okay This is a regular meeting of the President zoning board of adjustment Adequate notice of this meeting has been given to uh given pursuant to the provisions of the open public meetings act at the time of the board reorganization in January this year The board adopted its regular meeting schedule for the year Notice the schedule was sent to and published in
the Aspberry Park Press on January 31st 2025 and the two river times on January 23rd 2025 That notice was also posted on the bullet board in Burough Hall and has remained continuously posted there as required by the statute Copy the notice is and has been available to the public and is on file at the office of the bro
code Copy of the notice has also been sent to members of the public as have requested such information in accordance to the statute Adequate notice having been given The board secretary is directed to include the statement in the minutes of the meeting Before proceeding with the formal meeting tonight I'd like to say a few words to the applicants or experts in the audience about the role and
authority of the Fraven zoning board of adjustment The board is a separate independent municipal legal entity and its limited authority is specifically set forth in burough ordinances in the New Jersey municipal land use law Squa's legislation in nature and the members of the board are unpaid volunteers appointed by the mayor and council The zoning board does not enact the burough
land use laws and regulations The burough council does that The zoning board does not enforce the land use laws of the burden This is the responsibility of the burough code enforcement officer This board deals with appeals for relief the requirements of the burough's land use laws or denials by the zoning officer An applicant is never entitled
to a variance also known as an exception to the zoning regulations but must meet specific criteria required by the New Jersey municipal land use law and the varian ordinances like satisfying certain required standards of proof The board has no authority to wave these requirements The burden of proof is always upon the applicant to show that
he or she is entitled to the specific relief requested The applicant must prove that a deviation from the regulations will advance the purposes of the ordinance and that the deviation would substantially outweigh any detriment to his own plan variances relate to the future use of the land and are not intended or authorized to remedy
temporary or unique personal situations Roll call please Mr Mazzi here Mr Ryan Mr Here Dr Walker here Here
Mr Mr Le here Okay First matters Oh flagged flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands One nation under God indivisible
with liberty and justice for all Open to the public as okay The first application uh on the agenda today is the Mertha application This is a matter that was heard previously Um it's been carried previously Uh Murtha is not being heard tonight Um I'd like to make an
announcement that we are carrying the Murtha applications to the meeting in May What is the date Shield may 3rd May 1st The Mirthth application is being carried to May 1st Anyone hearing the Mirthth application
okay We don't need a roll call vote do we no Okay No Okay Great Um all right We're going to move on to the Lee matter please May I confirm that we have jurisdiction in this matter okay Anyone
involved in the Lee application may I ask you to step forward on the swearing at this point in time including Mr So so I swear the testimony you give before the board will be the truth the whole truth not about the truth I do Yes Yes What I'm going to ask you to do is before you start testifying state your
name for the record spelling your last name Do you have proceed do a little bit of housekeeping at this point in time marks and exhibits your mark is A1 land development application checklist as well as the zone board adjustment
application The mark is A2 the variance request This is the statement of exceptional conditions dated November 11 2024 A3 is going to be the zoning permit denial by Nichinski That's dated October 30th
2024 A4 is survey of the property prepared by Morgan Engineering Survey dated June 21st 2024 unrevised A5 are the act architectural plot diagram and first floor plan uh prepared by Minkler
architect dated October 14 2024 and revised as well as ZB1 which is the CME report Mr Rizo signature dated December 19 2024 as well as zoning
board 2 ZB2 which is the prior ZB adjustment resolution which was memorialized 62 Um and I ask Mr Are there any waiverss that we need to address pause one second I'm just going to note for
the record that Mr Mr Shivetti is around Mr Kovatz Um so this application you'll hear in a moment from the applicant is for a a deck edition So keep that in mind when uh you hear the the checklist waiverss Uh first one is complete floor plans They provided a partial first
floor plan only Second is elevations on all sides of the structure Third is the location and type of proposed attic access Uh fourth is a key map Then there are uh tax certification and copies of all
competencies easements and deeds I don't take any exception to these checklist items Um the tax status I I checked um even the day um as well as when it was application was made and the website says that all taxes are current and then
um this application was approved in 2022 um for the house Um so at that point in time the floor plans and the other architectural plans were reviewed Again this is for a deck so I don't take the exception to the more detailed
sheets You take the exception of those Anyone have any question about the proposed waivers okay Is that it is yours my name is Eric Lee Last name spelled L
U Uh I bought the property with my wife in August last year And um since we've been uh living there we come to realize that the access to the backyard is not uh very conducive for our living Um the
living room and the uh kitchen is where we're spending most of our time We have a 2-year-old son and we have another baby on the way any day now Should be two weeks from now Um so we are hoping to install the deck to be a landing so
that we can have the uh the door open out from the living room and then we can walk down from the deck to the backyard Um and right now because of the way that the house was built um it was right up
against the um the rear set back Let me state one thing I did omit A6 which are the color photographs and the subject properties are undated six pages uh two images each sheet Those reflect the actual conditions that exist
at present That's correct Okay You ready to cross the vote uh uh my name is Vincent Minkler I'm the architect for the project The last name is M I N K L E R the uh like my client specified uh
they are looking to build a wood deck uh at the rear of the property to make access to the backyard I did not know if you just testify as you testify an architect as my Yes Could you put your credentials on the record please what's that your credentials on
the record Uh I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey I've been licensed for 10 years I've had my own practice for those 10 years Uh I've appeared before various uh boards before While my drawings have appeared before this board before I have not
Um yes I licenses are active Yes And you've never testified before this board before no What boards have you testified before uh Red Bank Middletown Little Silver uh many within the area Okay Anyone have
any questions in regard to Mr Mler's qualifications okay Mr Mley go ahead Go ahead Um so yes my client's looking to construct a wood deck to the rear of their uh property to make access to the rear yard uh much more convenient for
them Um currently the only access to the rear yard uh from the living area is through their front door going around the house through a new gate that has been installed Um in order to get to that backyard there is access from the basement to the rear yard Uh the
basement is more of a utility space you'd have to go down the steps inside to then get uh to that rear door to the outside Um with a young child and young child uh potentially being in that rear yard the uh parents would like to have
faster access to their um uh which is the entire reason for the deck Uh the size of the deck is uh constructed as so to make sure we maintain clearance around the existing AC condensers that are at the rear of the property um that
is just for servicing and things like that We're not going up uh so close to them uh to to make servicing those difficult Can you talk about the height of the deck uh yes the height of the deck is uh roughly
um let's see I have somewhere [Music] uh it is five steps from grade um so it's roughly around 40 inches or so So where would be around installed around the deck so in line with the finished floor obviously and that's about 40
inches above ground and then plus the rails be a compliant item all sides of the deck for the right stairs Correct And then um what is the boxes that you're showing around the AC units you mentioned you want clearance It looks
like you're drawing new AC unit boxes See the original below it Are you moving them increasing the size or anything like that no Uh the boxes that are there to show the required clearance around those AC uh condensers um which
is to help clarify the distance for the stairs uh from the the deck So no changes no changes to those AC condensers And what about you host spigot there uh yeah there's a current host pick spot there uh we will make sure that the deck is modified in a way
that that sp is accessible but there's no changes uh to the spet itself So do you think you're going to cut off a few feet of what you're showing uh there may be just an access panel or a flipup hatch or something like that just to make the the hose more accessible
Is it going to be under the deck uh it will be field determined based on the height From what I saw uh the deck is pretty close to that height And there's also a sprinkler service line there The meter is there Um uh so it's it's uh it
the panel will either be um underneath the deck or there may be a notch in the rear of the deck uh depending on how it sits And then what about the stairs from the basement coming up are you going to be basically constructing the deck into
the concrete for that uh those stairs from the basement um are currently recessed into grade with a retaining wall around it The thought was to rest the deck on top of that retaining wall if it is a true engineered retaining wall and can handle that load If it's
not we will uh have the deck um can levered off of new peers underneath it Correct And then um in terms of windows like are you modifying any windows to the house or is it strictly a now there is
strictly adding a door to the the rear of the house the windows and everything else would remain that's how things Jordan how many varian trigger by both it's one uh one variance okay and what is the variance exactly
please the minimum required rear setback is 30 ft That's for principal structures The proposed deck which is attached to the dwelling will be considered the principal structure So that's 20.6 ft whereas the 30 ft required The existing
condition was actually measured to the basement stairs So those are 23.1 and then the house itself is shown to be compliant It is about 31B So no law coverage issues No nothing
else Nothing else Okay Mr Mler Mr Lee are you familiar with the history of this property i am not No Have you read the resolution that approved the structure that's there today no No No
I reviewed it but just you know I'm not here It's not So from my perspective I can certainly understand um why you know putting a deck onto this house seems reasonable I
can also understand the issues with regard to access to the rear of the property Um I couldn't tell you why the design is as it is Um I can tell you that the house has a torture history I think it was before this board maybe on three separate evenings to go through
plans There were a long list of variances that were created by this board in the construction that's there today Um Doug are you in a position to list off what those variances are identify them One of the unusual things was that the square footage of the
property at that point in time is identified as 8,139 Seems to have grown uh the lot depth uh shed was removed floor area three stories and I guess the uh floor area ratio where all the
variances would have granted in the past well sideyard and front yard too yeah I'm sorry yes so if if access to the rear is the main issue and given where the house is situated relative to the rear a setback we're trying to figure
out the best possible way with the minimum um need for a further variance on this lot It would be a door with a stairway down to a patio or something else Um has that been considered the uh door would have to have a landing to the
outside per code So there would be a size to that landing It couldn't just be stairs down Um so the distance would be relatively the same as far as how far So we we measure the setback to anything above six inches essentially Okay So
even with even if you could just do stair straight down would you measure it to the land yes To the ground essentially where it touched the ground Um so the question is did you did you consider that how was the impact different or improved well um
it would definitely be less of an impact to just have a landing and stairs down Um the thought was that it could be a space that the barbecue could be at um rather than having to go up and down those steps each time to to grill or you
know uh whatever would be needed there Um also an elevated platform for the rest of the yard uh for the homeowners to be able to sit and watch their children Look I I can understand the request Um but I can't understand the request in a
vacuum without taking into consideration all the variances that were previously granted I'm sorry to interrupt but the deck was something that was I believe proposed in the initial application and then removed
prior to the meeting where the application was Is that right you recall that Nice job Well I mean I I looked back at at uh at minutes
um when somebody at some point reeled off what had been changed where plans were submitted for that particular meeting and that was one of the items was a rear deck
Um so although it doesn't appear in the uh the resolution It It's because it was eliminated in the first round so to speak As far as I can tell
it's sort of to translate what that what that would mean to a board member to understand that that was originally part of the proposal is that when they originally came before us they had a long list of variances and a long list of variances were granted But as part of
the discussion and the accommodation to the board and trying to understand what the board felt as though they could grant that was pulled from the plans It would have triggered another variance obviously Um that was the previous owner correct you
purchased the house last year That's right They they built the house right well renovated Okay It wasn't a tear down the the issue the issue for me and I'm interested in what anybody else might have to say is that
the there's some common phrasiology which would apply here that slippery slope too many potatoes and too small bag and so each one of these things creates an incremental problem but I think that when a board looks at
something that was this complicated and was this diff difficult to make work um it it it is would pause that you review a further application to further expand a structure that required so many variances to fit there in the first place And for for not a moment please
don't misunderstand We recognize that we didn't create those problems Um but they run with the land and the board is not allowed to take your personal situation into account when it evaluates it Now you have an argument with regard to safety and I know you know that because you played it up already And accessing a
backyard is is certainly an issue that the board should be interested in understanding and trying to figure out whether or not the original plan was so flawed that maybe we shouldn't have granted the approval to build it because it sounds like the house doesn't really function very well Um you know as it's
laid out Um and I'm just curious what was granted doesn't seem to line up with the existing numbers that are on here Yeah this shows this shows maximum habable floor ratio as being compliant We
granted 39.9 and the hable floor area Here it says 2850 and we granted 3245 So I I don't know if
there's like an asbuilt that this was based on We don't have measured What's that we don't have complete plans It hasn't been measured by me at least So yeah I did not have complete plans Where did you get the Where did you get these figures for the based upon the footprint
of the home knowing that's a two-story home that's that's where that number is based on because we were not modifying the floor area I didn't find it to be relevant to measure the entire house But but wait a minute But you're putting
numbers on a plan that you're seeing and but you didn't really do the calculations to confirm that they were right It would have been far better to have asked for a waiver Sure Of completion of the zoning table if you weren't in a position to fill it out
correctly Sure Sure Okay So where are we getting our number i'm sorry Really quick chair For the purposes of the record the numbers in my letter are from the resolution So I'm not utilizing the numbers on the plan right i'm just saying plan No I I
understand When you get this and you know that it's not consistent with the plans that the board has from a few years back did you tell Mr Minkler that the numbers are wrong no Well I I think we should be doing that Um we wouldn't always have the
information that we have It's fairly unique um to see an application on something that we've seen so recently Um I I guess what I'm more interested in knowing is whether or not the house was constructed in accordance with the plans that we had authorized Although the only
relevance to this would be whether or not there's anything that affects the the variances or would you know need to be considered or appropriate to consider in light of the request Um I am disappointed that we have wrong numbers
just generally also when we have pre-existing non-conforming conditions we them resolution well so so I I don't know how an architect would do it but I think that
you would list the requirements and then you would list the existing conditions and you would note that the conditions were pursuant to variances that were granted But Mr Minkler said that he didn't read the resolution Yes Normally when I am dealing with an
addition or some type of alteration uh to the existing house that I know would modify the floor area I would definitely pay more particular attention to that Um that that's that's what I can say towards that um you know based upon you
know it would take me a few hours to to go through and and measure the entire house um in order to verify those numbers um to go off the resolution numbers I certainly could do that um and I would do that in the future Um
actually I don't think that's the right way to do it either Sure I think you could have pulled the construction plans from the construction office and I think that you could have cited on your zoning table that you're pulling those numbers from the construction plans Sure And and look we're not going to fault the applicant for that issue And I don't
think this board would want to see you in your practice charging your clients to do things that shouldn't be relevant to what's going on But I think the lesson is how you communicate to the board is really important Sure And when your table says certain things with your seal on it we take you at your word Sure
And so but that that's wrong So I think we know that now and I think we can move beyond it Next time if anything I would have it listed as estimated just to be clear that it wasn't a calculated based upon my own measurements Yeah Well and Jordan's going to flag it for you and
I'm not sure that estimated will get you through but okay We flagged it I'm interested in what other board members feel about the proposal to add a deck to the radius I have a question about safety Uh you've
got basement stairs which are going down and you've got a deck which is going up What are you proposing between the deck going up and the stairs going down to keep a toddler from falling off into
a basically into a hulge uh it's there would be a guard rail a railing around the back that prevents that fall Is the railing changing to the basement stairs or that there is no railing to the basement stair currently because I think what you were asking is if they fall off and
they'll just land in the hole Is that correct yeah I think he's asking if there's be some sort of screen or divider Is that correct exactly Right The the railing a guard rail That's what code requires And that that's a substantial substantial guard rail a 36
inch high guard rail and no further as there's one small handrail around the stairs going down the basement that's just going to remain in right I think the challenge is it seems like the house is already oversized for a lot especially because the calculations are
you know we're not sure so you almost have to take it at face value that what's here or what was granted in the resolution right is what was built And to that end it's already pretty oversized There was already a lot of variances granted Um it it does seem like it should have
been there to begin with but I think it the backyard is not that deep to begin with Um [Music] well the house meets the house to the to the it's where you're measuring it from right the 30 yard set back is 30 which
is is as per uh yeah the problem is that we're measuring to those steps right uh Jordan we're measuring to the basement steps that are coming out for existing conditions correct yeah yeah which is that grade and it's not really that right big of an is correct
but now you're taking what's 10 I'm measuring it there because there is the railing the steps themselves I wouldn't say would trigger the uh the setback it has It has to obstruct her We We I don't think we need to get into the
nuanced and they go down rather than up that that's what you were meant to I I would I don't know what the relevance of it is here No I'm just saying I'm trying to figure out how much we're losing So we're losing 10 ft of backyard 11 It's
11 by 11 dimension I think that's exactly the way you should look at it 20 foot seven Yeah 247 where 30 is a quarter So here here's the issue for me The issue is that the house is squeezed into the
lot to begin with Again it's not Mr Lee's fault It's a big house for the lot And we know that because we had to grant a lot of variances in order to put it there Those variances were granted as an accommodation to figure out how to renovate this structure and how to bring it up into accordance with modern times
and to allow the prior owner to develop it in a way that it sits today which on balance was viewed by this board just a few years ago as a reasonable compromise The suggestion that there's a design a design flaw should have been evaluated when they originally designed the house and it should have been incorporated It
was certainly apparent when the lease bought the house there was no access to the rear yard Um it is it is problematic to me that it doesn't meet the front yard setback It doesn't meet the sideyard setback And the proposal now is that it won't meet
the rear yard setback It is just extending the problem in a different direction I like the idea that it fixes safety issue I I'm not buying entirely that it is a safety issue because I think if it were a safety issue the uniform construction code would address it as such I think it's a convenience
and I think it's a design issue I don't think that the deck is the minimum way to get outside And if you were proposing the minimum way to get outside based on code I think I would feel differently about it I I've yet to hear though from others who may feel differently But I
encourage you to share your thoughts I don't feel differently I think the steps I think steps down could solve your problem without building more structure It's a nice to have a deck I would like it to but I don't know that that's the the the Can I just step in um
it was told to me that right the minimum wage which would be steps would also require a variance Which is why you know when we were at that decision point we decided well if we were going to request a variance we would request a variance
that would be also you know fit for usable decking which is why we decided the 11 by 11 Um we did think that was still you know uh less than you know a substantial variance that would extend
it even further past the requirement But um you know we would be open to a more a lesser footprint It just we figured because it would request a variance Anyhow we thought we would at least try something that we could use again for
you know sitting and and um just a better way rather than just walking directly out the stairs that is inherently reasonable and and the truth is you don't have any of the context that the board has with regard to the application Candidly you had the opportunity to learn it um when you
bought the house I I would have thought that you would have had some information about the history of it When you thought about making changes to it you had to fill out an application which included whether or not there were any variances that were previously granted and there was an opportunity to read what is a
very long and detailed resolution about the effort to get this house to where it is today And so that's the context of which the board communicates with you and I I I think it's important that you understand that Sure Because if you were in a different place and there were no other variances I think that we would
probably view it differently But my view of the variances is that it's an imposition on your neighbors on all sides So when you're in the front yard setback that's an imposition on the public space When you're in the sideyard setback that's really an imposition on the public space because that's a public piece of property And now when you
extend to the rear that's an imposition to your neighbors in the rear And and we're really hyperfocused on it because that's what Mayor Josh tells us supposed to do And so the development pattern in the neighborhoods is all based on the
rules And when we grant deviations to those rules we need to be mindful of destroying that pattern And the truth is that the house already is difficult to shoehorn into the res Um and so that's that's what we're struggling with Would it be possible and if you would be open
to lining up with those existing basement stairs since that is the existing non-conforming setback investation either way Sure But but you know question is whether or not by pulling it in some to to mark that line
whether or not that would create enough of a an accommodation to the rear yard setback that that the weather board member would feel differently Does that change the height of the stairs i don't think you can do it with with your side You have this that exclusion zone for
your um for the for the condensers If you wind up with the basement stair you're encroaching on that exclusion zone right but if one condenser is moved the other one can then be serviced without needing you know right now it's more convenient to be able to service
both independently but you could have the argument of needing to move the one to service the second one And how proud are you of that of that stair what's that how far what's the what's the delta between the edge of your existing and that stair uh the deck itself is 11 ft
It's 7 ft No the the the stairwell that goes down at the basement Oh how you're proposing to pull the deck back to even that right i I would need to verify that Uh I believe it's about 18 in but I'd have to verify that number Looks like 2 and 1/2 ft Yeah I was going to say it's
closer to 3 ft Yeah I think the challenge is too right is that because it's elevated and the grade of the property naturally goes down it's going to be very visible from the people behind And if you look at the pictures they have some green giants which is all fine well and good It just so happens
though where the trees end is exact is exactly where this is going to be viewed from right so to the extent it is an imposition on the neighboring lot um it will be very visible Is there any chance you've had discussions with any of the neighbors
i've talked to the neighbors in the front I haven't spoken to the neighbors that um that's directly behind me now Um but all the neighbors on the front side have been very supportive Well of course because it's not in their face right
well no no no I don't think that's fair Look I mean we we'd often times have neighbors that come in and support applications because they think that it's fine but those neighbors move and green donuts get cut down And while those are factors I don't think that they're not driving forces for me Um
look I mean to me if if the request is to put in a a a landing and then a stair that goes to the side I I see that differently but I'm I'm really struggling with with the addition of the deck however modest it is
you would need a variance for any location Yep At this point I do think that this absolutely needs an access to the backyard I I agree that that is a safety issue Um I'm not convinced
that having the 11 by 11 porches is the way to go But I do think that you needed a rear entrance And I think it's a shame that they would have built it this way I don't I don't recall this so it must have been before Yeah I think it was 2022 It was always It was always
going to be a flip Um but did they not have a a back door no the the basement stairs were supposed to be coming out of there That was the rear access Um it was a bad rundown house Well no wait But but
but remember so so when they tried to figure it out they presented to us all the things that they wanted They paired it back They accepted the compromises I don't remember specifically whether we talked about access to the rear or not but but definitely the issue was on the
table Um and I guess to the extent that it was discussed at that time and we had actually said don't do it But I I I'm struggling with that too And also I think if it if they didn't build it to to the extent of the variances that we
gave them that that would be helpful to know too So if if maybe they actually didn't expand it someplace else no they they would have to because they would only be able to pull permits in accordance with the exact plans that we approved So the the issue really is
whether or not they exceeded that That's what you would see if we did a fresh analysis So in that case then absolutely taking the construction plans would have made sense to for the numbers then So I thought maybe there was a potential that it wasn't that was built below Exactly Right But you're saying that that that
couldn't have happened Well it could have happened It couldn't have happened the way it's supposed to happen because the specific plans that were approved are tied to the construction permits It's all supposed to be tied together Yes But can't you do less you can't do more Can't modify You can't modify at
all because who's to say whether or not what they wanted to to remove would be something that was relevant to you So I'll give you an example There's a house on Fairaven Road that we approved and we did not speak about um the how many courses the basement was going to
be When the house eventually got built they added courses to the basement that they didn't tell us about So they had to add five extra steps that moved towards Ven Road Changes the front yard setback changes the entire appearance of the house The house that we approved is not the house that got built It was a mistake and it was a struggle to get the
construction department to understand that but eventually they did It's got to be on the money any landscaping plan for that fence to mitigate because you can't plan on the neighbors planting the rear fence Yeah I know there's not a lot of room now if you're going to go to
20 ft but we didn't plan on it No so look so the application is to put in this deck just like it is Um we moved from your presentation to discussion and we sort of engaged you
somewhat There's been a discussion about a potential alternative This has all become a little irregular What we would normally do was present everything here Um then the deliberation and then you would consider what we've said Um and then we would open it to the public and
then we would vote Um so let's get some regularity done for this Does anybody want to add anything further before we go to the public i can just put on record that I agree that they should have a deck to some
kind of extent I agree that it would help with the flow especially if they have kids Um and that when you're looking at houses I understand that they probably just thought "Oh we could totally just put a deck here." and they don't understand the
rigidity of our zoning process Okay So are you saying that as proposed you're in you're leaning in favor of what's proposed um it sounds like they would be willing to accommodate some
kind of a compromise but I think in general I agree that there should be some kind of deck landing something stairs going down It adds a nicer facade to the back which right now is just a white wall Okay How does everyone else feel about
that mr Forte what do you think about that um as it stands now I'm not in support of it in any shape or form I think the House is already shoed onto the lot I think it's a bad precedent to continue to add on to things that have just recently been added on to although
I wasn't here for it Um and I I think unfortunately listen I would I would love the deck too But we we unfortunately can't all have what we want right and that's why this exists to not make it get to a place where you have a Franken house where all the stuff is attached to it Um so I'm not in favor
of it in any shape or form the current way it's set up I don't think I don't think the house works as it exists today And I think that from a safety standpoint and from a
u from a functionality standpoint I think that some type of access from the house to the yard is needed Now in what form that occurs I I I I don't know But
you know it just it just seems to me that if we kill this whole thing that you're you're you're really putting a burden on the leaves that um uh that really shouldn't exist because they didn't understand you know what this
entailed when they bought the house and they once they lived in it they realized that this house doesn't work the way that it currently exists I'm I'm I'm going to allow for experience We need something there I don't know that the 10 or 11 foot thing
but there needs I think there really should be some access to the backyard whether it's just a simple set of steps or not which of course is a much although they do require variance the uh the structure is much less intrusive Here here's the problem that I
have with that I totally appreciate it because I'm empathetic and I'm a human being and I totally get it But what I I find problematic about that is that we we did not require that in the in the beginning Not a requirement It wasn't really even asked for I remember this case it was they were willing to make
compromise on compromise to get us to to agree to the FAR number really is what it was And you know it was okay we'll take that off that'll eliminate that variance We'll eliminate this variance But it doesn't work Look at the size of the resolution This is the thickest one I've
ever seen It was it was it was a mess I I my my point is that that those those feelings about the house working should be discussed when the house was developed and and fine it wasn't But the reason I'm saying it is because please in the future let's do that because it
is it is entirely logical that you would want this You have a tremendous slope here The grade the grade is really substantial Um and so you know I I I'm not even looking at Mr because it makes it harder to say what I think I really
feel about the project But it just it it is it is difficult with with people We always struggle with that I think everyone wants the everyone wants the deck I think it's just a horrific precedent for what's already something that's obviously incredibly challenged It's that this thing is so thick This is
one of the thickest resolutions I've ever seen And then on top of it it's it's encroaching from all siding from all sides Sorry I I don't I don't know I'm think it's really tough Mr
Chev do you find these minutes or no no Make sure that I have them downloaded somewhere but Well we have the thought what exactly you want to look at No I was just trying to find what I read earlier about the deck being rear deck
but I also looked at the original renderings and the original renderings don't look anything like the footprint here and had a landing and
a significant stair down to grade because at that time the um the sliding doors the seller I think they had proposed on on grade 89
the very original the first time around as I recall the the basement area included both utility space and finished space is that correct is that how it was finished yeah there is finished space but it isn't where we primarily use we don't spend time with our out there So
in order to get outside we basically are walking through space that we're not really using as like livable space but but as the basement was fit up is the finish area adjacent to the stairs and do you walk through finished area or do you need to go through utility room to
get to these stairs you do walk through finish space to to exit out Um yes And that's that's not what the testimony was just a little while ago right it was basically made it seem like you want them through an unfinished basement to get out Am I wrong about this most of Well the much of the basement is utility
space but the area that you walk through right you you you still do walk downstairs and then you walk through some finished space to go out but again it's not like that's where we spend most of our time Well I understand but it is finished space You're not walking through a dusty basement with your child
No with adjacent to a furnace No Okay And And what is it finished as sheetrock and floor and Yeah Right it was like originally proposed in the brief So my so my guess is because this is three
stories that that's a finished level that it was basically put together with that being the access that you couldn't get to it from the other level because it's not it's kind of a four and a half Um I I don't
know based on based on the discussion which I want you to absorb It sounds like this side of the day is kind of has some empathy for the situation Forgive me Um but that there's some there's some um struggle with exactly the 11 ft or
whether or not it might be a landing with a staircase that would go down so that it's the minimum but that it would get you outside Um before I But before we go further I'm gonna see whether or not anybody else has any comments but I just want to I just want to seed you with the thought
that that we've heard this and and I don't know exactly because they weren't exactly asked because you only have one proposal on the table Sure Right Yeah I believe my client would be willing to do the bare minimum needed to get to the backyard because that is their concern That that's true I mean right It sounds
like everybody agrees that space in itself is not ideal and adding an access point would would you know serve that So we well you have an access point though you have an access point you just don't want to use it right So not I think you
know we've been living there and after living there and spending time there with my child we've come to the realization that it's not a conducive access point It's not like we use that every day to go in and out And in fact it's just like we we're blocked off from going out to the backyard I mean we can
go through the steps of going downstairs and then out the backyard But the whole idea is like this house doesn't really feel like a home you know it's like it's not complete until we can access the backyard you know more freely Sounds
like everybody here It feel kind of like having a first floor plan that showed the space that you are in on the first floor would would be helpful in determining this This all just says
existing home to remain and it's two large rooms that that take up the the entirety of the first floor I don't recall what they are from the last application You know if you showed me that uh you know
this is our kitchen and the windows look over the backyard and that's where we watch our kids and you know that might make more sense to me but all I have here is existing home to remain Sure No I have no idea what it is What challenges would you face if you moved
the rear access to the back left of the your house like it looks like you always have some compliance space too Yeah that's a a highly elevated point Um and that's the kitchen So the kitchen sink faces
that wall Um so there's no real uh free space The the free wall is exactly where the door is being closed So it wouldn't have to change any space Is there a door to the basement um a door to the basement Uh
It's often kitchen Is there like a physical door physical door So to get outside you have to go through that door down the stairs And it is uh Jordan do you have the um construction there is that what you got
or you have full size set of these okay So look I I don't want um to the extent that Mr Shvetti thinks that seeing those plans um could impact how we view the the deck or the access point You certainly could get them Um okay let's do this I'm going to go to
the public and and let's let's wrap that up with any members of the public that have any questions or comments with regard to the Lee application Okay let the record reflect So with regard to what's been discussed um I think that the decision that you
should make before we deliberate and vote is whether or not you want to put on the table an alternative proposal And I guess the question would be whether or not you can articulate to the board what that if you're inclined to do it what that alternative proposal would be Um and I don't know that you how much you
thought through that before you came in tonight so I don't know if you're prepared Sure To tell us You are Yes Um and this is something I haven't discussed with Mr Lee but uh certainly knowing that 15 would you like to take a minute to speak to Mr Lee outside of our presence so that if you guys come up
with a I could probably answer Yeah I I think we're good You know I know the intent was to do you know just access the rear yard That that was the main goal Um if we were to do a small landing which is required for an exterior door
and then steps down towards the side of the house that would greatly reduce the size of the deck still provide the access to the yard which is the main concern Um and that would only put us over that setback And again I don't have
the exact number but by at at most two or three feet Which direction are you talking about toward the compressors or towards Yes towards the compressor So the stairs would end up going down towards those compressors
along the rear of the house not projecting further out from the house but just riding down the rear wall of the house What's the minimum size of the landing uh 3 foot by 3 foot is minimum size I usually like to do 4x4 to make room for uh handrails and the door
opening Okay So um to the extent that um you were proposing an alternative to the board um it would be a 4x4 landing it would be stairs to get you down The stairs would go to the I think the south
for the compressors compressor Um so the entire projection off the rear of the structure would be no more than four feet all in Correct Okay Um elevations need to have a step down or is it coming straight off the block is it is it coming i typically add
a 6 in step down from the door just in case there's snow and things like that Okay Is that the way the the deck is designed yes Okay So will the treads be going over the compressors no Okay So what would be the new delta
between the basement steps going down and how far i would still stay uh to where the uh north side of the deck is along that basement stair that I would still hold
it there Um but if there's concern about fall the guardrail should counter the concern about that Um and if we move the stair over further we lose access from the living space to that stair
No he's you You misunderstood the doc What Dr meant was you'll be with inside of that So right now the stairwell projects out You'll be further back Oh yes We're only going off the rear wall of the house 4T back But this the stairs are approximately 8 and 1/2 ft off of
the house Got it And sure it would be four feet So and this would be this would be four feet So you would be you would be within the the delta you know it would be at negative delta Yes Yeah Okay That's what I was Yes And and the house sits approximately a foot and a half
inside So this would be an additional 2 and 1/2 ft beyond it Okay Um does anyone have any questions with regard to the alternative proposal that we just talked about any clarity needed as to what this would be or what it would look like you just discussed
the the the grading in the rear yard I know we heard it's steep I was there and I recall it being steep I just can't really tell from the pictures truly how it slopes So how would this new design be impacted by the grading uh along the rear of the house it's it's actually a
little more level so it it wouldn't affect the number of stairs It would probably be similar uh number of steps as was shown for the day Thank you Okay Um I I assume that what you'd like
the board to consider is kind of option A option B yes Yes Okay Is there anything further that you want the board to hear before we deliberate and vote uh I did a quick sketch which I'd be happy to submit so everybody has an idea of
Yeah So anything the board does we would condition it on you actually submitting the formal drawing of it Sure Do you think there's anything gained by seeing what you've sketched so people can picture just in case anybody's not quite sure of what I was
Okay Is is your plan scale it is not It's 11 by 17 So so you're approximating how big it would be It's not Yeah I I am showing a a dimension to the size of the landing Mark it
Sure We're going to mark that When I mark that I take that Okay So mark it We're going to mark that A7 So as that's circulating um is there anything further that you want to present to the board no Okay So we're going to wrap up discussion Um and now
we're going to deliberate Um and I think that what we should talk about is option A option B and if there are enough affirmative votes which is four out of seven um for the deck um then we can do that first And then we can do the alternative plan second So that to the
extent that there's four affirmative votes for the deck then we can you don't have to go we can proceed Mr Chair can I really quick one one thing is potential condition of of an approval Um we discussed the the chart in the plans showing the incorrect numbers So I'd
want to condition an approval on updating that um so that the final plan doesn't reflect incorrect numbers But would you be okay with basically the removal and then notes referring to the resolution for the areas that haven't been calculated i I don't want to see the applicant spend any money on putting
numbers on paper that we already have The bad numbers should come off for sure Um and I don't I don't care how it gets addressed It can be tied into the original plans It's not relevant to what we're really dealing with other than the setbacks which I understand to be correct based on an accurate survey of
the asbuilt condition Right Correct When is the survey dated 24 Okay So we've got So I think we've got the most important stuff So Jordan yes it needs to be resolved and it can be tied into the construction drawings or
just noted as per the Yeah I was done either way All right Thank you Okay So we've circulated this So all right We're now deliberating Deliberate I was deliberate I thought we delivered I I I think I think that we can start down here Jack I mean to if do
you you want to try and convince the other two that were leading the other three that were leaning in your direction why we should do the deck do you want to move towards option B uh yeah I think I'm not saying it had to be an 11 by 11 I I do I just believe that he needs access from
his level um out there And if this satisfies that because it is significantly smaller then um I'm happy that gets it So you would lean option B You don't want to press on option A Oh no I don't need to press on option A
Does anyone feel differently about option A no I also would just say to Frank's uh slippery slope comment that I would I would note my opinion is based on the safety factor Um and similar I'm
thinking in terms of when we looked at um a pool in a certain location and the ability to get there It's kind of you know in my mind a similar thing if if you see something happening in your backyard the ability to get there
quickly So that would be why um I think that a a door from the first floor to the backyard is necessary and I would also need for the second option So I completely agree with you and I'm disappointed in me not having identified this sooner when we were I can't believe
you didn't identify upset with myself Um but the truth is that the accommodation to the minimum I feel very differently about than the accommodation to the 11 foot deck And so to the minimum I'm with you because the last thing you would want is for this to eventually become a
real problem Okay So what I don't even I don't know how I missed this It wasn't It wasn't missed Al brought it up It was eliminated You just got to It was eliminated What you need to remember is how many problems Oh I remember And so let's not let's not
dwell on it right it was years ago Okay So I think we've moved beyond option A to move to option B Jack you want to make a proposal for resolution okay So proposal for resolution for option B to approve option B
to make a motion motion conditions on motion So Jackie here I I I think that your motion that you're that you're looking for is a proposal to approve the proposal to construct in place of what
was here a 4x4 deck with a stairway that is running directly down towards the two AC compressors um in the rear of the art integrant variance associated with that based on the facts that we've collected tonight and the accuracy of the record
and also conditioned on there being a revision to the plan showing the improvement that they're actually proposing in your proposal Well he's the updated number of resolution Yes And that updated plan would would have to include
changes to to uh reflect the actual condition uh by reference to the original construction drawings That's what second Mr Vez yes Yes Walker Yes
Yes Mr Yeah Yes Congratulations Sorry Thank you very much Okay The next application is stump and
pecious I don't like people check under masks Has there been previous [Music] It's a good idea Yeah I already announced it So we're
we're lost We have jurisdiction on this matter Jurisdiction by any that are going to testify I ask you to step forward Don't be shy Jack got really brave You raise your right right hand
for our test the testimony before the truth about the truth Is that a yes did I hear a yes yes Yes Watch the exhibits if we could A1 is going to be the application together with a checklist together and legal
basis A2 is going to be the topographic survey of July 16 2024 A3 will be the architecturals uh nine sheets of
our March 1st of 2025 system coverage site plan I won't read that into record as to what's listed on the cover sheet Um as I said nine sheets A4 mean images three images three sheets
Um zoning board adjustment one will be the resolution adopted September 2nd 2004 CV2 is going to be the first engineering report for the signature of Mr Vizo dated December 23rd 2024 ZV3
will be the CME engineering report two March 13 2025 signature of Mr Any other documents that you want to have marked i see the board for your images If as we go if that's okay council
Okay Mark as we go Very good And and may I interrupt to go through the checklist wer if there are any other waiver items that we need to address or checklist items Thanks I don't have many Um I did not receive a submitted copy of the
checklist but I completed that myself um for the purposes of this um clarification from the tax collector um which I verified for the website today that taxes are current through February 1st of this year And then the draft notice to the property owners um it's
being published in the paper with the initial submission but I don't take any exception You recommend those waiverss be granted by all the board I recommend they be granted Yes Anyone have any questions or comments to be the art of those boards hey Mr Uh good evening chairman board
members Mark Hens on behalf of the applicants Lauren Peasy and Adam Stump This is an application for single family residents located in the R5 zone Uh by way of brief history the property um was originally a 1930s era single family
residence with the detached rear garage The opportunities purchased it last year and then proposed to add a second story addition over an existing rear one-story edition uh and a decorative portico share on the north side measuring approximately 15 ft by 15 ft Also
proposed is a new covered front entry with steps and the complete renovation of residents the resident's facade on all four sides The applicants are proposing to reduce the existing lot coverage which is shown on the dimensions as 66.6% 6% to
53.3% or 50% is the maximum and they seek variances associated with the port kosher and exceeding the area cap currently at 2266 which is an existing condition granted pursuant to that resolution that Mr Kovac referred to um and extend that
by 397 square ft representing the square footage of the rear to be added So um wi with that to my right is Brian registered architect I ask you please be sworn at this time and we'll get his credentials on record
State your name for your records Spell your last name please Brian Fitzgerald Fi TZ G R A L D Thank you Good evening Mr Gerald Do you have any licenses from the state of New Jersey uh yes I do And what are what are those uh registered architect in the state of New Jersey along with several other states I've
been practicing on my own for about nine years now Um if I was in front of you guys it was a while ago but I'm frequently in front of you know Little Silver Thompson uh Mama Beach Ocean Chairman Anyone have a problem
with district credentials okay that's good Thank you Okay Uh Mr Fitzgerald can you orient the board to the site and u the the existing conditions and talk about what's proposed by the applicants absolutely Um maybe we can this we will mark as A5 I
think it is and can you describe that for the board's benefit uh it's uh a set of pictures of the front facade as well as a rear facade of the existing structure Okay And uh those photos were taken by your office Uh yes and all collected off and
and they were um they accurately depict the existing conditions at the property That is correct Yes Okay Thank you Please proceed Yeah So as you can see um the house is situated gorgeously It is it's an older home right 100 years old
that um at one point had some charm over the years This has kind of become more of a Frankenstein home which they added on to over the years Uh what we think was possibly a wraparound stone porch at one point in time was enclosed as a solid box with no windows And you know
as it's kind of developed and added to and expanded on it's kind of lost right kind of some of that character spawn right you know as we've done some school exploration you know natural cedar was the initial um pling material for the house that's been replaced with a vinyl
siding Uh some of the detail the crowns and the [Music] fasciners in the front Looks very heavy very frozen Um doesn't really fit the neighborhood I think one point he used to but over the years it's kind of lost
that that um and as we talk more about what we're proposing one of the main goals and things we're trying to do is bring back the charm of the house improve the facade improve the the aesthetics of the structure as a whole and you know kind
of bring up that that Frankenstein added on small choppy rooms uh to be more of a livable house without in our opinion overdoing it um but also asking for some things that obviously don't have figured out
and what are those things so um initially we are existing conditions where you know we have um you know front yard set back we have 12.5 ft to the existing mason
planters uh we're going to remove them and add you know just a little nicer covered entry Maybe I should pull up Can you pull up the uh conceptual elevation okay And let's mark that as a six Can we describe that as a black and
white 3D rendering of the front elevation yes And I saw it back So we kind of go on A6 now So we kind of pull off the very awkward flat uninviting facade Bring some
windows back into it Bring a little more delicate of a stair right because we're so close to the street and kind of hopefully soften the facade right bring back natural materials that were there the real cedar real crown moldings in the phases and the gable ends um and and
carry that down through the rest of the house Is there going to be real cedar throughout the folding facade on the outside correct Yes Okay Or a combination maybe where we do the horizontal we might do some harding but it's going to be horizontal platform is one of the options Absolutely Got it Color palette's going to be again very
classical white green accents color we're still kind of messing around with but again it's going to be a very traditional looking house That was one of the goals both inside and outside in terms of material choices and scale of the house Cool Love it Also you know we do have um an existing
right sideyard setback Uh this porch when it was enclosed did step over the sideyard uh quite a bit We're not talking about exacerbating that Um we're just going to leave it as is Kind of clean it up make it look a little nicer The right side is the southside Just The right side is the
southside Yes Absolutely And then we're looking to add a primary suite up on the second floor as Mr for everything said over top of the existing first floor footprint Uh this is going to be the primary suite uh for Adam and Lauren Um it's
a it's not an overly aggressive suite Nothing's excessively the size just livable for more you know every day They currently have one bathroom up on the second floor that's shared between having their kids So they're going to have their own uh primary bathroom suite in there The closet in the space and a
pretty modest um primary suite I think it was time Um so is it fair to say that second story addition is between the existing dwelling and the cover deck that was approved in 2004 that's correct Yes Okay Absolutely So it's kind of a fill in
It's going to fill in Correct Is it visible at all from Lincoln Avenue uh it is not No Other than maybe you know again you can see these dormers down here Again we wanted to break up the facade add some character So as you're looking down your in their driveway you may see straight on Straight on No that will not
affect this house Um also one of the things that were kind of missing in this house was you know how they would use the house dayto day in terms of a a garage right loading groceries loading kids unloading kids
They had a detached garage Um you know that's how it was conducive to carrying out weather rain stuff like that We couldn't really add an attached garage The dimensions wouldn't fit It would be larger than what we propose Now even if we tried to swing it around to the back there was no good way to kind
of get in there So our plan B was to kind of come up with this port share concept kind of help bring some more charm and traditional character back of the house but also provide a modest covering They could pull under can't even fit their whole car under Again it's 15 by 15 Most cars are longer than
that but they could just pull the passenger doors in Again unload kids unload groceries stay out of the weather a little bit Obviously you know side door setbacks very tight there So we did the best we could to shrink it down to not impose on the neighbor Um and just again kept it a very very light
structure bringing charm back to the house Now the functionality of that proposed portico share is that really as a result because the existing detached garage is at the very end of the property and this property unlike a
typical you know 50 by 100 is 50 by 150 so it's an extra 50 ft deep Correct Absolutely So that's a distinguishing factor Correct Do you use the existing garage today but they use the existing garage right now It's storage and there is one car in it for the amount of time
on the left side But but they don't they don't use use it for any cars One car right on the left side right now And then the other two days are for storage which is just confirm who's speaking Oh sorry That's right But she can come forward and understand that Uh Lauren
you see some P I Z S T and yes we use the far left occasionally for a car but the rest of storage and Dr proposed board members would propose to be continued for storage You'll see on the site plan that
the driveway is proposed to be revised Uh thereby that's a good chunk of where we reduce our lot coverage to get a little bit closer to the conforming 50% by removing that serviceability to the middle and right bay of the three bay
garage The garage from the pictures looks a little like beat up Is that is it kind of super functional or it's pretty pretty much One thing one thing to note is on the on the um on the rendering that chair looks it
really looks very nice But I I lived across the street for about 10 years and that that lot the house next door to that is right on top of the block one So there really is very little space between that
for coach flusher and the house to to the north and and Mr Chzn I I think it's very simple I think that um the board funds it you know it it it doesn't function halfway right it can't be five feet It's it's it's either No it's not even the little you know the peers that
are bothering me And I know maybe I'm speaking out of turn for crime but not at all the uh you know having the second floor thing there and I know that the house next door is also very old and been there forever but it's right on top of that It's it's a it's a practical and
wonderful aesthetic embellishment and and if the board doesn't find favor with it then it's something that we could do without But it's the applicant's preference because of seeking that functionality as well as adding a nice aesthetic benefit to show it Yeah but
it's it's it's not it's not a hill that we're going to die on Mr Aan what's the difference in length between this little overhang that exists currently and then the portico share i'm going to ask Mr Fitzgerald if he can answer that So currently we are 11.5 ft
off uh the property line the existing covering and we're proposing point4 Okay So it's up to 11 foot difference plus Yeah You know it's significant Yeah Okay It looks like there's a fence between the street and the garage uh on both
sides of the house What's the access to the to that side of the garage no I not super in this picture but there is a double gate there Going back to A6 That's okay Uh there is a double gate
there that they use uh to pull a car through So you have to open those gates to correct Yeah And that's a function right now They have tool kits still to try to rally the kids from burning down the driveway Did we cover the uh the floor plan
improvements on the interior both first and I know you touched upon the second floor How about the first floor what's going on there Mr First yeah And second floor So Disney plans you can kind of see when you come in off the entry uh you're in an awkward space right again it was something that
was added on to right and this is kind of where we think they kind of enclosed that open wraparound porch initially Uh it's choppy with the foyer There's some column You see a projection on the roof It's a very confused area very dark area right again no windows why you know
someone chose to enclose it not light into the space which do a degree Um not understandable but they did Um you know we kind of follow back to the dining room We have a bedroom space right there over to the left Right now
you kind of work back to again one of the choppy areas back here where you have this transition space between a dining kitchen It's not really functional um a small off kitchen small off mud room and then kind of office study in the back um for the current
reason Upstairs is three bedrooms right now and awkwardly sized slope to the roof um with a bathroom that gets renovated and a closet space that's kind of shared This is what's considered kind of the primary suite right now It's a a
very disorganized space Um so we're looking to kind of improve that What we're doing to improve that is again trying to bring some stuff back to scale So looking at first and second floor plan you know we we provide that covered entry right provide a
little grounding for the house open it up with some windows kind of really try to establish a more uh defined vestibial space a little bit more traditionality there Keep the traditional stairs work beautiful in there And then kind of open it up right this is dealware to kind of
hide that beam from the street and both from the inside Quite a nice you know larger more open living room to kind of fit today's living standards Double doors are going to kind of walk into a traditional dining room Um and off to the side it's going to be kind of like the the playroom for their children
right now So when they're kind of utilizing the kitchen or the living room the kids can have a space but not be too far at site Providing a small powder room and a small laundry room downstairs a little bit more of an open kitchen Again we're not stepping out the back so it's not um working with the space we
have We're just trying to make it function more efficiently and a little bit more efficient mud room Pretty much where the current that would the port share would service that mud room area and that's why we're kind of talking about making
it make sense with the kids and loading and groceries and kind of just a day-to-day weather protection Is the basement usable at all or is it basement is not usable the basement is there any combination of crawl spaces looked like maybe an old reseller whole shooting one thing Looks
like it could have been up at some point in time Um no It's got mechanical on Okay Um second floor Again we kind of maintain the bedrooms The existing walk up uh access that here will be removed
It's not needed Maybe there was something going on up there previously but it's just going to be a pull downstairs for mechanicals um and any storage that doesn't make its way out into the crew garage Uh the bathroom's going to remain the same And then the primary bedroom again you can see it's 12 x 15 It's not overly sized with an
attached primary bath Primary again we know that the quarter share roof is not meant to be used in any way shape or form Yeah anything to change or lose any character in your house We're looking to kind of elevate it and increase it and
we think we do a pretty good job with the spaces and and kind of balancing that traditional aspect and the modern living of a family Mr Conro do you have the opportunity to review uh ZB1 um uh Mr Rizo's letter of
March 13 uh yes Okay And he asked us to discuss a couple of issues referring you now to page four item five bottom of page four Right And I touched upon the uh the garage as did the application for her testimony We covered
that Um and now the top of page five item B verify the proposed front yard setback measured as measured to the front of the stairs railing to the nearest tenth of a foot Sure Supply that Should the board uh yes On the I just
noted it today on the revised plan Okay We measured uh 12.5 to the existing front of the planter and we verified 11.3 today to the furthest point of what the welling would we feel it's probably
going to be pullbacks from that but the worst case scenario would be 11.5 still Okay Uh item C um no existing uh storm water troubles Uh no everything kind of appears u based off chat survey to to
lend itself to running towards the stream Um so you know we would tie any proposed and leaders into maybe a system and then kind of you know pull it towards the front uh where the street can pick it up and take it to the storm as part of the town So certainly we
could provide a drywall system However I see that we're reducing it even below what the prior variance approval at 56% was So I defer to Mr Brriso on that Chairman board members did you look at I mean first of all I acknowledge that you're reducing your
previous coverage but did you look to see what it would take to get the additional 3.3 down complant so again we you know we could remove some of that paper patio without you know to the board to get down to that 50 number Do
you know I mean it's doable when that patio right are you are you saying that knowing that would work or do you know like how much of that patio it would take to get down we we previously ran numbers I don't know what that
number's in my head There was a there was a portion of that that came off even leaving a little bit that got to that number but again I can't speak of the actual square footage right now Okay So you know lawyer math 3% is going to be roughly 225 ft and another tenth of that
would be 22 So 247 if my again employer math is right we'll leave the patio in that resolution was all down patio uh in the 2004 resolution it was so it's it's yeah it's
curved is it as easy as squaring at could very well be hard to talk I don't do that math on the fly though Yeah I don't have a uh favorite patio was was calculated by 334 feet Okay So yes we can So there's room
to cut 247 square feet or whatever Absolutely So then if we cut that Mr Rizzo would the firewall system be necessary um so that 50% the only increase in in building coverage would strictly be the
portico share given that the second story additions over the footprint and the reduction in the rear is I think large enough to offset the front Um so as long as all of your your gutters are actually draining towards the street not towards adjacent
properties fine We could get you a uh a drainage plant to dive if you need one Yeah Yeah absolutely With with too on it to show I had a few more things Um beyond this and these were addressed really from our
first letter Um that's why it's not here now Um will you agree to these as part of an approval and and have them listed in conditions is the front driveway apron from the street is credit and to replace that
with a new apron Yes Um the driveway to the rear uh existing garage is shown with two stone strips with grass in the middle to maintain that grass in the middle so that over time it doesn't just turn into one giant
stone in the driveway And then the third thing being touched upon is that there would be no access from the second story to the portico area Correct Right I'd recommend those um what was what was the middle area to be developed with the driveway between the two strips do
you there's stone strips and not to convert the middle area to stone yeah Stone the whole time Chairman board members I have nothing further Mr Fitzgerald at this time Okay Any questions commissioner
this one So the extra 400 ft that we're going over the cap is made up of that filling in the notch Let's call it in the back of the single story Um given that the house to the north is
so close and also is on I think that block's only 50 ft deep Oh is 100 ft deep not 150 Um I'm just trying to understand why that single story is there an airline open space issue where
that new bulk is going to be overseeing I'm not expressing myself You know what I'm getting i do So I believe what you what you're saying is the extension right it's going to overlook the front property that's very close to that Yeah That's just a concern I have and it's what it's spoken
to I think where our our you kind of see this line of delineation here someone that's being posing over the neighbor you know I think the property line for the the short lot you were speaking about ends kind of out there I
think that that looks like the width of the house next door to the north sort of ends where the first story edition begins right so they won't they won't you can confirm that they won't be looking out their windows to a new chunk of facade because it's where they're where they'd
be looking would be at the existing house Is that correct correct I couldn't visualize where that house where that lot It's it's roughly that's delineation I believe the house is shown on this plan I got Oh Yeah Yeah So that's the first
story edition then Okay Gotcha Did you consider bringing back the porch um it would be nice to bring back the porch but I think it would make you know and we kind of looked at what it would do to the floor plan would really kind of impact that living
space Um and kind of make what would you look at the extent of what her porch would be That living room right there would be it was a fine room for what it was back in the day Maybe when it was was conceived in the
1930s but now it's just a little small for a family of four potentially five to kind of utilize and gathering So while it will be very aesthetically pleasing I don't know if it would be practical for their paper
And put up your proposed floor plan So how does the first floor function again the front door as proposed or as the existing proposed As proposed Okay So we've come in through the covered entry into an entry vest This is kind of
segregated from the living space by a wall running front to back and a transom window kind of opening right to kind of really set off a traditional entry vestible area Kind of work your way through into the foyer which kind of shows off the staircase and the mill
work on the staircase And we're proposing to open it up let some of that light into that kind of diamond window that we're going to reuse Um because again that is a dark corner of the space and then that would kind of you know transition around into the main living adding more windows in the front adding
more light in because again it is very dark uh currently Obviously we can't add windows over here because we're so close to the property line for fire safety So we would just do a fence fireplace building The main kind of gathering
space that How big is this uh it is 19 by 17 How big is the entire first floor entire first floor is 1,458 ft and second floor 1167
That's proposed that as proposed Yes Existing 1458 776 on the second So again going up that del can you envision u how you could fashion the front of the
house without getting closer to the street okay So I mean we we could right So we have here's what it looks like right now Right It's very flat across the front Um
you just have these kind of massive uh bring planters I mean we could you know arguably try to pull the stair back and remove the rail and make a very steep stair to kind of match that front step back I mean we're only
uh we're only let's call it one foot difference for conversation with 12.5 or 11.3 I mean we could simply just have the railing end on the last riser I'm not sure aesthetically that's the best thing but we could do that Um
but we just feel that you know having a little you know nicer entry on the front just kind of sets the streetscape up a little bit But is it just the width of the is it just the width of the ballast there on the That's Yeah Yeah Again I don't want to land on this because it looks very high It doesn't look very plastic We kind of bring it down to the
landing and that right is what's causing that overage if you will I mean I can pull it back But your roof design your roof design it it is uh the way that you have it on the proposed won't be compromised by
uh that won't be compromised You can do that anyway Correct Okay Uh and I mean I think that would add to the aesthetics of the house Uh your your proposal is you have a front
yard required set back of 25 ft and yet you're 12 1/2 ft and you're planning on coming back even further Uh yeah again coming coming forward even further Correct And that's only just right the plant around Do you know do you know what the setback of the adjacent house
is maybe No I don't think we have that but they're all I mean I know it depends on that number but looking down the streetscape they're all kind of roughly in line with that that the south line I I live in I live in the general area and there's plenty
of houses Most of the houses on that street are in these are every house on that block plus a couple on the next block predate the zoning Look if if the setback's 50% of what's required and you're proposing to encroach on it further you should know
the answers to those questions as to what the other houses are I'm very surprised you don't I want to get back to the first floor floor plan because we didn't finish You've got 1,400 ft on the first floor Your problem is you don't have much room on the second floor most obvious thing to do as I look at this house is put that porch back and then
you can capture square footage and then you can put it upstairs and what you can trade is that I'm going to give you the aesthetics back I recognize that it's going to be a little tighter on the first floor and we're going to accommodate that but we need to get a fourth bedroom upstairs So was that considered
it was but we just don't see how without So here's the problem then What you're doing is you're taking this this zoning table I understand putting the porter share I can't even say it right in the plans but what you've done is you presented something that shows no conformity whatsoever It's just like the
last plan And what you've done is you've expanded it further to go to like a zero lot line which is crazy And when you look at the aerial and we'll see how tight these houses are together I'm really surprised that you've even decided to ask for it But be that as it may you've got a garage in the back
which is substantially oversized which is right up on the property line which is dilapidated and probably shouldn't still be there You're not proposing to remove it You're proposing to leave all the existing ills and then add new ones But you're not proposing to remove anything and put it back It just seems
so obvious that what you want to do is to give some of the first floor square footage back so you can put it onto the second I recognize it's an accommodation because it's a 2200 foot R5 zone Sure Um yeah you know we just the cost of
doing that what that would really cost of doing what converting this all back to porch front porch and then taking the entire center of the house while we're structured We're redoing that to accommodate a living space that and then then we lose a dining room So again
we're not we're further reducing our first floor which is a living space Again we're just trying to gain a primary suite that that fits kind of today's standards And I understand you know with pork sheriff right i mean that's close We know that's that's way we were just looking for you know how we
can maybe put I looked at these plans and my initial reaction was to put them down because it was so hard to understand how that made sense Your drawings are gorgeous The house is fantastic It doesn't sit in a vacuum It
sits right next to other houses So candidly it's a misrepresentation I understand you're not making a mist but but we know that We get it It's awesome on a piece of paper but you've got to live with your neighbors And so I also understand the need to update the house
for we do it all the time I get it But I'm not seeing an accommodation associated with the existing deficiencies I I I I understand we want more We always want more Well couple things right so in my
remarks I I hope I made clear that and I think I said this that the portico share wasn't something wasn't going to help that he wanted to die I'm allowed to react to it Mr A if you put it on the plans and it strikes me as problematic to even put on the plan So I'm candidly telling you my opinion You know that's
who I am Terrific Okay Okay Okay Good So what we're left with then is and and if it's an aesthetic consideration about a otherwise functioning garage that's used for storage as well as storage of the family's personality as well as
storage of a vehicle I I don't I mean that could be freshened of course if that's if that's a consideration of the board aesthetically but I don't think we're talking about tearing down that structure and building a new dash garage So I don't think that would be part of the proposal So really what we get to
is what's proposed with this I'll call it infill in the back between the covered patio that was approved in 2004 and the rest of the house which really doesn't have much of an impact on the neighborhood Is that an appropriate use the answer is it's only appropriate if
you restore the porch I think the applicant has to be given a little bit of time to consider the So in 20 I'm not saying no but I'm just saying that's Yeah I'm not proposing anything I'm asking questions as to what you're proposing So in 2004 this is what the resolution says correct the subject
property has a front yard setback of 13.85 where 25 is required Way up right uh right sideyard of 1.5 ft or 5T is required Way up Habitable floor area of 3663 which is not what's shown on your
plans as the existing condition 2363 I'm sorry if I misspoke That's okay 23 Nick 2363 where 2200 ft is the maximum permitted 56% lock coverage where 50% is the maximum permitted Garage sideyard 2.5 where 5 foot is required Garage rear
yard of 4 feet where 5 foot is required That's not the current standard I don't think although maybe it isn't our five garage floor area of 43.3 or 40% of the first floor area is permitted and a threecar garage where a twocar garage is the maximum permitted That's where we
start and now we've got all the other stuff I think you've taken up some driveway Can you point me to any other accommodation to the existing non-conformity that I might have missed in your presentation you taken up some driveway Is there anything else okay So to get down below the
50% what what could you do to get down below the 50% to take out one of the bar because the way I see it is the following the portico chair I think it's really tough for everyone here right I think you acknowledge if you get rid of that I've acknowledged that right if you get rid of that you're back to the
existing condition of the 14 irrespective of what's on the other resolution which needs to be addressed right but if you get rid of that you're back to the existing condition if you shave this or you do whatever you're going to do that takes out another variant front kind of is what it is Maybe you can move it back a little bit but then
it it's it it isolates it to the to the bulk right and it it takes four out of five of these things and tries to at least not make it worse right so that's I think that's a good starting point to at least talk
from to give us an idea of what can be pushed back to where it should be And I agree the plan I I I agree with with Ch Plans are beautiful The house is beautiful It's it's it's gorgeous right it's it's a huge improvement from what's here But I think we got to talk about
how what's acceptable and what's worth discussing and what's just too much And I think the port of chair is a bridge too far Um and it seems to me that 240 ft it's not hard to find to shave it to get it under if that helps Right You
know level set the rest of the application for review And and we said that Yeah Right So again I think what we're left with is the infill in the back right if if if we comply with the with the lot
coverage and we eliminate the portico share I think what we're left with is a second story addition in the back We make the accommodation on the rail Suppose we move it up Yeah There's no right That's that's not again that's that's not dur either I listen I do
think there's something to be said for keeping this thing right and fixing it and making it beautiful Someone bought this they'd probably knock it down 500 2200 foot cookie cutter you know panic piece of crap here right they'd still get more livable square footage anyway because they jam in a big basement So I
I do think there's merit I understand the basement's not there you know so there's there's less living space there as well Um and I do like the idea it's in the back but I think I think you got to address these other these other things that are a little a little much to get it to where it's at least an you
know it's a lot right it's asking for everything And then on top of it the square foot So again I I make the profer number one we'd eliminate the portico share Number two we reduce the patio so that we achieve 50% lot coverage
Number three we'd reduce the impact of the front railing so that uh it is it does not aggravate the existing setback Um and uh I think those are the main concerns
that I heard So the chairman said something before about taking back the front porch I don't know what's there now or what the functionality of it is Um it's always going to look like
covered porch that somebody walled in and unless you turned it back into a Okay If you turn it back into a porch and you have to get rid of the porc you have access to the
front door under cover next to the driveway That's such a great point your front yard setback Even if you put your eyelashers for your railing in front of the stairs
to the front door your front yard setback becomes significantly less because you're really removing a lot of the bulk at the front of the house If that was a covered porch and you said "I'd like to have another foot and a half in front of what
was approved in 2004 for the front yard setback." That be a lot easier than asking for a foot and a half in front of a solid wall That's the distance that it is from the front yard front lot line
um visually And Mr Porch depth is typically 6 to 7 8 ft something like that What's what's this depth right now of that well it's part of the room Well it's part of the interior room That's I'm trying to get
right So so they whether it was previously how how it was set up to be buried or not they they might have put some beams in there I don't know Probably not You just scale the roof plan It's under the roof But I mean you you you put the wall back where it was
And you've got a beautiful wraparound porch and you've got a couple hundred square feet That is that is that off of what you're That is talking about putting on the second floor Yeah What's that i I I just
want to clarify So So there's lines between designing and redesigning And the truth is Mr Charles it's clear that you know how to design a house because the plants are gorgeous I'll say it one more time There's no question that you're able to design a very very pretty home What what I'm struggling with is
the inconsistencies of the asks with the structure and the attempt to try to find some middle ground because you need to find square footage to put on the second floor And so I think the porch is just low hanging fruit But it it it the covered area man that is so right on The
reason you don't have a covered area is because it was walled off to the neighborhood with no windows And so rather than trying to accommodate the the need for that you've added the portico on the side rather than doing what is most instinctive is to put a
porch uh where the porch used to be I can see that your client is interested in saying something Yeah Do you want to step forward so that we can pick up on the microphone quickly wait I'd like to confer before you speak Can we have a fivem minute recess chair sure Thank you
Got any admin i'll take this opportunity to just go through two quick admin items from Mark meeting which I have reviewed and found no changes I'll make a motion to approve minutes from Mark six
Second yes uh yes yes yes Yes Do you mind passing your ruler uh resolution 270 hands I make a motion
to approve the resolution as submitted On the existing Mr Yes Yes Yes Yes [Music]
Public at the end Take five minute There's not even a used to be Who took the I don't know the mayor All right Can you do a roll call please mr Here Mr H Here Okay M Chairman board members
thank you for the opportunity to have a little recess So the request to convert a structure that has long since not functioned at a porch back to porch kind of has us all flatfooted So we're going to ask that the matter be carried for a month so that we can carefully consider
it Mr I I really feel the need to clarify that I I don't think that that's a reflection of what I intended to communicate I think what I was communicating was that from a macro level I see an old porch and I see a need for square footage on the secondary
court And I was asking whether it was considered and and to the extent that it was why it was ruled out And I think the answer that I got was that it would limit the space in the first floor which of course it would but it would give you an opportunity to move it to the second So we're not asking you to put the porch
back We asked a question which is I think led you to want to take some time to look at it and I'm good with that But I don't want the record to reflect that I'm I personally or the board generally is trying to directly in particular because we're not Is that fair i I you don't look well
No no I I think there's a strong sentiment articulated uh by several board members about restoring That's what my team is left with about restoring this porch and it catches us as I said respectfully it catches us flatfooted We we don't know the cost We don't know the feasibility It hasn't
been used in that capacity Probably I'm guessing uneducated for decades And so all I'm saying is if that's the direction that we have to go in for us to be informed to even consider it we're going to need the benefit of some time please That's all I'm saying I think if that that time allowed you to answer the
questions in a way that we could understand why that wasn't feasible I think that that time will be well spent Terrific Okay So you've asked for for us to carry Yes please We have stipulate to any necessary
extension What kind what kind of time you looking for Mr Akens what before I even I'm sorry Before I let you answer that Sheila how are we looking at night i don't know You could speak to her better in terms of the reviews that you're working on the
MRA matter schedule but it's not confirmed yet because he hasn't done the letter And then the um Santor application that is also supposed to be resetted and come back But
how many are deemed complete and scheduled and and and I understand Martha So beyond Murtha That's it That's it All right Mr Akens when when would you like to come around i I think we should list it for May Excuse me May 1
Okay Uh I think that's fine Stipulates any time for extension on the time of decision Uh so I'll make the motion uh to carry the um stunt matter um to the May 1st meeting without any obligation to read
I need a second Roll call please Yes Yes Mr Yes Yes Yes Thank you Thank you
Okay that takes us to the uh so yes and if I just have two minutes thank you Look at that Two for one special That's right Just be clear for everybody in at this point in
time that we have jurisdiction Yes we have jurisdiction I swear the testimony you give for the Lord will be the truth to truth nothing but the truth Yes Yes Yes Okay Same instruction I've given before If you've been here this evening before you start
testifying state your name for the record spell her last name for us please Okay If I can Mr Uh A1 would be the application to the zoning board as well as the check uh the development checklist A2 will be the
copy of the zoning officer denial letter as June 25 2024 A3 will be the sign will be the architectural plans dated March 20th I guess it was revised to March 20th 2024 Well 2025
excuse me 2025 rather Excuse me Thank you Thank you Um A4 will be the survey in the Atlanta survey dated June 27 2021 A5 will be images of the exterior
of the property Uh some six pages thereated Um we have the ZB1 will be the engineering report number one November 13 2024 The signature of Mr Viso ZV2 engineering report number two March
18th 2025 again Mr O ZV3 will be the third engineering report uh March 24 25 Any other exhibits we can mark as we go along the way uh just as we go Okay So we're up to A5 at this point in time
on ZB3 We concur Y thank you ladies and gentlemen I'm sorry My apology and Mr Chair I'm going to run through the the checklist submission waivers Um thank you being this the first time presenting first one is completed application guidelines checklist um I printed it and
included it myself prepare this second being draft both notice to property published in the paper and then following outside agencies county planning board freeold SC and M county
department I do not take any exception to board granting these waiverss recommend it to be granted I recommend anyone have a problem with those Thanks Okay Thank you chairman Ladies
and gentlemen Mark Gens on behalf of the applicants Daniel Svenia and Joanne So uh this is an application ladies and gentlemen involving property at 35 milside Place It's a corner lot Uh this is an undersized lot slightly undersized at
9,866 ft where 11,500 is required in the R10A zone Uh this is a circa 1950s era home Uh it's got frontage on Hillside Place and South Woodland Avenue Those furniturees are 94.9 ft They're
non-conforming where 115 ft is required The width is also non-conforming at 99 ft where 115 ft is required The existing front setback to South Woodland is non-conforming at uh 25.1 ft where 30 ft
is required It was the property was purchased by the applicants about 3 years ago The proposal this evening is to bump out their kitchen which is in the front of the house and create a bench seating work area for their family of approximately 203 square feet an
expanded covered front entry porch of about 24 square ft towards the primal side of the house and a covered rear entry of 13 square ft So the uh front creates a variance of 5t on the front yard set back to hillside place from the
new stairs It's a variance of 3 feet from the new entry porch and also we're exceeding the floor area cap by 165 square ft from 3,220 ft to 3,385 square ft Um also there's a rogue
hot tub that we're seeking to legitimize It was installed without a permit on the west side of the house um during the it's a remnant of the CO era The 10-ft sideyard requirement uh is uh not met Uh it was installed at 0.3 ft from the
sideyard Um significantly the property is also non-conforming with regard to F28 is required.33 exists and we're proposing to increase that by another 1/100th of a percent to 34 Um so with that um I would
um like to put uh Mr Minkler's credentials on the records although I note that about an hour and a half ago he was still qualified Big change in your status uh in that hour Uh I have presented before this board There we go Bravo One in the wind column Mr Chair
All right Mr Mthor I wonder if you could take a moment uh orient the board to the applicant's property and talk a little bit about what's proposed this evening Sure Thank you Uh the applicants have uh what is considered a two-story home Uh although it does rest on a sloped uh
property So the second story is the finished basement which is mainly underground Uh it's only the rear elevation of the home that has any type of uh access or windows or doors to that basement Um from the front of the house
and from the street it looks like a one-story home uh there were no dormers or anything uh to to that extent on the existing home Um so it does look uh rather squat uh especially for the area Uh along the street there are uh a lot
of other uh true uh twotory homes sticking out above the grade um with dormers to their attics Uh so this home really does look quite small uh by comparison to the other uh homes on the street uh especially in the immediate
area Um my clients are looking to expand their existing uh kitchen Uh the existing kitchen is again uh size uh to the original size of the home the 1950s era So it is on the smaller side Um
they're hoping to expand that kitchen uh to make it more usable for their family of five Uh as part of that kitchen expansion they're adding a small um uh breakfast area uh to that kitchen um which will overlook the the front of the
property Um they're also uh we are also proposing to expand their existing covered porch Uh right now they have what I would call a covered porticle uh portico just uh at the door itself It's again kind of a small uh gable uh area
at the door We are expanding that um to to make the home seem a little more prominent and fit in with the surrounding area a little better Um we are proposing to do a uh change of a location for the access to the existing
screen porch to the side of the home Uh this will allow them to expand that kitchen create more cabinet space Um so in order to make that access to the screen porch there is a small bumpout Uh that portion of the uh addition does
conform to both the front and sideyard setbacks Uh it is just the uh expansion towards the front of the house which is uh going over the existing uh front yard setback Um as I said the existing
basement is finished Um I do call out those floor areas there Uh I know that um I had spent some uh time with uh Mr Rizzo regarding the floor area uh and getting that uh
precise uh to the board specifications If I may interrupt for just one I failed to mark the resolution of May 8th 1999 1995 was A6 resolution of October 6th 2000 was A7 and the December
11 2000 resolutions 88 August 17 2001 resolution as A9 So Mizo before we get further into this can I ask about the basement so um we know that we have encountered situations
where um basements uh what have been commonly known as basement were kind of reclassified as a result of the changes to the ordinance Can you explain the situation here is this one of those situations technically it is Um although I'll point out that whether we consider
it a ground floor or a basement it's still going to be considered floor area and as a whole story Um in this case though the qualification would be based on the average grade of all four corners Um and then finished floor minus the
average grade has to be less than 30 in to count as a seller So in this case um that calculation comes out to 4.35 ft So that exceeds 30 in So is this house exposed in the rear in such a way that it's it's it's not a traditional
basement that you're getting caught up on because you're just more than 30 You have full exposure and it's finished as a living level now Yes Full exposure to the rear elevation There are retaining walls on the side of the home that allows for that rear elevation to be exposed And we've counted that in the
scripture Yes Okay And so I guess when the house was originally designed in terms of the existing condition it it is likely that um that was considered a garage I'm sorry a basement and that this house was probably previously measured only with that level when you
walk in at the front Is that is that a fair assumption um I'm really not sure I think it could definitely be categorized as its own board All right Mr Hens the reason I'm going through it is because you're triggering a devariance which requires
five of seven affirmative votes as you well know and the board has recognized that the changes to the ordinance has created a situation and I just want to make sure that we're all aware of it with regard to a change It sounds to me like that's not exactly what's happened here Although I I suspect that um over
time um this probably become more of a living level than maybe it once was originally intended But it it it's it's yeah whatever it is what it is Okay So it's it's it's included I don't know if historically how it was
treated If that's relevant certainly we can you know we can delve in delve into that Do some do some research It's counted for purposes of of today We're at 33 non-conforming We're trying to go to 34 with this Right Right So your existing non-conforming condition Yes is
not represented in the myriad of resolutions that we have with regard to the prior uh improvements to the property And so I'm sort of picking up on the idea that it is likely that since you are deviating from the standard today that at one point you were not the property and the building was not seen
as deviating from that standard because I don't see a variance for it depending upon how it was defined or included which I'm certainly not in a position to discuss presently Yeah but you're not I don't have the table in front of me Then you the existing
condition you exceed the cap at 3220 Uh exceed the we're proposing existing condition No we're at we're we're I think we're at the cap Do you exceed the flurry ratio yes ratio due in part to the uh
non-conforming lot size right but the existing condition does not meet the floria ratio That's correct 33 and it is not covered in a resolution and I'm identifying for everybody that if that had been a previous variance that we would have a resolution on it
and so I'm suggesting it's likely that that's because at one time it was not counted as traditional floor area otherwise it probably would have been cited by our new definition is what's causing that the floor ratio of D I I'm I'm suggesting that it's a factor that
you should consider when you look at the square footage numbers Yes Thank you Yes I we don't have the history somewhere It it either didn't get counted or how it got counted has changed We find ourselves today before touching anything at 33 Yeah The Florida
ratio in the zone hasn't changed for 20 years for sure and I know it goes back further than that The additions were done at a time where they would have known and the floor ratio would have been just what it is So I think the way just to clarify the record is that floor area ratio or a
variance with floor area ratio in all the prior resolution was not called out but you can just leave it there Yeah Yeah Okay Save us all a lot of time Sorry I didn't know where you were going Sometimes in that rabbit hole up here
you got to know how drop the rock then Back to you Thank you Okay So again let's uh you I think you were talking a little bit about the floor plans and uh your your calculations Yes
Um yeah the the existing uh floor area is 31.82 Um we are doing an addition of 203 square ft um which uh increases that floor area Um the proposed covered porch
is 215 square feet It is stepped back from the uh addition to the kitchen itself About 2 feet right about 2 feet to give the home a little more character Um and again we're we're creating taller gables at the front of the house where
currently uh there there's really none existing um just to try to compete uh or I shouldn't say compete uh to complement uh the other houses on the street And what are the materials and colors
that are proposed to be used identified to date sure the the materials would be matching the existing home which is primarily a cedar shake Um whether it's a vinyl shake or a true cedar shake I'd have to confirm Um but it currently has
a shaped look to it So M what are the variances triggered by the application could you respond please yep So the variances triggered are well let's do new let's do the new variances and then we could do the
non-conforming conditions Oh they are so um the the variances are uh set minimum front yard set back to um hillside at 25 ft where 30 ft is is required That's a new condition That's a new
condition All right South Woodland current again not to confuse but just to look back South Woodland is currently at 25.1 corner the other corner Okay Um the uh hot tub the offending hot tub is 0.3 ft from the side property line Where is
that hot tub that's on the um Is it on the survey that's on the west It's on the It's on the plans No it's not It's on It's not on the survey but it's on the It's on the updated uh plans plans It's on the It's on the west side of structure the northwest corner of structure
Sitting next to the deck on the survey It's a patio Why did they certify the survey over there affidav22 the survey predates the hot apparently But I thought the hot tub was co
service 22 patio That's where the hot tub I thought I heard the survey was June 27th 212 June 2722 Okay So it sits on what is shown as a
patio immediately behind the wooden deck It does I got it Okay So that's the location So the we address the um the front step back right and now we went right the dev variance increasing like from.33 to.34 and then the maximum
habitable floor area we're exceeded by 165 ft from 3220 to 3385 Okay those are those are the new variances Okay the hot tub I have 0.81 ft mentioned as 9 3/4 in It's just a slight increase but
okay you agree yes the the house is a little skewed to the property line So where the.3 is just closer for the screen So it's not only the hot tub it's the deck that the hot tub is on that's right up against the property line The patio The patio Yeah there's there's a
wood deck there as well with patio and then the screen porch Is is the deck So I want to talk about the pre-existing non-conformities but are is the deck covered by one of the resolutions i'd have to check Yeah I haven't seen those resolutions You haven't seen them no
Okay So what are the pre-existing non-conformities so the pre-existing nonconformities are the following Then lots of uh at 9866 where 115 is required The frontage is on the two streets hillside and south woodland
at 94.6 where 115 is required lot width um at 15 lot width at 99 where 115 is required and then required front yard setback on South Woodland at 25.1 where 30 is required and then the um the hot
tub but the wooden deck the deck excuse me yeah it's the last one you say is minimum required sideyard is 10 ft where existing sideard setback is you know is 0.3 yeah so so the resolution in 95
which is the first resolution we have says subject premises have has a left side yard of.3 ft where 10 ft is required and my guess is that in 95 they were citing the condition of the existing wooden deck is that a fair without having read it sounds like a
fair assessment sounds like that's something that was authorized in '95 or was it dimensions or was it the screen finding a fact there wasn't a resolution proving or was it the portraiture that that takes the the porch is the porch is the
same dimensions in the deck but also three the screen so covering the screen porch is on one of these well the second one the 200 this is actually really important so I'm going to I just I' I've just been handed it
for the first time so what what I really want to know is I want to know which of those improvements were authorized by other resolutions and to the extent that the wooden deck and the screen porch as they sit today were approved by one of those resolutions It's it's material for us to understand that Right So
converting the side screen porch to the family room um is is is permitted in the October 6 2000 resolution So that would that would assume or that would point that the resolution from the
screen drawing Yes it's still a screen porch It's not it's it's not uh there's no windows or natural constructs to tell the walls here Okay So there's another resolution It does
not seem to have been withdrawn Dated December 11 2000 which authorizes the 6T by 18 ft wood deck in the rear of the house Let's see if that's dimensioned Is there a deck in the rear of the house
now that I think that's the sideyard maybe Not perhaps not walk to the patio where the quarter lot that may be the rear lot The difficulty is the dimension doesn't match up No your quarter lot your your traditional
size you can gain a rear yard Um but the address is hillside I I agree If the traditional front of the house is the hillside I I think it would be a stretch for them to call I understand it's a corner but the
resolution is sparse but the dimensions don't match your deck anyway right so I think we can skip it And you don't have a deck of that dimension No Okay I I can't see where any of these honestly Yeah There's no second floor edition
The deck that's there doesn't match the dimensions of any of these There's no 8 foot bay window in the front of the house And the big window ever got built was there something else here i thought the screen porch was mentioned there was it but it's it has it's not done It wasn't a
screen porch They were going to turn it into a room They never did It's still a screen porch They tried to convert It never got converted Okay Or they got it approved and never got it So I don't know that any of these ever actually got done Okay But if a prior resolution said that an existing porch was approved to
be converted into full living space and it wasn't converted you can deduce that they were acknowledging that it was there and given them permission to make it even more intensive than it is right to the extent that these resolutions can be followed And I concur with that assessment as to the porch but I don't
think I'm not sure about the deck or the patio I don't think you have anything on the deck or the patio right okay that answers my question Was there anything else Mr McCloy with regard to the proposed improvements did you identify all of the new bandits
i did Yep And the existing contra Mr Brazil what what is the requirement for the hot tub if the hot tub were be installed today what could you get a permit for how far off the side yeah as an accessory structure the sideyard would be 10 ft as
with the rear but the rear complies Sideyard being if you're on hillside place the the left probably [Music] Okay So that's supposed to be 10 How many square feet is that is that uh
screened in porch uh the screened in porch is 148 by 15 That looks like the dimension Uh 234 square ft We already had permission for them to
utilize that It's expired and it's not it's not planned on enclosing it No Well no The resolution that references that discusses that it was withdrawn enclosing it was wrong Correct Just
leaving the porch Uh and just to clarify the screen porch is currently considered part of the floor area I was told so it is included in surprise as well Well if you take if you take the
if you take the 234 square ft uh off the 3385 you're back to conforming Correct What does that make consider thought it was about the way it was constructed
I thought it's the way it's constructed though already I I I I believe it to be and I also uh discuss with the zoning office who agree with my interpretation Yeah I I think what's important is that we understand um kind of what it is and how big it is so that we can just take it into account So that so the total
square footage of the screening porch is what uh 234 ft Screen in porch Is that like a threeseason room type of thing it's literally uh wooden panels with But how
is sorry if it's less than 15 by 15 how is it more than 225 ft is my math right 15 * 15 I'm not understanding that math How's that math working if it's less than 15 by 15 it can't be
more than 225 right that is based upon my measurements of of the screen I don't think what's on the survey is wrong or perhaps perhaps the dimensions are the inside Okay So so chairman since the architect has measured it I would
encourage the board to rely on his representation based upon his actual measurements Okay You measured it I'm sorry 234 Yes Okay Thank you Is there a reference u Mr in the resolution to the size of the screen there is not Not that I saw Okay
Okay we done I think we're there What's the distance and I think it's 10 feet from the lot line to the curb line Being that it's a corner and you're trying to approach by another 5t on the front yard just worry about sight lines as you're coming around the corner from south one
to uh we are proposing 25 ft to the front of the house Are you curb line to the property yeah Like how many because of course I know what it is to the curb but is there appreciable you know the in real life is that going to be an issue it would be Yeah it'd be another Yeah
about 10 right away It's marked as 10 ft on the survey on the left hand side Oh thanks Al Yeah I see it Is that a right away that's right Okay So 35 ft at the closest point Okay So in real life you've got an extra 10 ft as
well And the house to the left is a lot considerably closer to hillside Considerably closer to hillside than the than the existing house I just wor you Okay Looks pretty good So did you measure the house that's
immediately to your I see Mrs Cruz is here I don't know if she's going to speak but with regard to the house immediately to your west I guess that is Yes the distance of that house to the to their setback I did not measure the distance of that house with the the property line Okay If someone
has the answer they could step forward identify themselves spelling their last name Thank you S AU B I G So I do have um a document here Google Maps and there's a feature in Google Maps called
a ruler So I did it's I did a calculation of our neighbor's house in our house and so it is here at on the page Sure Let's mark it as hand that to you as A6 No I think we're now because we
marked the resolution I think I'm sorry I think you're pardon A10 A10 Sorry about that Can you tell us what the dimension is on that um depiction for your house first please okay So for our house first from
the edge of the house to the curve yes it's 44 feet current okay and your neighbor 32 ft okay so that the curve is not the property boundary as everybody knows so we need to deduct that but the
difference between the two is 12 feet okay yes and and the proposal is to extend the front of your house by how many feet 10 That's the furthest projection is 10 Yes the furthest projection is 10 So fair conclusion that you'd be two feet inside
of the name Yes Yes Okay Well based on based on the Google to the extent that's right based on a 10 it's 10 or five The existing was 30 and you're going the house is 10 but the actual steps which I
measured the existing condition to is would be a five foot increase Yeah Yes Well aren't there going to be steps on the new porch yes Yeah but they're set back from the the kitchen is proud of the porch steps right the the
furthest projection uh of the steps lines up with the 10-ft addition Okay So your new structure is effectively 10 ft deep You're absorbing the stairs into that structure The existing front of the structure includes a portico with steps
And so the the net reduction of the front yard set back is five but it's going to be completely different Correct Right Okay Sure Thank uh do we have anything further i have no further questions of Mr Mler at
this time Chair Okay Any board members have any further questions mr We can't assume the right away to the left is the same death as the right away in front of the applicant's house Is that correct you have a
dimension right the rightway with the south woodland as compared to hillside Uh no going for yeah going west of the to the left on this on this I just want to make sure we're we're comparing the rightway width of hillside place itself Yeah remains Do you know if it changes
right away with I wouldn't think it would I just want to confirm as you go west I I want to suggest that you be careful about answering that because I don't know that you have the information that if if or if you know by obser I was going to say obviously the plans don't but if you know by observation that's what uh the survey does note a 50ft
right of way for south yeah right the road's the same and it would be really weird for that rightway to be different in front of the neighbor's house than yours because we're measuring to the curb and if if that that the 10 foot is absorbed it could be materially different if it gets squeezed for
whatever as a practical matter the measurement to the curve is a fair way to evaluate it When we're going to talk technically about where it is relative to the front yard lot I think that's where we don't know for sure However I do see Mrs Cruz here and it's my understanding that the cruise home was
built without variances and was fully conforming and that's a little surprising because I guess this would suggest otherwise Um I'm going to open it to the public I'm going to ask whether or not there any members of the public that have any comments with regard to the
application at this time Hi my name is Patricia Cruz You solemnly swear the testimony you give before the board be the truth The whole truth nothing but the truth Yes And you state your name for the record spelling your last name please Patricia Cruz R Thank you And I live at that house 45 hillside
which is um next door um with Dan and Joan and um on the side of their house where the screen is So I've been living there 27 years So I have all the background and history questions on anything related to
what you were discussing earlier So So M let's get to that but first can you help us answer the question with regard to your front yard setback my recollection is that you built your house in a conforming manner without variances from the board Is that right um no There was
a slight variance related to uh a back part of our kitchen that uh probably a few feet off from what that back setback should be We had a little bump out in our kitchen Uh I believe that was the we did have to come
here So I believe that was the only issue But there was no issue with the front yard No So I have the our survey and um we have we have wraparound porches on our house So on my survey where my house starts not where my porch
starts We are 32 feet set back on the street So I'm not sure if you're counting that or where my porch starts No we would count it to the porch And if you came before the board the board would have recognized that But it's it would seem implausible Not necessarily
Uh if it was 27 years ago we may have changed We were measuring You didn't build it No our house is 15 years old Oh okay So so the backstory for Miss Cruz is that she came in to renovate her house and then she withdraw her application and then she decided to build a different house I didn't remember that he came before the board
at that time for that but I guess you did Yeah From and my understanding is it was just a slight issue with the back of the house and back You don't recall a front yard set back i don't Okay All right Um Okay So I I invited you for
comments and questions So beyond that do you have uh comments or questions regarding the application um so anyway regarding whatever the conversation was earlier if there's questions around what happened to in 2000 we were here in the meeting So if there's questions related
to that proposal I can give you the history on that But so what I would say is what I remember in 2000 um which were four neighbors prior um there was an application for them to take that entire screened porch area which is.3 ft off of
our yard and turn that into a twostory house two stories up and um expand that area and go two stories high and it was all going to be within.3 inches of our Yes So we did come to the board and say
that we did not support that on the budget and I don't believe any of the changes that were made back in 2000 as part of that Miss Cruz was the screened in porch there in 2000 um so what was there was only the screen porch That was
the only part There was no deck There was nothing behind it So that was what and so as part of that proposal they wanted to expand that back and go up two stories Okay So with the support of the board not thinking that was appropriate
right on our sideyard um and us also not supporting it that didn't happen And then soon thereafter those owners moved Okay Okay And since then left their screen porch What's that i say and left their screen Grass And since then there
hasn't from my recollection been any other further proposals of changes to the house to the okay that's the history um so I've I've spoken with Dan and Joan and gone
through the plans and you know um that.3 setback is a concern for us and our house um and um what I would say is that you know our request to them in this in this proposal is that they do not um
extend that um make it larger or make it wider in any way um and to leave it as is in terms of what their renovation would be And so from the conversations we had and looking at the drawings I feel like they have respected that
request Um so I would ask the architect if you would please confirm that but I don't think they've aggravated that situation um at all So with that uh you know our perspective is that the design that they're doing for the house definitely is a beautiful design and
it's enhancing the look of the house and therefore enhancing our neighborhood So um given that there's no um additional um work getting done related to that screen porch and making that area more
of a concern we would be supportive of the application So Miss Cruz there's there's a screen porch and there's no proposal for us to bless it today in its existing location There seems to be as part of that resolution reference to it We don't know how it got there Behind
that there's a deck and we've not been asked to do anything with regard to the deck and there's nothing in the resolutions that explains how that deck got there or whether or not there was a variance granted However there is a hot tub that is now located in that area and we are being asked to grant a variance to effectively bless that and its
existing condition Is that something that you considered are you aware of that do you object or are you that Well um so I'm aware of all the situation there Um from my understanding there was no
um approval granted on the deck that was put up by previous owners Um whatever the term you would use not approved but they did it So that's there now And there's you know obviously nothing we can do about that And you know the hot
tub is the hot tub I I don't really have any opinion on that Um I don't really see that discussion Well the obvious question for the board with regard to the hot tub just isolating that issue in its own is if it's if it were properly permitted it would be 10 ft from the property
boundary I think the question really for for you to be presented with and I don't need to put you on the spot is whether or not if the hot tub had been placed in a in a conforming location and I don't even know if that's possible whether or not that would be to your benefit The idea of having these rules is to make
sure that we're not imposing on our neighbors unreasonably And candidly there's a screen for porch in a deck that seems to be there that we don't we don't see paper confirming it's supposed to be there At least the board did the screen porch was there but it sounds like they weren't being asked to approve
that They were being asked to approve the conversion of that And now you've got the hot tub too So all we're being asked to address the hot tub So clearly back to you is if it were 10 feet versus 6.3 would it would it matter
yeah I mean I would I would say it's not a significant concern for us that it's there Um it it dips down So when you're on our property there's a drop So you don't necessarily see it like you see
the porch right there on our property You know I would say it's not a concern but is there landscaping in between between the properties between the hot tub and your property Yeah We have on our property that we put
to try to hide the screen and porch So it's also on the other side of your driveway It's quite It's quite a bit away from your house it looks like based on the street view Is that correct what's on the other side of my driveway the other
um It goes hot tub trees driveway and then your house Is that correct it goes hot tub trees our detached garage which is attached to the driveway right [Music] all right Again just in summary our
concern because it's quite visible and it's large and um and we feel it you know devalues our property is to have a structure.3 ft from the fact there's a hot tub that's dropped down low that really isn't visible is not a
significant concern for us We just want to make sure that has this were to move forward that nothing would were was going to be more detrimental in terms of that structure than what and I believe your question was to the architect to ask that he confirmed
correct what did you want him to confirm that nothing is getting um worse related to a structure point like not getting larger or wide or anything that I think going to exacerbate the screen Maybe maybe I can help answer the answer the
question So So Mr Minkler the screened in porch no changes are proposed Uh no changes regards to the size of it Uh we are changing the door access uh from the inside of the house Right The the wooden deck right no changes proposed with
regard to the size of that No changes And the stone patio on which the hot tub sits No no change in size is proposed to that No changes to to the hot tub package Yeah And that includes the group line that's on on the screen for you Sorry
Thank you Thank you Is that your cross thank you That's my cross Okay Mr Akens let me ask you a question Given Miss Cruz's testimony Thank you Mr Cruz Um would would you object to uh language in a resolution approving the variances that
discusses those structures that we're talking about and acknowledges that we see them that we're not granting approval for them but that we have discussed and acknowledged that they're not going to change I I think based upon my very cursory review of these prior resolutions
um I think that would be entirely appropriate Yes I support that I think that's important in the zoning chronology of this property and it's not present from again my very cursory review of the prior resolution Yeah And if you wanted to take more time to review it that would be that's okay I think we're I think we're past it You
know look looking at it I don't think they help one way or the other but I think the new resolution will help Yeah And and my point is that if the new resolution documents that we see it and that we've acknowledged that given what it is that and the commitment that it will not change that we've taken that
into account as we review the proposal I support it Thank you Thank you Notwithstanding the detail of the priority No comment The good old days Anyone else from the public yeah Any other members of the public that have
any comments or questions regard this application we lost the mayor Couldn't hand to the public Do you have anything further with the board other than thank the board for the consideration of the uh application on behalf of facilities
Thank you Mr Chair do you mind if I just run through some questions that I have no sure Thank you Mr Minkler Um the survey we discussed is from June 2022 Did you have a chance to review that versus the property and do you believe that
everything in the survey is accurate um except hot tub which has since been identified on your plan yes the hot tub was the only thing that I saw different from the survey Okay thanks And then with the addition in the front can you just describe what you're going to be doing with existing plantings any trees
coming out and then what you're going to do the proposed conditions uh there's currently some shrubbery in the front of the house which would be you know removed or or changed uh uh you know to come out towards the the new addition
and then proposed typical correct typical landscape consistent with the existing vegetation of property Correct Foundation plans etc No trees No no no trees Is there anything specific you're looking for this no I just want to make sure that
the uh essentially these Yeah green grass areas We're not talking about Yeah there was a note on the plans that the uh foundation planning should be installed Um there's a burrow ordinance requirement um for sidewalks and in this
case you have corner lot and both frontages don't have sidewalk I'd recommend as a condition um that you contact the burrow engineer and discuss uh the potential payment and loop of the sidewalk stipulate to that condition
comply with the ordinance Storm water management I don't really think you touched on it but you are proposing to reduce some of your driveway Correct Is that correct um I would ask that that be as a condition as well that the driveways um being reduced
and that is to provide a compliant law coverage which is 40% Correct Yes The front edition will just be towards the street That's yes Yes Are there any existing adverse drainage
conditions on the property are there any here directly saucers all good Thank you All right We're going to deliberate I'd like to give a shout out to uh the renovation of a ranch because we don't
have enough of them in town I'd love to see any effort to try and make a ranch livable Um there I love it I think it's an excellent design Um one though with the whole thing I mean we didn't really dig
into it too much other than does it bother you i don't see where you could put it in a conforming space to be 10 feet away from the I don't see are we just going to memorialize it or that's the thing that it exists No no we've been asked to actually approve the hot
tub in it existing location So that is the proposal and I I'll break protocol and ask the question Is there a conforming location off of the deck that it can be moved into that would conform i asked the applicant that question and the answer and and the architect the
answer was no Okay How far could it be moved towards conformance i did not ask that question Doesn't look like there's a lot of room Maybe perhaps a foot So actually what you have there is a 14.6 foot screen
porch Based on the survey the hot tub's probably 8 feet And then you've got a for dimensioned at 7 foot 3 in squared So it's about half of that And then is there structure right there if you were to you could slide it a few feet at most
You have steps down to grade five would deck So you kind of stop one to two feet in There's actually no it's literally right up against the stairs So you'd have to to move it any up against the retaining wall
and up against the stairs There was an empty space that by 3 in exactly where the hospital So you'd have to remove the stairs Remove the stairs and move it It can move at any distance And how far would it move if you relocated the
stairs if I remove the stairs uh I mean it's probably about 3 ft Maybe removing stairs to replace stairs in which would have to get down to the yard which would put the stairs right back where the the stairs you wouldn't be able to relocate
those without creating a setback issue I have I have some photos on page nine in my book Yeah Stage It's not just a Mr So did you install the hot tub or was it there when you bought I installed itself
whose retaining wall is that property on that retaining wall is on my property There's also another the retaining wall on the cruis's property So there's literally there's starts at one place but mine is necessary to be replaced shortly after moving in because it was
decrepit and falling and falling into underneath the deck This one but Mr Rizzo as I look at the picture on the bottom of page nine of your report I see a hot tub and I see how it's how it's depressed if you will But then that retaining wall is feet away The
retaining wall that's directly to the right almost touching the hot tub It's not really visible but there is one that runs basically So the other retaining walls I see And then the retaining wall you can see So there's right up against So So the deck's built around the hot tub The hot
tub is it was placed in a spot that was made for a hot tub It just so happens Well it conveniently worked out that way But uh we moved in there was an empty spot there that had like basically rotted wood that was part of or connected to So there was like a patio
there that was connected to um the existing retaining wall that was rotted and needed to be replaced shortly after moving in We replaced that as well as the platform that was already there it We found a hot tub that would fit in exactly that spot that was existing
there and placed it there It really isn't visible from from the cruises No But I I got to I got to say as much as I can tell you're a nice guy and you're nice nice guy I I'm I'm troubled by the fact that it was put in without a permit But all in it seems like it's in the best possible location
and the neighbor is most affected by it has has shared with the board that she doesn't find it to be in an offensive location and we stipulate that the screened porch remains a screened in I actually would like to go even further
Acknowledge that it's there acknowledge that we don't know how it got there but that we certainly recognize it pre-exists the existing ownership and that the um owner just correct me if I'm misstating this that the owner's represented that the porch will stay in
its exact I'm saying exact obviously it could be maintained but that it's going to stay in the condition and what I mean by that is no further finishing no glass no insulation no heat no cooling whatever is there there And so if if
that's okay that that talk a lot is what I was going to propose to really lock it in exactly as long If we can beautify it like we're going to replace our siding we can fix the siding on that as well but we're not making it any larger We would condition any approval on you
Absolutely Like making it more attractive and no heat No heat That's fine Yeah We're we're looking to maintain its core and we don't want to we know that they've already dealt with you know troubles with previous owners We don't want to encroach upon them We
purposely did not make that any addition there We don't want to enclose it We'd like it as an actual kind of at the rate of turnover on your property You're only going to be there a few more years Thank you I want to create Dr Laugher a road map for the next um Yeah exactly for the
next quarter Thank you Anybody have some discussion you good to go okay You can make a uh talking No there's just a lot of conditioning that that comes from I'll help with the conditions Okay then I'll make a motion
to approve the sub uh application as submitted with the following conditions That the uh let me think if I can get this that the screen porch be maintained in its current and unaltered state not to be improved upon in any way Well
we'll clarify that that it is that it's been acknowledged that it was an existing condition for which we do not know uh how it got there we don't identify variance for it and that it's been acknowledged during the application that it's going to be maintained in its
current condition Most notably screens not glass no heating no cooling Um um but that it can be maintained and have replacements in kind Um yeah Furthermore that the board
acknowledges the existence of the hot tub at its current uh location It's a very Sorry chairman Pardon me I thought I heard the word screen The porch does have screens on it now Yes Only has screens Only has no glass Right That's
the existing condition Screens No glass Okay Let me tell you location as it exist for the hot Correct You got that yep Got it We grant the variance for the location and placement as exists for the hot tub uh based on the with um all plans to be
based on the numbers should be based on the accuracy of the record We have correct uh training Yes Okay And then a couple things I mentioned the correspondence with the the burrow engineer to discuss the
payment is fine for and um and that the the driveway limits will be reduced to comply from the second Excuse me Never mind The removal of the driveway is part of the proposal
Is there something specifically you want to tie it to you want to reme-measure at the end or something i just want to make sure that when everything's done that the person reviewing it captures the fact that that driveway is being induced Okay So we'll
just be sure that that's a finding of fact Sure The condition as long as it's discussed in there Okay We go right on the 40% with the reduction Well that's that's how you articulate driveway would reduce to
substit [Music] Yes Yes Yes Yes Thank you Good luck Thank you ladies and gentlemen Congratulations Appreciate your time
Thank you Having no So we'll just open the public if anybody has any public statements or any comments you'd like to make Josh is gone but let the record reflect on Motion to adjurnn I All in favor
no guessing