in accordance with the open public meetings act 1975 chapter 231 adequate notice of this regular meeting of the zoning board of the township of Franklin has been provided Board members applicants professionals members of the public please speak directly in the
microphones so a recording secretary can properly process minutes Applicants and professionals please fill out the sheet in the table when you've completed the testimony and please call the role No sheet He doesn't need to He's got me
just said she seat on the table and don't cheat on the table Did you say roll call i'm sorry Okay I apologize I didn't hear you Okay As I said before we were on tape Uh Vasim Vasim Berdas uh Kunal Lakia and
Supendu Singh asked to be excused this evening Cheryl Bethia here Richard Brokanic here Alan Rich here Gary Rosenthal here Robert Shepard here Faras Khan here Michael Lordy here And Robert Thomas here Um
is your mic on green light's on Tasting Tasting Oh mine's on Okay good Uh resolution Sherry and William Schneider ZBA 25 O3 No flags Salute Perz and my authority
cannot vote Everybody else can I'll move Second Cheryl yes Richard Panic yes Alan Rich yes Gary Rosenthal yes Robert Shepard yes and chairman Thomas Yes No
discussion The uh one hearing on the agenda Sereno Tropiano and Susan Quilty ZBA 25006 C varants in which the applicant seeks to demolish the existing home and replace it with a new home at 48 Elm
Street Somerset block 70301 lot 17 in the R10H zone Mr Chairman I'll give a um summary of the application Uh this is an application uh related to the
construction of a a new single family house The property is located in the uh East Milstone area which is in the R10 residential zone and the historic overlay Uh the property has an existing single family home on it The proposal
would uh uh tear down the existing house and build a new one Uh it's my understanding that the applicant has um come on board the township historic commission on a number of occasions I believe up to three or four times back and forth Um and that the plan that's before the board at this point
incorporates the comments um that were received by the histo commission Uh I'm just going to go through this there's kind of cool 3D renderings here showing what the house would look like Um so this is the house as viewed from um from Elm Street uh obviously the front of the
house The houses that are in white are the um existing surrounding homes So you can see the scale of the proposed home uh in context to the homes on either side of the street Um it also shows the uh the details uh the architectural
details of the house again all of which uh have been reviewed and approved by the township historic commission It was also sent to the uh reviewed by the DNR Canal Commission um which um opined favorably on the application Um and then
there's a two-car garage proposed behind the proposed house Uh these are the two-dimensional um elevations of the proposed dwelling Um and then again some more shots of the uh context of the proposed home to the homes to either
side uh on Elm Street Again showing kind of consistent uh scale and setbacks to the homes on either side Uh and then lastly I'll show the site plan U because the site plan shows uh there there are obviously it's before you tonight because there's there are a few
variances The first variance is for front yard setback The requirement in the zone is 25 ft and the proposal would place the house 13t back uh from the front property line Um the existing is 9
uh I'm sorry is uh I think it's it's less I can't tell I'm not sure if it's labeled but it's definitely less Um and no you know actually it's 13 The face of the house is 13 the uh proposed
house the the main portion of the house is actually further back with the front the covered porch being that same 13 foot set uh distance backwards And then there's two additional variances One is for building coverage where 20% is permitted and they're uh just over that
at 21.3 and then an impervious coverage variance uh where 30% is permitted and 30.87 is proposed Um with respect to that um Mr Tropiano I'm sure could speak to this better than I can since I wasn't at
the historic commission U but it's my understanding that the historic commission required that the garage be placed behind the house Um and there's also an 8-foot setback that's required for that accessory structure Um so I'll
show the plan here Um basically you know in my opinion there's kind of you know in order to meet the 8oot setback they have to I'll kind of use my I'll use my cursor here You know if the house if the garage was right on the property line they could move the garage up because
they could pull right into the garage In order to access this garage you have to have this kind of scurve to get around the house and into that garage that's creating some additional impervious Um so that's essentially the application Again that's the the the amount that I
understand from the um you know the back and forth with the historic commission If you have any questions for Mr Tropiano he obviously better able to answer the review by the historic commission than I can Okay First we'll have you sworn in Are
either or both of you going to testify i'm probably going to be Is your mic on is your mic on Mr Tropion of the It should be Yeah Okay Okay You might want to move it slightly closer Thank you Is that better yeah that's good Could you raise your right hand please testimony
you're about to give is truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth to help you God Yes State your full name Spell your last name for the record and your address Sereno Tropiano Jr T R O P E A N O
And your current address is oh my current address is 23 Schindler Court Somerset New Jersey your presentation sir What Mr Healey presented to the board basically what your intentions are It is
Yes Exactly Is there anything you'd like to add to it uh no I think he was pretty accurate in that everything we did we did with with the historic commission helped us guide their guidance on what they you know initially were finally
approved You know they asked for a garage They we gave them a garage We uh they asked that it not be on street We made sure that and we were in agreement with all those things by the way We didn't begrudgingly do any of that We we like the idea of what they asked us to
do So okay I don't want to make up questions Okay Questions Anybody else i I I have a couple questions the now your does your your front porch now is it similar to to your neighbors on the left
and to the right in terms of the distance from the street it is Yeah it actually the house the main house itself is just a couple of feet further back like on the side that's not the the like the if we were facing it the left side
is the dining area and the right side is the porch and the porch actually extends about 2 feet more than the dining room wall Mhm But that's in alignment with both both the houses on either side And actually a little as you continue down the street it's almost every single
house And the only houses that are not at that level are houses that have big lots and then they're set back and they've got double or triple lots Are you are you uh is this a um a project where you're going to build a new house
and then sell it or are you going to move into this house this is the house we intend to live in Have you lived in East Milstone before no we've lived in Somerset since 2013 Okay Bob just so you know your question about the setback relative to the homes the
architect did a really cool 3D rendering that shows that the the house in brown is proposed and the houses in gray are the existing homes to either side So it shows again the the scale of the house and the setback in relation to the surrounding homes
I I think the part of the project that concerns me a little is the uh fact that you're instead of being 30 uh uh uh 30% coverage you've got 37% Is there anything you can do uh to reduce that
percent uh well the only thing we could possibly do is move the garage closer to the house And then as you if you look at the the survey part you can kind of see that that driveway ends up being I mean all the like it's basically I'm going to
be turning and kind of right at the corner of my house Um all right We if you look at it we even went through the pains of taking out the impervious the imperous surfaces between the tire tracks Right I saw that But that was
only at the front part not when you got into the back Yeah And I think the architect did that because they were saying that we're going to need a little more you know that turning We're going to end up running right over that Anyway one of the things that the architect did offer was that he did push the
impervious to the lot line but he felt that that was necessary because again tires don't go perfectly when you're backing up to get out And but and and then the only other thing I can think of is he's got the concrete walk and if we
do you know like slate pieces we're going to pick up a couple of percent maybe not even a percent I guess Yeah You know there's not that you know that much there I think I think the thing that we're battling here is that this is an undersized lot and because of that
all of these things kind of fall into become an issue And then the other thing that I would add is that there are actually materials that are considered pvious but not by the township So like there are actually pavers and and
different things that you can lay in the thing But when we asked about that we were told that those aren't considered in Somerset or Franklin Township as pvious surfaces So the only thing basically what they said the only thing we consider impervious is grass and
mud So so we it made our choices simple I guess but and I just want to confirm is that all the structures will be torn down including the including the uh the
building that's off your property Yeah there's Yeah there's a and there's a note on the on the survey I think above where we where we can see it that says that states that even things that are not on the property because the existing shed actually crosses over the lot line
Okay And yeah and it's a again there are photos in that packet that show the condition of the house and the shed is probably worse than the house So So you are going to get rid of it yes Yes Okay Yeah when you see the uh the the one on
the right that's ultimately you'll see that there's no shed or anything left anymore And that's ultimately where what we plan to do A garage and a house and that's it Okay that's all my questions Anyone else
okay Mr Chair I guess you could May I no Yes Go ahead Mr Trobiano Just for the purposes of the record you're from you you are in possession of the technical review committee memorandum of April 8th of this year from the township
Uh I'm not sure what that is I probably I know I got all the materials but I'm not sure Just for the purpose of the record Mr This one Sheepard Uh yes Okay Mr Shepard asked you about the impervious coverage My question is you're also seeking a variance for
maximum building coverage Could you describe um why you're seeking a doubling of them of the building coverage just just the size of the home because we added the porch in the front and the back and I and we added the porch in the
back because we knew that with the issue with a patio or anything like that We were going to end up over and we just thought you know we'd rather have a screened in porch And you will comply with all the review comments set forth in that memo yes
Thank you Thank you Mr Chairman Okay We'll let the record show that there's really no public here to open up to We're assuming you're here Also when you because you've sent the notices to
neighbors and people within 200 ft and they've chosen not to be here Obviously no one else is here so we don't need to open to the public Any motion or any other discussion
if there's no further discussion I'll make a motion Um uh I move that we grant uh uh Mr Mr Tropiano and Miss Quilty Um the variance is needed uh to build uh
the house uh shown in the plans for 48 Elm Street block 73.01 lot 17 uh giving them uh uh C variances for uh building coverage and
also impervious coverage and also setback right no Yes It's the the front setback 25's required 13 proposed Yeah Okay So those three three there exist But for the purposes of the record the setback is
currently the same as the existing setback according to the architect's plans Yeah it's it's it's still a problem but just for the purpose of the record Yeah it is it is the existing but since the old house is being torn down and new one going up they they need the
variance again I I agree with you but for the record need a second Yes I'll second Cheryla yes Richard Proanic yes Alan Rich yes Gary Rosenthal yes Robert Shepard yes
Faras Khan yes And Robert Thomas yes Good luck with that Congratulations Thank you all Okay we have something slightly different we haven't done for a while So we need to um You got to talk to your mic The mic
We have something additional to do before we adjourn that we don't usually haven't had for a while We need to have a a resolution to move into executive session to discuss some legal matters Uh I move that we uh that the
board move into executive session to discuss various legal matters I'll second Cheryl yes Richard yes Alan Rich yes Rosenthal yes Robert Shepard yes
Baron Michael yes And Chairman yes Okay we will now have to ask you to leave Emil you can just shut the Mr Chairman we need a motion to come out of executive session
Someone make a motion I move that we uh come out of uh executive session We have a second All in favor signify by saying I I Anybody opposed anyone want to stay in executive session 8:34 Let the record
reflect that all members of the zoning board of adjustment present the commencement of the executive session are present the recommencement of the open session as well as the board attorney the board planner and the board secretary the board attorney gave an update on a remand hearing regarding
1784 capital holdings Discussed with the board certain obligations and requirements that we are looking for Gave them some direction from a legal point of view indicated that he will contact applicants council relative to a a hearing date and b some information
provided by members of the board Mr Chairman I am asking that the board approve a hearing on the remand hearing from Judge Menon for 1784 Capital Holdings for Thursday May 22nd
2025 at 7:30 p.m or soon thereafter the matter may be heard Do we officially have a motion and a second and a vote motion second We need a motion to schedule this on the agenda for May 22nd
I move that we uh schedule 1784 1784 Capital Capital Holdings Capital Holdings uh hearing on uh May uh 22nd uh
2025 at 7:30 p.m or as soon thereafter as they may be heard A second Cheryl Bethia yes Richard Proanic yes Alan Rich yes Gary Rosenthal yes Robert Shepard yes The other members can vote
for that Doesn't mean they can Okay Uh Faras Khan yes Michael Doy yes And Robert Thomas yes With that Mr Chairman the appropriate motion is a motion to adjourn I move that we adjourn Second All in
favor i against a happy Easter Happy holiday