Good evening everybody. We're going to call to order tonight's uh zoning uh board of adjustment of the township of uh Barnard. Um 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 indivisible with all. In accordance with the requirement of the open public meeting laws notice,
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 on Kier Lane, Basking Ridge, New Jersey. It was also mailed to the Bernardsville News, Whippony, New Jersey or the Courier News in Bridgewater, New Jersey. And it was also filed to the township clerk all on
January 9th of this year and it was mailed electronically to all those 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 after 10 o'clock tonight and no new testimony heard after 10:30 this
evening. Um, Miss Keeper, can you do the roll call for us? Certainly. Chairwoman Jun here. Miss Bon here. Merr here. Mr. Krauss here. Miss Pichi here. Miss Par here.
Miss Silver here. Miss Tra here. Mr. here. Quinn here. Here. And for the record, Miss Keeper is present. Madam Chair, you have a quum. Um, Dr. Arwis contacted me earlier today and indicated that he was feeling unable to attend.
Yes. Thank you, Miss Keeper. We excuse Mr. Thank you, Mr. Dishi. I'll second that. Thank you, Miss Buckar. All in favor? Opposed? Thank you. Thank you. Um, next is the approval of minutes from our March 5th um regular session meeting.
They were circulated in in advance. Are there any comments or edits on those minutes or a motion to approve as drafted? So moved. Thank you, Mishi. Second. Thank you. Okay. The only person who is ineligible this evening is Miss Bman. All right. I
can't. I'll second. Okay. I'll second. All right. So we have Herrera. Yes. Mr. Kra. Yes.
Yes. MAR. Yes. Uh Silver. Yes. M. Yes. And uh Chairwoman engineers. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. He's in the minutes of the last meeting. March 5th. This is March. March 5th meeting. Yeah, I think we're good. We're good on
that one. Um, next is the uh approval of resolutions. The first one is uh the Guber application ZB24013. I think that was circulated in advance. And if there are any additional comments or or edits on that or a motion
to approve as drafted. Can you please mention the actual um version and everything for the record? Yes, I think that's helpful to do. Chris, do you want to do that? Yes. This is uh version seven dated 57 2025. Very recent. Yes. I would make a motion to
approve the resolution as drafted. Thank you, Miss I'll second. Thank you, Miss Contra. Miss B. Yes. Mr. Krauss. Yes. Madichi. Yes. Yes. Miss Silver. Yes. Chairwoman
Junior. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Um the next is the approval of the Settleowski um resolution which was ZB25002. That was also circulated in advance of tonight's meeting. Any uh comments or edits, corrections, or
motions? Yep. Madam Chair, real quick, Miss Bman was kind enough to point out to me there were a few uh just a few typos on page 78 and 11 where reference was to applicant applicants. So just you know just a few corrections on there. Nothing substantive just so it would be
adopt as they just Okay. Thank you. So is there a motion to um adopt that as amended? I'll make a motion to adopt as amended. Thank you, Miss Hot. Second. Thank you, Miss Bman.
Miss Bowman. Yes. Miss Pard. Yes. Yes. Miss Trap. Yes. Engineers. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. And then the last resolution for tonight is the rocker resolution ZB250001. Are there comments, edits or
motions on that resolution? Yes, madam chair. Same situation. Uh reference to applicant instead of I'm sorry, applicants instead of applicant on pages seven and eight. Just a few very minor typos. I think so too. Thank you. So, is there
a motion uh to adopt as amended or any other further comments or edits? I'll make a motion to adopt as amended. Thank you, Miss Felman. I'll second allow. Yes.
Miss you. Yes. You're not eligible. Okay. I'll second it. I appreciate that effort. So, okay. So, Miss Bman and Miss Pear. Miss Bman. Yes. Miss Par. Yes. M.
Yes. Yes. Thank you. Yes. We have a small group that one. Um, okay. Um, next on the agenda is the modification of a condition of approval for an extension of time which is
ZB24007 A. Is anyone here for that application? I brought my lawyer with me in case I needed it. Excellent. So um you're in front of the board to ask for additional time. Yeah. So just requesting more time. We we weren't able
to uh break ground before the 12 months uh ran out on us. Uh we had some difficulty advancing the drawings with our architect and then earlier this year we had some uh elements in the family that kind of sidebar our little project. Okay. So project plan delays and um some
medical issues. Yeah. Okay. So uh what additional time are you asking for? Um, I think uh it would be appropriate to ask for another 12 months. I think we'll get started well before that, but it wouldn't hurt to ask for the 12 months. It wouldn't it would probably be a good idea. Yeah. Okay,
Madam Chair, just real quick, that would take give them until May 8th, 2026 to commence construction, right? That is okay. Thank you. And Mr. Shaski, was was this the one I
think that there was a a revised resolution. I don't think so. What I have is 4225. I have I have 43025. There's a corrected resolution. I have a
corrected res. Okay. Do we know what was corrected for the May 16th version? Oh, this was the original resolution. There's a there's a version two of the extension. Just give us one minute. We just got to make sure we're voting on the right
thing. Okay. Sure. Correction. Dave, I hate to put you on the spot. Do you know what the correction was for? I think I don't remember what the correction was for. I don't think it was anything substantive. But does it matter? It was the second the latest resolution was adopted a month after the
original one. Yeah. So it it replaced the original. Yeah. This was adopted last Yeah. Last year in May of 2024, right? So why Oh, okay. So that's why it wasn't for an extension. It was it was the
original application. the corrected resolution. That was what was Oh, the the corrected version was Yeah, this was adopted last year on May 20 or I'm sorry, May 16th. So, this isn't even we'd be moving on the acting on the
extension, not the We're going from one year from the corrected resolution to one year from the date of the correct right. Hence is why the the later date. Okay. Yes. So all that's really important for is just to vote on the extension request one year on that point
to and there's a resolution drafted for that as well. Yes. Yes. Yes. And that has not been changed. [Music] No, but I think Okay. Okay. Now I understand what happened.
Okay. So because we had to adopt the corrected resolution, the date moved from what would have been May 8th to May 16th. Correct. Correct. That makes sense. And that therefore the extension that you'd be granting now for one year
would take you to May 16th, 2026 as opposed to May 8th like I stated before. So that's that's the request. Okay. So hence is why there's a revised version of the extension resolution directed on the first. Hopefully that makes sense. Okay. So, we're talking about this very
specific date last year. So, we're going off of May 16th, 2024. So, for this one, we're voting on to to give you the extension to begin your work by May 16th, 2026. You agree with that? Yes, absolutely. Yeah. And that's in the drafted resolution for tonight, the
actual draft, not the That's right. Sorry about the No, no, that's okay. We just want to be sure what we're doing here. So, um, is there a motion to, uh, adopt the, uh, drafted resolution?
So, move. Thank you. Yes. I'll make a second. I'll second it. Thank you, Miss Padichi and Miss Pear. Um, Miss Bowman. Yes. M. Herrera. Yes. Mr. Krauss. Yes. Missichi.
Yes. Mar. Yes, Silver. Yes, Chairwoman Junior. Yes. Good luck with your project. Thank you, madam chairwoman and board professionals. Thank you. Let's go. Say byebye. Okay. Um, next on the
agenda is the Ponucci case, which uh I believe we're carrying. Is that correct? We are carrying uh the application to June 4th, the June 4th meeting. The applicant is unable
prior commitment. Okay. So, that's case ZB25003. Yep. And is that without further notice, Chris? That's correct, Madam Cher. I'll just for the record, yeah, the applicant here did notice for our previous meeting back in April. Everything was found to be timely served and to be sufficient as
to its content. We carried it to this evening by voice announcement. We're carrying it again. So this is your formal announcement if you're here for the Ponucci application again concerning block 5502 lot 14 property at 21 court u application
CB25-00003 that is being carried with no further notice being required to the board's June 4th 2025 meeting 7:30 p.m. here at the Warcraft meeting room at the municipal building. That's your notice. You're not getting anything. All right. Thank you. My pleasure. Thank you. Um
next on the agenda is 8B, which is the Grand Homes Investment 14 LLC, which is KCB25004. Madam Chair, while everybody's getting situated, I'll just point out for the record, I did have an opportunity to review their notice. I
found it to be sufficient both in terms of its content and timeliness of service. was sent to owners of property with 200 ft on April 24th and also published in Burn News on April 24th more than 10 days in advance of tonight's hearing. Thus, the board has the jurisdiction here to the case.
Great. Thank you. I believe the represented by council. Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the board. My name is Nicole Manziaak M A G D Z I A K of the law firm Dave Pitney. Here this evening on behalf of
the applicant. We are here this evening seeking C variance relief relating to the construction of an addition to an existing home at 83 Highland Avenue which is block 6303 lot 31. The property is located in
the R six zone and is approximately 344 acres. It is an undersized lot for the zone. There is an existing single family home on the property that exists today. The proposal before you this evening is to add a second story to that home and
to add a garage on um what we'll call the ground floor but towards the back of the home and also to relocate the driveway. As you'll hear through the testimony this evening, the existing driveway is actually partially over the lot line. So, we are seeking to move
that on entirely onto this particular property to serve this house to eliminate that current condition. What's unique about this particular lot and project is that their ordinance actually changed um since the home was constructed and the setbacks
are essentially grandfathered in so long as you are maintaining the setback as it exists today or not making it any worse. And our proposal is to maintain those sideyard setbacks so that we're not changing them. The front yard setback we are proposing to change by one foot
closer to the road and that is limited to an extra stair that leads up to the front porch which is really being done in order to meet code requirements of today. The um home as it was constructed and the porch at the time was just a different code that existed. So that's
where that one foot deviation is. It's not the entire home coming forward one foot. It's limited to that front step. Um, currently the lot has a coverage of 23.2%. With this proposal, we are proposing to reduce that by 1%. So, we
are still seeking a variance related to coverage, but we're reducing the non-conformity. So, we're over what's permitted of 18% over less than what currently exists today. That lessening of the impervious coverage does not necessitate the need for storm water improvements, but we are proposing a
drywall anyway just because we think it'll be better planning for the property as a whole. And the driveway that we're proposing um is required to be 5T. As we said, right now it's currently less than zero feet, but zero feet to the property line is actually over the property line,
and we're proposing it to be half a foot off of the line. Um, we are in receipt of the township planners review letter dated May 1st, the board engineers review letter dated May 3rd, and also the environmental commission review letter dated March 25th. Um, all of this
year, 2025. You'll hear testimony this evening. We are proposing to comply with all the comments that were issued. We have no issues revising the plans to accommodate those comments. Um, so with that, I have two witnesses this evening. Our engineer and also our architect. The
applicant's representative is also here in case there are questions that either of those professionals can't answer, but we are not intending to have direct testimony from that particular witness. Great. Thank you. So, we'll start with um our civil engineering and Rudy will give us an overview of the existing conditions of the property, the
context in the neighborhood, and what our proposed conditions are. Let me swear your engineer as well as our engineer and planner in. Could all three of you please stand up? Raise your right hands for me. All three of you swear affirm the testimony you're about to provide. It will be the truth. The whole truth about the truth is all we
got. Yes. Okay. Great. Can you do me a favor? Can you swing that microphone? If you don't want to stand at the podium, can you just swing that microphone? It's just important that you speak right into it so that we can hear. I'll move over. Okay. If you're comfortable standing. Thank you. down
there. Thank you. So, while you're loading up the plans, which are the plans that were submitted to the board, um Madame Chair, we'd like to qualify him as a civil engineer. Can you provide your background, education, and experience? Uh I'm a licensed, uh professional engineer in the state of
New Jersey. Um I've about 20 years experience in um site plans and subdivisions and I've testified in front of this uh board several times. And your license is still current, correct? Yes. Thank you. We'll accept him. Thank you. Sir, can we just get your uh your name, firm, and business address for the
record, please? Rudolph Hollesman, H O LZ MN. And business address is Yanukville Aldrich, YVA Associates, 460 Main Street, Chester, New Jersey. All right.
So, as was uh briefly presented, the nature of the project is to add a second story addition uh to the existing building and expand off the back. Um so, looking at the existing
site, uh it's undersized lot by about 50%. um for perspective um relative to the zoning or zoning code um contains I'm sorry real quick guys can we get that screen working too or is that one
is that a commission okay all right you know what those are harder for us to see can so if we have what you're looking for can you just tell us so that we have it open in front of us we're looking at the right thing I could point to the hard hard copy This is why we still bring boards just
in case. Yeah. Why did you get Okay. So, Mr. Holton, this is sheet 204 that was submitted to the board, correct? Correct. sheet sheet two. Um, and there's no changes from this version versus what's in the packets that were
submitted. Correct. Yes. Just to confirm that the last revised date on that is February 5th, 125. Yes. Thank you. All right. So given the nature of the project to expand the house, um from a site
perspective, the driveway was looked at and the garage location. Uh the driveway improvement basically is to pave the driveway, keep it where it is, bring it up to code as far as uh width and move
it away from the property line as much as possible while still um providing the access to the rear and and side of the house. So the the existing garage space is actually the back of the house. And
in an effort to minimize coverage and come in under the existing coverage, uh the garage was placed on the side of the house and we we worked in a driveway into that location. Uh there's currently a gravel driveway that requires some improvements. Um so we're we're
providing curb um some drainage and enough room for the driveway in the driveway for a car to maneuver out of the garage. and um pull pull out straight out of the uh
driveway out to Highland Avenue. Um can I ask a question? Are there two um driveways right now? One on the side and one in the front. No, there's only one for this lot. Okay. Yeah. One paved entrance. Yeah. So, the ne the
neighboring one is is close. I think you could see it. Um Okay. The one to the west. Um it's close but sep separate driveway. Um I have a question. Sure. You just said the drive the garage was going to be on the side of the house. You show it on the back of the house. Um
on sheet on sheet two um the new garage faces the side. Faces the side. Um and in the existing one actually faces faces the rear.
So, Mr. Hollesman, to clarify, the addition is located to the rear, the addition that contains the garage is located to the rear of the house, but you enter the garage from the side. So, the doors face the sideyard. Correct. And the architectural plans might show
that a little a little uh clearer than than the site plans here. But um but as far as the expansion of the house goes from a geometric point of view in to the side and front there's no
expansion except for the yeah as was mentioned an additional front step. Um so that that's identified as existing 29.2 proposed 28.2 for the front yard. Um whereas the required setback is is 50
ft for this particular um zone. So that would be one of the variances along with two sideyard variances both both of w on both sides uh both of which are not increased relative to to the existing where 15's required um and we
have 13.5 and and 10.5 for the two sideyards um lot coverage again we're actually reducing that but because we're paving more the driveway you know the improvements to pick up collect some of that drainage and it proposed a drywall even though it's not technically
required was put in uh as part of the plan at this time. Um there's one tree to be removed uh located near near the um driveway, but otherwise um the trees on on the property are intended to uh to
remain So then just to clarify then driveway width is um being brought up to 10 ft where nine 9 ft was existing and the proposal to remove a portion of
the driveway on adjacent lot 32 is is part of part of the plan. And Mr. Holson, as you previously described, the portion of the driveway that we're proposing to remove will not impact the driveway or access of the neighbor. Correct. They have their own driveway. That That's correct. For that particular
lot on on the on the other side of the uh their lot actually. Are you counting that in the impervious coverage reduction? It's a wash in effect because we didn't count that as existing on our lot or
proposed. You only counted what was on here within the deed deed, right? Right. So, you're also reducing the neighbors coverage. Yeah, we're being nice. Yeah. Um, are there are there is it only
driveways? There's no trees being removed as part of that project at all. Um, there's one tree. I believe it's an 18inch caliper tree. Um, it's more clearly shown on sheet uh
three. I believe it's a maple and are you planning to replant? I think as part of as part of one of those Yeah. as part of agreeing to the comments and the letters. Um, whatever the tree requirement is, I think it was clarified what it should be and that would be
placed somewhere on the site. Um, and also it'll be talked a little more. There's a deck also proposed off the back of of the house with stairs leading to the backyard. Does the deck need the required?
Um, the deck would need to be 15 feet and I think it's a little under The deck. The deck's 11.3. And I think um I think one of Mr.
comments asked about the screening between that garage area and the neighbors. Is there any planned plantings that is going to go um that could possibly provide screening? I think he mentions
it in his comment number four. Um to the extent that there's room, uh yeah, screening is uh could be certainly added to the plan and be a condition of of any possible approval. Is there
there's minimal space? Maybe towards the back corner. Um there could be something added. I don't I don't think there's really enough space to plant anything in there. I know the board doesn't usually suggest
fencing as a screen, but I was think we'll hold that and see that comes up later. So, how far is the driveway from the property line that you're proposing?
uh h half a foot um along the stem and then it increases to about three feet at the back left corner. Would you need a fence? Yeah, a fence can go six inches off
property line. Yeah, but driveway 6 in off the property line. Well, you wouldn't be able to run it. Uh my main concern was that the screening where the garage doors are in that maneuvering area back there. You you you Yeah, you would need a variance to run the fence all the way up the line
along the drive. I mean, I don't even know. Well, I guess I don't even know if you squeeze it in there uh without encroaching on the neighbor's property at that point. Well, that's what I'm When you say half a foot, you're talking about a half foot to the back of the curb. Yeah, that's
know that to the to the degree. certainty yet because that's I left. Right. Right. Um I left. Yeah, I left one foot graphically. So
that that that could be shifted I think half a foot if we need it towards the house. But aren't there trees on your neighbor's property line about where you're putting the garage? Not on the line. Not sorry, not on the property line, but on on the back of
your the neighboring property right about the area where you would be building the garage. There's one. Is there screening there? There's some brush there that's not exactly mapped. I think we have some site photos that might help define that, but there
there's some not really maintained screening already that exists and I would say characterize it. It's on both lots right now. Um that effectively will provide some level of of screening but
again fence is a possibility that we could we could uh certainly discuss. Um it's just there's a they mentioned a variance and also having it that close to the edge of the driveway where we're making maneuvering um backouts is a little
bit limiting but certainly could be considered. Ju just be careful if you're trying to fit a fence in. You got 24 ft from the from the house to the curb line that really tight, right? I I agree.
cut that down or else, right? I I agree. The 24 is the minimum to make a maneuver out of the garage um and back up. And so the question is if you have enough room behind the just the apron portion, there's enough room behind that curb in the a portion to get
a fence and still maintain a six inch off the back of the fence. There is. Yeah. And not apron where the landing the landing portion, right? I had just one quick question. How did you achieve the reduction in the um lot coverage? The main thing was the the
gravel driveway that exists all around the back is being removed. So, even though you know I was at the site and it is there is gravel there. It just hasn't been maintained much, but it is gravel that's been used as a driveway um for a
period of time. Got it. Okay. Thank you. Actually, when I looked at it, I missed that garage in the back. They come all the way around and the garage faces the backyard. So, there's a long driveway to get to it. So, you're restoring all of the gravel
to grass. everywhere that's not being covered by either driveway or addition. Yes, correct. Right. And no patio beyond when the stairs come down, it's just going to be grass basically. That that's the proposed
uh plan. Yes. And this is a house that you're building, improving, and then selling, I assume. Uh I'm not exactly sure. I think the architect and maybe Nicole could speak to that a little bit more.
If that's the case, is there an opportunity um to have some kind of fund put aside so that if your neighbors to the east of you um since they have the room to put in some kind of
plantings that you would be able to it'd be on their property, but you would be essentially responsible to I can say from a legal point of view the neighbors would have to be here and they would have to agree to that
condition on the back of this house. My impression was it was pretty screen but I don't know if there were evergreen trees that seemed like there were a lot as council had noted, we would obviously have to coordinate with the neighbor to
do that. It's not our property, but we um have no objection to coordinating with the neighbor if there is an issue. Try to capture that some sort of Yes. It's a little difficult because we we can't just plant on their land, but you know, with the consent of the
neighborhood if so requested. Correct. All right. And then as far as the the letters from the professionals go, you know, I had a chance to review those and um and and talk to the applicant about it and there's we don't see any issue
going agreeing to addressing all those comments either on the plan or or with the the physical um uh construction of the site. I didn't answer my letter when you're
overware that Whatever they're given, that's a hard stop. Over that see over the existing front porch was added, correct?
I I believe um building coverage it's um added in and there's no coverage. Correct. And there's none proposed. Our architect will formally confirm that in testimony, but that's correct.
And there's an additional comment about the porch in Mr. letter which our architect will also confirm. We are not proposing to enclose that. It is just columns and a roof. And he'll confirm that. Yes. Correct.
Any further direct? No, that's all. Any other questions from the board? No. Are there any questions from the public for this testimony? Thank you. Thank you. Our next witness is our architect.
Andrew, can you please provide your name and business address for the record? My name is Andrew Pad Boresnak. P O D B E R E Z N I A K. Um the the address is 11 High Point Drive, HIGH, Point Drive,
Springfield, New Jersey. Can you please provide for the board your qualifications and experience? Uh I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey. Uh in short, um I graduated from New Jersey School of Architecture in 1985. By 1990, I received my license.
Been in my own practice for over 25 years. And your license is current, correct? My current my license is current. Correct. Have you been to before this court before? Uh long long time ago. Once. Yes.
Have we swore on? You swear affirm the testimony about providing the truth, the whole truth. Yes, I do. And you swear that the testimony you just gave is also the truth, the whole truth. I swear. Thank you. Thank you.
So, uh at present house, this this the existing house is one-story single family house. Um it it's because of the ground that it's sloping the the driveway is actually loops around the bag and entrance from it's a onecar garage but it's actually in a basement because it goes all the way around and
entrance to the back. Um existing house is roughly 1125 ft. has three bedrooms, one bathroom, kitchen, dining room and living room and then the garage in a basement that you enter through the basement upstairs. Uh also in the front there is a uh concrete platform which is
almost like a porch six feet deep all across the entire width but only center portion roughly 11 12 feet is under the roof. The rest of them is just a concrete platform on either side. Okay. ones of one of our proposal down the line when I will be explaining is
basically extending the roof and making the roof all across the entire front but it's there is an existing platform already there okay what we proposing to do is uh remove a section of the house in the back there is a bump out in the rear of the house of the main house uh
that we removing and we adding uh we adding roughly 30 by 22 feet addition which is 660 square feet we adding to the first floor and that will that will have a kitchen, bathroom and a and a family room. And then by doing
that addition, we closing off the the ba existing basement garage and we putting new garage facing as you're coming down to the right. So now we entering from the right. We're not going to have the all that that driveway coming all the way around. We're just coming down and entering the garage. And
at that point because the house is it's it's on the angle a little bit. Okay. We had to shift over on the right side so we can stay with the exact ex same amount of setback which is 15 feet there. We're keeping 15 feet but because
the drive the the addition is skewed we actually are getting 24 feet turn around there entering the garage. So we do have a turnaround space just because because of the houses being on the angle. Okay. So we proposing to add second floor
addition uh which which is roughly 1470 square feet uh which will have four bedrooms which is three normal bedroom three regular bedrooms with with closets and common bathroom. Then we have a master with with a couple closets and a sitting area and a bathroom and then
laundry and a and a two and there is will be two story for as you enter in. Okay. Uh, as I said before, the front porch, uh, what we're planning to do is basically put roof over the entire porch so it's aesthetically pleasing. So, it's it's it looks nicer. It fits into the
neighborhood. Uh, there is a there was that issue with that one foot setback, front setback, but again because of the height is just it requires by code to have a ex additional step. Okay.
Um see so this is I don't know I don't know if you can see this this is the this is the front porch the existing for porch the existing porch had a roof over it so now we trying to we proposing basically extend the roof to the right extend the roof to the left the existing front
steps there is actually one step there's a there's small platform and the steps there so that will remain except because of the of the height we have to add additional step. Okay. So, we we're proposing to pro basically provide the dining room, living room, there will be a guest room with a bathroom on the
first floor, powder room, uh there is a butler's pantry, and then the the addition rear would have a kitchen with a nice family room. While we're on the first floor in the porch, can we just please confirm for the record that the stairs will not be covered by a roof?
The stairs will not be covered. The roof will only go straight across over the main concrete platform. Okay. Anything in front of it will not be covered. And the porch is not proposed to be enclosed. Correct. No, the porch. No, they will only have four four columns and a railing as as everything as
required by code. While we're confirming things, the the plan set you're showing us that stated uh January 26, 2025. No revisions. Yes. Make sure the same thing. Okay. Thank you. So,
uh you have a basement floor plan which basically is showing the existing the the existing part part of the house that's being removed closing off the existing uh garage where before we had the cars going all around and basically
parked this way. So now we coming in and we coming basically to the right and this is we have in the basement twocar garage we have a small mudroom and then we entering the basement and through the basement going upstairs. Okay on the second floor this is the existing. So we
have a three bedrooms. We have a laundry room bathroom. Uh we have a master bathroom with couple walk-in closets. We have a nice master bedroom and a little bit of sitting area. Okay, that the the second floor addition
is 1470 square feet. So cows from a single from from one story Cape house becomes a two-story colonial house which fits very nicely into that neighborhood. It's it's it's well needed improvement.
Uh the material the materials that we will using will be basically vinyl siding but I think the owner is planning to do more of a black and white house black windows white siding with uh with board and b board and batton ver some vertical elements and then white
white shrimp. Um there was one comment in the review letters um from the planner relating to the second story and the overhang. Can you just clarify? Yes. Right. Right over proposing the second floor will have a
one foot overhang but it's over the new roof. It's not projecting anyway beyond the p front porch. It's just for for for adding a little bit three dimensions to the house. So it's now a plane across. We proposing that this little section would be basically uh overhang over the
over the new roof that we're proposing over the porch. Thank you. I think one of Mr. SL's comments asked you to talk about the condition of the existing existing you know do you feel that you do not need to
do total demolition visually the house is still in ver in good condition. It's a balloon framing on the side. So yes, we're right now the I think finished floor is 8'8 inches. We will be taking the entire ceiling. We adding to the 9 foot height on the first floor and then bas basically the do
conventional construction. Uh visually looks sound structurally sound. Uh it's I have no idea what's beyond plaster beyond the sheet racking but it looks in in decent condition. So I don't think there will be a need to taking it all the way down to foundation. Okay.
And are you comfortable with that? I'm comfortable with with that explanation just so the applicant realizes the importance of that that once you go beyond partial destruction you'd have to actually stop come back to the board for additional variances and that's going to throw you off a little bit. I mean the
idea all the contractors and everybody else know even though you're just taking down an existing wall and putting back the same thing only new it's still it's not going to cut it for the variances that this that you're asking for right now. The idea is to basically preserve as much as possible obviously and we're
not planning to go beyond that ceiling of the first floor. The that's the plan but the execution needs to match the plan. I do understand in this particular case it's very important. I do understand what and one
other relating to that. It's not in my memo, but I just wanted to ask for a a minor revision on the um on the floor plans in your legend where you show what's existing walls, what's new walls, and the like. Um you don't have a symbol
for you just mentioned the walls that you're building up. Yes, it's a white the white with the single hashing. It's existing wall, but we extending them four four inches to to have that 9 foot ceiling. I just want to ask you to add that to your legend so it's clear uh
when the construction will have I know you label it on the floor plan itself but you have all the other types of walls in the legend. Sure. No problem. Sorry. You're making the existing walls taller. Yes, we extending the existing
sister. Well, yeah, we're going to add and sister every six to eight feet. We're going to continue 2x4 just to for for strength, but most of it is just going to be adding 4 inches to the to the top of the wall. So your finished basement is going to be 7 ft high. So you're going to hold the floor. The
finished basement is it's Yes. Except there will be one step down for the garage. To the garage. You have to have it. Yes. Okay. How deep is the existing basement? the existing basement 7 ft. 7 foot height. Yes. So, you don't intend to go
any lower. Oh, no. They keeping the existing basement where it is. We're just stepping down once we have the addition to the mud room and to the garage. That's all we have for our direct test. Yeah, it will fit very nicely into the neighborhood. I mean, it's it's it's
twotory colonial, right? Are there any questions from the public? That's all the direct Mr. I think there's just two things to to confirm or clarify. Um just well we talked about the screening. I guess
we'll get to that. Um but uh number five in my um review memo about compliance with the tree replacement ordinance, I'm suggesting that the one tree that's coming down be replaced with at least one tree, a native hardwood
tree, regardless of whether the the tree replacement ordinance requires any replacements. Yes, we're confirming that we will agree to that. And the other um comment was um number six, they're putting in a dry well. The ordinance doesn't require a
dry well. So I would just make sure that's in the board's approval as a condition. So it ends up being constructed. Yeah. And other than the um the screening, everything in my memo was covered. Mr. Quinn, there is I think the
applicant agreed to it, right? The only issue I I saw was to make sure that you imagine the block walls with the retaining tie retaining walls just start fresh. If you're going to do all that work, you agree that then I'm
comfortable with everything else. Yes, we agree. Environmental commission. Yes. Dated March 25th, 2025. Yes. And we will agree with the comments in there as well. Usual standard fair management
practices best management practices to preserve protect trees best effort to plant the trees and shrubs. Just be aware of the potential ground tanks as best precautions and make a good faith best effort to
recycle repurpose or get any demolish. Yes. Not to me. Are there additional questions from the board? Might not have read this correctly. I don't read plans. How big is the deck?
12 by 20. 12 x 12. So that's big enough for, you know, table chairs, everything. I'm only worried about of course a patio being you know after a couple people have sold and bought the houses they want to put a patio back stone and more coverage that that is a sufficient deck
that can handle I've seen you know condos build tiny little decks and then everybody you know wants a bigger deck so or more areas so it sounds sufficient for a family of four okay thank you I have a question. I don't think
it's the is the property the property is being built as a spect or somebody I asked that. Hang on. Can you come on? I mean the council council can represent that. Do you want to answer or would you like him to answer? I can answer. Um yes, that's
correct. It will be built and then for sale. A couple I know we typically ask when it's additions. Um any exterior lighting fixtures come on back. I see at each door I mean we already required by code to have a light and and
a GFI outlet. So yeah there will be an exterior lighting and they'll be directed downward or shielded down. Correct. And then there will be lighting in the porch, but again down on the, you know, in the ceiling. The lights will be in the ceiling. And we're what we're proposing are standard residential
standard residential lighting. Correct. We're always worried about light going on other properties. So that's a conditional. Yes. And then um I think you've already represented with the plans the exterior of the addition, the whole dwelling, the addition, it's all going to be
architecturally consistent in terms of appearance. Correct. Okay. That's all. Yeah. I not sure who would answer this question. Did anyone speak with the neighbors? Either the owner or anyone
that's on the panel here or did any ownership or talk to anybody? Okay. Can you come up to the mic? We need to We need to just swear you in before answer that. Sure.
Yeah. Okay. All right. Sir, you swear affirm the testimony about provide will be the truth. The whole truth about the truth. Yes. Correct. Please name and I guess business address for the uh Amir Motivivala. The address is 5266 Foster Street in Piscadway, New
Jersey. Your last name. Um Motivivala is M O T as in Tom I W A L A. Thank you. I think Mr. PR was asking if you heard any concerns from any of your neighbors about the project or or
I have spoken to the neighbor on the left side. Um he's the one who he's the one who has a driveway close by. Yep. And and actually he's very happy that we're going to improve the property because right now the property is in a very bad shape. There bushes growing over. There's garbage outside and
inside. So and nobody's been living there for a while. So, he was actually very happy that we'll be cleaning up the property. Okay. Did he voice any concerns at all? Uh, he did not. And um he he he called me once that the front door was open. So, he he called me and
said, "Look, the door is open. Please close it." I'm sorry. I should have asked him. What's your relationship to the applicant? Grand home. So, I'm the owner of the company. Are you the builder as well? Um I have a
license too. Yeah. Yes. Any um other questions from the board? Okay. Okay. Thank you. Are there um any comments from the public on this application
or questions for that witness? That's right. Questions or comments this time? Anything else from us or anything else before you want to turn it over to the board or just briefly ination? We'd like to thank you for your time and listening to this application, we do think it is a great improvement for this particular
property and just a better planning alternative since although there are variances associated with it, we are actually eliminating some of those non-conforming conditions or reducing them with this proposal. We think the house will fit in really nicely with the neighborhood and and be a great
improvement. Thank you very much. Okay, I'll do my best. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. applicant here is seeking six full variances by my count. One is for the front yard setback. They're required 50 feet proposing 28.2. Next is for the easterly sideyard
setback. They're required to have 15 ft grandfathered in uh proposing again this is an existing addition being vertically exacerbated of 13.5 ft. Uh next is for the westerly sideyard setback also 15 ft required 10.5 ft proposed again vertical exacerbation
existing. Next is for the combined sideyard setback. Again, a vertical exacerbation. 40 ft required, 24 ft proposed. Uh, next is for the driveway setback. 5T is required there. They're proposing half foot 6 in. And then
finally, for the lock coverage, the required 18% that's the max peritted existing is 32.2. And then proposed is 22.3. 23.2. I think he said 32. Oh, I'm sorry. 20. Jeez, that must be sucks. Uh, 23.2. to existing 22.3 proposed. Right.
Right. As far as conditions, everything in Mr. Schlly's memo dated April or I'm sorry, May 1st. Um everything in Mr. Quinn's memo dated May 3rd. Everything in the Environmental Commission memo dated March 25th. I did note a few
things during the hearing. I'm going to come back more things that might require some discussion. They're going to revise the legend on the floor plan and the architectural plans to add a symbol for the existing walls that are going to be heightened. I think I capture that. Yes.
Thank you. Any exterior lighting would be downward directed downward and shielded not to cast light spillage on the neighboring properties and the exterior appearance of the addition would be architecturally consistent with the balance of the remainder of the dwelling. And I not sure if we really
close the loop on the screening of the driveway apa. I had on one hand we talked about a fence. We also talked about getting trying to get consent from the owners next door to add some screening if they wanted to on their properties, you know, with landscaping. So, I'm not really sure where the board
landed on that. I think we didn't. We'll talk about that. Okay. But that was the only outstanding condition. Okay, great. Does anyone want to kick us off with any comments or motions on this application? I guess the one opening is I know for
sure is on the screen. Um, I I can say that I've I was I drove by um the house. Um I don't live far from there beyond 200 f feet, but I don't live far from there. Um I do think that it is in need
of repair. Um I do not think that your proposal is at all outside of the character of the neighborhood. There are other homes on the street that have had additions. Uh the lots are very narrow. Um, and I do see this as an improvement
all around. Um, so for me, I I think that it's um I think it's a the drawings are beautiful. I think that the proposal is very nice. Um, and I think that it's something that's necessary. Um, I don't see it as any detriment whatsoever. Um,
I think that if the neighbors were concerned, they would be here and um or have written a letter or something. I think that um I think that your responsibility is for your property and um I think that there is some screening
there. For me, it's not necessary for us to put screening on somebody else's property. I think if they want to screen, they can. That's my opinion. Um so I wouldn't get involved with the neighbors property. I would let them come to you or come to us. Uh that would
be my thought. Um but I would be very much be in favor of this and I think um again no detriment. Um I think that it advances the um the um the multiple land use uh law. Um I think that it's not at
all out of character with the neighborhood. And I see because of the shape of the size of the lot, the narrowness of the lot, I think it's a hardship. So for me, I'd be in favor under C1. Thank you, Miss Bowman. Was that a motion or was that just that's up
to you and whether or not there are other comments? Are there other comments or should Miss Bowman keep going right into a motion? I completely agree with you. I agree as well. In that case, I would um deem the application I'm sorry just to confirm. So from what I'm I understand no
condition related to screening of the driveway. Okay. Understood. Thank you. Well, she's about to go. If the neighbors wanted screening, then they would Yeah, I I I I agree with that. As long as Yeah. As long as no screening is removed, that's we're not removing it. I
don't see an issue. And there isn't room on this property. If there was, we'd work something in. Yeah. It's important to think about our neighbors and and that's a it's a good thing, but I think in this particular case, um if there was a need, they would be here. So, um so I would um make a motion to deem the application complete. I would ask our
board attorney to um draft a resolution memorializing um the uh conditions and the stipulations um that the applicant has agreed to. And um I would make a motion to approve the
application under C1 and C2 and C2 because no detriment. Is there a second? I'll second. Thank you, Miss Pichi and Miss Bot. Thank you. All righty. Uh, Miss Bman, yes. Miss
Herrera, yes. Mr. Krauss, yes. M.I. Yes. Yes. Silver. Yes. Chairwoman. Yes. Good luck with the project. Looks like a great improvement. Thanks for doing that. Thank you. Good luck. Um, next on the agenda, uh, is
KCB25005. And I need help with the pronunciation of the last name, so I won't, um, say awesomeness. Awesomeness. Okay. Isunazadine. Okay. Yep. Close. Um, and shake like a handshake. Terrific. Okay. Thanks. Why
don't you um come up and we'll get prepared here. Um thank you everyone for being here. Just give us one second. Oh yeah, sure. Sure, sure. Make sure we have all your information. You can put your This is your plans for your house. Madam
Chair, while everybody is getting situated, I'll just put on the record, I did review their notice. I deem it to be sufficient in its content, timeliness of service. It was sent to owners of property with 200 feet certified mail on April 14th and also published in the Burnersville News on April 17th for the
10 days in advance of tonight's hearing and thus the board has the jurisdiction here to have the case and my legal opinion. Okay, everyone's ready. Terrific. Started swearing people in. Yes. Okay. So, we have to do it multiple times. Who's testifying tonight for you guys?
All three of you in four. Uh yeah, four there. Um sure. Yes. Okay. Everyone testifying just please raise your right hands and professionals as well. Do you all five of you swear affirm the testimony of the truth? The whole truth under the truth be okay. Great. Thank
you so much. Um first hello my name is Norine. This is my husband Kashiff. That little one and the other one is sleeping already. Um I wanted to just thank you all for being here um and hearing our application. We um are so excited to move to Basking Ridge. We've been looking for a town to settle down in
with a place we can put on roots and raise our children and join a community for so long. Um and finally, we found this beautiful little neighborhood. We talked to our neighbors and we fell in love. We walked the parks and um we knew that this was the town that we wanted to
to grow up in um and raise our little kids in. So, we are so grateful for you for letting us present our application here tonight. You would like to say something? Okay. Um, so without further ado, I know there were some questions um from our board and I'd like to pass it
over to our engineer. Um, but I just wanted to say hello and thank you. Terrific. Welcome to Bing. Thank you. Thank you. Hi. Could you just give us your uh your background, credentials, qualifications? Sure. Kirsten Austricorn from Austriorn.
I'm a professional land surveyor engineer and professional planner from land and ostricorn. I have my bachelor's in engineering from Ruckers University from 2006. My bachelor's in land surveying from NGIT from 2010. I've been
licensed in both since 2011 and my professional planning since 2013. All are in good standing in New Jersey. Um, I actually think I was in front of you guys, but it was like probably actually 10 years ago, which is weird to say. Probably before our time, I know, which is weird. It was like
probably the start of my career. I've actually been here before, okay, but it was at the beginning of it. But, um, everything is in good standing. I present a lot. I'm more focused in Bergen County, but I am in Morris County a lot. I'm in Union, Essex, Hudson, and
Payic. Um, I do come down to Morristown. This is where I started off with my original hiring and career was in Morris County. Um, so I am familiar with ordinances and the township around. I do my due diligence and planning my
plans. I don't know how else to give my credentials and and you're testifying as a planner. I'm going to be doing engineering and planning mostly. Surveying I don't think is going to come up. If it is, I can touch upon it, but it's mostly engineering and planning. Um
they have the couple variances but a lot of the questions that came up in all the reports are more engineering based. Okay. Thank you. And all your licenses are in good standing. Yes. Perfect. We will accept you. Thank you. So thank you
everybody. Uh I'm I'm going to point to the screen. This my board you said everything got changed. Um, so we are at 125 Lurline Drive and I say Basking Ridge, but I know it's in Bernard's Township. Um, block 7803, lot
2. The main reason we're here is that we have an existing nonconformities for lot width and lot frontage. Our lot area, the requirement is an acre. The property is at 70,525 square feet. So, we comply with that. The requirement for lot width is
200 and the existing right now is at 163.9. Lot front is is 100. The requirement is at 90 ft. As you read in the planner's letter, all of this changed in 1999. It did comply previously, but we kind of have this like interesting pie
shaped lot. Um, when I got brought on on the project by the the the buyers and developers of the project that wanted to live there, it was like, this was our home. This is where we want to go. And it wasn't until we got into the
architecture and zoning phase of stuff where it was like, oh shoot, we have some variances we have to deal with was not anticipated. Architecture- wise, everything was built in compliance. setbacks, front yard, rear yard,
sideyard coverages, everything was built in compliance. We go to submit and we're like, oh, we have lot issues, which is then which it goes into the combination of my engineering and playing testimony of being that main hardship of we have
an existing lot that has these hardships with it. Um, we have topographic conditions as the as the lot comes from. So, I'm going to use the left side to the right side. Everything is grading from the left to the right. So, the nor
the south to the north. Miss, I'm sorry to cut you off. Sure. So, we can confirm the same plan said it's March 18th, 2025. No revisions, right? Yes. Okay. Got it. I will only introduce one exhibit for your purpose. Appreciate But not right now. Um, yes, I should have
done that. Same set that was submitted. the existing conditions. There's an existing house right now in that neighborhood. There's a lot of um split levels and by levels of how the houses are formed. So the existing house, the driveway from Lurline goes down into the
property and you're about 5 feet from the first floor. You have to come up. Our intention, which then drove a lot of the engineering and environmental comments, is that they wanted an at level house that you come in the garage, you only have to come up two or three
steps, and you're at your grade level. From an engineering perspective, when we looked at everything, I said that's doable. We just have to make it work with how you place everything, which is what we did. But on that northeast side, we have that grade change happen. We
were able to bring in Phil and some of the comments were how much fill which when I looked at what was the existing dwelling versus the proposed we have about 750 yards of cut that's going to
happen out of the property. I can't specifically say to the exact number of fill. They're going to try to use as much of it as possible. But whatever has to come off the property, we're maximizing the slope that's permitted under the soil conservation district
where we have submitted to them for approval as well of in that that east sideyard. And the other part of that that I know has come up in the conversation which now I'm going to introduce an exhibit.
Introduce what is my aerial. So this is a colorized aerial. It's a colorized aerial and site plan. I was looking at the entire neighborhood. I tried not to make it look too outlandish, but we have the
trees in the rear yard that they are keeping, which I made green. And the intent of this northeast side is to keep the trees if possible. But I did speak with my landscape architect beforehand and understanding
the comments about the fill that's going to happen around the trees. It might be more prudent to remove them just based on their canopy level that it might not it might not enhance the trees that if we do a complete evergreen row, which is what the owner's intention was to do
anyway, and fill between the trees. But I think these two trees ultimately are going to have to come out, which we didn't show on the original plan. I do think that Sorry. You guys can't say I do think that is the intent and they will have that. So when I go back
to my original with that slope is that I talked to them. We're not going to do a fence because that's not going to really that sixoot fence isn't going to do anything. They want to plant something that will help support this neighbor to the east and also give them some privacy
and support this slope going down. And ultimately when I looked at the drainage side of stuff which I talked to them about is the intent of this drainage slope is everything in general from an existing conditions is going in this direction from a proposed it's still
going this direction. It gets concentrated in this area with this little bit of slope. But to my to their benefit, what I what I would propose is that the entire structure is getting put into a a drainage system, seepage pit,
and now the driveway is getting collected into the town system. So what currently exists right now with this single family home and the existing driveway with no drainage system is everything is going into that. So we are taking out the imperous coverage aspect.
So what will be still going to the neighbors is grass. It might seem more concentrated but they are doing going to be planting a nice evergreen row on this side with some of the comments with respect to the tree removal and
replacement that was looked into. Um we are going to comply with whatever the requirements are. So, we have to do a full tree removal, tree replacement requirements from whatever is being removed. Um, I'm going to take into account, going back to my aerial, of
what we're proposing here, and we're going to supplement that wherever possible. Um, we don't I spoke with the neighbors and the owners. They don't 100% want to do a privacy row in this rear yard because it will impact the
neighbors to the north. They have gardens and areas that they like. We don't want to block that sun completely. If we go back to this aerial I'm sorry before you go any further. So just I gota I do think sorry no it's all good. Exhibit A1. Yes. We already
established it's a colorized aerial site plan site plan exhibit. What's the date on that? Is that dated today? Yes. Okay. Thank you. So sorry now you're good. That's okay. Let me back to this. The ultimate intention that'll happen with
our plans to comply with both the environmental commission, the planner, and the engineer is that we have to do a tree replacement removal for whatever trees they have removed or are removing, which is all in the vicinity of the property and replace it. I don't
necessarily think they're going to do some sort of buffer along this side. I think they're going to go on the east side and the west side. Um, we have spoken with the neighbor and like the way the sun is going, we don't they don't we don't want to impact they have
a nice garden back there. We don't want to impact them on that level. Um, but ultimately we're going to comply. So, whatever that tree replacement removal requirement is for the number of trees that are being removed and however the ordinance is
part of that, um, that's what we're going to do. Going back to do I have to say the exhibit number again? That's not exhibit. These are the plants. No, these are just the plants. Okay. Um I Let's see. Um speaking to some of
the elements in the engineers letter, he asked about if the AC units were included. I didn't have them in the chart, so I will add them to the chart. We're still under coverage. That would just be a technical item. Um there was a revision to the required percentage that
we'll be able to do. He had a couple comments about my drywall details and curb details that I'll be able to comply with. Um I did mention so our fill I've approximated at 750 yards of cut. Their
goal is to fill that but whatever they don't do they're going to export. Um, there were other additional comments about checking some slopes, some technical comments in the engineers letter that I'll be able to do. The SED permit was submitted. So, any revisions
that are needed from the plan, we'll get to them for their comments, but we haven't gotten that back yet. We did submit that um with the environmental commission. Ultimately, all of their comments, we are going to comply with the clean fill that they are bringing in
or taking out. they're going to get tested and have that um be part of it. The tree removal and the tree permits that I just mentioned we're going to do. And similar to the previous application, the proper precautions for the demolition if it can be reused
or revitalized or however necessary donated donated they are going to do that. Um, with respect to the planner's comments, I have a couple things I need to add to the chart with respect to improvable lot area and building height
calculation as well as comply with the tree removal and replacement. Ultimately, I think everything I looked at prior to the meeting, all will comply. I just have if a condition of approval if approved of the minor adjustments for those three letters to
comply with all of them as a condition of technical details that they would need to say yay in simple terms um outside of potential any other
questions you may have. Yeah that you went through a lot there so make sure that all of those comments were addressed. I know Mr. Quinn, you had a lot of comments. Yeah. Are you comfortable? This is a very straightforward application. The thing that's so different about this, you're not going to be exporting soil from
this. I'm pretty sure. I don't think they are. I think the plan is to keep it and it was just balancing it out with the numbers that I was trying to do before the meeting. And I'm pretty sure they're going to do it. I don't think you have to get involved with that. I'm looking at that. I'm telling you there's going to be silver on this site. The
only reason I brought that up was because I don't know. I'm not account engineer. I'm the board engineer. So, I don't know what process they're going to have for clean you bring in to make sure. So, if it comes in that it's clean soil that they have to have it certified of clean soil. That's going to be the
biggest issue. Okay. Okay. So, I have a question. It looks like you're raising the grade but almost increasing the slope towards the neighbor's property. We are. Is that going to impact their property and their basement? I don't so
in um generally speaking no I don't think so because currently right now they have um they have roof water and pavement water going that's all just going into
that direction. So we're taking all of that into a system and away from them. So all they're then having is grass area. But I can I mean I can end up tweaking these contours to make it more of like the swale type that just runs along the property lines. So we don't
want it to necessarily which would be the ultimate intent when we end up when we meet the contour line. It's supposed to be that it's like it's at a V position which is supposed to then be it goes in that but I can add the call out of being like swale direction like away
from neighbor of making sure that the contractor does that but ultimately they're technically having less runoff because it's going to be grass runoff versus pavement or roof runoff that comes to them right now of how everything is draining because now we're
taking that all the way to a system in the front yard. So would you consider a retaining wall there so that we so that was a consideration we did toward someone else. Well we considered that but then it was the view of like if we can put so the because that view would
be for the neighbor's view. So still the water is going in that direction. And it was a consideration we did have is that if we have a retaining wall here, the water is still going to go that way, but now the neighbors have to see a wall with like plantings on it versus now
we're just we're going to do that arborvite row and have it that is going to absorb all some of the water as well that they're not going to see as much of it. that can get built into that like the swell can get built into that planting area versus a two to three foot
wall. Then the neighbor ends up just seeing a wall. Doesn't look like it's going to be that tall. It looks like no more than 5t. Well, what what would be five feet? Well, we would we wouldn't want it to be that tall. I mean, that would end up
being structurally calculations and sound. If anything, we would have done a two to three foot retaining wall that would be just off the property line. Um, not to have to generate structural calculations and then you're still having I mean a
five foot wall. I mean, not to be I'm I'm five feet. I mean like someone just the mess looking at a five foot wall. Yeah, I know. So, I'm just like they can get a gradual slope with like plantings on it versus like a wall in front of them. What is the slope you're showing
on? Is it three to one? It's a 3 to1. So I I agree with her that overall the drainage pattern they're drawing water away from the backyard. Now all of the runoff from the driveway goes to the back all of the So there is something to what she says. They're they're directing the driveway albeit with a lot of fill
to run out and they're collecting the house. So to me it's not a runoff issue. It's an erosion issue. Right. If it's if if the st if it's 3 to one or better it should be easier to stabilize. I actually prefer a vegetative situation
like that rather than retaining water. Yeah. Yeah. So for me it's not about the drainage, it's really about the erosion. As long as the thing stays stable, I I wouldn't necessarily see the need for retain. What but what about having the um having the swale and I don't I mean
they have I think as it is now they kind of have a swell on the property line now. If that to if this too is it is and I think that the way that it would meet and I can add a note to it of just saying like keep a swale along the property line and when we for this for
this homeowner we stake out the building and we could stake out the property line just being like swell along here like this is what would the applicant stipulate to maintaining the swell along that line? It's just a depression just a depression and grade just to make sure to make sure
the water it's going to run along the property line. want to make sure that what you're doing isn't going to make a bigger problem for your neighbor. No, that was we wanted to make sure that our neighbor in lot three doesn't get any more. But it sounds like the the way Kirstson had it planned it reduced. We
also have the note on our sorry Easterly property one. Yes. It's kind of an oddly sorry. No, you're good. You're good. Um we also have noted which they are aware of of that it's not supposed to impact your neighbors. So if there is any issues like we have to correct it. So
during construction I mean if like something were to happen they'd be like hey we have all this water like they have to fix it. I mean that's part of kind of the how the whole construction happens is don't impact your neighbors and I think I have notes of saying the same thing of this will not negatively impact your neighbors and if there is
they need to correct it and that's part of how the drainage pattern is supposed to happen. It's still supposed to follow the natural drainage pattern while we tweaked it. still going to go in the same direction, right? It's depending. There's no toppo off the property line. So
really without toppo off the property line, there's no telling how much they'll be able to craft the square on their side. What they're doing is they're meeting the grade at the property line, which and the grade looks like it runs perpendicular to the property line, so it shouldn't go cascading along to the neighbor's
property. But I don't know that they'll have enough room to actually construct a swale there because there's not enough on the property line for me to assess whether or not they're just going to meet the grade or they're going to be able to actually create a soil. But you're satisfied with the line of
vegetation that it'll absorb any excess water anyway. It's about the erosion. As long as the thing is stable and vegetated and it doesn't erode, there should be no impact to adjacent properties because there's going to be a lot less area throwing runoff to that side of the property. Just now they're
adding the potential erosion because they're steeping the slope. That's all. You're talking about like a packand kind of vegetation with some kind of grass. I mean, if it's 3 to one, you don't even need pack of sand. You could do grass or it's really a question of what they want to mow. Three to one becomes hard to
mow, right? But in that area, they were I mean, they were planning that that we one of the comments was about um light. Yeah. the cars because we're going to be up higher. So, they are fully they want to plant a whole privacy row of trees
there. So, all that's going to be of the grass area, which I'm assuming they're not going to mow that, is going to be some sort of mulch p like whatever can be between the driveway and their arborites that they're planting in this in this easterly side here, especially
behind the garage. And they're going to continue it forward not to impact that neighbor because they are coming up higher. And Mr. Sly, are you comfortable with your comment seven when you discuss the plants, the buffer plants to the lot on
the east that the the plants are going to reflect that? Yeah, I mean, I think that's what I'm hearing the applicants proposing, a buffer at least along that garage portion of the uh the driveway. And um similarly on the other side
uh the other neighbor where um I mean you're just having a bigger house getting closer. I think there should be some buffering there as well. That was my main concern. those two points which yes ultimately they will comply with and we have to do the full tree replacement
uh removal replacement plan and so whatever that number comes out to be but the goal will be on both of the westerly and easterly sides for the number you need to mention that you have stipulations such that the westerly side because I know they are removing trees
here that are close to where the house is on that westerly side so when we come up with the full numbers that to the satisfaction as if approved a condition of resolution that we have to put all those numbers together of making sure it meets the chart requirements is that that goal would be on that westerly and
easterly side. Okay. But if that's not adequate screening there would need to be more trees regardless of what the number the ordinance they are going to comply with all trees. So we'll have stipulations. Yes. Um for adequate
screening on both the eastern and western sides. Yes. And then whatever is technically needed for compliance with tree removal and replacement. Yes. Because we're not indifferent to where they go. Yes. Wherever they go. But both screening and otherwise. When you're
talking about trees coming down, there's two beautiful Japanese. We asked about them. We love them. Yeah. They're beautiful. Where are those? Right next to the driveway. Oh, they did ask about that. I felt so bad. She did what? When we did the original plan, we
talked about trying to change the driveway specifically because it was asked to try to, but when we were trying to bring it in and where that those I so I I can see where those are, but to try to I we
talked about flipping the house. We went through a whole concept of flipping it. It did not work. I know we went there was lots of concepts going through it and I'm sorry we couldn't get to that level. A concept of flipping was part of it to save those trees and it
just like didn't work for the rest of the house and everything like that. But that was really a consideration and they specifically asked for that. Not just flipping. I mean generally whenever I've done subdivision work and there's reasons for it, but you always try to put the the garage on the high side. It was the same conversation. It's easier
to get the driveway pitched out. But in this case, and I looked at that, but you got a utility pole pretty much right on that side dominating that. There was a like from when they bought the property to architectural face engineering, the
thought process that went into there was a lot that went into it. And I from the beginning said the driveway should be on the left side and it just didn't. It just didn't work from the that part of it was the utility. It just didn't it conceptually just couldn't work. We did
consider it. That is the consideration. That's also why it delayed them a little bit. It's my fault. On that side, our neighbors driveway actually comes onto our lot. So then it would have made our lot a little bit a little bit. It just like I see cuts into the rightway in front of here.
Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And then her mailbox is on that side of her driveway. So it's on our lot. Yeah. We have to move ours even over more. So the delayed side of the design, I mean, there was it was not just a flimsy let's just do this. There was a long-term process that went
through planning how they did this with the architect and myself because I did tell them that it should be on the other side. It did not work. It just didn't work. We tried. And um the pictures that are in the
application, who took those pictures? Conor. Our architect. The architect. Okay. And do you know when they were taken? I can find the date approximately. It was approximately a month ago. About a month ago. And does the property um you know the pictures I'm talking about,
right? Yes. Does the property essentially look the same in these photos? Can you just identify like just what trees are coming down? You can take it back. Everybody has a copy of this. You want just kind of show us the front of the house. Are those big
coming down basically? So this is that is so this tree and there's this big one the big Those are coming down. No, the the two big evergreens in the
front are coming down. There's another tree. I was trying to see where it was. It's hard to see. There's a lot of might even be able house. The ones in the front of the house have
to do they have to do with the driveway. had attempted keeping them but when we well it come copy that very fundamental question you guys are
knocking down the existing house yes should I have said that from the beginning I think we knew that sorry knocking down building a brand new house no one's living no one no but if they were We would tell them first.
I would hope or the trailer on the side. Or the trailer on the side. We would be like, "You guys have to leave before we knock down your house." But no, it's fine. Any um additional questions? So, I just have a question about the setback. Um I know in Mr. Schlly's letter it notes that it might cause some other
problems if we were to move it back, but can we just um talk about that a little bit? Like if you were to move it back 10 ft, I guess you really would be out of line with houses as well. Correct. So that's it was kind of a combination of that like
so yeah it does fit nicely. We went back where the seven it's a 75 foot requirement. We were at 75 and a half the existing was 80 but I was kind of like if we go back and it pushes all the slopes back. I mean kind of that no I see it. Yeah. They're trying to follow
the when I was when I visited the property I thought to myself it could move back. But when you look at it like this you can how it all falls in in the same line and it makes more sense. I guess you couldn't have push the house
to the right and made it a front end. Uh we No, that actually was looked at but again it was looked at the neighborhood which all of them have side entries and it just would have looked different when I came into the the planning side of stuff of being in
conformance with the neighborhood. They mean literally all of them are the right side entry which when I had suggested the left to flip it, it was pushed back a little bit from the homers respectfully of what they wanted and it was like but now when you look at it I'm
like they're all the same right side entry garage that a front entry just wouldn't look kind of it wouldn't look right in the neighborhood which then I have to put on my testimony as to why and that just I wouldn't be able to do that. I mean, so ultimately at the end, I
mean, I know and we we're going to circle back to this. So, they are proposing a conforming single family dwelling. There were concerns about grading and drainage and landscaping, which I believe we all addressed through the testimony. We're
going to comply with all three letters that are required. We're submitting to soil conservation district. We will be doing the tree removal and replacement plan that's required. I gave a conceptual plan um for just for purposes
but whatever is needed to comply with the ordinance but at the end of the day we are here based on existing nonconformities of the lot with respect to lot width and lot frontage we aren't asking for setback variances coverage variances we are dealing with a
completely C1 hardship of the lot and at the end of the day I feel like that justifies itself in fully supporting this application Um, and summing that up as well, if it were approved, I have some questions after with respect
to how the approvals work after and building permits and things like that, but only if approved that I can ask that after the fact. But in summary, yay, this application.
Um, Mr. Mr. Are you comfortable that uh everything in your memo uh was agreed to and addressed? Yes. Okay. And Mr. Clinton, same. Great. We have uh an environmental uh commission letter. I think you said you agreed to the comments. Yes.
Um dated April 28th. Yes. There was something in there about correcting the contours on the northeast part. Yeah, there was something about labels I have to fix. I saw that. I'm gonna do that. That was just a text issue. Okay. It's not going
to bring attention to it, but okay. Any other questions uh from the board for our engineer planner? Are we dealing with the multiple land use law or the municipal land? Any questions? Multiple. I know.
Any questions um from the public? Oh, was it now? Any comments from the public on this application? Okay, please do. You have to come up, please. You have to you have to reame.
Okay, I can do that. I swear. And we need to swear you in. Oh jeez. Raise your right hand. It's just a good comment. Well, whatever you want. Okay. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to provide will be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so I'll be God. Yes. Name and address, please. Sure. Patricia
Jehovah, 144 Gulch Drive. I am behind. Is that where you live? Right there. Right there. Okay. And do you have a comment on this application? This is my garden. Looks nice. It is. It's big. My My husband did it all for me. Anyway, the
house is in disarray, so we're very excited that um something has been done. We noticed as soon as they cleared the brush how it all of a sudden opened up. So, we're looking forward to having a beautiful house on the property to look at. We have a ton of trees um over here.
So, we don't even see, you know, the house from us. So, I I just mentioned that there's really no need for for them to put anything um for for our from our perspective. I'd rather not have trees because I need the sun. Um, but anyway,
just looking forward to having and it's I'm sure you drove back by. It's it's in rough shape, so it'll be great for Basking Ridge. Thank you. Do you have any drainage issues on your property or that property coming over? No, there is um like over here there it's it's pretty
high actually. You can see the kind of um it's like a steep drop off to get to ours in the back, but we don't I don't have any drainage issues in between I mean not this isn't about your neighbor that's next to them, but is there any
issue with the three properties? No. No. And when they did our house, they did great. Our drainage on our house is is pretty fabulous. When Ida hit, we had no nothing in the basement. So it was like they did it right. So drainage really does
does come into play. Yeah. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. Thank you. Any other comments? Okay. Anything else for us or or would you like to turn it over to the board? Anything else for us or would you like to turn it over to the board at this
time? Uh, I would like to turn over to the board. Thank you for your time. Thank you. Thank you everyone. Thank you everyone. Don't thank us yet. Don't thank us yet. They haven't voted. Okay. So I've noted uh I think two both variances are being requested again existing conditions
they're seeking a relief for lot frontage 100 ft required 90 proposed and existing plot width 200 ft required 163.9 ft proposed and existing as far as conditions go stipulated to everything in Mr. memo May May 1st everything in
Mr. memo dated May 3rd this year obviously and then everything in the environmental commission memo which I think was dated April 28th of this year. Uh additionally I did note a few things. The plans would be revised to add uh the air conditioning units to be included in
the coverage calculations. Talk about the memos. They would add a note to the plans indicating that the swale along the east property line will be preserved. And then um I know tree replacement was already covered Mr. SL
but all the replacement trees will be planted in a manner to provide adequate screening along both the easterly and westerly property lines and further supplemental plantings shall be planted as required ultimately subject to the review and approval of Mr. Y. Okay. How do you write your
resolutions after comments from uh the board? uh or motions from the board on this application. I am in favor of the application. I think it's a significant upgrade to what is there now. That house
looks to be almost uninhabitable and it it um I think you're trying to you talk to the neighbors. You have done your best in terms of the um erosion issues, drainage issues. So,
um I feel that certainly it is a um that I would be in favor of approving this application. Thank you, Miss Pichi. Any other um comments, suggestions, motions? I would I would agree with um Miss
Budichi. I think that um I think it's an improvement. Um certainly um I I'm grateful that you're looking into controlling some storm water management. Um, and I I do also see this as a C1. Do you want me
to make a motion? Yes. So, I would deem the application complete. Uh, I would make a motion to uh for the uh board to approve this um application and to um direct our board attorney to um draft a resolution
memorializing the board's decision um with all of the stipulations and conditions uh addressed this evening. And I will second that motion. Thank you. Thank you both. Yeah, I would just add I I think it could also be C2. I'm not really sure only because technically
they could move the house back. We don't want them to but they could. You find that it promotes the purpose which is to promote a visually appealing environment. I'm probably paraphrasing that. Yeah, it it we mentioned it as we
were deliberating that it's more in the character of the neighborhood. It just feels right, I think, to leave it where it is. So, it's not hard to find the basis of my experience. Yeah, we'll throw that in. Okay. Okay. So, we had a motion and a second. All righty. Miss
Bman, yes. Miss Herrera, yes. Mr. Krauss, yes. Miss Pichi, yes. Miss Pear, yes. Miss Silver, yes. Chairwoman of Engineers. Yes. This is a great project. So, welcome. I think it'll be great. I do have a nice little helper here. I do
have a question for um the resolution will hit the next meeting. Good luck. Okay. Are are they able to submit for building permits and then it's conditioned upon receiving the resolution for the building department? Like can
they call tomorrow? Okay. Okay. They were asking that too. They can apply and then we were also discussing that like 45day appeal period if they write a letter to continue. That's them. But it would just be more of if they can sub start their per like
demo and permit submission. Okay. So I will talk to you. You run you do that at your own risk. I've advised them of that. It was just more of wanting to make sure that we didn't step on any toes otherwise. I appreciate the board's time. Thank you so much. I should be
attorney in my next life. May I have a copy? May I have the exhibit, please? Yeah. Thank you. Can you say thank you? Okay. Next uh on the agenda is 8D Raymond uh ZB25006.
Can we have a quick Yes. Yes, we can. We're going to um call that in five minutes. Uh so we're going off for five minutes. We'll be back in five minutes. Okay, we don't but we could should we Okay,
thanks. We are um going to reopen our meeting board. Do you after a quick break and it looks like uh we are all back on the um so I think we had called uh the Raymond case
ZB25006. Sorry. Thank you. Correct, Madam Chair. Just let out council get started in a second. I'll just know for the record their notice was sufficient sent on time content was good. April 16th it was mailed out and published in the ver news on April 17th more than 10 days in advance of tonight's hearing. So
board has the jurisdiction. Thank you Mr. Z. Thank you. Good evening madam chair members of the board professionals Frederick Zelli Postpollock on behalf of the applicants Wakas and Arou Raymond. Uh this is regarding seven Fenwick Place. It's block 7702, lot 10.04, located in your
R4 zone. Properties are recently developed single family residential property located on Fenwick Place, which is a short culde-sac located off of Valley Road. Properties fully conforming as to bulk requirements save for the front yard setback for various relief, was included as part of the original
subdivision application. So, that's already been approved. The applicants wish to construct a modest 512 ft inground swimming pool in the rear yard of the property. Project will require variance for excessive imperous coverage. The installation of the proposed ingground swimming pool
including its coping and equipment pad uh will increase the existing imperous coverage on the property to 7,562 ft which is 17.3% of which 512 uh square feet is storm water neutral as we've discussed
many times. Uh also 276 square feet is loose stone surrounding the HVAC equipment uh and the pool equipment. Uh this is loose stone in the true sense. It is not something that's being walked upon or uh compressed by vehicles or anything like that. Uh if the water
surface in the stone areas were disregarded, the coverage would be 15.1 15.51% where 15 is permitted under your ordinance. project will also require variance from everyone's favorite ordinance, section
21-18.1, which in pertinent part requires a swimming pool to be located behind the rear building line of an existing residential structure on an adjoining lot. Since the adjacent lot 10.03, which is 11 Fenwick Place, is located on the bulb of the Fenwick Place culde-sac, the home is located that's
located on that lot is oriented in such a way that the applicant's proposed swimming pool cannot be located behind the rear building lot of the home. In fact, the applicant's entire lot uh is located in front of that building line. So, it's simply impossible to comply. I have two witnesses this evening. Wakas
Raymond uh our applicant and Paul Gdansky, our engineer and unless there are questions from me. Madam Chair, I'd like to say for the record that I was on the planning board when the subdivision was approved and I
was on the subcommittee that do a walk through with the neighbors and with the builder um as part of the planning board um as part of their
process they they did do a walk through a subcommittee did a walk through of the property with the neighbors before the subdivision was approved. So I'd like to have that on the record. Okay. Thank you. was that in
um about seven or eight nine years ago. Okay. Thank you. I will just note for the record before I forget, I took the photographs that have been submitted and there'll be testimony regarding those. Uh they were taken mid to late March. Thank you. Of this year. Of this year.
Yes. Okay. Let's swear everybody in. Got our board professionals and your two witnesses. to all for you. We swear or affirm the testimony you're about to provide will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. So, hope you got Yes, I do. Thank you so much. Start with Mr. Raymond.
Hi, good evening. Mr. Raymond, where do you presently reside? Seven Fenwick Place. And when did you purchase this property? Uh, we moved in August of 24. Uh, it was purchased in uh late 21 November. This is new construction and you're the first
resident, correct? Okay. Uh, and with whom do you live at the property? Uh, my wife and three children. And your children? Boys and girls? Uh, two girls and a boy. Seven, four, and a one-year-old boy. Okay. Uh, let's start with the photographs. We submitted a packet of photographs. You have them in
front of you? Yes. Uh, I'm just going to ask you to take one at a time in the order they appear and just tell the board what is portrayed in each picture. Uh, and please confirm that they still still looks that way today. Okay. So, um, so the first one is the front of the
house, street view. The second photo is to the left of the house, still the front view from the street, the culde-sac. Next is the left posterior of the house. The following is facing south in
the rear of the house. backyard. The following photo is the same view from the rear um uh uh of the house, the uh back of the property. The next is a direct uh
posterior visual of the back of the house. Uh then we have a uh north facing uh view from the back of the house. Uh this is a same the next is the same visual. um kind of adjacent to the
back of the uh the uh the house. And then we have a um look at the rear of the house um approximating um I guess where the uh proposed pool would be. And the last is facing um the side
of the house uh view of the main um Fenwick road. Oh, actually second to last. The last is uh a direct uh site of the right of the house uh coming from the uh right right side uh of the property. And all of these photos are accurate as of when
they were taken aside from some seasonal uh changes to the landscaping. Thank you very much. And we're here this evening because you'd like to install install an ingground pool in the backyard. Is that correct? Yes. You have three kids. Does that have anything to
do with why you want to uh it's the 100% the primary reason why we want to make a nice fun safe place for the kids to enjoy outdoors. So, um just so the board's clear, uh you did have a earlier version uh of a plan
which was a much different plan with a patio surrounding the pool and everything else. First, I want to make sure everybody's looking at the current plans. No patio was submitted 10 days ago. Sure. Well, that that's a color.
That's a visual. Yeah. Can we skip the revised date of the plants? Whatever the date April 17 Oh, I got 41725. That's the last. Thank you. So the good news from a coverage perspective is we've removed a lot of
coverage. Bad news is it doesn't do too much for us ultimately because we actually had the wrong percentages on the first plans. We thought we had an 18% zone and we have a 15% zone. So we're still here and of course we're still in front of a cold sacked house anyway. So we'd be here no matter what.
Uh but I did want to make sure you have the right plan in front of you. And uh Mr. Ron, if you would just in your own words, Mr. Gdanski is going to give us all the technical details, but just tell us what it is that you're looking to accomplish by installing pool. Uh, so we're looking to install an
ingground uh pool with a uh retaining wall for support for the appropriate safety measures and then um additional uh space for the appropriate electrical um and heating equipment. Uh is there do I recall there retractable covers? Yes.
Yes. Yes. Correct. Uh just uh looking at the plans uh the portion of your home that's that the pool's behind so to speak, you have a covered patio type area. Uh correct. Yeah. So there it'll be directly behind a covered patio space. Pre-existing.
Correct. And there's an outdoor kitchen and so forth. Exactly. It's an outdoor space kind of our entertainment area. Correct. But all of that's pre-existing. Pre-existing. Correct. Yeah. Nothing will change there. Are you removing any trees as part of this project? No. Okay. the photographs looks like there's no trees. There's no
trees to remove. So, planting some trees eventually. Yes. Yes. We would like to to spruce it up a little bit. Uh do you stipulate that uh no above ground lighting will be installed for after dark uh and that any lighting will be down or at least be
your typical underwater type pool lighting? Yes, I do. Nothing that would offend the neighbors. Correct. Okay. Uh, and you understand that the town has best water best practices that they request for disposal of pool water and so forth. You agree to those? Yes, I do.
Have you had occasion to speak with any of your neighbors about the project? Uh, yes, all the neighbors. Um, nobody's raised any concerns. Okay. Have you spoken with any of the neighbors behind you on the street behind you? Uh, Con Wedgewood, I have not. to know, but I um
have not heard of any complaints or any concerns. And you're completely buffered by the Yeah, there's from the tree preservation, right? Correct. And there'll be a secondary kind of privacy line that'll go up in that area eventually.
Have nothing further for Mr. Raymond at this time. Thank you. Hey, Mike. You took the pictures yourself? I did not. No, they would be a lot more blurry if I did. This was a Yeah,
photography. What was that? I said moonlight. Yeah, they're pretty good. There are no questions from the board. I'll call Mr. Gdansk. Is there an existing fence around the whole perimeter of the house that's
going to be used for a pool or uh our house? Uh not yet, but that'll be phased. Yeah, that will be done eventually. Yeah, but there's nothing there right now. Okay. total offense are you thinking? Uh I don't think we've gotten that far,
but I think there's a certain My understanding is that there has to be certain criteria. Four foot on the four foot. Yeah. Yeah. Because there's a fence existing fence. Yeah. So actually both neighbors have ex So we'll probably just match whatever. Exactly. On both sides actually. Yeah. Yeah. A black a
black Yeah. It'll it's all the houses have the same type of fence. Anyone from the public have questions for this? Okay. No, I I actually do. So, is there is there any screening proposed around
the pool itself? There's going to be plants on on top of the wall on top of the walls. There'll be some plantings between the walls and between the pool and the wall. like probably like shrubbery land.
I think you're pl you're planning on doing some writing. So the immediate Yeah. So we would put in the um Yeah. I mean there there's vegetative buffering on So there's existing on the back property. Yeah. Sides also. So when you're looking at the house, correct? I
mean it's it's almost completely open. all around the house. Yeah, except I mean I I know there's a nice buffer in the rear. Um there's no buffer on either side though. Um and then like if I were to like I could just walk into your
backyard right into the pool. So as it stands now, so I understand you're proposing to put a fence, but I'm just wondering if you're proposing to put any other Right. So, um, the property to the left of us already has kind of an evergreen, um, line that'll
be extended, and the idea is to put a, uh, perimeter privacy line, um, both to the right and then ultimately to the front of the house as well. You say to the right, you mean to the south? Uh, to the south. Exactly. Yeah. Can you put it
on the right here? I mean, even you can see from the pictures that you can see right into your neighbor's yard who has the pool. So, it's I'm not saying he already the entire property has some pri some screening. So, there's going to be some
planted here because your original photograph which is with I know you're not doing this plan any longer, but you had the Yeah, those still. Yeah, they'll still do that. Just not the patio. Correct. Yes. Correct. That's what I was. Yes. Okay. Perfect.
Thank you. And if you look at the seventh photograph in the packet, you'll see on the property to the left of the street perspective, they do have a private. So the thought is to continue that line concept on the other side. Yeah. Thank you.
So looking at some of the pictures um perception um your neighbors It looks like it's a slope down into their drive into their garage area or sort of where the pool you're looking at
the third picture. Is that right? Um, two fifth picture. Um, so I guess is there a concern with not only water runoff for them but also Looking at some of the other pictures,
it looks like the house behind you is actually much lower than you. So again, is there concern about water runoff given that you're going to be taking a lot of soil out to create any ground? I will ask Mr. Gdanski to give an overview of how the property functions from a
drainage perspective. I think we're ready. Were there any uh questions from the public based upon any of the recent testimony? Okay. Thank you. Mr. Gdansky, you're up first. Would you start by giving your uh professional and
educational background? Sure. My name is Paul Gdansky, GDSKI, 3512 Whittier Court, Mwa, New Jersey. I've been uh practicing engineering for about 25 years. I have a master's degree in civil engineering
from NJIT and my license is current is current. Okay. We will accept as a expert architect engineer. I'm sorry. Would you begin by uh describing the property in its current state and as
part of that would you please explain how the drainage currently works? Sure. So currently the property is slope southerntherly toward towards house number three. There's a the house sits on top of like a high point and everything is sloped towards the south.
I'm sorry. I I Oh, I'm sorry. So currently it goes south. The house kind of sits on like a high point and then everything goes downhill from there. with the with the propo with the proposed pool, we're actually going to
help a little bit because we're raising the grade, slowing the runoff, and also building these walls that will also flat kind of flatten that area. Additionally, I'm proposing a a perimeter drain around the pool that will collect the water and
direct it into a dry uh cult system that will put the water back into the ground. 50 words or less, what is a cult system? It's basically a dry well. Okay. But they're cheaper. They just take up more surface area.
Is the reason you reduce the cult system by hat because you got rid of that? Yes. That's my guess. The pool equipment is located in that the pool equipment's located by the AC units in the generator corner area.
Yeah, in the corner there makes the most sense. And would you take us through your design? I mean I basically I basically did if you do have the pool equipment there usually you have to pump water out the pool occasionally. They can pump it
into the cultex if they need to. Okay. That's going to be an option to do that. I don't Well, there'll be there'll be cleanouts in it so they could just open the clean out and pump the water into it if they had to. Um and what type of pool is being installed? It's a 16 by30 in vinyl in
ground pool and we're still proposing retaining walls and landscaping. Could you describe this? Correct. There they'll be landscaping. There's two a tiered retaining wall with landscaping between the walls and between the pool and the wall. Just for the record, are there any wetlands or wetlands buffers on the
property? No. No state open waters? No. No steep slopes in the critical sense? No. Okay. Any any environmental constraints at all? No. Not at all. Okay. And we've indicated no no trees are being proposed to remove. That is correct. Can I ask one question about the cover?
It's a retractable automatic cover. Yeah, it's an auto cover. Is that a permeable or is that like a vinyl? It's like that mesh. It's a mesh. So water through it. Yeah. Okay. Additionally, I I read the the memos and I have no com issue with any of the memos from the
professionals, too. So, just for the record, that would be Mr. Quinn's report and Mr. Schlly's review memo. Yeah. And the environmental commission as well. Okay. So, we can comply with everything. No issue. The only thing on my drainage
is originally have a per Yeah. Now it'll just be around the pool. But there's really nothing coming from the pool. That's all green area. So you're over in cover for the lot of the house. Yeah, we can do that as well. I
remember this application came and they had system. So that's the over here. So the houseed Grab a piece of the house and put it ready. You don't
have to worry. Yeah, that's perfect. It saves my client some money as well. Y Is there any pool lighting? Probably inside the pool. Yeah. Okay, that's it. Yeah, that's it. You said 16 by 30 32. Yeah, 16 by 32.
So, what what's the construction of the retaining walls? It's just going to be block segmental block. So, you included coverage. I've always understood Mr. Schling under them and water drains through.
You told me block because it sits on a bed of gravel and drains. Okay. All right. I thought you told me just the opposite. a man-made. Yeah. Yeah. But there's no segmental block walls. What I'm saying
like an Allen block. Okay. I I thought at one point in one of the one of the hearings you had said that that type of wall didn't count as lot coverage because It sits on gravel and does not have a
footing and water flow. is like he's talking about I'm just saying this is from memory that I said this on the ground. Okay, that was a question. I thought
that was not considered. My other question is is the AC and generator pad got quite a bit smaller. How did that happen? Because I took out the stone. The stone is a different if
you look at the stones. That's why. Okay. And I just want to make sure that I followed it correctly. So on Mr. slice comment 6C. That's how Mr. Zel, you were saying
we were 15.4, but we and not 15. Is that where that Let me see. The calculations indicate the loose stones are 276. There were there were some differences uh in their calculations versus ours.
and like the size of the equipment and things like that. I believe Mr. Gdansky I broke it all out separately. Yeah. Yeah. And do you agree then that the actual lot coverage is 15.4 currently? Yes, that's what I have. Okay. Okay.
Yes. I'm trying to clarify six. Did you see where I was coming from items in your Yeah, I fixed it. Yep. No, I have no I mean, I'm sorry. I have no problem with the with the comp. I guess more importantly, does that affect
your between closer to correct. I mean I I measured it off the the survey. So that's that's the numbers I was getting. These numbers here are the numbers that I calculate using the
survey. Okay. Well, Yeah, I'll check it again. Y 200. I'll check it. Can you check it out? What's that? Can you check it now? Yeah.
Yeah. See, I went to this outer edge. 23 by Say it a little louder. I'll put it 23 [Music] by four. It looks like plus 6
by 6 by six. It's 128 something like that. 128 What you 128? 128. Yeah, I got 200. That's why I was struggling
at 30. I don't know. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I That's what I messed up. I'm sorry. 30 by 30 by six plus. So now 11 by 10. It's going to be 290.
Yeah. What do you have for 290? 290. 290. Yeah. I got I got 203. I got 200. You got 310 and then 290. So I drawing right here. For once, the lawyer
is not getting blamed. This is Yeah. Well, not yet, Mr. We can blame you up at 10:30. Mr. Zel, you should have caught that. Oh, I'm sorry. as far as responding to my com. Okay, no problem.
Wait, did you guys agree on the numbers? Yeah, I think we're in agreement on what? 310. 310. Yes, we broke out. I broke out the loose stone from all those other all those other numbers. Okay. So, you can
reconcile that and won't change the total number. No. So, we went up a little. No, it's the same as what it was on. It's just I It's hard to see. I got to hatch it. But I
think he'll clarify the plan so I can understand. Okay. So, we're going with your numbers. Correct. Okay. We're going with your numbers. So, it's 15.4. Fix the plan. Yeah. Okay. So, we're 15.4 and we're still requesting 17.3. Correct.
That's good. Yeah. Well, we have to understand what we're doing. Okay. So, u Mr. SL, are you comfortable with six A, B, and C? Yes. Okay. Thank you. Yes. Thank you.
Okay, Mr. Z, I forget where we were. Mr. Gdansky, is that the uh Have you covered everything? I believe I have. Yes. Okay, then I have nothing further for Mr. Gdansky at the moment. Okay, questions for the board for engineer. Are there questions from the public?
Yes. Yeah. Hello. Title sign Riverside 172 Riverside Drive. If you give me a moment just so I can look at the plan. Yes. I'm on an environmental commission. I am not speaking for them. Okay. Are you
speaking or asking questions? I'm asking a question. Well, I'm just because I got you. This plan is different from the plan that was sent to environmental commission. That's correct. Yes. We removed all the patio. Okay. That's
just wanted to know. Okay. Totally different thing. Thank you. Thank you. Any other questions from the public on this application? Oh, no further witnesses. I can uh go over the planning arguments, not
testimony. If you prefer, I can Does anybody have any questions first before Mr. Zelli goes over the arguments? Maybe I missed the fence. The fence is being put up. Is there around the whole perimeter of the house or Oh, I'm sorry. It's just the
perimeter of the pool that goes into the house, comes around. It will go into the corner here of the house, come around, follow the property line, go along the uh buffer, and then come back into the house. So, we're not
proposing to fence the entire backyard. No, that area that area the same black aluminum metal fence. It will be it will be Yes, it will be the that the other neighbors have. Yeah. As the owner stated, he's going to do the same fence. Okay. And you understand it has to be
has to meet the safety requirements, four feet, self. Yeah. Any other questions from the board? Any other questions from the public on the additional testimony? Okay. Any questions from the board on the before Mr. Zelli sums it up. Okay,
Mr. Zelli. So just briefly on the positive criteria uh with regard to the section 21-18.1 clearly a C1 since it's impossible for us to comply uh with regard to both that variance and the coverage variance uh they can be
justified under a C2 or flexible C criteria when the uh purposes of the municipal land use law are advanced by a deviation for the zoning ordinance requirements and the benefits of the deviation substantially outweigh any detriment. uh specifically granting the variances in this case would satisfy
purpose I which is to promote a desirable visual visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangement in this case by providing an attractive swimming pool thereby adding to the existing desirable visual environment of the Fenwick Place neighborhood. In addition, um the addition of the
swimming pool uh will serve to conserve property values in the neighborhood as a whole, which mean remains a purpose of land use regulation, even though not mentioned in the MLUL specifically. That's under homebuilders league versus township of Berlin 1979 New Jersey
Supreme Court case. Uh we see no uh detriment uh in this case that would offset the benefits. Uh the proposed pools not being located behind the building line uh will not be detrimental given the distance of the pool from that home uh and also given the vegetative
buffer between the pool and that home that already exists. Uh all water shedding from the additional impervious coverage will be captured as has been discussed in the testimony. So we don't see any detriment. Therefore the benefits do outweigh the detriment. With regard to negative criteria, it's also satisfied. The requested variances can
be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without substantial impairment of the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance. With regard to the coverage variance noted above, all water shedding from the additional impervious coverage will be captured in the management system. Uh moreover, given the well
compliant and degenerous rear and sideyard setbacks, including the 25- ft tree preservation and buffer easement in the rear of the property, the swimming pool uh should have no impact, let alone a detrimental impact upon neighboring properties. Uh with regard to the
uh variance for the pool not being behind the building line, um I'm not even going to go into that any further. can't comply under any circumstance. So, uh, clearly there's no negative detriment to that.
Um, presumably the purpose of that ordinance, which we have to struggle with, uh, is to have a situation where people are not looking at their sideyard or front yard and seeing somebody's swimming pool. It's a well-intended ordinance and it's great on a straight road. Uh, on a culde-sac, it doesn't
work. On a curvy road, it doesn't work. Um so to say that we are violating the zone plan u by doing something that's impossible to comply on a good number of your lots uh just seems like a statement that can't be that can't be made and
can't be supported. Uh we've I know you've tried to get the town to change that ordinance. Uh for whatever reason they don't. So here we are. Thank you for hearing us. Thank you for staying up with us late. We'd appreciate a positive vote. Thank you, Chris. Just real quick, Madam Chair, got
to make sure any public comment. Oh, I'm sorry. Did I address that? Sorry. Is there any comment from the public on Sorry. Just want to make sure. Okay. Applicants. Applicants. Yeah. Applicants are interested. Okay. Sorry. Let you know.
[Laughter] Okay. Two variances being requested here. One for lock coverage. 15% is the max permitted. They're proposing 17.31%. The other variances for the pool location, as we have covered previously this evening, pools are not permitted to
be set to the uh they're required to be set to the rear of dwellings on adjacent lots. This proposed pool would not be to the rear of the dwelling to the lot to the north lot 10.03. As far as conditions go, everything in Mr. Schlly's memo dated May 1st, 2025.
Everything Mr. memo dated May 3rd, 2025. Everything in the environmental commission review, I believe it was dated April 18th, 2025. And sure, I think there might have been a couple things during the hearing. Uward lighting is covered in
Mr. A brief exchange about the storm water management system being modified to capture runoff from the dwelling instead of the pool. I guess they be subject to Tom's review. Okay. Okay. Is that like a specific amount
that needs to be captured? Just reasonable. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. And uh that's it as far as conditions. I think they stipulated to step. Yeah. Right. That's along both lines.
No, along the perimeter along the property lines on the east and the west. side property line backs already a tree. He was going to continue one of the lines and do the other line. I thought it was just the south neighborhood screening on the north. Yeah. My
understanding is we're stipulating to basically matching the concept. You've got it on the left already. Right. So it will match that same concept on the right and then the rear already has existing coverage right
same trees that are because the neighbors have screening on the north side. Do you need to do the north and the south side or just the south side? You just have the I thought he was going to continue the
line, right? Was it only Well, there's side lines. So, the the north side already go straight back and already exists. The back is a full conservation buffer essentially matching concept on the south. So, nothing on the north, just on the
south. So, that other conditions subject to I hope hope that's okay. That's okay. Thank you. Does anyone um want to make a motion on this application or have any comments
they'd like to share for deliberation? I'll make a motion. Thank you, Mr. I see this agree as a C2 variant. Um I don't think the Well, the block coverage I don't think is successive with the screening screening that you're putting
in. I think um this is a nice project and I appreciate you to lower the law coverage that that really um so I would make a motion to deem this application complete and to request the
board attorney to draft a resolution um subject to all the stated stipulations and conditions outlined and release. Just to be clear, that's C2 just C2 and I think C1 on the pool
location C2 their argument is because C1 and C2 doesn't matter. Thank you Mr. Krauss. Miss B. Yes.
Herrera. Yes. Mr. Yes. Yes. Yes. Miss Silver. Yes. Yes. Thank you. Good luck. Thank you all very much. Have a wonderful night. Thank you. Have a good night. He said she's high school. I
mean, we spent a lot of time looking. Is that you can find the C2 balance? Okay. Um, are there any comments from members before we pack up and leave? Yeah. Any um comments from members?
Cindy, I think we are cancelling our uh special meeting for May. Correct. Okay. Excellent. Any comments from staff? Excellent. Motion to adjurnn. Motion to adjurnn. Second. All in favor? Great.
Thank you everybody. Another successful meeting.