and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all who as a member for the term. I >> I John Gravener so
that I will faithfully injustly and faithfully partially end all duties as a member of the township Franklin zoning board to the best of my ability. I tell Dies that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New Jersey that I will bear the true faith
and allegiance to the same and to the governments established in the United States and in the state under the authority of the people. So help me God. Thank you. >> Okay. Pursuant to the public meeting act, the South Jersey Times and Sentinel
were notified of this meeting. It was posted in the municipal building and also uh in our uh township web page. Chrissy, roll call, please. >> Mr. Gatano >> here. >> Mr. Leo. Mr. Ketchum >> here.
>> Mr. Gafello >> here. >> Mr. Dazzari >> here. >> Mr. Mr. Hamill >> here. >> Mr. Terrasca, >> Mr. Glacius >> here, >> Mr. Gravener, chairman Gravenner, sorry. >> So, in in the absence of Mr. Leo, we
will see uh Mr. A. >> Okay. The minutes of the previous meeting, gentlemen, make your motion. >> There's a motion by Dana, second by uh Mike Garall. All in favor? I >> oppose.
One extension. Okay, first on our agenda tonight is CB23-04-1 in the name of Noria Chamber. >> Good evening everybody. My name is Bob Baronowski. I am an attorney at the law firm of Highland Chapro in Marlton.
represent the applicant on this matter to reass the LLC. Um, this is an application before the board seeking an extension of approvals that were previously granted by the board uh that were memorialized back on December 5th,
2023. Remember, this is the the floating solar energy array on the mining ponds at Sahara. >> How could we forget that? >> It was a mighty momentous occasion that feels like yesterday, but here we are. It's a few years later. Uh the project
has not commenced construction yet because of a regulatory delay in getting enrolled into the community uh solar energy program which as you know part of this solar array was to uh provide
electricity for mining operations. And another significant portion of the solar array was to uh be sold into the grid uh for you know for consumers to use and that would be through a community solar energy program. Um the way the program has worked over the past couple years
you had to put in a bid and project what your electric rates would be and how much you could generate and who would be the projected consumers and and there was a scoring program. So every year that the applicant was eligible, they submitted their bid and they didn't make
whatever the cuto off was for the last few rounds, but there is a new set of regulations that is in the process of being finalized that pretty much allows anybody who meets like eligibility criteria like basically you have a solar
array that can provide x amount of power into the grid that this project can satisfy. Um and that will be finalized and adopted as soon as all the newer new more newly appointed BPU commissioners take their uh seats. There were some
vacant seats that were just filled after the recent elections with the governor. So once all those pieces fall in place, uh this project will ultimately be able to uh submit for the uh what they call like a walk up bid. basically, you know, just give the information and this
project will meet the criteria that are expected to be put and then construction at that point can commence. It's expected to commence within 12 to 18 months after the the uh solar array is
accepted into this community solar energy program. And that's the reason why uh the applicant is seeking the three one-year extensions of time that are available. You know, under section 52 for a final site plan, you get the initial 2-year period when, you know,
can't there's no changes that that can be made to the the approval. And there are three successive one-year extensions available at the board's, you know, discretion, assuming there's been no uh zoning changes, assuming there's been, you know, compliance with and efforts
toward perfecting the approvals. So, the applicant is seeking uh with at the discretion of the board all three of those approvals. So, we don't see once a year until construction actually starts uh on the project. So, we're asking if the board would exercise your discretion
to give us those three one-year extensions all at once to give sufficient time for the regulations to be adopted for the pro for the solar array to be, you know, placed into the community solar energy program. Then within that period of time afterward,
like the 12 to 18 months construction will start and it'll go to completion. So, that's basic and there's no, just to be clear also for everyone, there's no changes to this plan. There's no modifications or anything. It's just an extension the exact same thing the board previously granted.
>> So I have a question. So this project if I recall was partially in Franklin partially in Monroe. Can you fill us in with the Monroe portion of this? >> Truly appreciate you asking that Mr. Shades. That was like the last note and I have to mention get there but I appreciate you got me
there because we did also ask for that extension uh from Ammer was also green. So yeah, the project is partially Franklin, partially in Monroe panels kind of go across both municipalities. The dividing line kind of runs through the mine pond. So we have requested the
same extension from Monroe and that was great. >> They did grant it. We also requested and received the same >> Mike was the public notified like a regular application. So many notice was given. >> So we need to open up
>> just on the issue of the extensions >> and you have all other regulatory approvals as far as land use county or finance or what? >> It's my understanding that well we definitely have uh finance and we have county and I think every anything else that need to be obtained I believe was
excellent. Thank you. >> Is there a motion to open up? >> I make that motion motion second by Mike Bar. All in favor? I >> opposed. Anyone from the public like to be uh heard regarding this uh
CV 2304? >> Second. >> Who was the motion? >> Motion by Richard Glacia, second by Dana Dary. All in favor? >> Opposed. >> Okay. What's your feelings for the >> I make a motion that we extend it to
three years. >> I'll second that. >> Yep. This is prefall. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gratano. >> Yes. >> Mr. Ketchum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Garafolo. >> Yes. >> Mr. Duzi. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Hamill. >> Yes. >> Mr. Glacius. >> Yes. >> Chairman Gravener. >> Yes. >> Congratulations. >> Very good. Thank you everybody. Have a good night. >> Thank you. Okay. Next on our agenda ZB25-9. Is it MAT Real Estate or Matt Real Estate? >> MAT.
>> MAT Real Estate. Mike, everything in order with the mat real estate? >> Yes. Those mostly get >> Mr. Chairman. of the board. >> My name is Tyler Prime from Primeville. I represent the applicant for the
project at 2099 Main Road. It's an approximately 7.23 acre site. There's an existing 40,782 building. Uh associated site improvements are already in place.
Tonight we're seeking a use variance to allow light industrial operations for primarily metal fabrication. You'll hear a little bit more about tonight. It's currently it's located in the uh residential agricultural RA zone. The
site uh as you'll hear has functioned in the manner. It's just a different use but a similar type of use for uh quite some time. It was a uh a wait it was a glass glass wall company was the most recent occupation of the site. So it's a
similar light industrial site. Um we do have a review letter which we'll talk about tonight from your engineer. We've responded with a uh letter as well from my office dating January the 28th that provides a lot of the clarification items. We can also provide testimony to
those items like we're not proposing any site changes. The site will stay and function just as it is today. Uh the site overall is in good condition. It's exit from our client as it sits and doesn't require any changes. Given that we do have the use variance, we have a
planner uh Sam Brown who will be providing planning testimony and we also as I said have a client uh here to provide uh any clarification on the use as well as answering questions from the report. So unless there's anything else we get started right away, feel free to
jump in if you have any questions. Yep. Let's get started right away. >> Good evening everybody. Um my name is Sam McGresa. I'm a principal engineer and planner firm Engineering Planning. Um would you like to state my qualifications for the record?
>> Sure. I'm a licensed engineer and a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. Uh both my licenses are standing and currently active. I've been sworn as both an expert in professional planning as well as engineering numerous boards throughout the state. I do not believe I've been qualified in front of this board since
not recently. Um >> well, you are now. >> There you go. That's good news. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Um for the exhibits, where do we usually set these up? >> Usually it's over there, but it doesn't matter. Happy to read a little paper, >> but it's better to block you guys than
the the people out. It's better to set up there, I think. >> Okay, that's perfectly fine. So, I'm just going to log into exhibits prior to um the first one is exhibit A1. called the existing conditions to aerial and the second is existing um I'm sorry is the existing condition survey that was
submitted as part of the submissions package. Uh we just highlighted a couple items on it for visual purposes. So if we take a look at exhibit A1 um the site is identified as 2099 Main Road. It's on
County Route uh 544 identified as block 5602 lot 33. As Tyler stated, it's around 7.23 acres. Uh the lakes high the lot is highlighted there roughly in the uh dashed um red um
line there. As we can see, primarily it's surrounded by mostly agricultural uses um with a commercial slash I'll call it light industrial. It's a shipping facility RLS logistics. um off to the side there. There are some
residents located along main road and it is identified as zone uh residential art agricultural. Um the existing building on the site, we flip over to exhibit uh 8-2
is around 40,700 square ft. It's kind of that funky reverse seat type shape here that you see highlighted in brown. Um there is parking areas off to the right hand side. I'm sorry, parking areas that could be installed in the front and then
um asphalt paved areas with a concrete loading area off to the right hand side there. Uh there's ample room for any trucks to maneuver, any kind of deliveries to maneuver. Um there's also ample parking located on the site located around the building um for lighting, existing lighting. There are
several wall packs located around the building as well as two pole mounted light fixtures right there to provide on the utility pole along main road to provide additional lighting uh where employees would be anticipated to park right there. Uh there is one sign that I
saw located on the site. Uh it's a monument style sign uh front along road approximately 40 square ft. Uh there's no proposed changes to anything on the site. Um Tyler says it's pretty much u use of the existing structure. Um there
are some existing nonconformities of both variances required for the site. Um it's my understanding that an ordinance was updated or passed I believe it was June 11th of last year. Um so as for the frontage uh front yard setback from main
road 75 ft is required and 54.6 ft currently exist. uh maximum impervious for the site uh total allowable of 15% we do stand at 31.9% so just shy of 32%. And then as well as
building coverage total allowable is 10% of the site and we stand at 13%. So again there's no increase of any of these variances. We're not asking for any relief uh regarding that uh these standards that um predate the most recent standards. Uh we are seeking uh
one use variance for the proposed light industrial use for the zone the RA zone. Um for some of the operational information um the site is as Tyler said uniquely qualified for this proposing very similar uh the current uh occupant
is zonal wall systems. Uh they do like light manufacturing similar to what we'd be proposing for the proposes. Um overall employees for the site um I believe from from the start we'd be in the 10 to 15 range for the maximum uh somewhere down the road of 20 employees.
Uh it's my understanding that there will be some field personnel three people in the field not actually in the office um as well as potential of two people working from home. Um that being said there is some opportunity. We do have the 15 stalls here if the need were to
arise. Um there's five total bay doors here. Uh three I believe three or four are able uh boating dock height and then there's one which would be a standard overhead door for uh van access between some of those doors between these two doors here. Uh there is potential to
possibly delineate some extra striping should the need arise for any additional parking. So there's more than sufficient parking to accommodate employees, future employees and guests um that may arrive to the site. Uh we don't foresee a lot of outside um people stopping by. This
isn't anything that's open to the public. We don't have walk-in customers or anything of that nature. Um the hours of operation for our site will be 6:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. Um that being said, it is kind of an early start for that sort of area. There wouldn't be any kind of
outside activity prior to the 7:30 hour um in the morning. When we say outside activities, that would strictly consist of possibly loading and unloading delivery trucks. It will be your standard type trucks um you know your Amazon, UPS, FedEx, etc. with an
occasional tractor trailer delivery. uh but fairly intrepid uh when seeking use variance which we seek for for our proposed light industrial use. I'm sure you're all aware of the positive and negative criteria outlined in the municipal land
use law uh section 4055-2. So the positive criteria outlines are maybe 23 or so points. I'm only going to touch on a handful of them that pertain uh specifically to our use. Uh the first one states under the special reasons that this use uh will be able to provide
adequate light, air, and open space. While we do exceed the current standard of 15% coverage for the entire lot, there still is over 2/3 of a lot that is undeveloped and is not proposed to be developed by any means. There's a wooded area to the rear that provides buffering
from our sites to the rear. There is a wooded area to the left hand side as well as a far set back. I think we're darn near 300 ft from the property line along uh what is that area street. So it is well buffered. It does sit back from
the property lines. Um although we're close to main main road, we're still over 50 ft away from main road. So I feel that there is adequate light, air, open space, etc. Um, item D under that states that we
will not conflict with our neighbors, neighboring municipalities, the county or the state as a whole being so similar to the existing use in there. I wasn't aware of any conflicts. I'm not aware of any conflicts with the existing use. So, I don't foresee our proposed use creating any conflicts. Uh, we do have
the neighbor to our right hand side there, ROS Logistics. Uh, them being a shipping company, I would assume there's probably a fair amount of traffic in and out of that facility. We're nowhere even close to that. We have our few vehicles a day, employees coming in in the morning, our shutdown
hours at 2:30, so we're closing relatively early. Uh this isn't by any means an operation that's going to extend into the to the late night hours. Additionally, we're located on a county route, uh which is very nice. We won't be generating any traffic any local neighborhoods. We tie into main arteries
that are very very close by. uh which ties into item H when it's it touches upon um transportation routes that promote increased level of traffic. I'm sure you're all aware we're about a mile mile and a half from Route 40 which is very close by major artery for the area
kind of connecting the Delaware end all the way down to the Atlantic City end and then it also ties into other arteries such as 55. Uh they're very close easily accessible Kelsey Drive. Um for site circulation, we discussed the animal room for maneuverability, the
parking area to the right, um the loading area to the right, and the parking area for our employees. Um item I under the special reasons states that promoted the desirable visual effect and development techniques. Uh while I wasn't able to
see the grass and the trees, there's no leaves and were pretty well snow covered. I did look at some some roadside shots that are available Google Earth, big maps, etc. Um, some historic aerials, different things like that. Everything seemed to be well kept, well
in order. Um, and I see the applicant should be approved tonight. Certainly continuing that tradition of keeping the property, keeping it in good shape, taking care of the landscape, etc. Uh the final item under the special reasons, it touches upon lessening the
cost of construction. Um which again I feel is really the crux of our application. You heard the word adaptive reuse. Um anytime we can utilize an existing building and propose zero construction. Um it is essentially a benefit I believe for the applicant as
well as for the community. Um the last thing we want to see is is a big building. It's not being used. those are those are never assets that can negotiate with. Um so kind of wrapping things up here for the planning testimony, we we lastly look at the negative criteria and it's can this use
be approved without detriment or causing harm to the public good. Um again, this is much less than our neighbors next door, much less intense use and very similar to the use that's operating there today. So there was no major issues before. I don't really see any
major issues that are a major harm now offering the the usability of the site for our proposed use and the fact that we have such limited hours. You know, there's no real traffic generation where you have your peak travel hours which be your 7 7 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. and your 400
p.m. to 6:00 p.m. kind of work complimentary to those higher traffic hours. Um and then lastly, the proposed use will not significantly prepare impair the intent of the zoning ordinance. Um we are not seeking from a
bulk standard perspective any additional relief. Uh these are all existing non-conformities on the site. We are set back the lot covers and building covers. So we feel that we applied um with that aspect of it. And then lastly to address some of the items in the master plan.
While the master plan does recognize um the uh scattered commercial uh facilities in residential areas, um this is a pre-existing use which we are not expanding by any way, shape or form. So we don't don't feel that it really
aggravates that clause in any way. Um and then lastly, um some of the goals outlined in the master plan, the 2024 master plan seeks to provide opportunity for business development, uh while respecting the um cultural heritage and
desire of rural character. Again, this is an interesting site, very well buffered. Um there's some nice tree growth around it. Um plenty of green areas and we would certainly be complimentary to that. And then lastly under goal number five it says I feel this is a very important aspect of it
provide support for growth and retention of business and industries which is exactly what we're going to be doing is retaining an existing business or introducing a new business to a currently operating uh business that we're just kind of that uh tradition. Um
that's for the uh site aspect of it for the planning testimony. Uh that includes any anything that I would like to address if anybody has questions. >> What exactly are you going to do there? Cuz my question they don't I know it's some kind of light manufacturing you said.
>> So it is light manufacturing. Um I do not know all the ins and out particulars of the application. >> I hope the attorney knows. Inquiring minds want to know. >> Okay. I can read a statement here. fabrication of metal can stairs, metal railings, ladders and other
miscellaneous products. So it would be manufacturing of metal type products. >> So I assume >> welding and cutting and metal metal work >> inside all operations will be inside. Um as as I had stated any outside activities
would be confined to just loading and unloading of delivery. >> So no storage outside. >> That is correct. >> No seat boxes all raw material be inside. >> That is correct. Yes, I checked on all that myself before appearing to sort of sort. >> All this stuff is made to order. I assume this somebody calls in. I need
this. They got plans and it's made there. >> Yes. >> So, they're going to occupy the entire site. The original owner is lead. >> That is correct. Yeah. There'll be one occupant instructor as far as I understand. There'll be some office space and then the warehouse space will be utilizing because
>> I'll be honest with you, I I I've known that place for many, many years. I never see any activity there ever. I never see a truck. I used to see cars. >> I saw a Jeep there. I didn't drive by it. Uh >> it was yours maybe. >> No, no, no. I pick up trucks. It was not
mine. I did make sure the four-wheel drive was all >> But it's all it's very well kept, but I just never see any activity. >> And then we're we're certainly looking to continue that. And it's not like we're introducing any kind of major activity that's going to go crazy hours like you said, outside storage. None of
that will be taking place. >> Yeah. Okay. You want to go through uh uh Dave, you want to go through your your technical uh comments? >> Yes, they pretty much all been addressed. We did an updated letter dated January 28, 2026
uh which we responded to the uh the attorney's letter of the same date. Um, so we hereby testimony that while they may have more potential employees than
than available parking spaces right there in the front, there is plenty of places on site for some additional parking. That parking will be a on site, not on the street, and b will be in paved areas. >> That is correct. No parking on the gr
any grass areas. Um, we heard the hours of operation 6:00 a.m. to 2:30. Anything outside is there's no outside work as listed in the letter. It's more just outside loading
of or unloading of materials. There'll be no outside storage of materials. There'll be no conx boxes and the like. Everything will h happen inside except for the loading. Um, we need a survey affidavit uh as a condition of any approval. We did
receive a letter dated February 3rd, 2026 from the Franken Township Fire Marshall. I think the only real comment in there was that address shall be posted. So, as a condition of any approval, we'll need the uh street address posted so it can be seen in a
north south direction on Main Road and that would be in accordance with the 911 regulations. Um there are some setbacks setback relief that's required in accordance in addition to the use variance uh front
the building setback right now is at 54.6 supposed to be 75 ft per our most recent changes. That's an existing non-conforming condition not being further aggravated but it's still a variance we should grant tonight uh if if you think that's warranted. Also lot
coverage. This is something new. We never really had a lot coverage requirement. 15% is permitted in this RA zone. They are at 31.9%. Uh and it's not being expanded. And again, um I think those are the two C
variances that are required. >> But what's that first one again? >> Front yard back. >> Front yard. Okay. >> And lot coverage. Now, there's a building coverage requirement in this zone um of 10% and they're at 13%. But the previous
application was granted 19%. So, they're not going any further than what was previously approved. Um I mean, you can grant that waiver, that variance if necessary. I think it runs with the land. >> I agree. We ask the letter just to be sure. >> Um we've heard testimony this evening.
What's that, John? I tell you, why do they need this? An existing building that was already approved. Why do they need these variances? >> The zone has changed the building. >> The zone has changed. >> Code has changed. >> Yeah, but we're not doing that to every place in the township. That's right. >> In the RA zone, we are. >> I guess we'll have to address.
>> We're going to have to have a variant for every thing that's in RA that's already built >> that comes back before us. >> A change in change in the use. Not exactly. >> I don't think this is a change in the use. still commercial operations,
>> but that's just >> cautious. You don't have to open it up to any commercial use and end up violates some of the things you talk about like outside storage, outside works. They need to know what a new person is doing >> in a residential zone especially,
>> right? And the use variance runs with that particular application, >> correct? Correct. >> This is a different use. So, it therefore it's a different a new application. Um, it sounds like based upon the testimony that a site plan waiver is appropriate for this application since
there are no changes. That's all I have. >> I got one question. What's the sign going to say? >> The name of the company is P P3 Metals. Um, so I would believe that they would like their company name
>> three P3 Metals. >> P3 P3. >> One question. >> Did you have any other witnesses? that that's between that my free metals as well. So that real estate is going to be the owner of the parcel and they're going to lease three metal. It's
>> I think it's one and the same ownership versus >> and the existing sign will not be increased in size. You're just changing out the sign board itself. Go to normal. >> Any other questions? Anybody? No, don't do it.
>> I can make a motion the public motion by uh Anthony Gon, second by Dana. All in favor? I oppose. >> Are anybody from the public like to be heard regarding uh this application? If not, the motion.
>> I make a motion to close. >> By second, second by Mike. All in favor? I All right. Heard the testimony. Is there a motion? I'll make a motion to second that >> with the two variances, lot coverage and
front yard setback and use >> and we were in the conditions that were >> all Yeah. All the relief they asked for in there. >> Mr. Gatano. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Ketchum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gofollo. >> Yes. Mr. Dazzer. >> Yes. >> Mr. Hamill. >> Yes. >> Mr. Glacius. >> Yes. It'll be good to have another business. >> Chairman Gravener. >> Yes. >> Good luck. >> Maybe we'll see some traffic in there
now. Okay. Next on our agenda is CB25-22 in the name of Now I have two different names. They have Darin Sudterin and I have Darin Sunderland. Which one is it? >> Sunderland. >> Thank you. My name is Darin Sunderland.
>> Sunderland. Okay. >> We're the only ones in the country. Um uh we're requesting a variance uh so that we can build on an under uh sized lot. Can I hold up one minute, Mike? Is
everything in order? >> No, it is. >> And would you raise your right hand, please? >> State your name and address for the record, please. >> Sure. >> My name is Darian Sunderland. I live at 3200 Street Village. Do >> you swear to tell the truth about the testimony you're going to get?
>> I do. >> Very good. Thank you. Go ahead. I'm sorry to interrupt you. >> No, that's okay. I' I've been here enough times to know how you guys do things. Both parts are very interesting last week. Um, but I did not decide to invest in all the prints and and stuff
like that. Um, I feel that 15 copies was enough to invest. >> You were here. Wait a minute. You were here last month. >> Oh, yeah. >> You sat through that. >> Yes, I did. And I sat through the month before when nothing happened. >> You must see what's going on. >> You must not have much of a million.
>> Uh, now my my family would disagree. Um, >> was educating or something. have I I will discuss I will make mention as to why I'm investing my time uh later but >> you can just continue with this application now >> for this application
>> there there is an existing house it's been there since 1956 it is about 1,50 ft which is a bit small for adding my parents uh my father has dementia he'll be 80 years old this year my mother has polio
syndrome she will be 82 this here. They are in great need of assistance. Um my brother passed away who was the owner of the house passed away back in October of 24. I am the administr administrators
of the estate uh because he did not have a will. So don't don't do that. Don't don't have a will. Um so we have not completed probate. So I cannot transfer it into into my money at this point. Uh and so that's why we're doing this because they need a place to live that
where they could be properly cared for and that's what this bedroom is for. Um the problem is is that we had 36,000 ft of uh property 180 by 200
and as of 2007 there was a uh raw requirement put in of 1 acre which is 440,000 43,560 ft I believe and for some reason the grandfather clause no longer works and that's why the other reasons that I'm
here because I would like an answer as to why 250 5391 no longer applies. But I would like to answer your question first. >> Yes. >> So you're adding on to your home is what you want to do. >> Yeah. >> For your parents.
>> Yes. >> That's it. >> No commercial use. >> No commercial use. Yes. There's a giant man cave there. >> Okay. We use that for storage cuz we downsized from a larger house. Is that that building that's in the back? >> That's the extra building. It's bigger than the house. >> It's metal.
>> Yes, it's cold. It's not heated. It's not air conditioned. There's electric there. You didn't have a permit for it. Uh so that was, you know, it was all put up before. >> You could form it with everything but the the lot area and the front yard.
Well, the whole house only apart because it's not because the house was put in before. >> So, but Mr. >> It's an existing non-conforming >> shiny. I'm sorry. Shiny. >> Shiny. Shy. >> Shiny. Excuse me.
um has determined that the ADA deck that was put in there, Bill, we permited it in 2009 that we would like to put a roof over. I'm not changing the size of the deck or anything. It now needs to have a variance because the working approach is on the front section. >> So that's your that's where you need the
front yard set. That goes to the porch. >> Okay. >> Is that it? That's it. >> Unless you have a computer. Well, Dave's going to we're going to go through our our engineers comments and then >> we'll go from there. >> Okay. Thank you, chairman. We we did a
revised letter dated January 28, 2026 for this application, 3200 Uclid Street. Um we're in the Malaga Village zone. This has got an existing house in a garage. Um we the application has since been
amended. The original application was for an additional dwelling unit on the property. That is not what's here before us tonight. It is only bedroom. >> So, can I explain why that I >> We're good. We're We're down to Let's keep this simple.
>> Well, no. There was a reason why I was told it was an NDU and but I you know, apparently it's not anymore. >> Yeah. >> Right. So, it's it's not just to clarify for the record. This is this is simply an addition to the house for another
bedroom. Um so the zoning officer had determined that he couldn't issue a zoning permit because the undersized lot. That's why we're here. Um so the addition meets all the setbacks. That's fine. The front deck, they're expanding
the front deck by covering it. So that triggers the relief for front yard setback. Um it's not any closer to the road than what's there now, but it is being expanded by virtue of the covering over. So it this application is simply uh under an addition for an under on an
undersized lot and front yard setback varants to the front porch >> and we wonder why people get annoyed. >> Yeah, that's true. >> Oh, sorry. I won't say. >> All right, Dave, you're done. Dave, there any questions from the board to to the applicant or anyone?
I make a motion we open the public. I second. >> Motion and second. All in favor? I opposed. Anybody from the public like to be heard regarding this application? >> If not, make a motion to close. >> Second. >> Motion and second. All in favor? I opposed.
>> Okay. >> I make a motion to approve. I second that. >> Motion by David Desert. Second by Anthony Gano. >> Mr. Gano. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mr. Ketchum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Garopolo. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Dazzer. >> Yes. >> Mr. Haml. >> Yes. And good luck with the man cave. >> Mr. Glacius. >> Yes. >> M. Chairman Gravener. >> Yes. >> Good luck. >> Thank you. Can I ask questions now? >> Just don't need to ask any questions.
>> No. I need to ask some questions. >> I have gotten no questions answered. >> Well, you're I think you're asking the wrong board the question. >> Well, my first question is for Mr. Bella because I asked Mr. Parabella both in person and via email as to why this
grandfather clause written in 1979 no longer applies. >> We have I got to start somewhere. >> Wait a minute. Well, you got you got your approval. >> No. Yeah, but you know what? It's not fair for everybody else. >> You need to go to township committee for us. This is not us. >> We've already done that.
>> So, I would like to know from Mr. Belli why this does no why this no longer apply or why does it not conform to my law? You want to answer that question? >> Because I have asked that. >> Okay. >> No, the zoning officer made a decision and that's why she's here. She's got her approval on me
>> and I pursued Mr. Farabella and said, "Please tell me why this doesn't work." And he could not do it. He says he went to you and asked you about it and you said it doesn't apply in this instance. And that is not a answer to someone who just put out over $1,000 to stand here
and be approved when I don't think I should have had to come here at all. We don't pick and choose who comes here. You understand that? >> I understand that. But what I'm saying is I wanted I've already asked the township board. They don't know why it doesn't apply. That's why Mr. Farabella
says he asked Mr. Belli. Mr. Belli said it doesn't apply. And I would like to know why. >> Well, there's where you got to go and sit at the at the township meeting. >> I've been attending those township meetings since November. >> You are waiting for punishment. We we
need to move on with There are applicants here that that want to give >> I still want an answer. I put out money just like other families. >> Maybe Mike you could uh give her an answer. >> To give me an answer. Um he discussed it with me. I just
selected call and so I'm not going to ask >> but there has to be a reason. Why is it the right? What if he is wrong? >> If he is wrong then he could apply for an interpretation. You could come in here for that. with your business. >> So, how do I apply for an interpretation? >> You don't need an interpretation.
>> You don't need one. >> Who doesn't? >> You got your approval. >> I'm worried about I'm worried about everybody else. Like, I'm not sure if it was you, but I didn't see you in the board. Someone here just said, "You mean everybody's going to be coming here for a change for this? >> This is something that was something totally different. Totally different.
>> I understand that. But what I'm saying is that simple home, basic homework, we want to put on a bedroom or do something that doesn't conflict with any other situation. should not have to go through the agony a barrier. >> You need to go to the township committee. Okay. Please, please sit down
so we can continue our meeting. >> Who's next? >> Next is CB25-21 in the name of Highland Development. >> Mike, all papers in order. >> Yes, they are. >> Thank you very much. Uh Robinson
appearing on behalf of the applicant Highland Development Group LLC. Uh this is an application uh for the construction of a single family home uh on an undersized lot. I have with me Greg Simons here as a project engineer to be my primary witness uh to walk
through the varian plan which was supplied with this application. >> Let's swear him in then. Okay, his credentials. >> I I still reserve some time for some opening remarks. >> What? >> I'd like to finish my opening remarks to summarize the variances of the
application. You'll get your term >> name and address please or name and credentials communication Simons from doing associates New Jersey licensed professional engineering state of New Jersey has been standing I have presented in front of this board before part of the planning.
>> Thank you. >> Without objection. >> Yes. >> Um Mr. Simons I'll skip ahead here. >> Yeah. You sure tell the truth about the testimony you're going to give? >> Yes. >> Mr. Simons, could you uh just confirm
for the board you're the author of the varian plan submitted with this application? >> Yes, I am. >> And in review of your variance plan and in conjunction with Mr. Shid's letter, could you just walk through the uh variance plan and the relief being requested for some of the nonconformities of this?
Um property is 124 Idol Lake Bridge Road. It's on a quarter of pine and idle lake. The block is 2804 by 5. It is approximately 0.17 acres in size.
We're asking rear planes bear ranch single family dwelling is a three bedroom single family going uh with off streetet parking and garage. Um there are residential uh neighboring
properties to the on both sides of the property. Uh Jones to the north and two adjacent lots. Uh lot six and then lot seven. Uh you can see Clinton tax map they are 70
by 100 and our lot is 75 by 100. There are houses on these two lots and I showed that in here on this map there's also additional lots on the other side of Lakewood Road that has smaller size parks. So just to walk
through uh the variances as Paul has been trying to give a review letter as a result of the lot being undersized obviously it's going to impact uh the ability for any househ variances and coverage variances. That's correct. So looking through uh the
summary as provided uh in this report uh we would be seeking uh variances uh the lot area and street frontage are pre-existing variances. Uh there would be the uh variance for building coverage, front, side, and rear yard setbacks. And then we would need an
impervious coverage variance based off of the footprint of the building. We're certainly going to exceed the necessary uh maximum 50% amount. Correct. Right. So to provide some history to the board as I was uh starting uh this is actually
a prior subdivision. We did some research and Mr. island was in in conjunction with the client that back in 1955 Idle Lake uh development was formed. Subdivision was done properly uh by this municipality. So all of these lots are back from the 1950s and some of
which elected to merge for double lots for bigger homes. You know the balance though as Mr. Simon testified are identical size lots are all drastically undersized by today's standards but they all have residential homes u you know surrounding the current lot. Now, in an
effort to see if we had an opportunity to improve our lot size, we did make some inroads and Mr. Simon confirmed with the client that we sent out the necessary uh mailing to both of our contiguous neighbors. Is that correct? >> That's correct. And we got uh a response
back, most notably correct, from lot number two, the double lot behind uh where they uh refused um to engage us in any discussion as to lot adjustments or uh purchase of their property. Uh and I assume as that the rear of
their home is somewhat near that property line. So there wouldn't have been a feasible way to take any of your land. Is that that's accurate? And both the adjacent blocks are currently undersized. So taking any additional land from those plots, you would increase that profil.
So without any realistic opportunity to gain more land of a pre-existing lot in the 50s, we're we're we're at the lucky hat. We're playing the hand. >> Yes. Okay. So considering that um uh if all of the variances we've uh
identified and are called out and we can just walk through the report, I believe the most notable consideration, Mr. China can confirm is just give a quick uh testimony as to the size of the driveway uh as it relates to note number
10 in his report so that we can uh provide some testimony and see which direction you'd like to go forward. Currently, we showed a driveway about 17 ft off the property line. Uh the driveway does extend another 10 ft to the roadway. Um a normal parking space,
a typical parking space is 9 by 18. Since we only have 17 ft shown, it was brought up by the board's engineer that it was undersized. Um we didn't ask for a variance or waiver for that under size where we can move the house back another
foot and ride that ATP which would need us to just increase the setback to the side the request there by one. That's correct and and we we have no objection to either solution whatever the board that is correct and the impervious coverage for property
moving the driveway making the driveway 18 ft would be 23.4%. So that would be the precise uh requested percentile that was trying to result in statistical pro. Yeah.
Uh we're here to answer any questions. Relatively straightforward application though. Um we we believe we've exhausted our options and um it's left us with a a lot that's particularly soon if it's undersized. So it it it can't be improved beyond that. Um, so without any
variances uh right from the board, it'll sit north and have no ability to be up. >> Does the applicant own the the lot? >> The applicant is currently under contract to No, >> I'm curious if any of the
the other the other homeowners tried to buy it as well. >> Yes. So that we we've submitted offers to all of the others to help uh to purchase some of their lots, >> right? >> So I have the agreement of sale um that we've submitted as part of our
application that we are under contract to purchase this lot contingent upon the outcome of this very comments Dave. I mean, >> all those lots there are so small, >> right? We had some fun doing the title search all the way back from the 50. So,
at least they did a small facility or something. >> Yeah, but there there was back in 1955 they made them lots that size, but today they made it an acre and a half for a reason. And this isn't even close to an acre and a half. >> Yeah, sure. But that's the nature of a
pre-existing condition. I understand that. But 1955 is different than 2026. >> I understand. But then effectively that by by the logic of approving it to 55 and then changing the regulation down the road means it's an unusable lot.
Nobody's doing anything on it ever. So this we believe fits into that. It's obviously a permissible use. It fits into the character and all the other homes on the lots around it are there and built to go along with. So 23% 23.4% 4% improve coverage. I
don't think that's a huge amount of improve coverage for a smaller lot and not a bigger footprint than any of the other surrounding homes in that in that character. Uh specifically, the client has provided more than happy share court. Uh approximately 1487 to 1643
would be the square footage of the particular model of the home that fits into the equipment particularly. Correct. And so we have a whole host of variances that they they went through. So lot area you need 1.5 acres. The applicant is
requesting uh the existing condition of.17 acres. Lot street frontage supposed to be 150. It's half that at 75 ft. Maximum impous coverage supposed to be 15% or 23.4%.
Maximum building coverage 10%. This is 18.6%. >> Front yard set back 75 ft. They are at 53 ft. Move it back. Requires a variance. Sideyard setback is supposed to be 20. They're at 17 ft, which is
another variance. Rear yard setback is supposed to be 50 ft and they are at 13 ft. So, those are all the variants that are associated with building on this undersized lot. Um, I did I did have a comment about the driveway. You you
technically you can't get put a car in the driveway unless it's hanging into the rightway. Um, we would recommend that the parking space it be in accordance with the residential site improvement standards and be a minimum of 18 ft deep, which would require losing a foot off the house.
>> Yeah. >> 17 ft. >> Move it back. Yeah, we cater's fine. >> Move it back and they goes more in the rear yard. >> Technically, it's a sideyard. The way the way our ordinance is written,
>> it says two. This is a corner lot, >> but our ordinance says the Idol Lake Road is actually the front. >> And just for a practical consideration, Mr. Simons, the these properties uh the house that would be built would include
garages. >> Yes, it would. and a two-car garage. >> Um I'm not sure if it's one car or two car, but there'll be one off street parking space in the driveway and one parking space in the garage. >> Okay, that would comply with the RSI requirements.
>> But that being said, the client has no objection to whatever the preference of the board. >> And our last comment then was we recommend that the driveway apron be paved in the same. >> Oh yeah.
>> So it comes down to the board. It's just you need a lot of variances. >> I I think the argument just to summarize is >> no matter what gets built there any >> this is where it's going to end up. It's either the government's going to make the decision that nothing can be built on the lot or it'll just be another
house in the road to house or anything. when you sent your lettering to via email. >> We got it. So, but in fairness, Mr. Simon, you can confirm the one that is unclaimed is
related to this lot six, which their house is already 10 ft off of property line. So, it's not like there's room. We didn't even, >> you know, but we did. We sent that letter. >> Let's clarify that letter. That letter that you did get back said that they
would not sell you any of their property. >> Correct. And I'm happy that was >> that the letter did it not also say that they are unwilling to purchase your property? >> It's the form letter that is provided by Franklin to be filled out by and no,
they're not willing to sell. No, they're not willing to purchase. >> So, the neighbor's not willing to purchase this. for a to enlarge their lot. That was the point I was trying to get to. Thank you, sir. >> Let's let's open it up to the public now. >> I make that motion. >> Motion by Dana. >> Second.
>> Second by Mike Car. All in favor? I opposed. Is there anyone from the public like to be heard regarding this application? >> Raise your right hand, please. You swear to tell Ruth about the testimony you're going to get. >> Yes, I do. Name and address, please. >> Michael back. >> Um, they want to do this on a point.
>> That's what they want. SE current 1.5. >> Yes. >> Is that well and septic over there or >> Yes. >> How do you manage to keep them separate enough from themselves plus their neighbors? >> I guess that would be up to that's up to
the county board of health. The county board of health makes that decision with wells and septics. If they if they can't do it, then there won't be a build of a lot. >> And how wide is this lot right now that they want to build on? >> 75. >> 70 75 ft.
>> 75 by 100. >> And then it's 150 right now. >> Correct. >> I moved down here from central Jersey to escape that crap and it just seemed to follow me somehow. I have seven acres and I don't feel that's enough. I think
I have 250 foot frontage. Honestly, I It's stupid that my lot's 250 by 15 something. Everybody I have, 1500 wide, 250 deep, and my neighbors the same way. We like each other, but not that much. I have a 100 foot lot right next to me and
that's why I'm here. I don't want to see those trees disappear and a house gets stuck there. 100 ft wide and probably is 15 100 ft deep. All you can do is turn it into big mansion side there.
This particular lot, every lot in the neighborhood is the same size. >> They're all undersized. >> 50 is an odd way to go out. >> Well, I don't know if they were all built back in the 50s. I share your sentiments on the moral character of the town, but um I highly doubt that unless
you know someone who lives on uh Pine or Idol Lake, you even know that road exists back there. >> Yeah. >> I don't even know where it is. >> Exactly. >> I've only been here 5 years, so >> and I don't go out that much. >> I've been trying to find my neighbors 100 foot wide lot just to keep my trees there.
>> But the families can't decide what to do with the two lots they have. One has a house, the other one's unbuildable. So stuff like this gets through. Guess what? You pressing it, it's going to be vulnerable. >> So anytime something comes up here, you're going to see me.
>> I I you know, every time an application comes here, it's it's treated as a separate application. >> I think we have another one tonight. So that's all I have to say about this one. >> Okay. Well, thank you very much. We appreciate your comments. Anyone else
like to be heard regarding this? >> Raise your right hand, please. You swear to tell the truth about the test your gift. >> Name and address, please. >> Uh, I'm Doyle 34 Street. Um, so I am the homeowner directly across uh from the proposed construction site. I'm asking
the board to deny the zoning variance to this new home. The law does not leave the required setbacks to multiple sides for permitting construction. so close to property lines in roadway would undermine the purpose of our zoning regulation which exists to ensure safety
spacing and responsible. The corner where this house is proposed already contains three driveways leading into very narrow streets with limited visibility. It also it's also a designated school bus stop and an area where children often from. The constant
movement of cars, buses, and pedestrians already make this intersection challenging to navigate, especially as there are no sidewalks. Adding another driveway and additional traffic on this small on this lot, excuse me, on a lot this small
meaningfully increases the risk of accidents and reduces the sight lines that are critical for safety. Building a house on a lot that is significantly smaller than zoning intends pushing structure closer to the road and property lines would creating a crowded
impressive look that is out of step with the spac spacious street aesthetic that defines this community. The scale and placement required for this construction would interrupt the natural openness of this corner would contribute to a more congested field that does not reflect
the farm and greenery our town is important. For these reasons, I respectfully urge the board to uphold the standards and deny this area's request. Thank you for your time. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Anyone else like to be heard? >> If not, is there a motion? I make a motion we close. >> Second it. Motion by Dazzy, second by Mike. All in favor? I. >> Okay. Any other comments? Rich, anyone? Jim,
>> you like to make some closing comments? >> Just to reiterate to the board, um there's really two choices. It's really that the the township determined that a privately owned piece of land is undevelopable and you're just stuck with a sour egg. I guess it allows the
applicant to build a house just like everyone else want. We think that it would be arbitrary and egrecious to deny the house of the exact same dimension, same size. Um because of the fact that the bar got between when the lot got approved originally with by
this board and what happened with the zoning regulations. It seemed logically about being grandfathered in. There's a lot that we didn't create. We just want to do what everyone else got. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay, gentlemen. You heard the testimony. If there's if no other
questions, uh, is there a motion to approve or deny? This one's a little hard. I make a motion to deny. >> I'll second the motion. Motion by uh Dan
Densry, second by Mike Arolo, >> Mr. Gatano. >> So the yes is for the will be a yes for the >> Mr. Ketchum. Uh, yes, >> Mr. Golo. >> Yes,
>> Mr. Dazzer. >> Yes, >> Mr. Hamill. >> No, >> Mr. Glacius. >> Uh, wait a minute. This whole I'm going to I'm going to go with I'm going with I say no cuz we're killing
properties and it's a shame. It's not the current people's fault that that was done the way it was done years ago. My argument is this announcement will take you this is this is an eminent domain that's about to happen. >> Okay. >> So that's the way I'm voting.
>> Chairman Gravener. >> Yeah. And and I'm the same way. I'm No. I mean I think it's way undersized. I agree. But every other lot in that area is the same size. And what are you going to do with that piece of property? That's not that's not right. >> No. >> Nothing is what we decide. And the homeowner just has to pay their taxes.
And there the law the the government is saying you can't vote any no matter what we're coming for these variances. So >> we're we're done. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. >> What was the vote? >> All right. Thank you.
>> What was it? How many? >> So that was the den. >> Okay. Next on the agenda CB2-20, the name of Shaina Grace Scavli Good evening. Tyler
again. This is um put an addition on this as well. >> I didn't get your name. What was it? >> Tyler. >> I should know you. >> Is she? >> I can't see out of one eye and I'm blind in the other. Is the amate going to do
any testimony? >> Raise your right hand, please. You swear to tell the truth about the testimony you're going to get. >> Yes. >> Name and address, please. >> 33. >> Thank you, Shannon. >> Address.
Um, so anyway, mom and dad own this house right now. wants to get it. She wants to purchase it from her parents or get it. I don't know how with her, but whatever. She's going to get it and she wants to get on
to it. She is um an artist and wants to part of the ambition is to put an artist studio, renovate the kitchen, um and I think renovate a bedroom. So, it's going to require an expansion. Now, right now, because it's in the Pineeland zone, it's
less than 3.44 acres. Uh so it's from the sides and by adding this addition on some of this renovation but there's also addition to the footprint on the ground she's expanding
that nonconformity in a the density. So she has to come here and ask for permission. So the natural question and you've heard it of other people is you know what have you tried to do to enlarge your lot to make it conforming.
So what I brought and it's part of your application is the survey from 2022. She received uh her parents received approval from the zoning board to um the original lot is what's shown in pink here
and she the uh lot next door used to wrap around the back of her of this lot. And as a result of that 2022 subdivision that got approved, uh, she now owns this whole thing that's shown here. So, she's
basically doubled the size of the lot already. So, when the question is, what are you what are you doing to try to get more conformity with your lot size? That's what's happened. There is a lot the the joiner on the west side is a
flag lot. So the flag is here. You can't get any land from the land. That's their access to and from the river. In the back is White Oak Country Club. You know that the D owns it. You need a the
legislature to approve, you know, giving land to somebody. So that's not happening. And mom and dad have already generously uh conveyed that back piece there to the slot. So they're they vote. So, she's out of options as far as
trying to make her lot any larger than it is now. So, in the in the application, you'll see the um architectural select page from
the architectural lines that shows what's going to happen. you you probably won't even see it from the street. Um because the addition is out the back. So if we're going to ask the question
about how is this going to impact the neighborhood, nobody's really going to see any difference down road, you're not going to see this. Um, and on the architectural drawings we can see both the uh expansion footprint
what that's going to look like. Part of that is is a jack stone. It makes it look a little bit more exaggerated than what it is. Um, of course, and then the other drawings show you the what the efficient part is going to be
um out of that. So, um, this this addition is this studio is for her personal use. This is not a commercial operation. She's not a retail shop or anything. It's just for doing
her thing and that's it. So, >> so what relief do you need? >> What relief do you need? Strictly the >> just because we're the density is 3.4iz 21st size block.
>> Anything to add, Dave, besides that? >> It's It's a lot area variance, right? You need 3.4 acres. It's 1.6. >> Everything else is fine. >> It's a lot area variance. They meet all the setbacks >> and the additions behind the house. >> Correct.
>> All right. How about we open up to the public? >> I make a motion we open to the public. >> Second, second by Mike Corp. All in favor? I opposed. Anyone from the public like to be heard regarding this application? >> I make a motion to close. >> Who was the second?
>> Who's second? >> Dana with the second. >> All in favor? I >> Okay. The testimony. >> Second. >> Motion by Andy Gono. Second by Andy.
>> Mr. Gano. >> Yes. >> Mr. Ketchum. >> Yes. >> Mr. Gafello. Yes, >> Mr. Dazzari. >> Yes, >> Mr. Hamill. >> Yes, >> Mr. Glacius. >> Yes, >> Mr. Chairman Gravener. >> Yes. >> Okay, next on our agenda, CB25-24
Avis LLC. Go on and paint, young lady. >> A little bit more than paint. Go ahead, Mike. Mike, are everything in order, by the way? >> Okay. Sorry. Go ahead. >> My name is John, the attorney representing
regard to his application for 451 Street, block 259, block 4. So I'll just preface this by saying it's my job now to distinguish my application our application from one two
and we're going to do that. Um this is an application requesting what's been deemed as 3C variances on an undersized lot within the RA zone. Um lot size, lot
frontage and total purpose coverage. Uh but many of the arguments are at least radical and the primary argument is
within a four block zone from 259 through 256. There are six lots including pounds that are in vicinity or in the ballpark of 04
acres uh in air. They vary some 35 to about 44. It's a grouping of lots. There are six lots just like this. Um this is unproved. the lot if you're facing
the subject lot from the street. The lot to the right is the same exact dimension the same size. Um my client uh is a contract buyer for this property and was proposed to put it in a 2200 square foot uh residential
property. Um so again within a four block zone there are six lots of just blocks in our block 259 there is one compliant block
out of one but in 258 out of eight lots there are zero um there is one in 27 one and 26 and they just
>> just for the record, you mean 257 and 256, correct? >> Yes, sir. >> I'm sorry. >> It's okay. >> Um, so when we come in here asking for this, does the lot meet the character of the neighborhood? Yes, four blocks it does.
Um, is it on the smaller end of it? Yeah, it does. Um it it it is on the smaller end. Um but there are no large lots in this zone area. There are again one out of eight
in 259. Apparently it was just a reconstruction on zero out of nine on 259. Uh the relief we're asking for is not
extraordinary in this area. And we're at 04 actually 41 acres which doubles the size on the last lot we had in front of me not 17 it's more than double that.
Um so those are the distinguishing features of our application between and um this greatest principle >> within that lot I turned down and this is why I have to distinguish
this our lot size is double that within again the four blocks in our row we're one of six of the same size. Um say, but Mr. Robinson's last argument is
actually essentially becomes an eminent donation. If lots like this cannot be utilized, the town is effectively taking the money. You're paying taxes on it. You can't
sell it. You can't use it. You can't pay it. it's effective eminent domain. You're just robbing people of the value of this property. Um again within our own block and this
addresses an item in your review. We cannot obtain land from any other lot within our block that wouldn't create another variance required or increase the undersized.
So while I understand and I really didn't want to be here for that application, I think there are distinguishing features between this one and the one from again double sized a lot more than
double size. And it absolutely fits in the character of the neighborhood. As a matter of fact, right to the right, it's the same exact size. Um That's what we're asking for. >> I mean, I I went by there today. It's a
very low lot, too. >> Yes. Apparently. >> So, it's under size and it's low. So, >> maybe we have to What do you mean by >> I mean that probably all the water is going to go into that lot. I have a
neighbor who's kept slipper in this. Um, and because she has workers, she's on that. Um, but that's a grading. Um, and a grading plan would be a requirement of any construction as you had mentioned before. If you don't get the in the
context of if you don't get the approvals, you don't build and that would be on us. We would have to get a grading plan approved prior to any construction and then finally get it inspected after it was done to make sure it was in
compliance. >> Correct. Exactly. >> Is it going to be a one story or twotory builds? Good. >> Two. Two. >> Which makes sense because Dave, you're on. >> Thank you. We did a letter dated January
8th, 2026 for this application. And we're in the RA residence agriculture zone. As you heard testimony, there's a lot area variance required for this application. 1.5 acres is required. This is41 acres. There's a lot width variance
or street frontage variance. Supposed to be 150. This lot is 800 ft in width. And there's also a maximum imperous coverage variance. Part of this um 15% is the maximum allowed. This is 17.4%.
Um, so those are the three variances with this application. Um, there is parking in accordance with the residential site improvement standards for this proposed four-bedroom dwelling. And as with the other
application, uh, a paved or concrete driveway apron is recommended as any part of any approval. And and like you said, if if this we weren't given topography of this, it's not required, but if if in fact this is a low lot and
it holds water, um there's a lot of other steps the applicant needs to go through. Uh if if it gets approved here tonight, uh with grading plot plans to meet your township ordinance requirements that no water can leave your site, can't impact the neighbors,
you also need septic design. They'll be looking at items such as that also. if they don't meet the minimum depth to seasonal high groundwater, it can't support a septic system. So, um there's a bunch of other steps. If if this application goes forward this evening,
>> is that part of our ordinance that the water can't leave your property, Dave? >> That's part of the grading plot plan review by the township engineer. >> Any question for the applicant? Yeah, the pictures you showed with this
lake. >> I don't think they're from the >> Oh, these photos. >> I seen the same pictures. I saw them. >> Yeah, we got we got the exact. >> So, I saw the same pictures you saw. I did and I'm sure she's coming. Okay.
>> Um, she did submit them. Um, a lot of that is also on her phone. >> This is not just exclusively pictures and I'm sure she'll explain that. >> Okay. um point that out. >> All right, let's open up to the public. >> I make that motion motion by Daryl.
All in favor? I opposed. Okay. >> Anybody from the uh audience here like to be heard regarding this application? Come forward. >> Come on. We're going to have to swear in again. Okay. You swear to tell the truth about the testimony you're going to give? >> Yes, I do.
>> Name and address. Michael back 69 all um is a contract sale. >> What's that? >> The the applicant here is not actually owner of the property. They want to buy it and build the house. >> I'm assuming that's Yeah.
>> Current owner got here the property. Are they going to live there or they can sell it? >> I was on a plan board for 12 years. Chairman for 10. You know the town. I saw this all the time. People came, did what they had to do to get their
arianes, built it, and split and all it did was kill the school system. We got besides everything else that we actually had to go down to R40 lots, north zone, 40 ft wide. Used
to be 50, used to be 75. They just kept shrinking, shrinking, shrinking. And I would hate to see that happen here. 100 ft to me is not near enough to build a house with a a trailer on. At least they want to go two stories. So it's not a huge house with a huge footprint. I mean
I have a boulevard in 40x60. Their house picked less than that as far as footprint for for what they want to do. But 100 foot was was made for a reason. We just hope you keep it and follow that the reasoning for work or change.
If you want to do a 100, you want to do these tiny lots less than half an acre, change your zoning. >> I'm saying we can't change anything. >> No, I know you can't, but they have to go in front of the the council >> and and try to get the zoning changed.
Wasn't the master plan just done recently? >> That's correct. >> I'll go back to your original uh testimony from the previous application as well. these streets. I doubt if you don't live on them or have an uncle or aunt on them, I can almost guarantee you
that you've never been down. >> Um >> unless I got lost. >> That's a pretty good turnaround spot. But um I again I want to reiterate I am also concerned about the rural rural characteristics of Franklin Township. But um take a drive through there. I
mean you got the addresses here tomorrow if you got time Monday this weekend. >> Check them out. >> 200 foot radio, right? That's always correct. >> Well, if their neighbors aren't here to complain about it, so be it. I don't live there. It's not going to affect me. It may affect me in the future. And believe me, I'll be here if my neighbor
ever tries to do something like this. That's all I have to say. >> Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else like to be heard? >> Raise your right hand, please. You swear to tell the truth about the testimony you're going to give. >> Name and address. >> Jennifer Pal 447 Street
address. Okay. >> Yeah, we know. Yeah. >> Excuse me. My name is Jennifer Pump. I am the owner of the property immediately adjoining the subway parallel identified as block 25509 lot 4, New Jersey. I
submit this letter in formal opposition to the variance application for the destruction of a single family dwelling on a lot of minimal lot size and lage requirement under NASA 30570.
The applicant must demonstrate a hardship unique to the property and prove that the requested variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the public good and without comparing the intent of resilient plans. The applicant has failed to commute
statutory requirements. Minimum lot size and plantage standards are fundamental in controls particularly where storm water management is concerned. The subject blocks deficiencies are the inherent characteristics of a parcel and
do not constitute a hardship created by the zoning ordinance. Development of a residential structure on a lot of this size will necessarily increase in coverage and surface water runoff. There's an existing drainage problem
affecting neighboring properties including Wyoming. During the moderate and heavy rainfall events run off already impacts adjacent block. Physical limitations of the onsized parcel leave insufficient area to adequate adequately
retain infiltrate or manage storm water on site. As a result, any additional development will exacerbate existing conditions and export water onto neighboring properties. Create a substantial detriment. Granted this variance would permit and
testify development on a parcel that cannot safely accommodate it. In parent the intent of the council to present the plan and establish an undesirable precedent. For those reasons, I respectfully request that the board not application for the single family
dwelling. Um given the exercise nature of the lodge, there is a physical capacity, we change storm water on site without directly directing runoff on one neighbor. Um >> are you right next door?
>> Yes, I live next door. I have a K. I actually submit photos. So the border does come from their property onto ours as well. We do have some issues with the water as well because as you indicated it's very low right there. Um so it just
when the snow's going out it's going to be very heavy. We had to obviously invest a lot of money when we had to expand in water. We had to we literally had to buy trash pumps and thankfully we moved to LA time were able to funnel the
water all the way down at the property they had. So >> that's what I was actually going to ask you. Where where does where does it ultimately end up draining away too? Does it go out to the farm field there at the end? >> So when it it's been, you know, several years since it's been like that. Well,
we have trash and we b just hundreds of feet of um you know, >> the discharge hose. >> Yes. Thank you. Um and we dump it down at what we call just the data. >> But if you go out of your driveway, make a right, it goes down that direction.
>> Yes. and we run them along the road. Literally, things have happened to >> Yeah, I was just curious. It's a high volume of water. I saw in your photos. Uh I mean, it's it's a lot. And >> we just did how to protect our house. I mean, obviously we actually have it, but um
>> we actually put one of those generators on there. So, if we're not home, at least we're trying to protect our home by, you know, having, you know, the electricity goes out. >> Yeah. I mean, you can see your your driveways disappeared in one. You got a pallet set up there to I guess manage the pose. >> My driveway you see it build a little
bit. The lot that's you know in question is off to the left. So you know >> it's just >> Yeah. And and that of course if approved the builder would be responsible for encapsulating controlling all storm water and runoff. There are regulations
in place that the zoning board doesn't necessarily have her view over but um I wouldn't want you to be terrified if something got approved. It's not not that this house would get built and all that additional water is going to be coming out here. It's not it's not how
they're allowed to do things. >> I guess that >> How how old is your home? >> Um we are about 20 years now. >> That's It was built 20 years ago
>> or 18. I think it was 18. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Basement or crawl space? basement, >> you know, >> shine pool. >> One time it was a 3 ft of water >> and then we obviously got some back and
redid some things and it's not exactly usable. You recommend my contract. >> All right. Anything else? >> No, thank you. >> Is there You're welcome. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh, anyone else like to be heard
regarding this application? I make a motion we close public by Dary second by Mike. All in favor? I opposed. A couple. >> Sure. >> Um unless there is a backward zone in
Franklin Township. >> A what zone? >> Like an upside down zone. Um that's >> I think I explained that. What the heck's a an upside down? >> I got it. >> Is this a science episode?
Um, sorry. Um, where gravity doesn't work. Everybody seems to acknowledge we have a low yet I just heard testimony that this low is pumping water onto on that another lot.
Gravity works that it goes to the low. It does not go to the high. Uh, so I have dubious thoughts about how this lot is putting water onto other lots when this is the lowest lot there is. Again, if
approved, my client has to jump through hoops. He's going to get a grain plan to make sure that he is self-contained and he's not affecting other lives. his construction on this and I think this will but
this could actually help her life if as she says water miraculously comes from the low to the high and he is now self-contained she does not deal with anything coming from that line I I I I think I think
you're taking that the wrong way I I think what she's concerned that if something's built on there it is going to go up and it may run into her property. That's what we just said. >> Or if right now his bathtub lot's currently filling and discharging onto her lot after it's overwhelmed. Once you
put a house in soil and it raises it, that water is immediately going to be flooding her property instead of taking 3 days of rain to start >> or the property across the street. >> Where's all that other water coming from? It's coming from the adjacent lot. >> It's coming from all the lots, not just
>> all the lots and boom. So, nobody's keeping their water. If he builds, if my client bills, he will be required to keep this water on his lap. >> That's going to be a challenge. I can tell you that. But that's up to you.
>> And that's up. Exactly. That's up to him. But he would be required to do that. And to be honest, maybe that alleviates some of the neighbors. Maybe see it may not be able to be done. And
maybe he doesn't get vote. We're just asking for the ability to >> whatever it is, you won't be able to put any of your your water from that property on anyone else's property. >> Exactly. >> If it gets approved. >> Yes. >> These mobile homes occupied on this pro on this street.
>> I'm sorry. >> The mobile homes on the street that people still live in? >> Uh the one on the corner? No. Um where RVers and uh Buttercup and then the one on the other side of the lot. Yes, that is occupied and a lot of the
>> a lot of the sites there are actually on pads not for you know or the mobile foundation mobile phones >> Google map. All right. Is the uh the footprint of the house that is in, you know, you're
looking at putting on the property, how does that fit in with the houses that are already there? Is it a larger size? Is it the same? Like, is it going to fit the the aesthetic of the I'm I'm ignorant to that to that part. >> I have to defer that. >> He should be testifying.
>> Let's hear from Mr. A, come sign in. >> Raise your right hand, please. Swear to truth. That's what you're going to get. >> Name and address. this one 12 ranker 130. Um I would say probably on the larger side. I don't think it's biggest
home, but you know the the neighbor to the right has actually stated it's a mobile home. Um someone does live there. I don't know how but there's a few houses on the street that are two stories. Um I don't think it's an eyesore. It's not going to be
but I'm not so um it's bigger than the two but it's not. Thank you. Okay. Any comments?
>> Okay. I'm going to make a motion approving. >> Got to second that. >> I'm getting tired of motion to approve. Second that. Yes. >> And and with the variants that go along with it, which are lot area, street frontage, and maximum impervious
coverage. We have anything else, Mike? want to make sure all the if you're motion to improve that all the the runoff from that property stays on that property. >> Yeah. And that's part of runoff. The water's got to stay on the property. I don't know how but got to make it work. So you'll need
>> Does it work? >> Lot of infiltration. >> Okay. There's a motion. And did you second that, Anthony? >> Yes, sir. >> Second by Anthony Gano. Chrissy. >> Mr. Gano. Yes, >> Mr. Ketchum. >> Yes, >> Mr. Gafalo.
>> No, >> Mr. Desarie. >> No, >> Mr. Hamill. >> Yes. And I would just like to say for the public that me personally, I take into consideration the the placement of these undersized lots in consistency
with the other houses around them, not as a blanket statement that every undersized lot would be treated the same. So, we do have a lot of these in Franklin Township. So, um if you plan to come to the meetings, you're going to see more. >> Yes, >> Mr. Glacius. >> Yes.
>> Chairman Gravenner. >> Yes. Okay, that concludes our applications tonight. Move on to uh the resolution. >> Yes, we have two. I'd like you to go to those separately. Um we have
Please move for the >> motion. Okay. Is there a motion to approve the uh CB25-11? >> Make that motion. >> Second. >> Motion. >> Good time. I have a second. >> All in favor?
>> I opposed. And I abstain. >> So the second one was the coart which was a lengthy somewhat contentious hearing. Um, I want to make sure we have a confirmation for the record in the minutes so that you all receive this resolution in
advance. You had an opportunity to review it. If anybody has any changes now, let me know. If not, we'll assume you that reflect your your funding. Um, everybody I think was here, >> right?
>> Uh, Mr. Terresque is not here. Okay. >> Everyone else is here. So, we'll do a roll call on that. >> Um, do we have a motion? >> Is there a motion to approve? >> I'll make a motion. >> Thank.
>> Yes. >> Wait, what do we approve the resolution? >> The resolution for Copart one you chair for. You did your hair last last >> Mr. Gatano,
>> Mr. Ketchum. Yes, >> Mr. Gafolo. >> Yes, >> Mr. Dazzeri. >> Yes, >> Mr. Hamill. >> Yes, >> Mr. Glacius. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay, that's it uh for the meeting tonight. Is there a motion?
>> Motion to here. >> Second. There we go. >> Motion second. All in favor? I opposed. Meeting adjourned. >> Oh my god. Count on you. >> It wasn't