. Uh the uh it would be a if it's a motion to grant I'm going to assume it's a motion
to grant uh the pool location deviation uh for C1 and possibly even C2, but certainly for C1 uh reasons I would imagine. Uh and the conditions would be those stipulated to by the applicant as set forth in the reports of the planner
uh and the engineer, albeit the engineers one comment is is no longer applicable perhaps and the environmental commission's recommendation with respect to storm water best management practices and the overlap of the best management
practices for discharge and pool water. Um but I'll assume unless I'm told otherwise that the board is not imposing a condition for a current letter of interpretation for wetlands. Yeah, I'm comfortable with that. I don't
know if anybody else has. Okay. Other than that to the board for passage. Thank you. Okay. Does anyone want to um make any comments or a motion on this application?
Pool location. There you go. I'll make a motion. Um I see this is C1. um the hardship of uh not being behind the um property line. There's nothing you could do really about that. Wouldn't make any sense to
move it in back and you'd be in the wetlands anyway. So, and then you really wouldn't need to go to the D. Um so, I would just um deem the move to deem the application complete. Um and I would ask our board attorney to draft a a
resolution memorializing the board's decision to approve the application. um with all of the stipulations um put forth tonight with regards to the um the um
review letters. I'm sorry, I'm a little tired. Um and stipulated to the uh to by the applicants and motion. Thank you, Miss Bman and Miss Pichi. I would just say
just could say C2 for the sake of argument but there's there's or keep the resolution really simple and make it see Miss Simon Miss Pichi yes
miss B yes Miss Poptart yes Miss Silver yes misser yes thank you welcome to town looks like a beautiful property Yeah. Um,
next on the agenda is uh Schaefer ZB25022. Just give us a second to fill out the paperwork. We'll be good to go. Madam Chair, if I may, the I did have an opportunity to review the notice for this application as well. Uh found the
content to be sufficient. Found it to be timely served. Certified mail on September 24, published on September 25. Both at least 10 days prior to this evening. So the board has jurisdiction to hear and decide the application. And if I'm not mistaken, I see one witness.
I'm going to guess it's the applicant. Um, and we have a board professionals. If all three of you will raise your right hand, do all three of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes. Thank you. Good evening. Um, you want to tell us uh
why you're here and and what you uh need our assistance on? Sure. Well, my name is Eric Schaefer. I'm representing my family that lives at 41 Ellis Drive. Um, today I'm seeking a coverage variance. Um, I am not seeking any alterations to the property
whatsoever. Um, so I guess I'll just tell you a story because there's no real technical about uh, sure, you know, requirements here. Um, I purchased the house in 2022 and I had one baby. I now have three. And so we decided we needed more bedrooms. And so
we are converting an attic uh to an additional uh, bedroom and moving the laundry room upstairs. There's no coverage alterations with this project. Um, but when we submit the permit for construction, it was noted that there was a pre-existing uh overage um and
that we needed to either remove our front walkway and our rear walkway um or come here today and seek a variance. Um, my lot is undized. it is kind of an awkward position. Uh which we did explore adding just a room onto the
back, but that created a whole host of other issues. Um so, uh that's pretty much the extent of the application. I'm I I purchased the house and it was nonconforming and so I'm hoping to get approval so that I don't have to rip up
my front walkway. Okay. Sorry. So, question. You're not building an addition at all. You're just converting the existing attic. Yes, it is a lot more space. It is a second floor conversion. Yes. There is no change to the the footprint, right? At all. At all.
So, you're not adding any coverage. It's just that this was uncovered. Correct. It was a pre-existing Yes. nonconform. Okay. Correct. There's an addition, but it's a it's a vertical addition. Correct. Yes. Second floor. It's not an addition. It's just
it's not even it's not even raising the the height, though. You're saying you're just converting what's it will it will go up because it was the attic was I don't know the technical terms um for but it was a like this and we're making it more a room size. Okay. Yes.
Thank you. Okay. Can I just ask how old is the home? I think it was in the 60s it was built. Yeah. So go ahead. I mean I guess I'm just you know sort of
like the same idea with the pool that we just went through. um with properties that have been around for so long or had structures and all that for so long just sort of replacing or or not doing any more variance if you
would but there was no variance with this property to allow for the overage that's the issue maybe Dave can explain I suspect the uh uh the lot coverage overage did not pre-exist resist the zoning ordinance
for some other reason it happened without getting approval. So it may be that the board giving this approval now uh puts their property in essence in conformity and it may be a benefit to
them uh as well as to any successor owners of the property. But that's just my guess. That's good. Um, I touched on that in comment number
five of my October 2, 2025 memo. Uh, basically you can see from aerial photography what happened. the prior owners uh who own the property prior to the applicants
uh at various times added um they enlarge a driveway, they enlarge a front walkway, they added a rear patio and walkway without any permits and without um okay any review or
without any variance and uh put the property into its current non-conforming condition that was inherited by uh the applicant and was the I assume the shed was already there. Yes. I have made no changes uh to the
property since I purchased it. And I assume you're using the shed. It's providing some useful purpose for you now. Correct. Bikes and uh small RV cars for my kids. Important. Have you spoken to any of your neighbors
about this project? Um, I've spoken to lot 20. Have you heard any concerns from your neighbors around this project? No, they were concerned that there was no variance when they put in the papers previously. Um, but yes, nothing nothing
for the construction or for this hearing. Okay. And had you um when did you say you bought the property? 2022. 2022. So since 2022, have you heard any complaints from your neighbors around the existing And are there any um do you have any
issues with with water or water coverage from a storm water perspective? Um not near the property, but there is a small trench that was there when I purchased the house that runs two one one foot one or two feet off the uh street.
Um and it it catches all the water from the entire neighborhood and continues it down into a river. Um, but it all stays very close to the street. Nothing near our house or near any of the papers um that currently exist. So, a swale basically in the front yard
behind the curve line. I don't know what a swell is, but I called it a trench. It's like a Yeah. Yeah. Just grassy depression. Yes. Yes. And um you got a copy of Mr. SL's memo, right? Correct. Do you agree with comment number six?
Is that regarding the lighting? It's it's regarding the existing air conditioning unit which appears to be about 9 ft should be included in the lot coverage calculation. Um I would agree. Yeah. Okay. So you let's see.
So I assume you'd like to amend your application to include that 9 ft which would make 19.59% which is a little bit more than your application asked for to include 9. Is that correct? Sure. Yes. You don't have to.
You've come all this far. Yeah. I will do what it takes. Um and also any lighting or any um you should confirm that any existing proposed exterior lighting should be directed downward. That's standard.
Confirm that. Yes. Confirm. All lighting will be pointed at entrances to my house and not above them. Mr. S. Any um other concerns or comments? Um yeah, number eight in my memo just is
a clarification on the plan where um on the plan where it shows the upper deck, there's that I'll call it a trapezoid area between the deck and the walkway. That is a planting area. Correct. It looks like it on the pictures. You know what I'm talking
about. If you're on your upper deck looking away from the house. Oh, the Yes. Yes. There are shrubs planting and that that area is you can't tell from the it's shaded as if it were patio. Um but the plan should be revised
to reflect that that is a planting area just to avoid confusion in the future. If I'm hearing you correctly, that could potentially offset the 9 ft from the air conditioning unit. Well, I don't know. Would that count towards impluded? I don't know is counted as
coverage. It's just I think the shading is is extended onto that area and it's graphically incorrect. You can ask your architect to look at that. Okay. Um I don't know that it would change the numbers, but it just needs to be
represented that it is not an impervious surface. Fair. Understood. And I um the other thing I didn't mention in my memo though, the architect did provide an update to the application with the new coverage numbers
and um and the fact that you'll be eliminating the the enclosing lattice around the deck. Yes. Uh and the plan should also be revised to incorporate the revisions that are mentioned in the uh the architect's
letter, the new uh the new lot coverage calculations. Understood. Okay. So that's and that when you um I Whether you'll have a separate permit to apply for these existing improvements or you just update the permit you already have is probably more likely um you'll
submit a plan that reflects all of this and anything else the board may require tonight. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Quinn, are there um open comments on your um No, I was confused too about I had two
two numbers listed from Pery had one in the plan on theart and then letter updated it. So this is the number we're going with. Correct. Um so no I have nothing further. I would say that the driveway in terms of drainage a lot of the improvements the
driveway the walk out front all of that drains towards the street. So it's not apt to have crude any damage or impact to the res. Excellent. M question of Mr. Schlide. the um can you give us the date of that uh
architect letter that you received because I don't think we have that September 17, 2025. Thank you. Resolution. And then um Mr. Sh, did you get a copy of the environmental commission report like this?
Yes. Do you have any issues with their um comments? Madam Chair, if I may, Do we uh the first one show the limit of disturbance square
feet was that already provided or was that necessary? No, I this is a your opinion. Have you started you haven't started any work here yet? We have. Yeah. So do you have we have a contractor on site? Do you have sil fence up or anything or any area?
Even technically they show no limited disturbance because all of the work is done over the existing house. Right. Same for but there's always a small limit of disturbance associated with equipment and materials that are brought on to use buildings. So the township has a threshold of 2500
square feet. I doubt if you're going to hit so conservation district but do you have any s fence up there now? Anything at all on property or no? No. Okay. Well, just beware the township if you exceed 2500 square feet and I can't say that he is or is not going to. But
if he does, you you'll have to deal with soil conservation district measures in accordance with but but would it be your opinion that uh the provision of a limit of disturbance in square feet now is
necessary or not necessary in light of before mentioned? Yeah, I would say if he's already started, it's not necessary. Now, you you're dealing with the township engineering department. Have you already dealt with them? That was part of the initial permit for
construction and there was a um they brought this up and they said you couldn't start and then we worked with them to say we will get a variance or we will rip up okay the papers and then they allowed us. So, the point is it's not in the jurisdiction of the township engineering department. If they deem that there's going to be a limited service that
requires soil erosion sediment control, county engineering department will make that deal with that. So it might not be necessary. Might not be necessary for now as required. I I drove by the site today. There were a couple of trucks parked in the driveway, but they're not doing anything on the property at all.
Okay, good. Everything is just a question and a recommendation, Beth, because sometimes what happens, I mean, not so much in this case, but the case before this one where you're close to 5,000 square feet, I I've been involved in towns where all of a sudden, you know, the contractor comes in, he starts throwing steel fence
up and he starts doing stuff and all of a sudden the engineering department says it's a whole irony. You got to get SCD conservation approval. And now if people are waiting four weeks to get SCD approved. So I I just try to be cognizant of that. You're dealing with a touch of engineering department, you'll
be fine. Okay, that might cover number one. That was number one. Um there's also a comment uh yeah obviously uh if you do get an approval you know you will uh continue to be over
the impervious coverage u number. So we always are mindful if you do any plantings to consider native um trees or shrubs that you know do a better job of absorbing water. Yes. And I did put my comment.
Yeah. Please do it. everybody who's over just live with the limit you have or else you'll have to be coming back here asking for you know Yeah. You should know that better than anybody. So yeah. Right. Right. You'll find yourself here. Yes. Be wary of that when you're contracting
says I got 100 square feet of papers you might want to I was actually told by my architect that variances only last for one year and then you must actually the approval for them but yeah that's something you'll deal with the attorney and um are you removing any trees or
you're not did you need any uh tree permits not removing anything number five recommendation maybe not applicable not okay and then um their last point was during demolition um we always ask you to consider recycling repurposing or gifting any
demo material you agree to consider that I will consider Good answer. Are there additional questions from the board on this application? Any additional questions from the board on this application? Are there any questions um from the
public? Are there any comments on this application? Okay. Do you have anything else from us or you want to turn it over to I have nothing. I have nothing else. Thank you. Okay. The It's a mot I'm going to assume that
it's a motion to grant the locked coverage deviation of 19.59%. Uh which includes the air conditioning unit ad uh over the maximum permitted lock coverage of 18%. Uh that's with all the conditions stipulated to as set
forth in the planners memo and the engineers memo. The planners memo inclusive of the uh revision pursuant to the updated September 17, 2025 letter from the architect. I dropped my
microphone and uh and the stipulated two portions of the September 29 environmental commission memo which I have as uh two, three, four and six, one and five found to be perhaps not
applicable or not necessary. Um so that will be my assumption it a motion to grant four out of six for passage. Thank you. Okay. Is there um anyone who would like to make any comments or make a motion on
this application? I'll make a motion. Thank you. I'll redeem myself this time. Um I would make a motion to uh deem the application complete and to grant the requested uh relief. Um I see this as um
under C1 it's not self-created as a hardship. You inherited a a problem. Um I don't see this as any detriment. I see it as being keeping in character with the neighborhood and I do see it as an an advancement of the um municipal land
use uh law and that we are um creating a better um home. Um fit for your family and for future residents. So, um I would also ask our
attorney to draft the resolution memorializing the board's decision um and subject to all of the conditions that were stipulated to by the applicant and stated deliberations. Um can I just also include C2?
Yes. Can I do that? Can I amend that? I'll amend it to include C2 because I feel take the shed away if he wanted to, but um I feel like because you know we haven't heard from any neighbors, it's been like that for some period of time. It doesn't seem to be causing any problems. We haven't had problems with
water. Um I'd be okay with it. I'll second the motion. I I looked at it as if it was a conforming size lot and lot 18.27% was a full size. So I don't see any issues with this. So I will second.
Thank you, Miss Parker. So, Miss Bman and Miss Miss Kadichi, yes. Miss B. Yes. Miss Popar, yes. Miss Silver, yes. M. Yes. Chairwoman engineer. Yes. Thank you.
Thank you. Okay. Next up on the agenda is 7D, which is the YAN application. ZV25025. Thank you for waiting patiently. Thank you. Madam Chair, I did have an opportunity to review the notice for this one as
well. Found the content to be sufficient. Found it to be timely served. Certified mail September 24 published September 25 both at least 10 days prior to this evening. So the board does have jurisdiction to hear and decide the
application. I can swear in the applicants and our board professionals. the wall raise their right hand. Do all of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you all. And back to you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Um, so good evening. Do you want to tell us uh why you're here? We have your application in front of us and we have Good evening everyone. Uh, so my name is Shu. Can I ask you to speak right into that microphone? Taking it as well. All right. Yeah. Good evening. My name
is Shu Yan and this is my husband Way Lee. Uh we're here tonight to propose um for our addition to the current house. We have a uh onestory single family house which is we bought it from the original owners in the n that was built
in 1960s I believe and we're are proposing to um remove the majority of the structure and then uh add a second level. I may build a new level, first level and add a second level to make it a bigger house. Um due to the um need of the um space we we need for our growing
family. Uh we have our third child during the time we um um after we bought the house. So we just feel like we have we need more space um and also our parents sometimes um visit us um from Canada. So we do need some some extra rooms to accommodate them as well. So
that's u why we're here. Um and we do have a few um variance requests as listed here. A minimum lot area, a minimum improvable um lot area, and minimum lot width and a minimum front yard setback. Um that's um what we're
here for. Okay. And if I understood it correct your application um none of these are changing with the exception of the minimum front yard. Uh correct. Yeah the minimum front yard um even uh right now the existing is
74.7. Um we are not changing that. Um as of the wall setback but as of the steps I did talk to Dave about that. um this the sidewalk, the steps from the front porch
will be um having like 71.3 feet of the setback instead of the because of the wall. Right now, we're not bumping the walls more. We're just because of the stairs, we need to um have a little bit more setback. When did you purchase the property?
In 2016. So, you're living there now? Uh we leave a different house. Um if you look at our previous uh we did um we file a um an old um a previous variance application 177.
Yes. Um because in original we wanted to um you know we have that in mind to build a sec was too still too too small for us. So that's why we built we had that required but then we have some family medical emergency and you know the plan was just suspended um for a few
years and that was approved at that time. It was approved at the time but we didn't proceed. That's completely expired, right? Complete doover. Yes. Yes. And then we It was approved by resolution August 9, 2017.
Uh and the applicant did get an extension. Correct. We were hoping Yeah. We were hoping we can Yes. taking them through August 9th of 2019. Yeah. Correct. the desperation
times the charm. We still didn't make it. Yeah, it was our time. Yeah. Our time here. Um for the record and I guess um or at least I don't think it's inappropriate to um that I believe it was a seven to zero
unanimous decision. That's factual testimony resolution. Yeah. Thank you. Did you get a copy of Mr. Slice? Yes, I did. And from Mr. Queen as well. Excellent. Yeah. Um, Mr. S, do you mind
um maybe walking us through your nonfactual? Sure. Uh, looking at my October 2, 2025 memo. Um, one through four are factual. Uh number
five is uh the applicant touched on uh or actually answered the the setback to the wall of the building and and the porch roof, I believe, is going to be the same
74.7 as exists. But they need a couple extra feet for the porch steps, right? And that would be 71.3. Yes. Uh, so that answers that question. I'm sorry. So we're So the front yard
set back deviations, can they go to 71.3 ft versus 75 ft required? Yeah, that that's the actual front setback. Noting that that's only for the steps, the actual wall of of the um of the building, including the Porsche roof
is going to be at the existing uh 74.7. Got it. Thank you. Uh number six uh is with regard to common topic tonight the limit of disturbance
um which is shown on the plan to be pretty much hugging the structure right um and I I don't know what the magic number is to widen that by but there needs to be some room to work in there.
Yeah. And the the only um well while well one issue would be whether it needs soil conservation district approval or not. Uh the other um more important in my mind would be that it would be further encroaching into regulated slope
areas and the applicant would want to be sure that moving that limited disturbance out further uh can be done while still complying with the um steep slope disturbance requirements. And looking at the steep slope analysis
that required on the plan, it looks like there's plenty of wiggle room there, but it is um something that would need to be uh careful with uh especially the there's a small area of uh greater than 25% slopes which are off
limits uh to disturbance compared to other categories of slopes that you're allowed to disturb a certain amount. So the the the limited disturbance wouldn't be able to go into that 25 and greater percent area, but it would uh should be in my
opinion and I'm I'm guessing Mr. Quinn's probably going to agree that a little more room is needed than is shown on plan. And is that something the applicant understands and can Yes. Yes. I did talk to the um
engineering uh engineer um um Steve Parker about that. Yeah. And he said we will definitely uh revise the the redo the calculation and we also plan to reduce the deck because we put a huge deck in the back and we you know never need it that big and I just talked to
the architect you know we did we never want it that big he just threw it out we never give a thought you know oh why do we need that big so we're going to you know reduce that huge deck to much smaller like around 200 square feet of maybe a patio or something instead of a huge right now I don't know have the
number but it's like 600 700 square feet 700 square f feet of the huge deck. So we're definitely not going to doing that. So we're going to by reducing the deck um to reducing the disturbance area and also um Steve the engineer will recalculate the boundaries as right now there's no work area work space
basically. So he understands that he will redo based on the new plan he will redo the calculation to make sure we comply with the uh 2500 and if not we will do the soil erosion um permit as required. Yeah definitely. Yeah. Thank you.
Uh number seven, uh you've heard this before. Exter any exterior lighting that you do, we will. Yeah. Non-nuisance lighting. Absolutely. Uh number eight, uh the plan shows no trees to be removed. No trees to be removed.
You'll provide adequate tree protection. Yes, we will. Yeah. And that was it for me. Okay. Thank you, Mr. S. Mr. Quinn. Sure. Yeah. The first two are just comments. The third one, and this is not an
impervious cover issue. They're far from it, but yeah, when I was going through the the proposed coverage analysis, Steve's got like 248 drive square feet of driveway removed, but the the amount of addition going in
the driveway is like 118 square feet. I couldn't understand, right? I couldn't square that together. Again, you're I don't think it's going to be an issue. You're not going to have an imperous cover violation. You're not going to be over the thousand square feet that generate storm water management, but I think that
we'll do reboot. There's something not quite right. Yes. Mr. Parker clarify. Definitely. Yeah. Yeah. Definitely. Thank you. Um and and again, you're far from it. I don't think it'll be an issue, but the
building height The way I saw it, your architect had 27.8 ft from the finish floor to the highest point that we Steve seems to be using 34 feet and just flying that to the client. So, you're not going to have based on what I
not going to have a height variance, but no. Yeah, that number should be clarified as well. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Um, he can also there's no FEMA issue here. I don't know. This might be holdover is note three.
It's just it's an it puts like uh township officials on alert, but it's not necessary in this case. There's no flood issue anywhere. You're not even close. So, that can come off. Okay. Uh and then I had the same comment regarding limit disturbances Dave did.
You'll expand it, right? You may not be the 5,000 ft that requires so conservation district, right? But you'll certainly be over 2500 feet that will require the township. Yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. Yeah. And that's all I have.
Thank you, Mr. And then did you also get a copy of our township environmental commission? Yes, we did. Yeah. Did you have a chance to go through their comments? Yeah, we did. And it's pretty much about the same as we mentioned before. And we definitely plan to, you know, um
plan to to u put more trees or shrubs around the new built, you know, area in the front in the back. Yeah, native trees and yeah, I did have the link here. Yeah, and they have a list of what the recommendations are.
Yeah, there's no additional storm water, Mr. They're not over the cover. They're well below any threshold. Okay. In their comment number five, um they did talk about the steep slopes, right?
And uh your thoughts around stabilization for Yeah, just by um doing more lawns like shrubs, planting shrubs and maybe um containing um retaining walls if needed in any areas. Yeah, we do plan to do
that to to stabilize the soil. Okay. Have you t taken out any tree permits? No, we didn't. Yeah, applicable. Um, they wanted you to be aware for the potential of any inground tanks, although
plate and asbestous and then also um if you'll please consider recycling, repurposing or gifting of any. Yes. Any questions from the board? Are there any questions from the public?
Are there any comments from the public? Do you have anything else for us? Um, no. No, that's it. Thank you so much for the time. Hope this is the last time we see it. Yes. Hopefully the uh
to te it up if I may. Madam chair, we have actually Oh, yeah. Lot area variance of.99 acres versus 1 acre minimum required. Approval lot area variance of 9,549
square ft, just shy of the 10,000 square foot minimum required. lot width is 160 ft as opposed to 200 feet minimum required and the modified front yard setback deviation the proposed front
yard setback is 71.3 ft. Yes. And uh as opposed to the minimum required front yard set of 75 ft motion grant all
conditions as agreed to pre Thank you. Thank you M. Okay. Does anyone want to make a motion or comments on this application? Last one of the none. All right, I'll do
it. Thank you. I see this I think this is C1 variance because of the steep slopes of the property and the the existing building being where it is and zoning haven't changed. Um and I would assume also the undersized
nature of the lot. These would be the lot area lot with an improveable lot area. I think the phrase is it is what it is. Yes. Yes. Exactly. Exactly. So, I would deem the application complete and direct the board attorney to draft a resolution
memorializing the board's decision to grant the relief requested by the applicants subject to the conditions stipulated. Thank you, Miss I missed. Was that Miss Silver? No, thank you,
Miss Fichi. Yes, Miss B. Yes, Miss Pard. Yes, Miss Silver. Yes, Miss T. Yes, Chair of Engineers. Yes, thank you. Good luck with the Okay.
Um, next is number eight. Any comments from members? I guess um, Miss Slayman, we're going to cancel the October 16th meeting, right? Um, and I will say I am not able to attend the November meeting. So, Miss
Bowman has volunteered to chair that one. Okay. I I also have an issue with the November meeting. Okay. So, we should check attendance on that one. Um, for sure. Yeah, I'm going to be out of state. Um, any other comments?
Excellent. Um, any comments from staff? No, thank you. Good to see everyone. Yeah, you too. I feel like you should introduced yourself. I felt that way. Yeah, exactly. Okay. Motion to return. Motion to adjurnn.
Second.