ready. Okay, thank you. Okay, >> we're ready. >> Ready. >> Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Welcome to the Monday, April 27th, 2026
board of adjustment meeting. This meeting is in compliance with the open meeting act as adequate notice has been provided of this meeting by mailing the annual schedule of meetings to the star ledger the leader
union county source and posting such annual meeting schedule on the bulletin board in the town hall reserved for such announcements. The official website of the town hhps
rclark.com in compliance with public law 2025 and proper filing of said notice with the township clerk. Formal action may be taken at this meeting. We ask all to
stand for the pledge of allegiance and a moment of silence. to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice
for all. >> Madam Secretary, roll call. Dante Tignini >> here. >> Thomas Maid >> here. >> Douglas Croc >> here. >> Chris Tierney >> here. >> John Calaguire >> here.
>> Christine Adinasio >> here. >> And Chairman Ed Ruth >> here. Let us ask everyone to take a look at the minutes of our March 23rd meeting.
At the same time, we'll welcome Christine as a new alternate member of the board. Thank you, Christine. >> Thank you. >> Um, may I have a motion to approve the minutes of our last meeting? >> Motion to approve.
>> Motion by John Caliggo. Second. >> Second. >> Second by Dante. Right. Roll call. Vote on the minutes. >> Voting on the minutes. >> Okay. >> All in favor on those.
>> You want a voice vote? >> All in favor of approving the minutes for March. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? All right. >> Motion carries. >> Motion carried. Thank you. Um All right.
Correspondence. Do you have Kelly anything? >> Nothing at this point. All right. Uh we will begin then with calendar 5-26, Hunter Avenue Partners LLC.
Uh this item was discussed at our last meeting and the vote was carried over until tonight's meeting. So there will be no further testimony or notice required. May I have a motion on this case?
>> Mr. Chairman, it's also appropriate if the board wants to have any kind of discussion if they want to um help to help them formulate whatever motion they might want to make. >> Okay. >> So, if the board wants to um recall this was the 330 Westfield Avenue on the corner of Westfield and Emerald. Um we
did have testimony from the applicants experts as well as from the board engineer and the board planner. the board engineer is here tonight as well in case the board has any other questions. Um, and I have the memo from the board planner if there is anything else that the board wanted to discuss or clarify before somebody makes a motion.
>> All right. Are there any questions from board members before we go to a vote? >> The variances here were a D5 density variance, three lot area variances, a lot two lot frontage variances. Um and
they had agreed to um to make payments in lie for some of the tree replacement in the sidewalks. >> If no questions, may I have a motion on this case? >> I make a motion to accept calendar number 5-26.
>> Okay. Doug Croc, do I have a second? Someone second the motion. >> I'll second. Okay. >> To be clear, this is a motion to approve uh subject to the condition of complying with all the comments in the um planners
and the engineers reports. >> Yes. >> Yes, that's correct. >> I have a question about you mentioned sidewalks. What was the agreement on that? um they had said they're not going to put the sidewalks in, but if they make a payment into the sidewalk fund
instead so that we can the board the township can then um use the money to put sidewalks someplace else that they make more sense. >> Okay. Um I was just wondering if we could maybe add another stipulation to this >> the motion. Good. Good. >> Um basically I know there was a I mean
there was a lot of people here last meeting. There's a lot of public outcry it seemed on this one and it seemed to be around the houses. Since we're not sure what's even going to be there yet, we're just we're giving a picture of possible construction. So, I was wondering if we could propose
a limit to twotory constructions on these houses to be a little more in line with that street because I've gone up and down and there's not a lot of modern housing going on right down there. Uh the few that really stuck out were the ones that were three stories. there was maybe two
or three of them that just didn't seem to fit. So I would like to propose that. >> Um so Mr. P, you made the motion. Do you accept that to be added to your motion? >> I'll accept that.
>> The amendment accepted by Doug Croc. Do I need a second on that? >> No. >> No. Okay. Thank you, Doug. All right. Do we need to restate the motion or any questions that the the
board has before we go to a vote? >> Seeing none, I will ask roll call vote by the members on case 5-26. um your motion. Would you like to hear from the >> Sure. >> applicant on the amend motion?
>> Please, please, please come forward and put your name. >> Yes. I didn't want to interrupt your process, but if if that's important to some member of the board, I felt that it's appropriate. For the record, >> Donald B. Fraser Jr., Prada Fraser and Forester of 16 Valley Road, Clark, New Jersey. On behalf of the applicant uh
who is here this evening uh the houses which will be constructed uh will be two-story houses. There will be no uh living space above that and that can be a condition. >> What would be the overall height though of these houses?
>> That's on the plans. I'd have to I didn't bring those plans with me >> because I'm assuming there might be a third level like a walk-in height or what are we thinking here? I'd have to have Mr. If if the board wishes, I'd have to have Mr. Nimchek answer that. I'm not uh prepared to answer that
question. >> Um I did review them. I did review my notes before I came in this evening and there was testimony about um whether or not there might be something in the attic and that was left as sort of something that wasn't decided was my understanding at the last hearing. So I appreciate the question and the
condition. Um >> I'm just saying that we are prepared to stipulate to that council. plan to see if I can find a hide quickly. >> And there was no height variance. What? No, we're not open. We closed the public portion of the hearing. I'm sorry. We
closed the public portion of the hearing at the last meeting. >> The um >> Thank you very much. But as the attorney has said, >> so the the engineering plans from Harbor
Consultants say 2.5 stories 29 ft and 35 ft is what's permitted. 29 feet is the proposed height. >> So that's two and a half. So I'm thinking >> but they're saying that they're agreeing now to not put anything in the top. So
the question I guess is can the then can the roof pitch be different if if there's definitely not using the half. >> Yeah. Because I mean the whole objective here is to make it it more in line with with what is already there. Whereas because I know this is what a lot of the public was having big issues with.
They're like oh we can't wait to see what they're going to build. So, this is trying my attempt to appease them and to try kind of take control a little bit of what might be there since this is really just for the, you know, subdivision. If you're
if you're looking for a comment for me to respond to that, I guess my topline comment, maybe that's bad word there, topline, but I would say as I heard just council say, and I don't know the plans in front of me, 29 1/2 ft, whereas 35 ft
is permissible. The applicant is substantially less than what the applicant would be entitled to build in terms of bulk. And I would suggest to the board that is not um overbuilding here.
>> Answer your question. >> Yeah. I mean I have a question for the board then. I mean do we could we put a height restriction on this? >> No. >> No. >> I don't think we can because it there's no request for a variance. >> No, I understand that. just as an ask of
them to appease. >> Right. The the is the the issue is to just choose a number. You're not sure what the you know without an architecture. >> How long? I've never seen a turnout like that and it was it was all negative. >> So I'd like to kind of address >> does does the public does rich does the
board engineer have a have a thought on whether or not um there's a reasonable height condition for a two-story building? >> My opinion is it's below no boundaries required for height. I think what Mr. Fraser said here >> is correct
>> talking to the mic. >> It's 29 ft and it's uh it shouldn't be an issue is my opinion. >> My comment would be that any other home in that neighborhood as it tends to redevelop can redevelop in accordance with the ordinance height that's already
there. So by starting construction at a lower height with a new application, this property could become disadvantaged in the future. Um if I think the con in my opinion the condition if you so chose
would be to simply say two stories of living space with any level above that being limited to storage would be your appropriate comment. And then you don't the applicant has not asked for a height
variance. So there's really no discussion on what he can or can't do. The ordinance level allows anyone in that neighborhood to do the same. >> Except I would note that the applicant is agreeing and committing to build in
accordance with the plans that are submitted. So, the applicant himself is saying, "I'll be under 30 because I'll be at 29 and a half." And I think that um um Mr. Okconor's comment is very well taken as other houses are
demolished and rebuilt. A lot of them are going to be built till 30 to 35. My client's going to be at 29 and a half. I respectfully don't see the problem, but I appreciate Mr. tearing your um concern for the comments which were expressed by
the public. >> Okay. >> Any other comments from the board members >> before we vote? >> Um and just to be clear with um that this there is a devariance here. So we need five affirmative votes in order to pass. Okay. >> How many?
>> Five. >> Five. >> All right. >> Janet, you want to take a roll call then? >> Yes. Roll call. Janet. Ante Tini. >> Yes. >> Tom me. >> Yes.
>> Douglas Croc. >> Yes. >> Chris Tierney. >> Yes. >> John Caliguire. >> Yes. >> Christina Nassio. >> Yes. >> Chairman Ed Ruth. >> Yes.
>> Motion is carried. >> Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. We appreciate uh not only the affirmative vote, obviously, but we appreciate the care and attention that the board gave to this matter and the respect shown to both the applicant and
the members of the public. Thank you. >> All right, moving on to our next calendar case 6-26. David Lopez, Lopes rather, and Nancy Costa 53 Cold Divine Road.
>> I do have some handouts for the board if you would like to share. Um, unfortunately, I was unaware that would be so many, so I I am a little bit limited. >> Yeah, give them to our secretary. >> You want to swear them in, right? >> Okay.
Well, while we're handing those out, While we're getting those handed out, why don't you guys get sworn in? You're both going to testify. Raise your right hand. Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> Yes. >> And just spell you one at a time,
speaking to the mic. Spell your name for the record, please. >> My name is David Lopes. D A V I D. Last name L O P E S. >> Okay. My name is Nancy Costa. N A N C Y C O S T A. Thank you.
>> Okay. So, this you're the owners of the house, correct? and um you want to do make some additions. Why don't you exp explain to us you know what you want to do and where you ran into trouble with the zoning office. >> Um sure. Um so good evening board. Uh
thank you for your time. As I mentioned, my name is David Lopes along with my wife Nancy and I. Um we are the owners of 53 Cold Evan Road. And tonight we are respectfully seeking an approval for a second story addition uh with interior renovations um to our existing single
family Cape Cod um along with a modest extension of our front porch. Um the goal of the project is to create a functional fourbedroom living space um while working within the constraints of our pre-existing non-conforming lot. Um being situated within the uh zoning uh
location of R75, our lot is considered to be undersized at just over 5,300 square feet, which naturally creates uh an inherent limitations in the design improvements to fully comply with uh today's current standards. In response, uh the project uh has been intentionally
designed to be built up rather than u expanding the existing footprint um hoping to preserve open space and limit and limiting the additional impact to the property itself. We are requesting three variances. Uh first, the minor front setback variance
um is requested for the porch itself. Uh which will be extended to a little bit more than uh 26 ft. Um while the neighboring uh homes all follow a 28T um prevailing setback, uh the porch does not extend beyond our existing front steps. Um and the request is limited
strictly to just the porch itself and will not have any sort of um effect on our our dwelling. Um secondly, the slight increase in the imprevious uh coverage um is a request up to 53.31%. Uh which is negligible and does not
materially impact any further um runoff conditions. And lastly, we're requesting a modest floor area ratio uh variance of 42.6% which is driven by the need uh to achieve a functional uh secondh second story layout. Uh we've made conscious
effort to minimize the impacts of the neighboring properties um and remain consistent with the character of the neighborhood. The design is a practical expansion um that respects lot constraints and the intent of the zoning ordinance. Um and and to wrap up the the
opening remarks um we've been living in this house for about 8 years or so and we we duly value the community. um with our growing family as we expect our first child in the coming months and with the need for a functional um office uh setup, these improvements hopefully will allow us to stay within the home
and create a more functional and sustainable living space. Um and naturally, of course, we are also um open uh to reasonable conditions that the board may propose. Moving on to the second uh page. Um I'm hope that I'm up going at an okay
pace. Uh moving on to the second page is our existing uh prevailing um um setbacks. Um as you know considering we are in a um pre-existing non-conforming lot uh we do have a required setback of as you know 25 ft with a prevailing of
28. Um with our existing uh dwelling sitting at 30.8% which is well within compliance. Um as for our side setbacks um it is 10 ft uh by 18 on both sides. Um, our existing building is currently sitting at 6 feet on the lefth hand side and that's to lot
42 and on the right hand side it's sitting at uh 12 feet which is close to lot 40. >> Moving on to page three uh you will find >> before you move on is this just a copy of what was submitted with your application or these new documents. Okay, some of the board members so some
of the board members have these with them in larger format. Okay. Just let me know when you get to a page that was not submitted with your original application because then we want to mark that mark that as an exhibit. Okay. >> Okay. That'll be towards the end of some supporting.
>> On page three, you can find the existing and the proposed uh first floor uh plans with the addition of the second story home. We are proposing to move our existing uh two bedrooms on the first floor to the second floor. Um and proposing to build an open floor concept as you see here on the bottom of the
page. Uh we also have an existing enclosed side porch that we would like to enclose. Um as well on page four is the plans um drawings of the plans that you can find for the second story floor. Within the red confines of this box here
is what our existing second story uh floor currently uh looks like. Uh which equates to se 377 square feet. The proposed second story um addition will bring in an additional 777 square feet totaling uh just over 1,154
um square feet for the second floor. On the bottom of the page, uh you can see photos of our existing home um and pictures of our prevailing setback uh with review against our neighboring homes. Uh the left-sided picture is our existing side porch that we are
requesting to enclose. Um, and you also see a picture from our backyard of the house as well. On page five is the front of a house. As you know, we have a prevailing setback of 28 ft. Um, and to the corner of the house, as I mentioned earlier, uh, the
house currently sits at 30.8 ft to the corner. Uh, the shaded area in red is the proposed porch, uh, which we are requesting a variance for as I previously mentioned. Um however it would not extend uh further into the front setback than our existing front
steps already do. The pictures below uh depict uh what our um neighbors homes uh have as well. Um as you can see here on the far bottom right uh our neighbors have homes with enclosed entrances that also extend into
the front setbacks as far as our existing uh open porch as well. And I'm referring to lot 40 and 41. On page six uh and page seven you may find the elevations from all four sides of our house. The very first picture is
the front of the house uh which at its peak um the home will reach uh less than 29 ft. Um from the left hand side you can also see here in the white area that is our existing home and the gray shaded area will be the second story edition.
On page seven uh is the elevations from the exterior of the home. As you can see, the uh shaded area and gray uh will just be the addition of just the uh the attic crawl space and um and you can see further extensions onto the left hand side as well. From the right hand side
of the picture on on the bottom, you can already see that the the drawing itself depicts the enclosed side porch uh with each floor reaching about 8ft ceilings as well. And lastly, uh, from page eight, uh, and
beyond are just, uh, further supporting, um, examples and and how our requests and and our, uh, variance ordinance that that we are requesting approval for, um, further support our our, um, belief in in which that we are maintaining um, how
the development of our neighborhood has been uh, constructed over the years. So, uh, address number 19 and ma'am, I'm sorry. These are the point at which, um, are not part of the existing plans. These are just supporting details of my own. >> Okay. So, page 8, 9, 10, and 11
called a photo packet. And you're going to describe. >> Yes. >> Um, so the examples that I'm going to be showing are all within the same street or within the adjacent street and all fall within the uh zoning district of R75. Um, address number 19 and 63 both show a
perfect example of what we're requesting as our front porch setback. On page nine, uh, you will find address uh, 61 CEO Road, which has a very large second story edition, as well as a a side to
side um, front porch in which we're only requesting half of that. Um, 28 Cold Evan is a very beautiful second story home as well on the same street. And on page 10 is the or I should say my favorite two homes within our street in
which we use as as examples to build our own specific drawings as well. And that would be uh 56 Cold Devon and 65 Cold Devon which are um exactly across the street with one another. And then lastly, as I mentioned uh in the adjacent streets uh two Alice Lane
and 17 Alice Lanes are also um two beautifully built second story homes. And with that, I will open it up to questions from the board. >> Very detailed presentation. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir.
All right. Any questions? Um, do I have any witnesses for this application? >> Nobody else. May I recommend we we do have some witnesses of ours. >> You do. >> On behalf of >> All right.
>> to speak on behalf of the application. Okay. One second. So that's they're they're to speak in favor of the application. So let's just make sure the board has any questions first. Get those out. They're not fact witnesses. They're >> any questions before we hear from these witnesses.
>> Seeing none, um that you call them forward and we'll swear them in. Yes. These are very good f family friends of ours um whom which I've also grown up with. They also currently live in Clark as well. >> Okay. Raise your right hand. >> Do you swear or affirming testimony
you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Just state and spell your name and give your address, please. >> Jessica Rodriguez, J E S I A. Last name Rodriguez. R O D R I G U S. >> And your address?
>> Sorry, we're here with the whole family. I just wanted to advocate for the the >> Can we could you give us your address? Where do you live? >> Uh we're in 561 Valley Road, Clark. >> Uh I just wanted to advocate for the family. As they stated, we are we are close family friends. My husband and I have moved into Clark about 15 years
ago. Um we came up to the board a few years back to do our own house. Um Dave and Nancy Lopes have have worked with us and taken our recommendations on our own experiences. Um, this is a great family in our community. Um, just my personal
experience um, and just by by nature of what they've given back to the community. So, I just really wanted to advocate for them. We want to keep them in town. Um, both Nancy and Dave have been helping out, my husband and I, in a large program that we're operating through the Wreck Center for Kids. There's about 65 kids involved in the
program that we're working on currently. Um, and they've just been heavily involved through many programs throughout the years with the community. Um, we do want to keep them in town and I, like I said, I just want to advocate it's a very good family. Um, and they they moved into town many years ago, uh,
with the intention on staying because of the nature of of Clark and the family setting that it provides. Um, and now with their growing family, I think it's more of a crucial time for them to really analyze the house that they're living in with the intention that they were always going to expand. Um, and
really getting to to let them have that expansion that they were looking for. I know they've seen many houses on their block doing the same. Um we've done our own in our own home um by nature of that third child that you're seeing running around here. Um so you know we th those families that really are giving back to
the community. We are looking to have them stay in town and really give back and see the young generation kind of thrive in Clark. Um so that was just my petition to have them um you know the the the board uh really consider their application.
>> Thank you. Thank you. >> Any other witnesses uh in >> do have one >> supporting your application? >> Our next door neighbor at 55 called Evan Road. John um is also as well. >> I swear you in. Do you swear affirm the
testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Okay. And you give your name and spell it and your address, please. >> Yeah. John J O N. last name Mil M I L N E 55 Civan Road, Clark, New Jersey. >> Thank you. Go ahead.
>> Uh so on on behalf of my wife and I, um we live next door to David and Nancy. We've only been in the town for about uh seven months now. Um but great neighbors, huge supporter of the the business case that they've put together today. um would love to see the the
street thrive and um you know, as David mentioned, there's a lot of other homes on our street that have had the uh approval to do um renovations of this scale. So, as the next door neighbor, um we'd love to kind of support them in um
adding value to 5 uh to Civan Road. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. Anyone else from the public that wishes to uh speak either for or against this um application?
Seeing no one, Tom, you have a question or >> No. >> Okay. Seeing no one um less than for a closing statement from uh you sir regarding your application.
>> I think it was very thorough. Probably doesn't need >> you don't need it. I Yeah, I have to agree. You were very thorough in your presentation. >> I was prepared to review the variances given that you don't have any uh professionals, but I think you covered it. Does the board want me to go through it one time or you're you're good?
>> I think we're good. Okay. Any questions? Any motions >> on the variances that are being asked? >> Okay, I'll call for a motion on this particular case. >> Motion.
>> Motion >> and second by Tom me. All right. Voice call votes. Voice vote rather. >> Madam Secretary >> Hayden. >> Yes.
>> Dante Tini. Yes. >> Thomas Maid. >> Yes. >> Douglas Croc. >> Yes. >> For Steey. >> Yes. >> John Caliguire. >> Yes. >> And Chairman Ed Ruth. >> Yes.
>> So, your application is approved. At our next meeting, we'll have a written resolution. Um, and then you'll be able to pick that up afterwards and then you can go to the building department. Okay. So, it's going to be one more month till you get the paperwork. >> Fantastic. I do have one question if you don't mind. Um what is the standard approval time frame to be able to start
construction? >> You can talk to J. You can talk to the building department afterwards. Yeah. So first you need to get the the written resolution from us. Then you take that to the building department. I don't know where you are in your permit submission process or how you know how much is needs to be changed or fixed. So this is
step one and it's going to be one month until you get our papers and then you go to the next step. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Thank you board members for your time and we appreciate it very much. Thank you. Good job. >> All right. Our next
item on our agenda. This is calendar case 6-26. I'm sorry, 6-20 7-26. I can't read my notes. Uh, Jerry Scouturro
for 306 and 308 Westfield Avenue. And before you start, uh, Mr. Attorney, I just have one statement that before we begin these discussions on this application in the spirit of full
disclosure and transparency. I had considered recusing myself from these discussions because of an over 20 year friendship with the applicant both professionally and personally.
However, further reflection and thought about this that I might be abregating my duty as chairman if I did not sit and hear this case. I feel I can professionally evaluate the case as I have other cases
and that have been presented to this board. However, if the attorney or the applicant have any reason I shouldn't sit and listen to the case and vote on it. Yeah, the applicant has no objection.
>> No objection. Okay. Thank you. >> I can talk to this though. This only if I >> That's separate. You could talk out in that one. You could talk into the mic. Either one. >> Idiot. Start walking around. >> Yeah. She talking to the mic. >> I'll try to be stationary. Um, good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of
the board. Uh, again, my name is Donald B. Fraser Jr. I'm with the law firm of Prada Fraser and Forester at 16 Valley Road here in Clark. It's my pleasure this evening and my privilege to represent your applicant, Jerry Skatero. Um
we're here uh on an application to build four town houses in the townhouse zone across the street at uh what's it? 306 and 308 Westfield Avenue. Um, I'm a
little nervous coming before the board having watched a prosay applicant do as fine a job as that gentleman in front of me just did. So, I got a client here who's paying me to be here. And if I don't do as well as the gentleman who
was here in front of me, I'm sure I'm going to hear it from Mr. Sketuro. Um, but with that having been said and with the board's pleasure, um, I'd like to just dive right in with testimony. And my first witness is in
fact Jerry Scouturro. >> Let's get you sworn in if you come by the microphone. >> And I'm going to try to use this. >> Do you raise your hand? Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matters of truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> That is correct. >> And state and spell your name for the record, please, and give your address.
Jerry Scuro, 135 Hill Chris Drive, Clark, New Jersey. >> Thank you. >> That's spelled out, Jerry. >> S C A T U R O. >> All right. And Jerry, you're the owner of the property on Westfield Avenue that is the subject of this application. >> That's correct. >> Why don't you introduce yourself to the
board? >> Um, my name's Jerry Skurro. We got past that. Um, I'm a longtime resident of Clark. My parents bought houses here in 1960. Uh, I went to Clark schools, so I've seen the landscape change. Uh, the
town has changed over many years. And, uh, I I love to have the, you know, I'm very proud of the town and, uh, glad to be here, raised my children here and still live here. >> Okay. And Jerry, the application is was brought and filed in the name of yourself and Lisaquro. Um, at this point
in time, uh, Lisa Curo is not part of the application. That's because she's recently deceased. Correct. >> That is correct. Yes. And as a result of her passing, you're now the sole owner of the property which is the subject matter of this application. Correct. >> That is correct. >> All right. And just very briefly in
layman's terms, tell the board what it is that you want to do. So, um after the township did their um the master plan, I saw that there was some it was a townhouse zone and
residential zone and uh I've been involved with the real estate business for 38 years in Clark and I know a lot of the projects that are around and I've looked around to see some of the projects that are there and some that um I thought I'd like to emulate. Um, so I
did see the the project on the corner of Raron and Walter. Uh, there's four town homes there. Um, I like them very much and I thought uh that might be a nice project. I discussed that with my architect and my engineer and that's how we came up with this current plan and I
thought it would be a very nice project and it would look beautiful in that location. And just again generally in kind of summary fashion, what you're seeking here to do is to construct four town houses that would be in two separate uh buildings of two town houses
each. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> All right. And it would all be under one common ownership on one lot. Correct. >> Correct. >> All right. I have nothing further for Mr. at this time. Any
questions of the applicant from the board? >> Uh, yes. Could you please just explain that last comment? One common ownership on one lot. It looks like the I would assume there's going to be four units with four ownerships.
>> Well, did I misunderstand something? >> It's all one lot. There's not going to be four subdivided out lots. It'll end up being four units. I would imagine or expect it'll be some ultimately some form of condominium ownership. >> Okay. So that will and if if I recall
correctly, I don't have to I'll pull out the planners letter, but if I recall correctly in the planner's letter, it was suggested that the two lots was currently or originally there were two houses on two separate lots that one of the planners notes was that the lots
should be consolidated so that at the end of the day the four units will all be on one tax lot. and the applicant is accord that that would be appropriate. We kind of always planned on that but um
uh the town planner made it a note and my response is yes it's appropriate. >> Thank you. >> Um Mr. Fraser, while you're talking about the the planning report, it also comments calls them two duplexes. Um I believe that technically the definition
of town houses in our ordinance is three units connected. So technically these are just >> I hear you. >> Technically they're two two duplexes and technically that's a used variance. >> I appreciate that and that's why we have notice for that variance and it was
after I received the planner's letter and after we had the DRC meeting with the planner and with Mr. Okconor that that issue came into focus for me because I was originally not aware of that provision of the township zoning
ordinance. But yes, uh variance relief is required for the townhouse units to be in two separate buildings of two units each as opposed to say one longer unit where you had all four units in the
same building. I just want to make sure we have it on the record. >> Thank you. >> We were going to be addressing that with our um our engineering and planning testimony council, but yes, it's uh that has been driven home to us, >> right? Just because we're using the word
townhouse and technically in our our ordinance, it's not fine if you use the word te townhouse going forward as long as we understand technically they're duplexes and then we can let the planner deal with it. >> That's fine. If if I slip and I say town houses,
>> that's what I'm saying. Fine as long as it's fine as long as we know. >> This is what we want to do. >> Okay. I think they're town houses. I've been calling them town houses, but uh I appreciate the definition of townhouse as the nomenclature has set forth in the Clark zoning ordinance and Miss Carry is
quite correct. Getting back to Tom's question, the individual units will be owned by the people living there or Jerry, will you maintain >> the ownership of the buildings?
>> The contemplation is that there will be an application made under the state condominium act, which I am in no way an expert in, but to uh that the ownership of the four units will ultimately be a condominium form of ownership.
Okay. >> As opposed to like one person owning them and renting them out. Okay. >> Does that respond to your question, Mr. Ruth? >> Yes, it does. >> Thank you. >> All right. Then if nobody else has uh or if anybody nobody has any questions for
Mr. Skurro, I would call um uh Mr. Gallerano, Anthony Gallerano, who is the engineer and planner on the project. >> Just one additional question. A street is going to have to be put in in front of the condominiums in order to gain
access from Westfield there. >> Did you say a street, Mr. Ruth? >> A street or some sort of >> whether it's a street or legally a driveway is an interesting question, but that and those other aspects of the site plan are something that I would have Mr.
Gallerano testify to. >> Okay. >> And certainly great question. >> Yeah. Uh, and I think I know the answer, but I'd rather have the expert and somebody under oath answer it rather than just give you what I think the answer is. Got >> Okay. >> Okay. May I call Mr. Gallerano?
>> Yes. >> I call Anthony Gallerano. >> You need to swear again. >> Do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter of truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Okay. >> Mr. Name? Yeah. >> Mr. Gallerano, you testified last month
in connection with the Hunter Avenue project, which if my recollection serves, you were qualified uh before this board as I at least an expert in the field of engineering and I think also an expert in the field of planning. I intend to profer you as an expert in
both of those fields. Can you give the board the benefit of your qualifications? >> Sure. Uh I hold a bachelor of science degree uh in civil engineering from New Jersey Institute of Technology. Uh graduated in 1984. I've been licensed as
both a professional engineer, professional planner since 1988. I have testified uh throughout the state of New Jersey for numerous. Uh I also provide >> I'm sorry. You got to get a little closer to the mic. If you're not hearing
feedback, nobody's hearing you. Okay, >> thank you. >> Uh yeah, I also provide um services, consulting services in planning and engineering uh to various uh municipalities and zoning board and planning boards and again I have
testified here two months ago on the previous application. >> And are your licenses as both a professional engineer and a professional planner current and in good standing? >> Yes, they are. Mr. Chairman, I tender Mr. Gallerano as an expert in the field of engineering and planning.
>> Okay, >> he's acceptable. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Gallerano, can you take us through the site plan? >> Sure. Um, attempting to bring up a uh this is an aerial exhibit. I just wanted to start with this was not submitted with the application. So, I would assume
we'd have to mark this. >> This is A1 aerial exhibit. >> And what does A1 depict? Uh so this is um uh aerial u identifies a aerial exhibit for 306 308 Westfield Avenue
dated April uh 27th 2026. I know everybody is I'm sure everybody is obviously familiar with the location. I just wanted to point out that uh these are two existing uh single family dwellings. These are actually the the
last two lots before uh you uh get to the bridge overpass over the Garden State Parkway. Uh and of course obviously right across the street from the library. Um what the applicant um is looking to do obviously is to
>> get close to the mic please. >> Sorry again. one applicant is looking to do is to uh demolish all of these uh you know improvements that are currently on on the property. And just Mr. Gallerano, just from looking at the plan that you have on the
uh visual overhead, we see the Garden State Parkway on the right or I guess that's sort of to the southeast of the property. Correct. >> That's correct. And is it correct that there uh that the two properties which are the subject matter of this application there's nothing else between
them and the parkway right? >> Correct. >> So the application that you're going to take us through is ultimately backing up to the parkway for lack of a better term. Fair to say >> correct. >> Okay. Please continue.
>> Sure. So uh going to exit out of this. going to bring up uh our site plan and this is uh the plan that was submitted with the application. This is not uh been altered
at all. So it is exactly what was submitted with the application and with I'm going to zoom in on the cover sheet and the uh the two properties Mr. Um, as the attorney pointed out, they are located in the
RTH, residential townhouse zone. Uh, this zone encompasses, uh, four lots. Lots 27, 28, 29, and 30 are lots, uh, in question are lots 29, and 30. Again, um,
abudding the, uh, the Gardener State Parkway. Uh the total combined area uh 19,954 square ft or uh 0.458 acres. U the intention is to consolidate
these lots create one lot for which to uh construct the uh to the uh four proposed town houses. Uh just scrolling down uh this is sheet number two. Just a second before you leave that, you know, you look at the
plan and it's just worthy of note, I think, because we were here last uh month with uh Hunter Avenue. That's actually the Hunter Avenue project, which is at the corner of Westfield and Emerald Place is where you have your
cursor right now, which that's that lot 26. Correct. >> That's correct. So actually this project, Hunter Avenue's project was within our 200 foot radius and last when we were here last time on that project,
this was within their 20 foot 200t radius. Correct. >> That's correct. >> So it's really the same block, if you will, and they're both directly across from the building we're in right now. Correct. >> Correct. >> All right. Please continue. >> Sure. Uh so we're going to scroll down
to sheet number two. Uh on the left side of the sheet of the uh existing conditions plan. Basically you can see the uh the two existing dwellings. Uh lot number 30 also has a detached garage at the back. Uh the lot is um
essentially rectangular. It does have this skew uh on the uh southeast uh side along the Garden State Parkway. So makes it slight slightly irregular. uh takes away from being a a a perfect rectangle.
So, uh with that, scrolling over um to the uh right side of the sheet, this depicts the uh the proposed conditions. And what the applicant is looking to do is to create uh two
uh two unit buildings uh which uh we're calling town houses. uh we know that the definition of a townhouse and in in the township is uh 3 to 10 units. So we know that uh we're not meeting that. So that technically
does create a variance. Uh however, when we we looked at this application and we sat down with Jerry uh trying to figure out what's the best configuration, we obviously had two options, right? We could have had a a four-unit building or
we could have two twoounit buildings. I mean, those are really the only two options here, uh, other than have a three-unit building and a one-unit building, which would obviously make any sense. And my recommendation was to do this configuration because the this
creates uh a more desirable units. Basically, essentially, every unit is an end unit. And what that does that gives you um more uh air and light space for each unit. So, um, you have each unit would have windows be able to have
windows on all three sides where if this was a four-unit building, the two interior units would only be able to have windows on the front and the rear. So, we felt that this was no um better from an air and light standpoint. Uh, it kind of cuts the massing of the
building. You split the building into two rather than have the one large building. Uh, we I believe that this was was a better configuration. uh even though again it did require variance and we'll get into the the justification for the variance a little
bit later but um that was the reason why we uh decided that collectively again with Jerry the architect and the team that this this would be the better configuration. Uh e each unit was going to be is going to be three stories, three bedrooms. Uh
each will have a uh a twocar garage and a twocar driveway. Uh so we're providing four uh parking spaces for each unit where under RSIS 2.4 would be required. >> When you say four spaces, that's two inside the garage and two in the
driveway. >> Correct. Two driveway >> for each unit. >> So yeah, that would total four, right? Per per unit. Uh we're also providing uh three guest uh parking spaces along the northerly side. Uh they would just be
basically for visitor. Uh the uh this would be this would be a a single accessed by a single private uh private road um which would or private driveway which would uh basically uh be
in the uh ownership of it of a homeowners association. So this is going to be a um a com a condominium arrangement. Um each owner would basically own the land under their unit. all the other land outside
will be in common ownership under an HOA. I also personally live in a townhouse, so I I know how this kind of how this works. Uh also being involved in in in in numerous uh townhouse uh projects and and applications. Uh
>> so there's a total of 19 parking spaces overall, four for each unit, two inside, two outside, and then three either community or guest spaces at the end. Yeah, we thought that it would be um beneficial to have some guest spaces. I
mean, obviously a guest could park in front of a unit, but we just thought it would be beneficial to have those three three guest spaces uh in the back. >> And was part of the the idea behind that to reduce or eliminate the need for
guest parking to spill out onto either Westfield, I guess there's probably no parking there on Westfield, or onto other neighboring streets. Correct. Uh yeah, Westfield Avenue we know is busy probably. I don't believe you can park there anyway, but yeah, that would prevent cars from looking for
spots uh around the neighborhood. So I think believe this is a wellparked project. We don't we don't see any I don't see any issue with with um having any overflow parking having to go out outside of the uh the property limits.
My only question is who is responsible for snow removal and any maintenance of that driveway or street, whatever we're calling it. The >> answer is the homeowners association. >> 100% the HOA responsible. Yeah, absolutely. >> Do you mean as opposed to the town, Mr. Ruth?
>> Right. As opposed to the town or >> would be the association's problem. >> Problem to take care of. Okay. >> And I have a question. To the right of the property, there's open space. Is that community space or how is that uh
uh split? >> Would that that last unit own all that space or how would that work? >> So what what it happens is there's what's called um common space and limited common space in in a condominium uh assoc arrangement. So basically the
the backyards of each unit would be for the exclusive you of use of that unit, right? Um, and what we're proposing to do is fence in uh the rear yards just to provide some privacy. Also, the space between um the the front of your unit
like from the wall, you know, each side wall of the walls up to the uh curb line is also called limited common space. So that driveway in the front um is for the exclusive use of that unit even though it's inside the common space but that's
called limited common space. And when the condominium documentation documents are put together and you have the master deed that's going to stipulate that that is limited common space. So you can't park in your neighbor's driveway, right? Even though technically it's common
space. You can't park in your neighbor's driveway. You can't go over and have a barbecue in your neighbor's backyard, right? So even though it's a it's a common area, there is limited common space which is for the exclusive use of each unit. All of the other space or outside of that is all for anybody to
use. So anybody can use that space. The kids can play there. They want to I don't know do whatever they want to do there. It's obviously within the limitations of what would be in the master deed. So the master deed can stipulate that, you know, there could be no loud music,
there could be no barbecues outside of there. Those are all things that the association can police themselves and put those those controls in their own their own bylaws. >> Exactly. Other than the driveway area or the backyard behind each individual
unit, the remainder of the open space will be under the jurisdiction of the homeowners association. Correct. >> Yeah. Correct. And everybody, you know, again, there's a ma, there'll be a master deed, there'll be bylaws. Everybody has is has to abide by those. >> Will there be some sort of buffer at the
end of the property? I'm thinking of what noise you're going to be getting from the parkway. You know, >> I anticipate that that will be something that when it is built, the answer will be yes. and that whether it be fence,
arborvite or what have you in the back up against the parkway, >> the uh the builder will address those things and the applicant is willing to consent to any reasonable condition if the board believes that it needs to
impose something on that rather than uh relying on the builder having half a brain when he builds it because he's got to uh shield the parkway from people that he wants to sell these units to. >> Sure. >> Yeah. And the reason the units again
this thinking this out as we went through various concepts um why the units were pushed back towards the uh parkway and not on the westerly property line was basically to create separation to the neighboring property. So the where they're where we're proposing
them, they're creating the greatest separ the largest separation to any adjoining houses. So for example, the house on lot 28, which is directly to the west, if you were to go from building to building, you would there would be a 61 ft separation. Uh if you
go to the uh to the north, there's basically two uh lots that adjoin this property, lot 32. And if you were, we measured the separation between those two buildings. Um, the closest building
to that house is 70 ft and lot 31, which is just a little further to the west. Uh, the two buildings will be 190 ft apart. So, that was this was by design to move the to move the um buildings closer to the parkway again to
get them the furthest away from the adjoining uh buildings. >> The point, Mr. Gallerano is it could have been built the other way with the private road driveway adjacent to the parkway. You could do it that way, but then you would move all these units
closer to the neighbors. Correct. >> Correct. >> And the thought was that by moving the units closer to the parkway, we would not be adversely affecting anybody else. Is that a fair way to put it? >> Absolutely correct. And again, um providing more air and light space
between between the buildings. Um so again that that was the rationale of why the buildings are to the east side of the property and not to the west side of the property. Uh so we're also um scroll um down to
the next sheet. This is our um lighting and landscaping plan. So the idea uh is to um screen the the parking lot with evergreen shrubs. Um we have uh rotodendrums along the easterly property
line. Uh I believe there's a desire to change those arrivites. Uh so we we uh proposing to kind of make that that uh change on the fly here where instead of having roadendrums on the easterly property line we would have uh abberites
>> and that was at the request of a neighbor. Correct. >> Correct. That was between a conversation between Jerry and the neighbor. >> Okay. And and the applicant here was exceeding to the neighbors preference for arrivite over roodendron. >> Absolutely. I mean that was a just you know the rodendrums that's a was just a
design preference to how we did it but we have no objection to changing our plan and providing the abroades. >> Okay. Please continue. >> Yeah. So we're providing lighting uh for the parking lot. Uh we are going to zero out all of the the lights at the property line so there's no spillage of
lighting onto any of the adjoining property lines. Uh we also zeroed it out at the parkway property line because that's what the the ordinance says we have to do, but I don't think we're going to be intrusive to the to the parkway. Uh I'm going to scroll to the
left of the same sheet. And this is our uh grading and and drainage plan. Uh we're providing an underground detention system under the driveway. Uh we're going to capture the runoff from the site. Uh that's going to be detained and
that's going to be released uh in a in a reduced uh runoff. So for the two 10 100year storms, our runoff will be reduced to what's that of uh current conditions. We've also graded the property so that we don't have any any runoff going on to any any adjoining
properties. So, um, with that, um, oh, and we are going to be replacing, um, we are removing one tree from the property. So, in accordance with the tree replacement ordinance, uh, we're we're replacing
this with four additional shade trees. We have, uh, one up in the front, uh, three in the rear. Uh and again that is the our um resolution uh to comply with the uh tree replacement uh ordinance.
Uh the um and then lastly uh I just do have one other exhibit. It's just it's a color exhibit. It just kind of puts it in perspective of uh just the different coverages. >> So you can see the uh
>> I'm sorry. This is a new exhibit. >> Oh, I'm sorry. He had not this was not submitted. >> This is going to be A2 because the colored one was not turned in. Right. >> Yes. Correct. I apologize. This was not uh submitted with the application. >> So, um again, the gray you see is the driveway. The green obviously is the
grass and the landscaped area and the and the amber uh orange are the uh are the units. Um and again, just kind of give you perspective of just how the different different coverages relate to each other. Um, with that, uh, I have no
other, um, direct testimony on the engineering and site portion. I believe >> we're still going to provide some testimony on variances. >> We will. I believe the architect is going to speak next and then I'll come back and go through the planning. >> My suggestion, Mr. Chairman, is I would
uh, we we've now concluded the engineering portion. I'm going to bring back um, Mr. Mr. Gallerano to provide planning testimony. But in terms of the sequencing of my testimony or my presentation, I'm I'm an attender. Um Mr. Gallerano is the witness on
engineering right now. Then after we finish the engineering, I'm going to do the architecture and then I'm going to bounce back to Mr. Gallerano for the planning if that's acceptable to the board. >> Any objection? We proceeded that was fine.
>> All right. So then I tender Mr. Gallerano on the engineering issues. >> Does any board members have any questions of what has been >> Rich? >> Actually, I have one question. Um, is there going to be any signage planned
for what's facing the parkway? >> For what's facing the parkway? >> Yeah. On the back side, >> is are there going to be signs facing the parkway? >> Any signage? Yeah. Any >> Yeah. >> The answer is no. >> Okay. Thank you.
Unless you want to put up one that says call Prada Fraser and Forester pop Clark attorneys >> on the sidewalk. >> Just an idea. >> Is it going to be fence or is it going to be open?
>> Is it or is it going to be brush? >> Uh the only fence is going to be in the in the rear of the unit just to create privacy in the back. Uh there'll be landscaping, you know, around the parking lot, but but the only fencing was proposed is going to be along the uh
the back of the units. >> Rich, do you have anything further? >> I don't have anything further at this time, Mr. Chairman. >> You may proceed then with >> I suggest Mr. Chair, hold on. I suggest, Mr. Chairman, that u Mr. Galler should be tendered to members of the public who
may want to question him. >> Any >> open to the public. Anybody who wants to ask a question about the engineering testimony, come forward and give your name and be good evening. Yes, speaking to the microphone. Give us your name and your address, please. >> Or you didn't need the mic.
>> You can do >> Okay. I'm taller. It's better for me. >> Hi. Um, I'm John Solawinsky. I live at 324 Westfield Avenue in Clark, New Jersey. Anything else you'd like to know? >> That's it. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Miss Carrie. Um, I would like to address the board and uh the builders here about the fence. to the proposed fence by the parkway. It says it's a 6ft vinyl fence, correct?
>> Um, wouldn't it be maybe a better idea if that fence and doesn't the topography go downward? Slope downward in the property uh to the pro to the parkway. It slopes downward, correct? >> Yeah, but we can't encroach into the
parkway. >> Well, the top I'm not talking about encroaching into the parkway. I'm talking about where the fence is going to stand, the sixoot fence. >> Doesn't the topography of the land go slope downward? >> Correct.
>> Correct. Correct. Um I would propose and suggest to you guys maybe to build a taller fence or a sound barrier. Um not not an ugly sound barrier. It's just like maybe a taller fence and with with
the bushes and shrubs. um if if I personally owned that property, I would I would do that if I did. But that's just a suggestion that I would like to make. Um secondly, um
let's see just just that um is uh does the board have anything to say or is this just time to question uh >> just on a question >> questions for the for the >> for the engineer? you can you please respond to that that maybe you want to
maybe ask to build a higher fence or because of the topography going downward it's not going to even be six foot it's going to be so low and there's a lot of loud cars the race cars go I don't want to make the noise here but >> yeah they really I drive the park enough
I know I know >> but when you live next to it you hear the race car drivers that have the the the engines and it would be beneficial both to the residents nearby by but also very much being built next to the parkway. I think that would be wise for
you to propose a taller fence. >> We can certainly um Yeah, I mean we can certainly take a look at it. I mean I I'd have to I can't respond without studying it, but something we'll take a look at. >> But that's not really an engineering question. And that is really a proposal
to the applicant as to whether the applicant would be willing to build a higher fence. We'll take that consideration under advisement and I'll discuss it with my client before we sum up.
>> Fine. >> Any other questions from the board before >> one more? >> One more. Thank you, sir. State your name for the record and your address. >> Robert Cunningham. Uh 314 Westfield Avenue. I'm the adjacent owner with my
wife, of course. Um I looked at I looked at the plans at the town hall. I just didn't understand the lighting plan. Um what kind of lighting? I see a bunch of dots on your thing. I didn't understand what that was. Like >> Yeah. So what you're what you see on the plan, these are what they call the foot
candle values, right? So, um, what the idea is that they would they zero out at the property line. So, they light up the property, but the record requires that they not spill over onto the property. So, they're designed to
provide lighting on the lighting in the parking lot, but at the property line, the foot candle value zero zero out. >> What kind of lighting is that? Like they're on poles or they coming off? >> Yeah, it's it's p it's a combination. Um it's it's LED lighting. I mean
everything today is is LED lighting. Uh yeah. So they'll be on um I get the height of the polls. Uh minimum. I'm not sure what the the height of the poles are, but they're they're going to
be um two poles uh lighted with LED lighting. Again, um be zero at the property line. So, they're not going to spill onto the adjoining properties. >> I didn't understand all the zero. >> Well, it's just it's a grid. So yeah, every one of these is just is a value.
>> Um, >> right, >> you know, >> one just to give put it in perspective, one foot candle >> or half of like a half a foot candle is like a full moon. So you we're not like overlighting the parking lot. It's just enough to provide for safety. >> Okay. Um, and since we're on the
landscaping part, there's the trees that are being removed. I think there were ones that are staying. Which ones are Can you show me which ones? There's two big pro there's two big signs on basically on the property line. I just I'm sorry. Signs trees.
>> Yeah. So the trees along the property line are going to stay. Yeah. There's one tree like right in the middle that's going to be that's the one that's going to be removed. >> This one is like these will stay. >> Yeah, they'll stay. That's the idea. >> And there's no issue with assume that's
a fire lane would be the accessible. How how wide is that driveway? I say, >> "How wide is the driveway?" >> 20 foot. >> Okay. >> Yeah. 20 is fire code. Yeah. Yep. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> So, with respect to the lighting, do we
comply in all respects with the township ordinance? >> Yes. >> Yes, we do. >> Hi, Nancy Toasquez, 43 Colonial Drive, Clark. made me think of two questions as I listen to other people's questions. In terms of the lighting
with LED lighting, what Kelvin is it going to be set at? Because nowadays when people install LED lighting, they put it at like 6,000 Kelvin and it pretty much lights up everything. And it's the most annoying thing in the world to live near when your neighbors
have 6,000 Kelvin lighting on. >> Yeah. So again the um the idea of the lighting is to um keep it at not overlight it. So the lighting in the parking lot it it varies between uh you
know point4 to uh like two 2.8 at the building. Um which is not very that's not a that's not very bright. >> That's not very bright. That's in Kelvin then the >> it's not like it's not like a shopping center where it's going to be like bright. It's it's enough
>> like Wells Fargo parking lot. >> Yeah. It's just enough to create safety, you know, for the uh >> Okay. Uh and the second question I have with it being a condominium, it sounds like it's a condominium. I mean, we keep talking
about associations, homeowner associations. I never heard of duplexes having that. That's usually two family house. But anyway, let's say that we have this unusual condominium. I guess that will have a name and there will be a sign at the front of it. Is that a
sign? A question for the architect, the engineer or anybody or come come back later on. It >> do you want a sign or do you not want a sign? >> I'm just saying usually you have a sign. It's in front of condominium units. Do
you have a sign? >> If if if >> they have names, they have association names. >> If the board would like a sign and the neighbors would like a sign, we can do a sign. If people want no sign, that's okay, too. >> Okay. Okay. But it will have an
association name and it will be registered as with an association. >> Yes. >> Um declaration and all the other documentation, >> everything that's required under the condominium act. Yes. >> Right. So, strange uh duplex situation
to me, but it is what it is, I guess. >> Um, if I if I could, I don't know that we answered her question. She was asking about the intensity of the light. Not that it's LED, but like more yellow versus more white light. Um, I I know a
lot of places will say like 3,000 Kelvin as something that's more residential versus like a 6,000 Kelvin. So, I just we talked about it, but I need an agreement so I can write it down. What about on the lighting? >> Yeah, like a like a yellow versus a white light, I think, is what their
neighbors are asking. >> Yeah. Well, yeah, LED tends to be white. Um there's what we look at like a um uh the old type of lighting like sodium vapor has more of a orange glow, >> right,
>> than a white light. Um there's like a metal hallite which also has a brighter, but the trend is getting away from those type of lights. Uh the LEDs are what really pretty much everybody's using today. Um but again, these are not overly bright lights. Um they're, you
know, they're they're moderate. Uh like I said, we have like 2.8 at the at the building, then it goes to about an average of 1.4 in the parking lot. And again, just to make an analogy, you know, uh 0.5 c.5
foot candles. I always kind of relate it to like if you had a full moon, that's 0.5 foot candles. So, it's it's not it's it's not super bright, but it's bright enough that it's provides safety. If somebody came home, they can they can see what's going on. Um, you know, some of these lights that you put in front of
your house that you buy in Home Home Depot, I mean, some of those are over over a foot candle. So, it's it's, you know, and those aren't overly bright. I mean, they're just um pretty much lighting the front of the house. So, um the intention was was not to overlight
it knowing that there's adjoining property. So um we we did it what uh would provide safety. Um you know again zero zero foot candles at the property line so there's no spillage on onto any of the adjoining properties. And these are uh we use what we call downward
facing fixtures. So these fixtures face downward not outward. Um so when you're driving or you're looking at them you're not seeing this like bright light light shining in your face. These are pointing downward. Okay,
>> Mr. Gallerano, just to clear up what Mr. Frasier was talking about, you made no application for a sign as part of this application. So, there is no application for a sign variance. And if the applicant chose to
construct a sign, they would have to comply with the ordinance standards or come back to the board to seek an approval for a sign variance. >> Well stated. >> One more thing, please. >> Yeah, I guess uh John Solowinsky again.
Um 324 Westfield A. Uh, I believe a sign would be good because you know it you you go right over the overpass and bam, right there is where you would turn for Amazon drivers, UPS, so on so forth.
I think a sign would be good. suggest I would uh consider making making a sign or a private drive uh you know with a name either private drive or you know you may name it after yourself or your
wife you know God bless her. Okay. Um you know may she rest in peace. Okay. And um all I wanted to say was with the lighting, we were just at floor and decor the other day with my wife cuz we were looking at renovating the bathroom
in our house. And on one side you have all the lighting fixtures for like um your van your v over your vanity um your medicine cabinet and they're all those bright bright bright lights and I hate
them. I hate them with a passion. On the left were all of the orange glowing lights, the ones we grew up with, you know, and uh we paid way less for for for lighting those those light
bulbs way back when, but that's another story. Uh all and I you just uh mentioned that they will be downward-f facing lighting. That was a a a main issue of mine because some of these LEDs, they can be a small LED and they can light up a huge area, but then they
at night they just blind you. I find them to be blinding. I don't even know why they're even legal if you ask me. I'd rather they be the orange the orange kind >> you're talking about. Yeah, you're talking about like the um sodium vapor. I mean um we can look into they're
really outdated. I mean, even PSAG is getting away from sodium sodium vapor lights. Um, but certainly we could I can consult to my client about that. And just just to go back to your point about the uh the street, even though the street is private, it still has a name.
It'll still have a street sign. So, when you drive by that street, it's going to be, you know, whatever ABC Court, it's going to have a street name. When you drive by, you know, nobody, you wouldn't know it was a private road. These will have house numbers. So mail deliveries,
they're going to have a very specific address just like going to any other house. >> Yeah, that's not a problem. Just as long as you know >> Yeah. >> when people have their guests come over, it's it's not a problem to me. It's just for for the >> Yeah. Yeah. I know. I mean, I know you're saying some some developments put
signs, they have it like, you know, whatever um you know, Clark Estates and but that's that's optional. That's not required. The street will have a name. It'll have a name and these will have house numbers like just like any other house. So mail, UPS, FedEx, when they
put it in their GPS, it's going to take them to that to that house. U Mr. Mark Hayden, do you Mark Hayden? Oh, no. The next gentleman, I'm sorry, I don't see your name tag. >> Oh. Oh, Mr. O'Connell. I can't forget
you. They fixed the water problem. Thank you. I called American Water like 20 times. >> That's all. >> That's all. >> Yeah, >> that's all folks. Luna Jones is over. >> Any questions from the board of uh
Pardon? >> Hopefully have >> There's another There's another lady. >> Please come forward. >> Gileia Collins, 72 Georgia Street, Clark. >> I'm sorry. Can you say your name again? >> Into the microphone. >> Into the into the microphone. Can you
say your name again? >> Thank you. >> Collins. >> Thank you. >> 72 Georgia Street. Clark. I travel Westfield Avenue frequently going over the Parkway towards ALJ. There's a curve before you enter the area like in front
of the library. Um, will you be approaching the county to put any type of driveway sign saying driveways ahead? Because at 3:00, I mean, at 2:30, it's backed up
with parents picking up their children at the high school and the traffic light on um, Emerald Place. It's going to be congested and you're going to have people that are not familiar that all this is happening
there. And a lot of towns where there's homes after a curve, you know, they'll say private driveway or driveway ahead. Will there be any approachment to the county to put up any kind of warning
sign saying that there's a driveway ahead? Oh, there is. >> Yeah, there that that would be up to the county. We can certainly ask them, but again, that would that would be their that's their decision. Yeah, >> just keep in mind there's there's two
driveways there now. Um because there's two existing houses. >> I see it every day. It's hard for people to get out. putting in one more defined, organized driveway and actually pushing it further from the uh from the bridge.
So, right now you have one driveway that's closer to the bridge, right? >> We're actually pushing it further away. So, what we're proposing is going to is going to be a significant improvement to what's there now. >> Okay. Because I see people trying to back out and pull out a lot. >> Right. Right. And that's going to be
avoided because the way this is configured, all the cars are going to go straight out. They're not going to They're not going to back out. >> Okay. Just for the safety and there's people walking there a lot going back and forth. >> Sure. >> To the high school. Thank you. >> Yeah. You're welcome.
>> Anyone else from the audience? >> Okay. Then, Mr. Chairman, at this time I'd like to call the architect, please. >> Checking that none of the members have any other questions. Do you do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give in this matter is the truth, the whole truth,
and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> State and spell your name for the record, please. >> Sure. My name is Paulo Dantis. First name is Paulo. P A U L O. Last name is Dantis. D A N T A S. >> Hi, Mr. Dantis. You're the architect who drew the plans that it's um that are
here this evening on this project. >> That's correct. >> Okay. Could you give the board the benefit of your qualifications, please? graduated from New Jersey Institute of Technology in the year 2002 with a bachelor's in architecture. Uh have been licensed in the state of New Jersey since 2007
and I have uh testified on many boards uh in Bergen Ex's Hudson and Mammoth County as well as here in Clark. >> And are your licenses all current? >> Yes, it is. >> Mr. Chairman, I tender um Mr. Dantis as an expert in the field of architecture.
>> Is acceptable? Please describe the project, Mr. Dantes. >> Thank you. So, the exhibition that I'm going to be showing at least for now um was submitted in a black and white. Um the only relevant now is is in color. >> A3.
>> A3. >> Thank you. So, what are we looking to do is a project that will consist of two uh two unit buildings on the subject of the property on 306 308 West Westfield Avenue. Um each structure uh will
contain two attached resident dwellings and with each resident uh with each uh each will have their own private entrance, private garages, internal stairs and also private area on the outside. The plans are as follows. On
sheet A 100, which is our title sheet, and which we have a ground floor plan, we have a livable area of 568 square ft and we also have a twocar garage of approximately 460 ft. The building use
group that we're looking to use is a residential group R5, which is significant to a single family um construction. It's a twounit uh building and it's going to comply with all the state codes. On each dwelling, we're
looking on the ground level. Um I'm sorry, each dwelling is going to be approximately 2,600 square ft plus minus a livable area and is going to be distributed across the three floors above the grade. Uh the overall building
footprint is approximately 25,56 ft. Uh the ground floor will accommodate for a family room. At the rear, a twocar garage in the front and then an intermediately in the unit. We're going to have an elevator, full bathroom, and
some interior stairs which leads you also to the foyer util. >> Just one second. You said an elevator. Will each one of the four units have a private elevator that serves only that unit? >> Yes, it will. So each elevator will serve that unit itself and it will have
accessibility to the three levels. >> And was part of the idea behind that to make the unit uh accessible from a um handicap standpoint and also to enable uh owners or users of these units to age in place.
>> That's correct. So we we look at these uh have been more common lately. Uh what we're looking is some people do not want to leave their towns. Um and then what we do to accommodate is provide an elevator which will then uh give accessibility to all the levels and
allows them to grow as they please. Um at what age? >> Thank you. >> Um the utilities and mechanicals and the storage needs will also be located within the ground floor. Uh at currently we haven't done no closet, but we still have to go through the the elements of
the utilities that we're going to propose. Uh the main entrance of each unit is going to be provided at the front with the exception of what we call unit B. Uh unit B is the furthest unit located close to Westfield Avenue. And
that uh particular unit will have a side entrance located and also will be provided um more decorative or consistency with what the front of the facades are. Um each >> but let's stay with that point for just
a second. I'm looking at sheet A 100. Could you um direct the board's attention to what you're talking about uh on this unit B? >> Sure. So, what we're looking at is most uh the other three units will have an entrance from the front. On the unit B,
which is closest to Westfield, we'll have a side entrance here. And as you could see from the rendering, we'll have the entrance on the side and then also the implementation of the side elevation uh being complementaryary also with the front where the garages are. >> And was the purpose of that? Well, that
was a change from the original plan, isn't it, Mr. Dantes? And if I recall correctly, that was uh in response to some of the comments from the board professionals. >> That's correct. That was requested. And the purpose of that was to provide something with a nicer facade and more
architectural interest facing Westfield Avenue which is you know I guess the frontage of the property so that from the outside people wouldn't be looking at a side blank wall. Is that a fair way of summarizing it?
>> That's fair. >> Okay. Please continue. So each unit will have its own dedicated mechanical utility housing for heating and cooling, hot water and also the electrical. Um in between we'll have a demising wall uh
for the two units from the ground level and it will be continuous from the foundation all the way to the roof in accordance to the fire radius separation requirements. Sheet A 101 which is a second and third. The second floor has a livable area of approximately 1,038
square ft. That's consistent on each unit. We do have an open floor concept in the front where the living and dining room will take place. We'll have our kitchen and eating area towards the back. And then in between we'll have our powder room, pantry, coat closet, and an
elevator in the middle of the unit. Interior stairs are centrally located within each unit and will provide access to both the ground and the above floor. The third floor which is located here, we have a
livable uh area of approxim. This will be consistent again with all the units. It will contain three bedroom um areas. First will be the primary suite in the front which will have its own walk-in closet, private bathroom
and an accessibility of a vestibule somewhat. Uh within that we have two additional bedrooms at the rear with closets and then we'll have a share hallway u bathroom and within that we'll have a laundry closet and again the
elevator is being shown uh for the convenience of accessibility to all the floors. All habitable rooms will be designed at to meet all requirements of room size, lighting, and ventilation within the code.
>> What's the height of the building? Um, Mr. Dantis, >> the building the way is described in Clark is to the mean of the roof. We have 33 feet 33 feet and 3 and 5/8 where 35 is required. >> 35 is permitted. permitted
>> and the building in terms of height then terms of the 33 and a half what have you complies >> that's correct >> our front elevation has been articulated to read to distinct um a whole entire
unit but also have expressed his own entity. Um we did try to do this by creating some gable some dormer features material treatment uh but also also tried to maintain as as a single uh architectural composition. Um the
exterior materials that we are proposing um we are in combination of the fire cement. Let me see if I have a rendering. Exterior materials will be proposed or a combination of fiber cement lap siding uh board and bat siding as well and uh
and fiber cement uh brick and stone veneer at the water table and below architectural ashalt singles. We're going to have some aluminum clad wood windows um decorative uh trim and corner boards selected to be compatible with the um residential characters around
surrounding houses. Um our roof has been designed with gable and hips. Uh we also feel that that's providing a residential scale that hopefully is also consistent with the surrounding homes. Our front and side elevation have been carefully composed. Um and what we tried to do
during that is to break down the overall massing of the building so it does not appear monolithic. Uh we feel that we achieve this by variations of window placement and grouping. Uh materials transition and trimming banding between
floor levels. Um also circulate some wall offsets, bumpouts where the floor plan permits um and some roof line variations including the gable dormers and continuous e detail. >> Now you could build this project with
four units attached if somebody really wanted to do that. Would that be correct? >> That's correct. The only element that we would actually be eliminating is the windows on the side. But for the egress purposes, I guess we do have the bedrooms facing the back and we have the master facing the front. So we achieve
that. >> Was part of the reason from an architectural perspective why you believe that that is not preferable is to eliminate what you just referred to as massing in terms of what would be presented to the neighbors. >> It would not only be the massing but
also in addition to our engineer um testified. I think having end units gives it more of appeal and also brings more light into the unit itself. >> But in terms of the impact upon others because that's that's what you're giving us is reasons why the applicant might
want it or why the people purchasing from applicant might want it, but it's also more beneficial to the neighbors and the neighborhood for this to be broken up into two separate buildings. Would you agree? >> I do agree that also in the driveway as well. You would just have a massive
driveway with entry points. >> Would almost look like a parking lot, right? >> A little bit. >> Do you have anything else to add in terms of the architecture? Uh, Mr. Dantis, >> that concludes my testimony. >> I tender the witness. >> Any comments from
the residents here or questions of the uh architect? again. Uh, John Silowinsky again. >> Thank you. >> 324 Westfield Avenue. And, uh, I just have a question. The storage space for
these people, are they going to have to go to this local storage space by the stop and shop or are they have do they have an attic or a basement? >> So, the attic is going to the attic will be mostly if anything will be a furnace. Uh majority of the storage will lead
either be behind the garage which I think we have adequate space or where we call the family room. We'll probably have over there also a couple closets and so for storage facility >> that will be all. Thank you. >> Nancy Tosquez 43 Colonial Drive Clark.
Where are the windows on the drawings that will be not there if there are four units side by side? >> Sure, if I may. >> So just on the side, if you look from the left side, you have all these
windows here. One, two, three, four. And then from the right side, you also have one, two, three, four, five, six, and a couple on the bottom. >> Okay. Okay. Okay. And the second question, when you talk about the height, does that start from the top of
the garage? >> No, it starts from the ground level all the way to the mean of the roof, which is between the eve and the top of the ridge >> as per the ordinance. >> Any other questions from the audience?
have about the board. Any questions of the architect? Seeing none. >> Okay. Then I'll bring back Mr. Gallerano to provide planning testimony. Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. So, Mr. Gallerano um I guess the
first thing would be why don't you tell us what variances are necessary? >> Sure. So the uh first and foremost I the uh again going back to the definition of a uh townhouse uh the ordinance states a townhouse is 3
to 10 units. Uh we're proposing uh town houses with two units to each building. Um, you could debate whether that's a D1 or a C2 variance. I'm going to just go through the D1 and just um go with it that way.
>> We we need some Dvariances anyway, right, Mr. Galleran? >> Yeah, correct. So, we we'll we'll go with it as a as a D1. Um the bulk variance is required uh is the lot size uh minimum lot size of 40,000 square feet is required uh
where this property is 19,954 square ft. Uh one sideyard required uh is 20 ft uh where 10.9 ft uh is proposed. And um actually I'm going to
go back to uh the drawing. And this is going back to the uh site plan drawings that were submitted with the application. Again, the these have been unaltered. Uh so the uh
the requirement is 20 ft. Uh the setback to the uh Parkway rightway uh is 10.9 ft minimum, but that's that's at this corner here where the property line kind of makes a skew. Uh the
remainder of the rear yards are actually at 13.2 ft. So 10.9 is the variance. It's 13.2 ft. uh creates a little bit better setback as you go uh further along uh the rear of the uh the
property. Uh rear >> again that's backing up to the parkway. There's no neighbors there, right? >> Correct. So that's backing up to the uh backing up to the uh the parkway right away. Uh the uh number of stories uh is
uh required is 2.5. Uh three stories are proposed. However, the the height is compliant. So there's no height variance being uh required. Uh it's only the number of stories. Uh the parking setback from a exterior lot line is 10
feet where 5t is proposed and again that's along this easterly I'm sorry a westerly property line and that is going to be fully screened uh with with with abroades. Uh we did are also requesting a variance
for um set back to a building where 10 feet required 9.2 is proposed and that's in this area right here. Uh looking at this in a uh after taking a second look um we'll just we're going to make that 10 ft. I don't see any reason why we
need we need that variance. We could we could just slide those three parking spaces over a little bit and uh and and meet the 10 ft. uh all all the other bulk requirements uh are being met. Uh we do also need a D5 uh variance for the
uh density. Uh the require or the permitted density maximum permitted density is 8 units per acre. Uh based on the size of our property, it calculates out to 8.73. Uh in order to have four units on this
property uh in conformance with the density requirement, we would need exactly half an acre. Uh this property is 0458. So we're short by 0.042 acres uh where it would be 100% compliant uh with with
the density uh requirements. >> Put another way, we're just about 10% short on the density, right? >> Yeah, we're we're we're like right there. We're just a little bit short. And you know, if this property didn't have this little jog in it and it was a perfect rectangle, uh that wouldn't that
wouldn't be an issue. Uh so the um so for the purpose of the uh the proofs um the uh the bulk variances can be can be subsumed into the into the D1 variance.
Uh we're going to start with that. So first the um first prong is whether the site is particularly suited for the use. Uh it is zoned for down town houses. Uh we are again just very slightly off from
meeting the uh the density requirement. Again it's really I consider it to be the minimus. So I I would um conclude that the site is suited for the use. Uh when we look at the negative criteria, the test is can the variance be granted
without substantial detriment to the public good and will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the zone plan and zoning ordinance. Um again we we look at the uh where the where the variant where the deviation is
located. Uh the setback variance is up against the parkway. certainly not going to have any impact uh to the parkway right away. Uh all the parking is going to be fully screened. Um and again uh the buildings were by
design placed to the uh easterly side of the property to create that that greater separation to the uh adjoining property. So I I would conclude that the variances that are being uh requested really are not going to have any negative impact to
the surrounding area. Uh we next look at the positive criteria. Again the test here is are there special reasons that depart uh from the zoning regulations in this particular case. Uh we look at the purpose of zoning
uh the the the placement of uh the the units uh the the separation between uh the the two buildings. The idea of creating two side by sides instead of one four unit building uh does provide
for um adequate uh light uh air um and open space and and light uh light. Uh also I believe that uh this provides for s sufficient space and appropriate location for variety of agricultural, residential, recreational, commercial
and industrial uses and open space both uh public and private according to their respective environmental requirements in order to meet the needs of all New Jersey citizens. Um this kind of also goes handinhand with uh one of the goals
of the master plan which is to promote a balance of land uses including residential, commercial, industrial, public, recreational and conservation zones. Uh this does create a uh a townhouse opportunity. Majority of Clark
is is single family. Uh so this does create that that variety of of uses. uh this particular case town houses uh as we mentioned earlier uh the the addition of the elevators allows people to we
call a age in place uh people who want to don't want to climb stairs anymore uh have the have the option here with the elevators to be able to move in here stay here and um not have to worry about um not being able to climb stairs
and then um again I mentioned we did look at the uh the master plan. We do believe it does promote the goal uh the goals and objectives of the ma of the master plan. And then lastly with the density variance um as we know the uh
density variance doesn't uh require the same level of proof as a D1. It doesn't require that uh enhanced uh proof. uh it must only demonstrate that the site can accommodate any potential problems associated with the larger density uh
than what's permitted by the ordinance. Uh in this case I represent it's such a very very small deviation um to get that fourth unit. Um you couldn't see from the naked eye the difference between a halfacre lot and a
lot that's uh only 0.04 acres less. So, um I again I I see that this site can can clear can accommodate uh that that that extra unit. >> Um well, >> it's not really an extra unit because you would be allowed like 3.8 or >> Yeah, right. Well, the problems with
density, you round down, right? So, you know, 8.7 units is eight units. It's not nine, you know, nine. So, this is kind of the way that's calculated. it it ends up that you would be allowed three, but to get that fourth unit, it's such a very very minor deviation. Um, so for
all practical purposes, uh, it's it's really dimminimous. Um, and again, uh, I just in conclusion, I believe that the, uh, special reasons exist for the granting of the variances, uh, and that the, uh, the benefits of
granting the variances outweigh any detriments. This will not have any substantial negative impact on the surrounding area, will not substantially impair the intended purpose of the zoning plan and ordinance. With that, I have no other direct. >> I tender the witness.
>> I tender the witness, Mr. Chairman. >> In other words, ask away. >> A few questions and getting back to the driveway. Uh, I understand there is going to be in this homeowners association. They'll be
responsible for any snow removal on the property. >> What about garbage collection? >> Is there adequate space in that parking area for a garbage truck to get in, turn around so they're not backing up on
Westfield Avenue? >> That's an engineering question, but I got an engineer right here. >> Sure. So, what we uh the garbage would be stored within the garages. We're not proposing a dumpster. Um these could be would be put out in front of their unit.
Um just like if they were, you know, put out in front of a >> garbage can putting out there. >> Yeah. Just a garbage can. There's really no need for a dumpster. >> There's no proposal to put dumpsters in that parking area. >> Yeah. I mean, a larger a larger development might have dumpsters, but
for four units, um like I said, I live in a townhouse development. We we put our garbage cans out at the front and then they're picked up picked up at the curb and it and and and it works. It really it really isn't an issue. So, um yeah, a garbage truck I envision would would would back in um pick up the
garbage and then pull straight out. Um that that's usually the way typically it's typically the way it's done. >> So, there wouldn't be a concern of a truck pulling in forward and having to turn around. >> Yeah. No. >> Back out onto Westfield Avenue. >> Yeah. Well, they would not be backing
out. >> Couple points have been made on the fencing. Uh, is that the current plan? Someone looking out of their kitchen window. Obviously, we'll see the parkway, but if they were in their
backyard on that slab, that would be a patio. Is there sufficient blocking? You're never going to get rid of the noise of traffic obviously, but not to be a detriment to Oh, I look out my
backyard and I see 50 cars. >> Yeah. No, they're not. It's a six, so they're not going to they're not going to see the cars. I mean, I mean, >> I understand what the gentleman was saying about the slope that if you have a six-foot fence, but the grading goes
down another foot, you only have a 5ft fence. >> Mr. Chairman, um the sixoots fence was based upon the ordinance. If it were the board's preference that the fence be 8 feet rather than six feet, the applicant could live with that. We were trying to
comply and not create another variance. But we don't object to an 8oot fence. >> Rich, do you have any comment on that or >> I Your ordinance is for a six-foot fence.
Um, an 8ft fence would not be substantially different from a six in this particular instance. And the next door neighbors are screened from the parkway by these homes. And nothing in the upper floors of these
homes is going to be impacted by a fence, be it 6 or 8 feet in height. So again, it's up to the applicant's proposal and the board's choice whether to grant an additional variance for that type of situation.
>> Thank you. Any of the board members have any further questions on this application of the architect or >> at this point he's the planner. >> Pardon? >> At this point, Mr. uh Galleran was the
planner. >> The planner. Okay. Anyone >> open to the public? >> Open to the public. >> Right. Yes, please. >> Come up. Give us your name, please. >> Phyllis Cunningham, 314 Westfield
Avenue. >> Thank you. >> How high is that transformer? Because pulling out, I don't know how far away from the street it is. Cuz pulling out, as the other lady said, is a little dangerous. I pull out of my driveway all
the time, and it you have to be careful. And if there's a transformer high blocking the view, it might be a little problem. It could be set farther back or farther away from the where it is right now. >> Yeah, the transformers are generally
about two foot high. >> Okay. >> Yeah, the the final location unfortunately usually gets dictated by the power company. Um but yeah, they're only >> I don't know two foot high. They're not they're not big. It's only for four. There there is there's there's a chance
it could be a pole pole transformer, but four units were kind of like on the edge. So whether it would be a pole or or a ground mounted. >> I just don't want it get hurt. >> Yeah. No, it would be it would it wouldn't block the site for sure. >> And the other thing is um 20 ft. You're
talking about a garbage truck. I deal with a blind woman in a town home situation and there is no parking in the horseshoe because of fire trucks. It's all considered a fire lane. Is there any way you could put more parking? You only
have three parking spaces for those people that have visitors. Is there any way you could possibly There's looks like there's a lot of space. You could put maybe more parking there so that way you have a fire lane. Again, I'm
thinking safety. That's it. >> Well, they're not going to be able to the um I'm sorry. Um people will not be able to park within the driveway. So, the the driveway itself is a fire lane and it'll be marked like no parking. >> Okay. Cuz before they said, you know, you could park in front of
>> No, you can park only in your driveway, but you can't block the 20 ft. And the fire department 100% is going to um have this. I'll probably put signage, but you don't want to paint yellow because it looks bad in front of a new townhouse. >> I may be a little nervous with parking in front.
>> Yeah. No, no, you only in your driveway, but not in the actual driveway itself. Yep. Getting back to the signage, is there I thought I heard a gentleman say there's a sign there now indicating that
there is a driveway. >> Well, I think we're talking a couple different things here with the sign. I heard >> over the bridge. I mean, >> I heard somebody say, and I don't know, and listen, my office is in Clark. I come this way. I should know. But I heard somebody say that there's a sign
as you come over the bridge that, you know, lets you know about this. But I think that you need to focus respectfully on the fact that instead of there being what's presently there now, which is two driveways, >> as you come around the curb, which is maybe sort of dangerous,
>> right? >> We're going to go down from two to one plus it's further away from the curb. So, we're taking a situation that is suboptimal right now. We're making it better. Are we making it perfect? I
don't know. But we're making it better. Now, the applicant does not have an objection to putting a sign there. We haven't talked about a name. I don't know if it's going to be Scurro Estates or what. Um, but the applicant doesn't have an
objection to putting a sign at the front of this. It wasn't part of the plan. We can do that if that's what people want. We cannot do that if that's what people want. >> One where,
>> right? But we're talking talking about something a little different. >> Okay. Well, the applicant will not have the ability to post off premises signage. any reasonable signage that the board wants to require the applicant to
install on the applicant's own property, tell us what you want, we'll do it. Um, but I would still emphasize what we're doing ameliates the potentially negative or dangerous
condition. We certainly don't add to it and we're making it better. >> Thank you. Any questions from anyone else in the audience or the board at this point before I call for a motion?
>> You can sit down. >> Oh, no. There's another question. >> Was there somebody else who didn't speak? >> If any any public that has um comments for against the application, go ahead and come up. Um, my dad could not be here today. He's
the legal owner of the home I live in. I'm entrusted to it right now. So, in case uh my they pass away, which I hope they don't. I hope they live to be over 100. Uh that the house would go to me. That's why I'm here. My dad couldn't
make it. He's the assistant shop steward and he had to cover for someone at the chemical plant that he works at. So today he wanted to call out and come to the meeting and and uh you know talk to everyone here but he he couldn't. Um I
could make a phone call to him. I said I if that was allowed to be put on the microphone or I could speak for him as he told me. Would that be permissible? >> You can give his com if you agree with his comments. Go ahead and give them as your own. Yes, I agree. I agree with his comments and go ahead and give them as
your own >> for Anton Solowinsky. Okay. Who currently resides at 2013 Boon Avenue in Clark. >> Um, and he's presently the owner of 324 Westfield Avenue in Clark
along with my uh my mom uh Juliana Solowinsky. So, Antony and Juliana Solowinsky are the owners. Um what he wanted me to uh explain and
say is that we are now Bob Phyllis and I John Solowinsky and my wife who's pregnant and we're trying to start a family are now the monkeys in the middle of two new developments. And I am not saying that in a negative
way. I we are we are accepting we are accepting the reality of you know Clark was a farm back in the 50s and everything moves forward. So um if you can't beat him join him okay and that's that's not a bad that's
not a bad plan. Bob has his nest egg. He keeps a beautiful property and he's been here longer than I have and I respect uh the man very much over there behind me and and Phyllis as well. They've been great neighbors. And uh all I wanted to
say was that my dad said if these new residents are going to move in on the left side of my property, which is the Hunter development, um with the three houses and then on the right
of Bob and Phyllis's property are going to be the new uh developments of the two duplexes, condos in quotations. Um, we don't want to be left out since we are not now getting all the urban sprawl
neighbors and, you know, we're getting, you know, uh, houses facing our backyard. All we wanted to do was make a statement. My dad and I wanted to make a statement that we don't get contested by future residents that move into the new
housing um either on Bob's side or on the side of me uh on the left side of my property, my dad's property, uh that the new residents don't contest
that we would, let's say, want to build town houses in the future. because of course my dad worked very very hard. He worked a lot of overtime and he made the American dream come true for me and uh he wished he could be here but you know what he someone's got to
keep the factory running and he's the backup shop steward and uh that's his job to keep it running in case someone calls out. So, he's there and all I wanted to all I wanted to say for him is that we get grandfathered in that we do not get left out um from the townhouse
zoning ever in the future. if if the town wants to remove townhouse zoning allowance or or duplexes or you know the zoning as as it currently is in our area that we are grandfathered in no matter what that we
can stay on our properties as long as we wish Bob Phyllis and I John Silowinsky and my wife Paulina Silinsky that we don't get left out um you know in the future that do did I make my point clear
enough for everyone? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Have and thank you for that. >> Uh may >> not that we have any control over >> well >> future but >> I know you don't have any control but since this is all public record I can refer to this into the future >> right
>> on this date that this was stated to the board. >> Okay >> that I would not like this to be contested by any new residents that they would not like me to build maybe town houses. actually my dad legally. Okay.
Any comment about that? >> Um that only that this board doesn't have anything to do with zoning or reszoning your property. So I understand exactly your your what you're saying. I understand your concern. This board isn't the one that would change your zoning. So but to the I I understand
your comment. as long as it's not changed or if in the future clerk says no more town houses, uh people say no more, no more, no more. Okay. Well, we're already zoned and we want to be grandfathered in stated today on this
date. Okay. >> This board doesn't have the authority to say that because the zoning decisions are a council decision. >> All right. I I hope I get a a a council
zoning uh notification in case it changes. >> If the council tries to change the zoning or desires to change the zoning, there's a process that happens that includes public notification. >> Okay. I just well out of politeness
sake, I just hope that the zoning does not get changed that it just stays at is as it is. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. >> Thank you for your comments. >> Uh Robert Cunningham 314 Westfield Avenue joining neighbor. Um I'm also the
Arbite guy who was like looking to say if >> talked to Senator the Arborvite, sir. >> Yeah. I mean the because uh we have a nice kind of barrier between us and the neighbor from um basically where our fence starts. We have some leeland cypus
and we have a couple sheds. It's only the back 50 f feet or so that is would be open. So our vites if that's possible >> no problem >> would be greatly appreciated. Um we uh my wife and I had known this was you know coming at some point and um we were
a little worried about where it was going to be. Um we went to the town hall last week and we were very pleasantly surprised and I want to thank Jerry um particularly because could have put him right up against our house and it would be a lot more I'd have a lot more like I
was last month at this point. Um but it I think it's a great design. I think that um you know considering it's a town home you know townhouse that's it is zoned. I mentioned that last month last I don't know when that happened but it happened at some point. it fits within
the zoning. I think it's appropriate for the zoning. Um I didn't necessarily agree with the first part of today's meeting that that but that's a whole that ship has sailed. Um this is what I really think is important is that the zoning and the application of variances
uh in this case really considered the next door neighbors. I really think that's important and I think that's really something that you know I don't know how you can take into those accounts as the board members you know the bo the town is getting really tight um so sometimes it has to be maybe
that's not the best idea this was a good idea so my wife and I fully support this >> thank you very much for your comments >> again any questions from the board before I >> get to sum up Mr. Chairman, >> go right ahead and do your
>> I'll be very brief. I was uh gratified to just hear the comments of the two most affected neighbors. I'm not so sure I like the monkey in the middle reference because it sounded kind of negative to me, but I'll take it in a positive spirit.
>> I said I'll take it a positive spirit. And you know, it is interesting and the two applicants applications, the one last month that got memorialized earlier tonight and tonight's application. You know, you talk about coincidences.
The fact that those two separate, totally separate clients both came into my office more or less at the same time and they end up here and there's just the two properties in between. It's it's an interesting coincidence, but I think
overall when you think about and I want to emphasize for a second the comments that the applicants or excuse me the uh the neighbors just both made. I think this is not just a good application. I think this is a great application. I think this application really
demonstrates what good zoning and what a good board of adjustment is really all about. The reason we have boards of adjustment is to not just go with the strict mechanistic application
of well okay this what the ordinance is and you don't do anything else. No, the purpose of a board of adjustment is to look at the zoning ordinance, look at its application to a particular property
and project and make smart common sense decisions. That's what this board is about and that's what you folks are volunteering your valuable time to do and to do this
service for the community. And I think when you look at this project that Mr. Skuturro and his professionals have designed and you look at the way that the buildings, the proposed buildings are pushed over
toward the parkway, like who are they going to borrow bother over at the parkway? They were put in such a place that would minimize and eliminate any negative impact upon the neighbors. The zoning for this area is townhouse
zoning. And I think I would suggest to you, Mr. Chairman, and members of the board, that you'd be hardressed to come up with a better townhouse project for this site
than the one that my client and his professionals have designed here. And if you look at the you know specific variances that are taugh that are discussed here you think about the one for lot size
it's minimal or density excuse me the density as um Mr. Gallerano described the variances they minimous I was playing a little fancy game with math and okay maybe you're really allowed 3.8 28 units and we're asking
for four. And Mr. Gallerano forthrightly said, "Yeah, but you don't do that. You have to round down." I get I get it. Okay. But when you do look at it mathematically, that that variance is minimal. When you think about the lot
size one, it is what it is. We got 19,000 someundred odd square feet. I can't make the lot bigger. The lot's a little irregular. because of where the parkway is. Nothing we can do about that. And the one about having the
two separate buildings is just better than if you had one massive fourunit building in a row that's going to block light, air, circulation, and everything. It's just better. This is a good
project. I'm proud to be standing here before this board representing Mr. and advocating for this project and I respectfully suggest Mr. Chairman that the board should grant this application with the variances that were requested
subject to the comments and colloquia of this evening. You want the sign, we'll do a sign. You don't want a sign, we won't do a sign. You want an 8ft fence instead of a sixoot fence, we'll go with the flow. If you want an 8ft fence instead of the
sixoot fence, we'll go with the flow. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. >> Thank you. >> I heard an echo. >> Pardon me. >> Um, so if the board's ready to call to present a motion, but just let me know.
um if you want to change anything that was presented on the fence and as to the sign there was a lot of discussion but they did state that there will be like a you know main street like a sign for like a regular street that is proposed. So whether the board wants something in addition to that, let me know.
Otherwise, if you just make a motion, it's for what they presented. But if you want a higher fence or a sign included in your motion. Okay. >> I have a motion on this application. like to make a motion to accept calendarus 7
26 >> with any modifications or >> um no no mod not modifications none >> and that motion will be subject to compliance with the planning and engineering reports correct the
conditions in the the reports from our professionals >> right >> okay >> I have a second I'll second the application as presented. >> Madam Secretary, >> Dante Tiknini, >> yes. >> Mark Hayden,
>> yes. >> Thomas Maid, >> yes. >> Douglas Croc, >> yes. >> Chris Tierney, >> yes. >> John Caliguire, >> yes. >> Chairman Ed Ruth, >> yes. Mr. Chairman, members of the board, it's
been a pleasure. Thank you. >> What other business do we have? >> Two resolutions to adopt. All right. >> We have two resolutions that have to be approved. Thank you both and the audience for your comments.
We'll now entertain the two resolutions that were come from our last meeting. >> Okay. First resolution is calendar number 4-26. Um, Elelliana and Ryan Landalfi, 78 Hutchinson Street. These are C variances
to construct an an addition to the existing single family home, including a single car attached garage at the property known as 78 Hudson Street. So, we have a motion and a second. >> I have a motion on the first.
>> I'll make a motion. Dante made the motion. I have a second. >> I'll second that. >> Second by Chris Tierney. >> All in favor or you want to do >> individual. Roll call, please. Yeah. >> Roll call, please. >> Yes.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Douglas Croc. >> Yes. >> Chris Tierney. >> Yes. >> John Caliguire. >> Yes. >> And Chairman Ed Ruth. >> Yes. Okay. Okay. >> And the second resolution is calendar
number 3-26, Katherine Golich, 333 Carolina Street. This is an application for C variances to construct a pergola in the rear yard of the home property block 137 lot 5. Have a motion and a second, please.
>> I have a motion on the second resolution. Make a motion to accept. >> John Caliggar made a motion. Second. >> Second the motion. >> Dante. Making the second. Roll call, please.
>> Dante Techni. >> Yes. >> Douglas Croc. >> Yes. >> Chris Tierney. >> Yes. >> John Caliguire. >> Yes. >> Chairman Eduth. >> Yes. Okay. That's it for resolutions.
>> That's concludes the resolution section of our agenda. >> What next? >> Uh discussion. >> Any discussions from any board members about this meeting or anything else
that needs to be brought up to the board at this point? If not, I'll close that area. item of the agenda and >> motion. >> Look for a motion to adjurnn.
>> Mark Hayden made the motion. Second. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> I >> I >> motion carries. >> So carries. Thank you all for your time and effort. >> Good job, guys. That's a lot. Three
applications is a lot.