I'm making this announcement in compliance with the open public's meetings act being chapter 231 public law 1975 laws of the state of New Jersey. The planning board secretary has prepared a schedule of the meeting of the planning board of the burrow of Kennaworth for the year 2026 and has
posted a true copy of this schedule on the bulletin board located at the front entrance of Burrow Hall and has mailed true copies of this schedule to the local source in the Star Ledger as it m and is maintaining a copy of this schedule in Burough Hall. Accordingly, the notice requirements of the open
public meetings act have been satisfied in regards to this meeting. Can we stand for the pledge of allegiance, please? I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Roll call. >> Mr. >> Here, >> Mr. Davis >> here. >> Mr. Clementi >> here. >> Mr. Perno, [clears throat] >> Mr. >> Oh, I'm sorry. Mr. Pantina
>> here. >> Mr. Nio [clears throat] >> here. Mr. Sader >> here >> and Mr. Lidd here. >> Okay. Uh we're all here. Um Mr. DeMarco. >> Uh yes, chair. So I know there's a lot of people here today that don't normally
come to planning boards. Uh I just want to explain the parameters of what is happening tonight, what's on our agenda. Uh we do have two resolutions that will be voted on. There is no public comment on those resolutions. They are just a
vote. It is not open to the public. There will be no comment for either one of those resolutions. We will then move on to the application. We have two applications tonight. Those applications, depending on how long they take, could conceivably take all night.
What I mean by all night, the board has a condition and a standing rule that by 10:00 we do not take any new witnesses or start any new testimony. whatever witness is in the middle of testifying, we try to get to a point where that can get concluded and then we finish the
board's business at that time. Uh so for all those that are here for items that are not on the agenda, uh you may be here for a while. You are asked to respect the fact that there are two applications on here. Although it may
not be important to you, it is important to those applicants. Uh it is their houses. uh they are here to try to get approvals. Uh they have attorneys, they've invested money, they've invested time, and I would ask that we all understand that and allow them to have
their case heard by this board. >> Thank you, Mr. DeMarco. Um communications. I'm sorry. Uh is there a motion for approval of the minutes for 4 uh 28 26 and for 519
26 special meeting? >> Motion made by Mr. Mazio, seconded by Mr. Clemente. All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. Okay. Resolution application 2602 Coravee Major Subdivision. Mr. DeMarco. >> Yes. There's before the board is the
memorialization of the action that was taken by the board at its April 28th, 2026 meeting. Essentially, it's a resolution granting a major subdivision to Corweave, Inc. for premises located at 2000 Galapan Hill Road designated as
block 181, lot 1.02. The applicant appeared um before this board in April 28th and provided testimony by their surveyor, Mr. Matthew Cickle. Uh essentially uh he did submit a with the application and
presented to the board is the major subdivision plan uh which was dated originally just December 16, 2025 and revised March 3rd, 2026. Um the applicant did agree to accept all comments by the board's professionals
namely that of Darren Massie and Maldika the engineer and planner respectively. Um essentially the existing lot is approximately 35.9 acres and has roughly 1,290 ft of frontage on Gallop and Hill Road. The property is
located in the 2000 Galap Hill Road development plan and the property was proposed or is proposed to be divided into four separate lots to be identified or proposed to be identified as block 181 lot.6 approximately 6.9 acres block 181 lot
1.0105 approximately 13.8 [clears throat] acres block 181 lot 1.01 01 04 approximately 7.1 acres. Block 181, lot 1.0103
approximately 7.9 acres. Um the board did take testimony uh listen to the public and various questions were raised. Uh it was acknowledged by the board that they were there for the limited scope of just the
subdivision. Um there was no site plan, no building plans or structures or improvements. Uh and then the board did vote and at that point in time it was Thank you, Mr. DeMarco. Uh for the resolution 26-2,
is there a motion to approve the resolution? >> Motion approved by Mr. Lady, seconded by Mr. Mazio. Roll call, please. >> Mr. David, >> yes. >> Mr. Yes. >> Mr. Darno. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mazio. >> Yes. >> Mr. Vali.
>> Yes. >> That's it. That's everyone. >> Okay. Next application is number 257 minor subdivision Alishik Enterprises. Mr. DeMarco. >> Correct. That resolution is a resolution denying minor subdivision and a variance
relief to Elshik Enterprises LLC for premises designated as block 43 lot 12 known as 530 Monroe Avenue. Uh the matter was heard on January 23rd and March 24th, 2026. Um, the applicant did appear to do a uh
to seek a subdivision and subdivide property into two lots with a variance pursuant to uh relating to the premises known as block 43 lot 12 uh as depicted on the tax map of the bar. In particular, um the applicant was
seeking a subdivision um and a variance for the side setback. [snorts] They did present testimony of their board uh to the board of their land surveyor engineer Edward G. Uh the
excellent art architect Roger Winkl also testified. [snorts] Um they did agree to accept all of the recommendations by the um board professionals.
The subject cited was identified as block 43 lot 12 in the borrow's tax records and has a street address as stated as 530 Monroe Avenue. Uh it is a vacant corner lot located at 530 Monroe Avenue between 22nd Street and North
21st Street. The property is in the R5 medium density single family residential zone and the applicant is seeking um as stated a lot um with a reduced side setback.
Various witnesses were test uh testified as to the condition of the lot. On several occasions, the applicant was asked directly by the board uh if they could uh make the two properties conforming. At both times
or in several occasions when asked by the board directly and by professionals, uh the answer was given the negative uh that he did not prefer. He did not even consider it. Uh as a result, um the
board then took a vote and the advocate application was denied for its variance and it suffers. >> Thank you, Mr. Demarco. Is there a motion to um have the denial approved? I guess
that's how you would state. >> You vote yes on the denial. >> You would you vote yes. >> Deny it. You vote yes. >> You vote yes. If you you uh want to vote yes on a denial. If you it's a denial, vote yes. If not, no. Is there a motion? [clears throat] >> I make a motion. >> Motion by Mr. Pantina to vote to deny
that >> to deny the application. Why aren't >> you justing the resolution? >> It's just a motion to approve the resolution. >> A motion to approve the resolution made by Mr. Pina, second by Mr. Mazio. Was it? >> No, I can't vote on >> Oh, you can. I mean, I'm sorry. Mr. Scaderi. Okay. Roll call.
>> Mr. Cerno. >> Yes. >> Mr. David? >> Yes. >> Mr. Fmenti? >> Yes. >> Mr. Pantina? >> Yes. >> Mr. Bowi? >> Yes. >> And Mr. Scaderi? >> Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. DeMarco and board members. Okay. The next application is 2601 structure in the
rear yard. Um, Diaz is the name 415 Lafayette Avenue, block 12, lot number nine. Mr. DeMarco, as a matter of procedure, do we need to swear in our professionals and any of the witnesses that Mr. >> We should do that at this time. Uh, Mr.
Goodman, I don't know who the witnesses are. Ed Deck is my engineer surveyor and uh somebody dropped it. Dropped it. >> Is it just Mr. Jack? >> No. Um the owner of the property
Diaz is here. Uh she um uh is Portuguese and Brazilian. >> We'll we'll deal with her separately. So that Miss Kathy and Mazi please. Uh do you swear the testimony
shall give before this board shall be the truth? The whole truth of the truth. >> We'll deal with the applicant. She has an interpret. >> Okay. >> Swearing both of them. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. Uh good evening everybody. Uh the applicant Mis Diaz is the owner of 415 Lafayette Avenue. Uh she's here tonight to uh ask for uh C2
uh variance relief uh special reason uh to allow for her patio to remain uh covered. Why is she asking for this? Uh in order to mitigate unique and ongoing impacts uh caused by
the adjoining municipal park and the municipal trees. Uh if uh Ed Deck could position the uh easel with the picture. Uh uh sometimes a picture tells a thousand
words. And as you can see the uh the house in question uh has a covering of the entire patio. Uh it also you can see uh the soccer goal that backs up right to her properties. There's no netting.
Uh and you can also >> I'm sorry. Perhaps Mr. Deck could hold the uh the picture in front of you so that you would have a good view of it. Well, that's somewhat better. >> Is that better, Mr. Chair? >> Yeah, a little better though. You can
see, guys. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> So, as you can see that we have the soccer go right backing up to her property. No netting. There's a lot of playing that goes on. Obviously, that's the purpose of a park. Uh we have um uh
two uh trees that back up right to the uh back of her property. These are uh sweet gum uh trees. Uh there's constant droppings of the spiky balls. Uh obviously the leaves etc. And so what
Miss Das has done and I certainly on her behalf apologized for not knowing the rules to go and get the proper permits. uh uh people who come into our country sometimes just want government to leave us alone. We just do what we have to do
to survive. And I think uh in that case she does uh reflect her apology. There was no disrespect in not following the rules to get permits. Um uh but there are extraordinary conditions that other
residents in the area do not face. uh the covered deck which or the covered patio I believe is a reasonable response to the problems that she had and and so tonight um Mr. Deck will uh testify to
what is there. He is the surveyor and uh Miss Dios is here to answer any questions uh through her interpreter Andre Andrea Torres. So without further ado, I'll ask uh Mr. deck to uh uh
testify as to what this property is like. >> Uh the property >> Mr. Deck, if I may, I know [clears throat] that you've been before this board a few times. Are all your credentials still in order and up to date? >> Yes, they are. >> Okay. I find that to be fine with us,
everyone here. Okay, you can proceed, Mr. Deck. >> I think uh all of you should have Mr. DEX survey which is dated I believe November 7th, 2025. And my first question uh Ed is have you
been to the property since then? And does the survey that you did in November reflect what's there today? >> Yes, I was at the property the night of last month's schedule meeting and uh nothing has changed in what was there
presently which was shown on my plan. >> Okay. Could you uh tell a board what is there? Now >> we um the property situated at the corner of North 16th Street Lafayette Avenue. There's presently a 2 and a half
story current dwelling and then alongside it there's sidewalks and a porch and also a asphalt driveway area for a car in the rear yard. And that's the area of
our our um presentation tonight is a um gazebo or overhang a shedded area which is called gazebo and that is a cover and you can
see that on the uh plan underneath the trees there right there and uh that's over a concrete patio and mainly to the right of it as shown on my survey is a small shed. Uh as you can see the
wall there's a wall that's shown represented by a double line that's shown on our property approximately. >> Excuse me, Mr. Deck. The secretary asked if you could just speak up and speak into the mic. We're having a hard time hearing you and recording the
conversation. Thank you, sir. >> Sure. Sorry. >> Is it on? Yeah, I think so. Right. Yeah. Right. So, um the area of focus is that area behind the house. It's called the gazebo on my plant and concrete patio.
And it can be also shown seen on that picture. You also see the white vinyl fence that surrounds the rear of the property. It's mounted on top of that concrete retaining wall. Uh, and it putts up against the
fence that's uh on the um on the uh applicant's property in that fence that belongs to the town, the barrel itself. Um, and the two trees are
also shown. Um, I have a blow up of this I'd like to pass to the Just for the record, Mr. It's just a blow up of what was already submitted. uh had an additional shell in the trees
uh investigated on the ground circles. We're going to mark this then as exhibit. >> Yes. >> Exhibit A. >> Yes. >> Would you mark this? Uh Mr. Demarco >> just exhibit A. >> Exhibit A
because it does contain the difference. It has it's not just a a blow up of what he submitted. It also has the depiction of where the trees are. >> Okay. Thank you. >> As that um exhibit A shows, we're showing two trees that butt up against
the wall itself very close to within a foot. >> And does the canopy of the trees hang over uh Muskas's property? Yeah, I would say at least almost half of the tree of the canopy extends beyond onto her
property. >> And when you say they're right up against the fence, how how far are the trees from her property or where the uh covering for her patio is? >> Show them on the uh hands out ahead. The trees are approximately the base or
trunk of the tree is approximately a foot away from the property. >> Okay. And uh the soccer goal, where is that related? >> That's approximately 4T away from the property. >> Uh Mr. Deck, does the uh
acting as a surveyor and as a engineer, uh does the nature of this covering um impact at all water runoff and onto the property uh any of the neighbors? No, the uh runoff is generated from the
rear of the applicant's property. It's not impacting the resident property [cough] the [clears throat] west of the applicant. If anything, the water will go over the detailing wall onto the enjoyment field
being excessive [clears throat] because majority of the property, this is the rear of the corner property. So, there shouldn't be any impact on traffic or car view etc because of this rear uh roof on the patio. >> Right. the uh any uh structures that are
located on the property are far enough back from the site of Watt Street. >> I have no further questions for Mr. >> I was just wondering uh Mr. De
you referenced the tree and the Saka doll and it's a foot away from the property. >> What are you what are you trying to tell the board? that the tree is too close to her property >> or trying to uh I guess the uh the trees impact the applicant's property by not
so much trunk and retreat but the canopy overhead. >> Okay. So >> and and soccer ball is in close proximity to her property. The people playing soccer might take the ball over the over the soccer ball onto our
but that would exist even if the um the the whole structure wasn't there. If it was just a fence, the ball could still go over the top, right? You live next door to a a playground play area. I mean, that could happen regardless, right? I mean, if that's the point,
>> if I could suggest, Mr. Chairman, the point that we're trying to make is that if you're uh sitting on your patio, yes, the ball could go there, but it's not going to hit you in the head if you have a covering. And and and that's the point
uh that Miss Mus Dios is is trying to make. She just wants to enjoy her property. And she's not telling the town to take the trees down. She's not telling the town to move to soccer. All she's saying is if I'm living there, I just want to be able to enjoy my
property. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Tech, can you enumerate the um the relief that we're that you're requesting? I don't think we I I didn't catch it. It's >> the relief that we're asking for. >> Yeah. >> Yes. The relief we're asking for is
there is a um your land use ordinance uh permits only a 10 by 10 covering and her covering is larger than that covering the entire patio that she's utilizing. So the relief that we're asking for is a
uh larger covering for her patio than the ordinance permits. And also there's a sideyard uh I believe a sideyard uh >> ship. No, the Yeah, I I believe we're too close. Uh
>> oh, as far as the different variances. Yeah, >> we have the side yard set. >> Yeah. >> So, our parameters are a 10 x 10. What is the size? >> 25 by 30.
So, >> I I'll just um I'm not sure if I understand. We can only put a 10 x 10, but if someone came in and requested an addition, there's plenty of coverage on this slot that we could have the the uh it could have been
contemplated. No, >> you're saying you think >> so. It's an the 10 x 10 is what considered an accessory structure. Is that is that the >> the rules for pergola are I think you have specific rules for pergolas and I believe it's 10 by 10 is the covering
that's >> because this is considered or classified as a pergola as opposed to >> I believe the town has classified that. >> Let me ask a question. So, um, if the property owner came in before she built this, before the property owner
built this structure and asked the board to put up a 10x10 structure, it would be permitted. It would be okay. If the property owner came in and asked to put up a 26 and a quarter by I don't know 30
foot structure, the board would listen to testimony and have the option to say sure or no because it's only 10x10 is required if permitted. Yet the property owner did
not come to the board, did not go to the town for permits, did not ask for permission, is just asking for forgiveness, I guess, and asking that somewhat of a hardship be asked because it's already up, right? Sounds right.
Well, um, >> and really the trees in the soccer thing has nothing to do with because >> I think I think the tree and the soccer field have everything to do with the reason that she's asking for the relief. Uh, putting aside for a second uh, her
inability or unwillingness, not really unwillingness, ignorance of not knowing the proper procedure to come before the town. uh her reason is to be able to enjoy her property, the the trees. I
mean, ask yourself, look at the property. If it was your situation, would you like to be sitting on your patio and be uh bombarded with uh leaves and bird droppings and uh uh sticky
balls and potential soccer balls? or would you take some action to try and safeguard your area so that you could enjoy your backyard? >> Would you also think that I'm sorry, Nick, you have the floor? Excuse me. >> Sorry. I'm sorry, Chair. Is that why we have ordinances though to maintain
certain things and you as a lawyer should know that? And >> Okay, you're absolutely right. There's no excuse there's no excuse for ignorance of the law. No excuse for ignorance of the law. And and I'm here simply to say
that Mr. Diaz uh does not speak English. She was not familiar with our our laws, our ordinances. She did not know the proper procedure. And yes, she's here to ask for forgiveness, not for permission. But it's not out of malice. It's not out of disrespect. It's simply the the
situation that's before us. >> Okay. But I thought you should open that rather than trees and >> Yeah. the the uh Mr. Lady. >> So, who built who put up the structure? >> Do we know? >> Well, who built the covering?
>> Yeah. Who built the structure? >> Yeah. I mean, nothing. That's the question. Because I mean, a builder in town should know should know the law basically. Can we run? >> Yeah. She she was responsible in getting people to build it. Yes.
>> So, so apparently the builders had no idea. Well, what the code was. It's just that this happens more frequently than you think. People build a structure, a builder build something, doesn't do anything correctly, follow
rules, and then the situation comes up more more than we'd like, I think. >> Well, if if if what you're saying, sir, is that there are many instances similar to ours, I kind of >> pardon,
>> which Okay, I'm sorry. I I kind of think our situation is unique simply because we are up against uh basically the municipal uses that conflict with our enjoyment. Uh and we're not asking the
municipality to do anything. We're just trying to make the best use of our property. And I think in that sense we're different than many of the instances that I think you're referring to. >> Uh Mr. Basio, >> when when was this built?
>> Mr. Goodman, right now you're on the border of testifying. So, I don't know if you want to >> wait. You want to swear in these people? >> I I just >> I'm just saying you're answering a lot of questions. >> Well, I'm getting I'm getting the information from them, but uh let's swear them in so they can answer. >> Yeah. I didn't know if we're going to go
one question or 10. >> Yeah, let's uh let's >> Yeah, I mean I think it's easier for you. Right. >> Right. It's just >> Okay. Andrea and >> so who's the interpreter first? >> Andrea to >> Andrea. Torres. >> Yeah.
>> Okay. How are you? >> Good. Do you swear affirm that the translation you're going to conduct shall be true and accurate to the best of your ability? >> Yes, I do. And then I need you to translate for me. >> So I didn't say anything. So you nothing
to translate yet. So hey Miss Diaz, uh do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. >> And Miss Torres, just for the record, you're not certified as a translator. You're a friend. You're going to do the best you can.
>> Okay. If you don't understand something. >> Yep. Okay. If you need more time or you need somebody to repeat a question. All right. I'd rather you get it correct >> then not. >> Okay. >> All right. Thank you. >> Can I um ask I'm sorry I didn't hear
your name. The translator. >> Andrea Torres. >> Andrea Torres. Can I ask you a question? >> Of course. >> Do you live in town? >> No, I live in Newark. >> New York. Okay. How long are you friends with Miss Diaz? >> More than 20 years.
>> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> So, ma'am, if you stand closer because I don't need to hear her answer. I need to hear your translation. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Go ahead, Mr. >> I think there I think
>> last question was I believe um uh Andrea asked when it was built >> and who built it >> and who built it. August 2025 >> and was my friend. >> Did you say 2025?
>> And it was her friend. >> Yes. >> Is he a contractor? And does he have a contractor's license? He's a contractor. >> He's a contractor. >> So, he knows he knows the law. >> I don't know.
>> As a contractor, he would know better, right? >> He only does decks. Yes, Mr. Coming from the officer on October 29th of 2024. Oh, because it was done in uh sections
that was one was complete. Yeah. See, I don't know. The complaint was 2024. Correct. >> Says October 29th. [clears throat] >> No. >> Oh, she's saying is it two years
already? Oh, [clears throat] in her mind was 2025. >> Okay. >> Because it wasn't done like all once was done in sections and she's kind of confused. >> Yeah. She's confusing the year. >> Okay.
>> Okay. So, we have a paper in front of us. I believe this was by the applicant who made these statements. In October 20, October 29, 2024, the department received a complaint regarding the property. The first notice
of violation was sent out to Miss Diaz, but the property owner did not respond. And if I'm going too fast, slow me down. I'm going to just read the second part, so maybe you could combine it. The second notice was sent out the property
to the property owner along with a summon and the property owner failed to appear in court. The owner response eventually acknowledged the violation, contacted the office to correct the
gazebo and figure out how to proceed. Feb February 28th, 2025, the owner filed a zoning application that acknowledged the framed gazebo 2025 of March. The zoning application
was denied and that's why you're here tonight. So, this has been going on since 2024. [clears throat] in her mind she thought was 2025. >> I can understand she might be nervous and confused and we're going to take that into consideration as well. But
what the the the case in front of us here is that you're asking for a hardship, but it's clear that this has been going on for quite some time and I understand there's a language barrier and we're sensitive to that. But we also know that the contractor who built this knows better and knew what he was doing.
And we also know that when you purchase a house next to a park, you [clears throat] have some things that you have to look the other way with, like a ball coming over the top of the fence, but you also get the beauty of the park. >> So, it's a give and take situation. So
it's going to be hardressed to set a precedent that when a 10x10 area is allowed by the ordinance and [clears throat] you build a 36 by 20 five, you put the board in an awkward
position because what will happen I believe is that everybody in town will start building decks and gazeos and things in the back of the house and come in and ask for forgiveness. So you throw all the ordinances out the window
pretty much. when she moved to this town, she moved because it was better for the her her daughters to go to school here. And um she didn't really realize the the point of the park. She was like um excited
about that her daughters was going to go to a better high school. So she was moving from Newark and she thought, "Let me move to a city where these schools are better. I want the best for my daughter." She didn't realize she was going to have that problems with the
park on the side of the house. >> Is not it's not only like the whole situation people camp I don't really have like privacy or privacy. >> I have pictures people may camp around
the the you know the fans. So what? Okay. >> Miss Andrea. >> Yes. >> I I think the planner would like to ask you a question. >> Of course. >> Mr. Okay.
>> Mr. Dexter, stand in front of the mic. because you kill him and after rewatch Mr. deck. Just for board's understanding, could you recite the variances that you see? >> Uh the variance would be the size of the gazebo. We're allowed 10 by 10. We have
25 by approximately 30 by 25. >> I believe the ordinance says 100 square ft and what's being proposed is 535. >> Correct. >> Right. Okay. The next one, >> the only other one I'm aware of is the sideyard setbacks.
>> Okay. I'm referring to um our memo by high rule associates dated May 18, May 26. Um there are a couple of other on variances that you need. One is set back to the gazebo. Uh the [clears throat]
structure which is 535 ft. Um the rear property line set back wired is 10 ft and what has been proposed is or what exists is 5.88 ft. Is that correct? >> Correct. >> Um the sideyard again um I think our uh
memo the way it defines what the front yard and sideyard is. Uh this property by the park uh would be the rear property line and by the sideyard seat would be the side property line and the adjacent neighbor would also be the side
property line. So that setback is only 5.17 ft. >> That's also a variance. >> That's correct. Um, in your testimony today, I think uh what the board heard was the trees are um I forget how many feet from the
fence. >> Approximately a foot from the property line. >> Probably a foot and the goal post is about 4t from the property line. >> From the pro uh yes from the property. >> So if this was a compliant gazebo, the setback would be almost 14 ft.
>> 10 ft plus those. It's correct. >> Is that correct? So um you know in terms of the impact from the adjacent park would be minimal if this was a compliant setback. >> Well it would be further away that's for sure.
>> Okay. Uh the second question what's the height of the entire fence including the wall. >> It's a 6ft high fence plus the wall is elevated possibly 2 to 3 ft. >> So in total it'll probably be 8 to 9 ft.
>> Probably eight. Okay. And how much do you think the goal post height would be? >> Six. >> Okay. Really? It doesn't in the picture it doesn't look like it's at 6 ft, but I may be wrong. Um and there's also a chain linking fence in front of it.
Right. Right. >> Correct. So there are a couple of um things that are um kind of negating the impact that that we've been at least the board has been told about today in terms of the the ball or whoever else is
playing over there and the impact that's going to happen on the on [clears throat] this subject site. >> Excuse me. Mika is is Mistia okay? >> No. >> Why don't you give her Can someone give her a seat, please? Why don't you have a take a seat right
here? >> Thank you very much for moving over. >> Miss Diaz, would you like a bottle of water? I make a motion that the board take a 5minute recess made by Mr. Davis, second by Mr. Massie. All in favor? back into
session. Motion >> so moved. >> Moved by Mr. David, seconded by Mr. Mazio. All in favor? >> I. >> Okay, we're back in session. Um, we're we're sorry that she doesn't feel well. We're going to handle this as best we
can. However, there are some questions that I think Mr. Deck and Mr. Goodman can answer without putting Miss Diaz through that that stress. Um, Mr. Lady. >> Yeah, just you examining property. So, Um, I mean this is not just a cover. I
mean I'm looking at what's included under this cover is like a um almost looks like a stone fireplace or it's a stove, a kitchen, um grills and everything else under there. Um
that's what's in there for sure or can you comment on that part of this whole >> It just seems to be it's more than just a cover to cover trees in a ball. >> It's considered I believe called an outdoor kitchen.
>> Okay. >> I have an additional question. So does the It looks like the I guess it's a stove or a barbecue fireplace. that extends through the roof. The chimney extends through the roof of this structure. Is that
accurate? >> That I'm not aware of. >> Based on the pictures we're seeing. >> Based on the picture, it's accurate. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um, Ma, I'm sorry, Mika. Would you like to have some questions? >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, so
I'm sorry for uh the applicant, but uh Mr. De just technical questions. So we've established there are setback variances from the rear property line, the side property line and the size of the disease. Right? >> That's correct. >> Three variances there. Um I believe the
survey also shows there's a shed on the property. >> Correct. >> And uh we noted that again the shed is located in the front yard because of the sideyards too >> on the street. >> That's a variance. I'm not sure if that
was ever uh brought into uh conformance or ever asked permission for as well as the setback of the shed from the front property line is only 3 ft. Is that shed remain attached? >> Um
yes. >> Okay. So you would need variances for that. So in in in total and without talking about the front yard set back which is an existing nonconformity uh the property does need five variances
with what is existing over there. What is the height of the visible? >> Uh I never measured it but uh it appears it's even with the bottom of the second floor. I would say approximately about 14 ft high.
>> 15 ft high. 14. >> Um I I believe >> so the documentation shows that it's 12 ft high just so you're aware that was submitted for the hand sketch. And the reason why Mik is asking is 12 ft is the maximum height for a gazebo. So I think that that
uh you might want to just refer to the application documentation you put in with it. I don't know I don't believe it was from your office but Mr. Goodman might know there's a hand sketch. >> I believe I you know put in um I would I would recommend if the board
was looking at this that we would need to make sure a licensed architect tells us something because otherwise is it a variance or not a variance is still in the um all right so we've established
currently there are five uh variances uh Mr. Depp could you for the board's perspective provide the positive and I believe Mr. Goodman said it's a C2 criteria that you're seeking. >> Could you please provide the positive and the negative criteria for these?
>> I could I could certainly comment on that although I'm not a licensed professional but the uh the positive aspect would be that it enjoy her property to the fullest extent that she's entitled to. Uh it doesn't have
any negative impact. There are no residential properties to the rear enem. And it's uh far enough and high enough blocked. Most of the block at least the incinerate uh activity that'll be going
on there is blocked from the street by the incline and slope of the property more. So the wall and the fence on top. Uh [clears throat] as far as negative goes, uh it'll be presented in negative.
It's going to impact the neighborhood. >> So the testimony that was just provided is the positive impact that it's blocked from the street view. I mean the testimony was that the height of the fence is approximately 9 ft. Wouldn't that already block everything in the
street view? In other words, people in the street cannot see over the fence, >> but it's the grading of the property is as such that people already cannot see over the fence >> over the existing fences. Correct.
>> Yeah. >> So requiring this zebos that is 500 square ft where only 100 square ft is permitted um there is an impact on the surrounding neighborhood. >> Wow.
it it I guess it could be considered a negative impact only I think when someone's opinion that it's intrusive [snorts] or ugly or doesn't fit into the neighborhood but it's certainly pretty
you know from that picture you really can't tell that there's even there at least I can't draw Um, Mr. Chair, that's >> Mr. Scaderi. Thank you. Uh, >> I just have two questions. One I'm not sure that you guys can answer. Uh, first
one is, did she approach the town to put a net, any kind of netting up to block the balls from coming into her yard? >> It's my understanding uh that she has had no conversations with regard to the soccer field. Correct. And then the second question is
I know we keep saying 535 square ft but if you look at the measurements it's more like 800 square f feet is that was 25 is 20 uh 30 ft by approximately 25 ft. >> Yeah. 26 by 30 and change. So more like
>> So which is it? Is it >> more like 800 ft? Close to 7 >> 780. >> Yeah. 780. >> 780. >> So we went from 100 to 525 to 800.
>> Is that all you have, Mr. Scader? >> That's all I have. >> Mr. Deck, I'm sorry. >> Oh, I didn't see somebody there. engineer. >> Just have one or two minor questions I'm not sure if you're going to be able to answer, but obviously it was brought up by some of the other board members. There's been improvements underneath the gazebo fireplace. There's been a lot of
wiring, lighting, plumbing. Has any of that been designed or checked for code compliance? >> Not not my >> Okay. I just mentioned that because with an outdoor stove through a roof, there might be some concern from the fire
official for a fire sub code review. That all you have, Mr. B? Mr. Deck, in in that picture there, I have a smaller version of it. It looks like to the right of that, that's the small portion of that shed. Is that a shed there?
>> That with that smaller roof, >> there's a porch that's right alongside the building, which has a roof. >> Then in in the next frame, you have 6x6 post with a micro land beam on top catching the roof. Does that roof
structure tie in to the house >> from alongside the building? Yes. From >> So it's part of the house structure now. >> Yes. There's a porch that runs alongside the building. >> What is it next to the building? >> So where that micro
>> a porch that runs alongside the building? >> So >> So it does it's not connected. So it's connect. >> So what you're saying is that this is
like this and when they come out of that living room door the rain water goes into that into that door that's not covered in between the two. >> I don't think so but >> Mr. De is that >> I haven't seen this picture so I can take a picture.
>> You somebody you guys provide somebody provided us. >> Yeah. >> Okay. But there's every picture but that picture like showing what's beyond the microlam beam which
looks like maybe a twoft opening or so before you get to the brick wall of the house >> and I can't imagine that when it rains with that pitch roof that water is diving right into the house. So my
question goes to is the roof structure part of the house >> the roof structure of the gazebo. >> Mr. De take a look at that picture >> and you'll see the fireplace. You'll see what looks like a bar and it's sliding
doors and then you got a microlam beam that goes right across here. So the roof structure goes down like this. The microlam beam is here. The doors are here. You're telling me it You're telling me it stops here and doesn't tie into the house and all that rain water with all of that beautiful work?
>> Well, there appears to be something there. I can't tell from this picture, but I would think that they would have that covered between the edge of the gazebo and the house itself. I don't know if it's an eve from the house that extends to the gazebo. I don't know.
>> Well, something's going on. Um, something's going on. because you wouldn't build this structure and have that drop off of water coming into that. Let's look at what it is >> on a driveby. My impression it wasn't connected.
>> I'd love to. I drove past >> at first blush. It's not connected. >> I'm just wondering if they were going to put gutters [cough] up or something, but it's not finished. They kind of just stopped working. >> You know, in this in this look, it looks like you could see daylight coming through. The reason I'm saying that is because once it's connected to the
house, it's another hole. That's another whole issue. >> I I did drive past and I didn't think it was going to fit, but I wasn't looking specifically. >> There's nothing there, >> Mr. Chair. >> Yes.
>> The other issue is uh planned out that the height limitation is 12 ft. Otherwise, you need a variance. And um I'm a little concerned because we don't know what the exact height is at this point. It's not been presented. I
appreciate Mr. Goodman saying that it's 12 ft. Um but I don't think he went out measured it or there's no evidence of anybody measuring it. So it's unclear whether variance is needed for that also. Um, so better course of action may be to
carry this to allow them to answer some of those questions of the building actually attached, you know, is there a need for a varian for that? Um, that may also give an opportunity for the applicant to recover and provide everyone needed because she was not able
to finish her test. I just put that out there that I'm a little concerned that there may be a unknown variance that we don't decide and by implication someone thinks we do approve it because there's really nothing in front of you to say that it is actually 12. I mean I don't
mean to be rude or disrespectful but I'm a little surprised Mr. Deck that you haven't provided the details around the structure that we're here to either approve or deny this evening. I mean, usually you present the variance relief that's required, things of that nature,
which you have not done tonight. So, I think I would agree with the attorney that we should carry this case, that you should get your ducks in a row, so to speak, and then come back with the information that's required so that the board has all the facts at hand and it may also need to be renoticed depending
upon what you're bringing notice with regards to the variances. I know there's a lot to put in the catch all, but when you go from one to five or maybe six six better sources of action might be to renose that carry it here.
>> Yeah, the board would abs absolutely recommend that this is renoticed. Get all your ducks in a row. I think the board is in agreement with carrying this. >> Mr. Chair, just question. >> Yes, sir. >> So, if there's people here who are against this, can we hear that tonight or should we wait till we hear that?
>> If it's being carried, you have to wait until >> Okay. I mean, if there was somebody here that had a question from Mr. Deck on his testimony >> up to now >> up to now, I would I would prefer because it's fresh for the board and fresh for that person and they might not be able to come. >> Okay.
>> So, if that is the case, then if this part of the testimony is over, Mr. Goodman, then we [clears throat] would have to open it up to the public or for questions about this application >> related to this application to this testimony. >> Would would you like to do that at this point?
>> Yes. Okay. >> Is there anyone from the public that wishes to ask any questions of Mr. Deck related to his testimony so far with regards to this application? >> Seeing none. >> Okay.
>> I make a motion that we carry the case. I guess it would have to be to our September meeting at this point. Right now it's in September based on our our summer schedule and quarum, but we'll let you know when
I'm sorry. I would prefer if we just said it's a meeting so we can notice it and if we don't get to it, we can always carry notice at that point. >> We know the date >> September 22nd. >> September 22nd.
>> Okay. All right. >> Motion made by >> Thank you. >> Well, we got to close it out, right? The motion made by Mr. David, seconded by Mr. Mazio. All in favor? >> Let us just get organized here a second, gentlemen. Give me one minute. Okay.
[clears throat] >> [clears throat] >> set up. >> No, not yet. >> Okay, we do have an easel with plan. You want to bring that up? >> Okay. Our next application is 25001 one family to two family Hamad Azi. Did
I pronounce that correctly? 214 North 15th Street, block 32, lot number five. Who do we have in front of us tonight? Perfect. Thank you, chairman. Uh my name is Christopher Rodriguez. Uh I'm councel uh for uh the applicants Ayat Razi
Abasim Abunaga and Hamdi Kazi uh from RNR Legal Adviserss LLC uh M 28 Valley Road Sweet 1 Montlair New Jersey. Um we're here before the board today with respect to that property located at 214 North 15th Street uh block 32 lot 4 zone
R5A. Uh we're seeking a C2 hardship variance. The purpose of this particular application is to allow a family to to stay together. Essentially, uh the current owners, well, two of the current owners, Abessa and Hamdi, are getting older in age and they'd like to have
their their children. So, Ayazi, who's their daughter to to move in in an upstairs unit, this is a conversion from a single family to a two family. Uh and we are seeking uh C2 hardship variance relief specifically from the minimum lot size requirement of 7,500 square feet
which was amended back in 2015 which I think some of the board may remember um as as well as the uh parking requirement which would mandate that we have four spaces. Uh the turnaround requirement for the driveway uh and specifically with respect to the tandem parkings. I know the plans currently have a four
parking tandem setup. Uh the applicant advised me that they'd like to that they're going to be walking away from that setup. So they'd convert that into two. So I don't know if as a condition for approval, we'd submit revised plans to show that's a two parking space in the back and we'd be seeking a variance for two spaces to meet the requirements.
Uh there's also a pre-existing front yard setback uh condition uh which is not being touched whatsoever. The front yard is not is not being changed in any form or fashion. Um and we are seeking a waiver with respect to the uh driveway width. Uh the bulk of the driveway is uh
12 feet. There's an abutment uh with respect to some stairs that lead up to the what would be the second floor unit uh for a small portion which the architect will testify to later today. Uh there's a small section of 10.8 ft on that driveway which uh we seek a waiver
for because it would not restrict a car to go back into the rear side of the parking lot. Um there's also some notes from the uh planners report and the engineers report with respect to buffering requirements and award table requirements. While we don't have those today, we will uh comply with those with
those items as a as a a condition on approval. Um so in further also there was one suggestion from I believe the planners report requesting that we seek approval from the Union County Planning Board. I don't necessarily believe that that's necessary since the road that the
propertyy's on is not a county road. Um, but in further into the application, you'll also be hearing from our architect, Mr. Anoir Al- Khib of AK Architecture, and our planner, Mr. Ricardo Fernandez of uh, GIA Consulting. Um, the architect will be testifying as
to the floor layouts and specifically she'll respond to items raised by the town planner and engineer. Uh, specifically with respect to the water table, uh, basement exit, attic space, the driveway width. Um, and, um, Mr. Fernandez will be testifying as to the parking variance and the statutory
positive and negative criteria mandated by municipal land use law. Uh so without further ado, uh I'd like to call our architect, Mr. Anoir Al- Khatib. >> Hi, good evening everyone. >> Good evening, Mr.
Could you spell your last name, please? >> Alib. >> Yeah, you can just say a L k H A T I B, but you can say just Alcativ. Have you appeared before this board before, sir? >> No, this is the first time for me here in this board. >> Okay. Can you uh just give us your credentials and is your license still in order?
>> Yes. I'm a registered architect in the state of New Jersey. My license is current. I testify in different boards in the state of New Jersey, New Jersey City, Paramis, uh Clifton, and this is the first time uh testify in this board. Okay. Thank you, sir.
>> M can you just uh do you swear or affirm that the testimony you're about to give to the board You have truth. >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> You guys want to be by the >> Yeah, as long as the board can hear.
Would it be okay if he approaches? >> There's a microphone. >> Oh, okay. Perfect. Okay, Mr. Alativ, um, as just a matter of, uh, of knowledge and to educate the board, could you walk through some of the design elements that you've crafted into this particular set of plans with
respect to each floor's layout? >> Yes. So, I was talking, you know, just going over my plan so I can explain exactly what it is as a project. So, um, so I So um first of all this set of drawings here are the same set of drawings that
you guys had and they are the same dates no change no changes on it. So the same number of sheets and the same day which is last date was March March 11 206. So I'm going to skip the first page which show the location of the building
zoning map and the X map to go over the site. So um the existing property is uh 5500 uh right now contains a single family home occupied by the owner has one and a
half floors. The first floor is used for living space and the second floor used for bedrooms and the existing building is located about 20 1 ft from the uh street line. So u there are some non-conforming
condition this this property. Should I go through it right now? >> Yes, Mr. Albert. >> Okay. So first we explain about the lot is 55,000 ft which is not existing on the minimum required 7,500 ft. The lot
width has required 50 ft and we have 50 ft. So that's performing. The front set back requires 25 ft. Uh the existing uh building is located at 23.1. Uh the proposed construction plan alteration of this property will not
change the existing front yard. So the proposed front yard will remain as 23.1 which existed on performance. The rear set back the requires 20 ft. Right now we have 52.6. We are doing an addition to you know set
back about 28.8 ft from the radar. This compliance the um total setbacks of the of the progress will be 20% of the width. So the required will be about 10 ft. We
have 19.6 and the proposal was still 19.60. Our addition will be explained here. It's only being added to the re not introducing any additions. Um the maximum height is 2 and a half floor permitted. We have right now 1 and 1/2
and we're proposing 2 and 1/2. The building height per minute has foot is 35 ft. Right now we have 275. We're proposing to have 34.8. So shy from the maximum. Uh the maximum building coverage is 50% permitted.
Currently we have 18.4. We're proposing 29.8.4 which is also permitted. The um maximum per 75% maximum allow. We have 36.3 or proposing up to 74.3. We're still under
the maximum and the employ ratio 75. Uh right now we have a 27. We're proposing 727. So still within the apartments the parking uh we're proposing to have in our plans right now we're showing four parking spaces which is we're
eliminating 10 parking spaces to meet the tendon variance and the final will go over this u so that variance will be removed as tendon but will still be named as the fire
>> so we're proposing to do is um to add to the existing building the radar about 750 50 square ft building area with a basement first floor and second floor and also we are creating an attic to be connected to the second floor. The what
we're trying to do also in addition to the addition itself we are trying to convert existing single family to a two family structure [snorts] since right now the the building is located on the zone R5A which permits a two family zone. So we're trying to
bring this building to match the uh existing zoning use in this in this area and to bring the two families that we have. So I want to move right now to the existing condition of the building so we can you know show what we have so far. So as mentioned earlier right now we have only
one and a half I'm going showing the existing condition also some existing structure and the existing as well. So the existing building right now on the existing basement with a 7T high
right now is used basically as a finished area with some sitting area with a full bathroom and mechanical areas. Um the existing first floor we have a onebedroom living and dining area with enclosed porch. The height of the
existing first was about like less than less than 80 like shadow 8 foot and um the existing second floor you can say is a half floor because there was a hip condition which is an attic with two bedrooms they're not full height. So you
will see from the audition they are like basically like the roof of the first floor with the uh bedrooms inserted into. So the existing condition of the house are not meeting the standard the modern quality blood that we have right now in New Jersey and the client our
client and the owner wants to improve that building itself. So he said I want to improve it and also I want to add to it to bring it to a new family condition to match the property and also improve the quality of the building. So um what what we did is we added to
the rear portion of the existing house 750 area which we included uh finished basement and we also we had first floor and second floor. The first floor we altered the interior of the first floor.
Sorry for the proposed floor plans. The proposed first floor was altered completely to change it from a living and dining kitchen into an apartment. So the apartment will be apartment number
one and will have three bedrooms, two bathrooms and a half and a kitchen. This this first floor will be direct connected to the existing basement. So the basement to the first floor would act as one unit and the access from the
for the stair from the first floor to the basement will be only restricted to the first floor and also there's an exist from the basement to the rear yard also on the first floor. Uh the second floor which is the new floor added to the to the building plus
the addition on the rear will create the second apartment that would introduce into this project. The second apartment would be very much similar to the first floor apartment. Two bedrooms, [clears throat] two and a half bathrooms, kitchen and living and dining area. Now the second floor, it has an
access stair connecting to the attic created by the roof line that we have. That attic would be a finished attic with the maximum allow permitted by the ordinance to be used as an accessory to the second floor. Number eight, there's
>> well Mr. Ali, before we move forward, there were a couple of uh points that I believe the planner had in their report with respect to the rear entrance for the basement. Uh what's your understanding of the purpose and use of that particular rear entrance and whether that's necessary to this application?
>> Well, the rear end the rear end of the existing may be used for the whoever is building the application in the basement to access the radar. So for convenience purposes so be easier to access the rear yard from the basement instead of going through the basement through the stair
itself walking through the driveway that you know will be an active driver for the parking space and access the radio. So that's the only purpose for the radio. We have a full bathroom in the basement. We don't have any kitchen line and we are, you know, open to any conditions requirements in the basement
to be used as the >> Perfect. Thank you. And as to the attic space, do you you have an understanding of what the use of the attic space is intended for? >> So the attic space I was explaining earlier, it's connected to the second floor apartment for the stair itself. So
go to D-03. Uh we have about 600 uh square ft of an area of the attic will be an open space connected directly second floor by the second floor
and will be used as a recreation area for the where the second floor so it's used by the second floor and you know also we have two windows front and back giving lighting to the to the attic itself. So looking at the building section that we have in this drawing to
show like you know the actual roof line created the attic and which is going to draw a-4 which is the proposed eleation itself the building architecture will be blending with the existing neighborhood typical family
with standard siding uh as fiber shingles double front windows very much similar have neighbor is in the neighborhood not bringing anything new to the to the to the mix that we have there. There will be a
permitted height 345 maximum height 2 and a half stories and a basement. We have ving in the front with windows. Uh then we have also a stone covering the basement exposure of the foundation
wall themselves. And then we have the main of the building cells matching in color. And that's basically what we have in the architecture. >> Perfect. Uh Mr. Alkat, could you actually go to the driveway section uh real briefly?
>> Okay. So the driveway so we have right now an existing driveway is about 13t um which used right now currently for parking and access to the rear yard is to also have existing parking. this construction. What we're trying to do is
keep the existing driveway to extend the parking itself to the rear yard and provide the two parking spaces on the rear of the one of the comments that we have about the width of the driveway itself. It was you know um reduced by about 3 ft in the location where we have
the stair to pass the second floor. So if I go to the architect plan, we use that the projection of the um stair to access the first you know the first floor is higher than the grade about 3 ft. So we
have to access the stair. So that projection clearing that width bar would sell 12 ft. >> And based on your knowledge, I believe that that the width is reduced from 12 ft to 10.8 ft. Is that correct?
>> Correct. >> And based on your expertise, can a car still pass through that area? >> Yeah, it it would be passing anyway. We don't have the two-way driver will be one way driver. So somebody who comes on the way to the other lead. So the 10 foot versus 12t from my experience uh it
works but we just for the pass through and only just pricing for the landing and couple of steps not it's not the whole drive. Perfect. >> Okay. Okay. Uh so there were also a couple of comments with respect to uh
buffering requirements with respect to the commercial structure that's nearby which is the baseball field and the HVAC. Yes, we we will will comply with the buffering either in terms of landscape or maybe like something fancy whatever
you know it's in work with this city plan. So we don't have any issues with that >> and do you have any concern over the seasonal high water table uh with respect to subsurface floor elevations and whether we can comply with those particular requirements. >> We will comply with that. The new
addition is that has a basement. So if we would do the geotech report if we see any issues with the water table that we need to raise effect the basement itself we will raise it just to comply with requirements and if has to be we can go a little bit lower we go lower so we don't have the geotech report yet
because we not in the construction phase but we will share a copy of that with the building department and we'll see if we can comply with and or we do some modification to the >> perfect thank you Mr. I have no further questions for our architect. [clears throat] So board if
you have any particular questions. >> I think the board is going to yield right now to the engineer and the planner uh for questions and comments. >> So my first question would be obviously the tan parking is going to wait for the
testimony. Is it still intended to have two spaces to the left of the driveway still or is it going to be just a straight in andout driveway? Oh, it will still have the two spaces. Um uh but Mr. Alkadib if you want to answer that question in more detail and also the planner will be speaking to that to
those points. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So the the the two 9 ft and 10 9 foot space will be still the one at the end they will remain but the two 10 will be completely eliminated. So the car that carried >> so we'd be seeking a variance of two
spaces. Um, now my next question would be with the basement access. Just looking at the floor layout plan, I know that it's proposed as a finished basement, but a full bathroom and shower in there. Yes. >> What's going to prevent that from being
converted into another unit with its own entrance? >> Well, first we don't have any kitchen or gas equipments there. So, um, that one of the condition. Second, we can just, you know, work with any condition we have in the in the solution.
>> [clears throat] >> The applicant is definitely immunable to any suggestions of the board. >> Yep. They're concerned because of that word to ever get converted. Obviously, it's going to be a larger parking varian issue. We don't want to have, you know, something where there's proposed four required and now it gets to five or six
because that's why I just want to make sure the record's clear. Um, obviously you said you will I'm assum you're in comp with all the letters because right now we're going to need a full final grading plan to make sure that there's no adverse effects of the neighboring properties. So that would be something that we would require
if this were to be approved as a condition of the approval. Um, the upstairs attic space is that bathroom that's in there. Is it a full or half bathroom? Just for half. Okay.
Thank you Mr. Chairman. Uh would you please let us know what's the square footage of each unit? >> Yes. >> So the two units will be identical in the interior area. So we have uh about 1300 square ft
1300 second floor would be about total 1,400 70 ft and the first 1470 ft. Now if you add attic to the second floor which is with a large square would be about like
the second and the add to the first floor would be multipl. >> So just so I get it right your first floor unit is 2800 square ft. >> Yeah that's part of the unit right
>> and it is finished. So are using habitable space and the second floor unit would be 2,000 square ft which includes the recreation space on the >> correct. >> Uh is it still your testimony that it's still just going to be three bedrooms per unit?
>> Yes. Um I think as uh board engineers express concern um as professionals I just want the board to know we are a bit concerned about that exterior exit from the basement that can have likelihood of a
technical converter not from this applicant but in future it might happen it's a convenient shift so I would recommend to the board to consider some kind of conditions to protect that and as you've testified the applicant is available to you.
>> Correct. That >> um in terms of I know the testimony is that you'll meet the HVAC um ground uh buffering. I just want to make sure u the understanding is there
that it would require a minimum of 3T wide area surrounding the ground mounted HPS. It's your understanding that that area exists and that you'll be able to comply with it. >> So around or as a height? No, it's basically it says buffering shall
consist a minimum of 3 foot wide area surrounding all sides of HBAC and utility boxes and screening shall be at least 4T high. >> Yes. Yeah, we can comply with that. We will adjust because right now in the area we have extra space and between the
the backyard to the proposed stair we have no. >> Okay. And then the second testimony was that again regarding the buffer that you will comply. Uh I want to make sure again for the record the buffer width
has to be 10 ft and the screening height has to be 6 ft. >> You do have space. >> When you say the buffer be 10 ft is like away from the property line or itself. >> So it's counted from the property line where you are adjacent to commercial or
a non-residential property. From there it has to be a 10 foot width and some kind of screening has to be proposed which can be up to six feet high >> buffering from the neighborhood and from the public ones. Yes. So you do have your All right. Um just want to make
sure um this um in terms of um just because you're you are an architect. I want to make sure the size of the unit are these the general sizes 2800 and 2,000 square ft for a
threebedroom or is it a slightly larger unit? These are a little bit more quality life of typical threeb units. You know, if you go to a typical apartments for three bedrooms, they do like 1,200 square ft, maybe 1,400 square ft. But because we're trying to get like
um better quality and we including basically as a new condition, they have a basement, the first floor, have second floor and attic. So that put I think it's it's very applicable to quality housing by now in this case. So it's it's not that big if you divide it into
four. If it was on four as a 200,000 ft yes >> just so um you understand where I'm coming from in this zone a single family is allowed to have a 5,000 ft l area and two family requires a 7,500 ft area. The
ordinance was established keeping in mind the unit sizes that would be reflective of the size of the unit that comes. >> Correct. I understand but also our F is within the D. So we are we try to take advantage of F that we didn't pass it.
So that gave us more privilege to have more which is better for the quality since we're not you know against any of the the permitted or I do believe that the planner will be testifying further as to the the characteristics of the neighborhood. You'll find that there are
a number of two family uh lots in that area that are sub 7500 ft. All fair actually fairly spot on to 5,000 ft. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Uh applicant will now call [clears throat] the planner assuming
there's no further question. >> Excuse me. Does the board want to ask any questions now or you want to wait for the planner and then we could Okay. Thank you. >> So the applicant now calls Mr. Ricardo [clears throat] Fernandez. Good evening, chairman, uh, board members. My name is Ricardo Fernandez.
I'm a professional planner to state in New Jersey. I've been doing this for quite some time and have testified through many boards. Uh, I've never had the pleasure to come before you this evening, so I'm very happy to be here. I'm a licensed planner. My uh, license is still active. I have an undergraduate
degree in urban studies and a graduate degree in community development. And I've done this for applicants and for municipalities alike. It's fine. Thank you very much. >> Mr. Fernandez, if I may u to swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give to the board shall be the truth, the whole truth.
>> Thank you, [clears throat] sir. >> Um if I could, I just want to make sure they recognize. >> I'm sorry. >> I I didn't know if you accepted this off. >> Yes, I did. We did. Yes. >> Before you swore them in. >> Want to make sure. Uh, so what I did is
I did a little um slide deck show for the uh members just to ease and make it faster if that's okay. I'd like to put that into evidence if that's okay. >> Is this new? >> Uh, it is it is new. >> It it did use a lot of what you already seen before you.
>> But that way we can just follow along and make it easier. So >> So council is being >> exhibit A. >> Exhibit A1. >> Thank you council. A little more surface. >> It's got a bit of a gavvel effect
[laughter] to it. >> Um so I prepared this uh for this evening for the board members. The first is just indicating the address that uh we'll be presenting. Um the second page is the zone map. So
we know this is in the R5A highdensity 1 and two family zone. I also tried to take from existing exhibits to make part of this so that there's no new photographs. So, this is actually from the planners report
showing the subject property and the neighboring properties. As you can see, um I'd like to draw your attention to the property that is directly next door to this parcel. So, you can see kind of um how that sizes up in comparison to
the applicant as well as the three part properties across the street. Starting with the reddish orange U roofing going up north towards the top of the page. The next page, not to belabor the point,
is our zoning requirements um and the waiverss and variances that we're requesting. As was discussed, uh there was a 2015 ordinance change uh making two families from a 5,000 ft to a 7,000
ft 7,5 uh 7,500 ft² lot. There is a pre-existing front yard setback that irrespective of the board's action this evening that's to remain um which is 23.1 and 25 is required. We are
requesting at the bottom I highlighted it even though it says it complies uh we agree with the board of professionals reports about the tandem parking and the backing of radius. Uh the good news is that under its current condition, the
vehicles have to back out and under this new condition, based on the ordinance requirements, you're able to do a K turn once we remove those tandem parking and you can come out straight forward and not need to back out onto the roadway, which I know was a requirement of the
code. Um the next one is the existing survey of the existing conditions. >> Just so we're clear, you're on page three, top slide, right? It's the way you handed it out. >> Oh, I'm sorry, guys. I'm going too fast. >> No, no, you keep saying next page, but I
didn't turn page. My eyes aren't what they used to, and I keep hitting around with my glasses, and I keep forgetting when to put them on and take them off. Uh, so I made it bigger for my eyes. Uh, but I didn't want to waste too many too much paper for the for the board members. Yes. So,
um, it is the top of the third page. Uh, these are the existing conditions. So, what I just mentioned about the driveway, if you see the driveway right now, you come in head head on and then you have to back out. With the new design, you're going to be able to do
the K turn. So, the next slide, which is existing conditions underneath, this just kind of solidifies the discussion about the substandard condition of the property. Um, as the architect was going through the existing
conditions of the second floor bedroom, my head started to hurt cuz I started to remember my first house, that's how it was. I kept banging my head off the side of the ceiling because the the roof was hitting um, you know, the bedroom. So, obviously, in comparison, when you look
at this photograph and you look at the rest of the neighborhood, this is actually incompatible with the neighborhood. It's much more substandard uh, than the other properties that are there. on the what would be the fourth page on the top
it says properties across the street from the subject property. These are the three parcels that we indicated uh from the planners report. These are all two family houses existing two family houses on similar lot sizes
that currently exist within that uh section of the neighborhood. Now, just to refresh the board's recollection, because I I know you know the township much better than I do, this is a dead end street and the neighboring property uh to the right of this parcel is the
Little League field, right? It's the Kennallorth [clears throat] Little League field. And then the the the bottom slide is the property directly next door. that is also a two family house on the
same exact lot size. when you look when you compare the um the slide on the previous page of existing conditions, I know it's going to be a little bit hard to see, but if you look at the first picture to the left, right, of the
three pictures that are on existing conditions, I purposefully took that photo so that the board members can actually see the setback, the rear yard setback that the neighboring property that is a two family has. So you when you're talking about the
footprint, you'll see that the footprint that we are proposing is going to be consistent with that nextdoor neighbor's footprint um and their rear yard setback. So uh just so and if if the picture is too small, I actually made a larger copy that we can add into
evidence just so that it's more visible. I mean I could do that if uh if the board would like. >> I'd like to see that. Please, >> we'll mark that as a >> So, just for the record, you took these photos.
>> I took these photos. I'm the one that put them in the PowerPoint. >> When did you take the photos? >> I took the photos on Thursday last week. >> Okay. So the photo that I'd like to draw your attention to is the photo on the upper left hand side of the photograph
pass down. Um you'll see that the rear where the property owner the subject property ends the neighboring property has a good additional other like 15 20
ft of setback still within that property line. On the uh fifth page, you have the proposed project, which the architect went over. I won't uh delay that point as well. It's going
to be consistent with the neighborhood. It's going to have um sighting that's consistent with other properties uh in the neighborhood. And then finally the proposed project which is also uh part of the architect's plans which shows the
parking layout that we will be removing the next the two parking spaces removed. So uh to sum it up the use is permitted.
It's not uncommon when a municipality changes a zone that there are pockets there are pockets of neighborhoods and blocks that really are pre-existing non-conforming now due to that change. And in this
particular case, there's very few of them that are actually single family on the block. Right? So what happened in this in this instance is those that had the opportunity to do it before the ordinance change were able to do it and
get it. So literally if we were here before you before that ordinance change, we'd we'd be in compliance with just about almost every single bulk requirement that the municipality had at the time. Unfortunately, things being what they were, uh our client was unable
to do that. Um, just to paint a little bit of different picture and understanding as someone who's represented municipalities that have had major issues with illegal housing, right? Um, they they have right now the
the parents are elderly and they needed to live on the first floor. uh two of their children are set to live on the second floor and they're sort of caretakers to them on the first floor, but they are blessed with two more children and seven grandchildren. So the
idea was, well, if we get the kids running in and out of the house, right, how can I let them use the yard without kind of running through the So that was the thought. But again, as was stated, they're imanable. If the board were to say, "Okay, close that staircase."
They'd be happy to store the staircase. Just wanted to give you kind of an understanding of why they wanted to have as much usable space as possible uh within the unit just so I could read it myself.
Um the front yard setback that we're requesting is a pre-existing non-conforming that that will not change. Um, I believe that the benefits of updating this property, bringing it into conformance with today's standards, as well as making it consistent with the
neighbors definitely outweigh any of the detriment that you may have. Uh, especially that this is going to be kind of the benefit of a one family as a whole. Uh, as you can see, especially with the removal of the uh, driveway tandem parking, the driveway is actually
going to work uh, better than it currently does where they're able to do a K turn out of the property and come straight out. Uh, I do believe as well, in my professional opinion, that a 10-ft uh, driveway width, especially for such a limited portion of the driveway,
right, does not interfere with the K turn. So, they're going to be able to do the K turn and it allows enough room for a vehicle to get out past that that small stoop um that they have there. Uh the project I believe also in the
update um meets the purposes uh purpose C of municipal land use law providing adequate light, air, and open space. It also promotes uh under purpose I a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques especially bringing it up to today's uh
construction standards. Um the project is not only within character of the neighborhood the it's actually more in character with the neighborhood than what's currently there um as it sits today. And
I you've seen you've heard my testimony. You've heard the architect's testimony. You can actually see on the first page of the plans before you kind of the tax map layout. All those two family houses are on identical lot sizes as the applicant.
The one anomaly is the one that's closest to the corner. And I believe that was recently approved because they had multiple lots. they were able to adjoin our our um our client has asked the municipality to try to get a portion of the park. But I
don't know about you, I don't want to cut center field any more than we have already cut it cuz they're hitting enough home runs over the fence as it is. Um and as far as the parking standard is concerned, that whole section there, it's a park and that's not the main entrance to the
park. the the main entrance of the park is on the other side and has its own parking standard. I mean its own parking lot on the main thoroughfare on the other side of the ball field. So this is not the main entrance. Uh we believe that most of the time there's going to be more than abundance parking on on
street parking abuing that ball field because there's at least several hundred ft of length going down that um I think it was a left field line that you know isn't with another use that would
require the parking for that section. So, when you're talking about two cars, um I think that there's more than enough space there to accommodate those two cars uh especially during, you know, the nonworking hours. [snorts]
>> And that is uh my testimony. Open any questions that we may have. >> Thank you for your um your testimony, Mr. Fernandez. Um the engineer have uh some questions? Uh yes, just for clarity on the site on
the cover sheet, I know you mentioned in the neighboring in the neighborhood there are existing two families. Can you just identify what blockage so it's clear for the board? >> Sure. So just uh for the board's edification that goes along with the photographs that I
took of the neighboring properties. uh the one directly across the street. In fact, if you look at the one that is to the left of the property, you can see that it's almost the identical lot size. And then when you look across the street, not with the exception of the
two larger lots, the four lots next to it are identical lot sizes. And the photographs are there showing the two mailboxes showing that they there are two family properties. We looked at the tax map. Um there's at least uh five of
those properties on that are here that we can identify as two families uh through the board. You just read the block of I got to get my glasses on. I got a little tight on that. Give me a second.
>> All right. So six, lot five, lot four, lot three, >> lot 32. So lot 33, we're talking about lot six. So the photos you have specifically show
lot three, lot four, and lot five cuz lot six is al off the 200, but that is also and if you notice there, there's like a a guard rail that divides the street. So that last one is also two family, but it's it was kind of a little bit off, but you see they're all
identical lot sizes. And then on the block across the street is block 32. That's lot six. Not to mention that, you know, lot 7.01 is also, but it's a it was a different design and it seemed larger than our lot. That's that's a two family and the one across the street is
a two family on the corner as well. So, as you can see, with the exclusion of our property, you're lucky if you have one other one that's that's Mr. different I think you did a thorough job with respect to summarizing the criteria but if you could just provide a
quick bullet point as to the positive and negative criteria just to for the sake of the board and for the planner engineer. >> Yeah. So, um, the positives of renovating and, you [clears throat] know, rehabilitating an outdated, uh,
parcel, right? Bringing it up to today's standards, bringing up energy efficiency, which doesn't only help their t their bill, it also helps the neighbors when they're using less of the resources within the neighborhood. You also have the fact that you're helping a
family, an elderly family have uh access uh to, you know, a more modern uh style home. The the negative the positive outweigh the negative of I believe in my professional opinion that it does that it forwards is the purposes of uh the
intent of the the plan. And if it were not for that change in 2015, again understanding that the I understand completely the board had a purpose, the municipality had a purpose, but this is a unique case, right? It's a unique
dead-end street, right, in an overall much larger area um that we find this anomaly. And I believe that they're well within the character and there will be no substantial detriment uh to the public good or the intent of the zone plan by this one waiver for this
specific piece of property. >> Okay, thank you for that. I just had a couple other comments and slash questions. So I was just looking at the neighboring properties across the street. Seems like the minimum driveway width for all of them is 18 ft which is help which helps with the parking
concern I have here is you have two parking spaces in the back. There's going to be two families. So right now it's all one you know one cohesive family but if everything else is sold off how does that get managed now you only have two spots. How do you keep the driver from being blocked in the future?
>> Right. So so the requirement is four parking spaces for the units. We've conceded to the two parking spaces and the testimony is such that there are significant on the street parking specifically in that site. If I may approach the plan once again
>> when you're looking and we're looking at the tax map again, if you look on the north of the map from the from the corner spot, this is all park. It's the entire It's the entire Well,
it's more like uh center, you know, left uh left center all the way back down. Um there's no properties there. It's just, you know, and it's not the main entrance. I'd have a different conversation if this would have been on
the other side where the parking for the park is. But that has its own separate parking, its own separate entrance, you know, more closer to first base and home plate. You can tell I like baseball. Um, and they have uh so there'll be more
than two parking spaces available along that side of the street that are not being used for residential purposes. Right. If you know somebody wants to go through that section, >> correct? I guess the question where I was getting at is access to that driveway needs to stay clear in order to
reach the tandem spots. How are you going to prevent somebody from parking directly in the drive? Say there's a new owner. They have there's four cars now and the two spaces are taken. What's going to prevent somebody from parking two cars in that drive? >> It's the same thing that would prevent anyone from doing it right now in any
other of the of the driveways. Right. So >> I disagree. Those are 18. Say that again. >> Those are 18 ft wide. So you can fit two cars in and two feet. >> That's >> right. But they also But if you look at a lot of them, they don't have the can turn behind. >> So a lot of them have to back out into the roadway.
>> Oh, no. No. I understand that. I guess where I'm getting at is what's going to prevent somebody from parking the driveway. Would you do that? >> So that's self-regulate because I know if you block hot spot, we're going to have some words, right? Because I want to get out. I got to go to work. I want to try to get there. So I want to try to >> Yeah. I just don't want to leave burrow officials trying to police a tenant
matter. That's where I'm trying to go with this. So would there be any kind of you know restriction on parking within that 10T 12T lot? >> So I think I think what we could do if the if the board wanted a condition that the leases
right would be for a specific unit, right? So let's say for whatever reason uh you know the the the children move out, right? They're going to lease the space to someone else. You know, normally under normal circumstances, if
it's a two family house and there's not enough parking, the the lease holder, right, the the owner or the the one that's leasing will kind of make those spaces available or not available depending on their needs. So,
that could understanding what you're saying now. Uh, but again, I I want to reiterate even though you got two cars next to each other, they back out into the road. You won't have that heat. Oh, it's a safer movement. I agree. And I disagree with that. >> Right. So, right. We're looking at the
positive and negative, right? [clears throat] And the board specifically says you wanted cars to come out head first. Um, and that's what we're able to do here. And understanding the engineer's point. Usually, there's some self-regulation because if I'm if I'm the property owner, you know, in my
lease, it'll have some sort of language in it. And if there are any conditions, of course, the applicant is willing to comply and make take any suggestions that the board wishes to impose on a condition for approval. >> And if you go to the next plan sheet, I believe it is. I was waiting for your
testimony too because there was questions about buffering and I don't know if this more planning or architect that there's going to be there's you're going to comply with the ordinance. SO1 is the one. >> Let me just double check. >> Yes, it is.
So, with this layout here, there's 5.8 ft in green space to the to the west and then the AC units are almost right on the parking spaces. Now, the testimony before was that that they're going to comply with the ordinance. I'm just concerned because there's a 3ft buffer
that's going to take up one of those spots and a 10ft buffer is going to come in the other direction. So, if you guys can maybe clarify your testimony on that a little bit. >> Yeah. So, I can tell you that meeting the 3-FFT buffer towards the rear of the property
is not something we're going to be able to right now. That being said, you don't want to lose a parking spot, right, for the buffer. And secondly, what you have here is a wall. there's a
a solid concrete wall of a commercial property that faces the other block. So, you're really not buffering it from any, you know, neighbor, you know, or any of that type of uh scenario that you would require buffer from the residential side
of it. Um, we can very easily comply on either side of the unit. So complying for the left or the right where if we're looking at the left side, it would the neighbor would see it. That won't be a problem to do that buffer. And then on
the other side is the ball field. And I can tell you with all the fencing and the grass that's on the other side of the ball field, we'll still comply, but it it's even harder to see it. And it's not, you know, right. The whole point of the buffer is from a residential area to to not negatively impact your neighbor.
In this case, you could definitely not impact our neighbor. We're definitely not impacting the rear neighbor. That's a solid brick wall which is on the property line by the way that there's no setback. It's on their property line. And then you have the ball field on the other side. So we will be able to comply
with the with either side of that. >> Thank you. >> Ma, you have anything? >> No, I Mr. Just so I understand. So you won't be able to provide the three foot around the HBAC. So, we're going to seek that as it is
>> as a design waiver for only >> we're going to we'll do two out of the three sides because one side's against the building. Uh so, we're requesting for two out of the three sides so that the rear portion >> doesn't take away. >> Right. So, one, we don't want to lose
the parking space. >> Um or we'd have to push the parking space back. And two, there's no uh there's really no residential impact to that rear cuz it's a solid brick. So you are >> so that 10 foot also you won't be able to because right now what's shown is 5
foot. You'll stick to that right in the rear wall on your plan. >> Well, we meet the you need we need the lot coverage. >> Yeah. The to the >> the forget the HAC. The second requirement is the buffer from the commercial
property which is the real property you're talking about. That's the 10 foot. Right now the plan shows it's only 5 foot there. So I want to make sure that that will also not >> the same exact thing I said for the HBAC. >> Yeah. >> For that back wall because what are we
buffering from a brick wall, right? So it's like opening a beautiful window and you see a brick wall. That's kind of what we have here. >> So there'll be a variance from that. >> Yeah. The testimony is that uh because the adjacent commercial property has already a brick wall there, they would
provide another 5 ft with some kind of plantings there and still have the two parking spaces. >> It essentially self >> it essentially self buffers itself. >> There's no window to the no there's no
windows. There's also just for the boardification that's a solid wall. There's no windows there. It's not like they're, you know, in fact, it's on the property line. You can't really have windows there under the code because it's closer to 3 ft to the property line. So that the question is if that I
mean that doesn't change that can't have a window any Mr. Mazio. So the testimony the main reason for for doing this we're saying is basically to um to allow for some for
multigenerational living and family combined. Why don't we just do a you know our our bulk ordinances are pretty liberal as far as what we can do on a 50 by 100 lot. Why isn't it just a one family house? Why do we go for um a
variance that's looking for a 50% um uh deviation from what the current ordinance is? Is there a reason for that? >> Because it still adds to greater privacy for the family that's going to be above. I mean it is it is a you know for all intents and purposes a mother daughter type of situation currently
[clears throat] but you know you still want to have separate entrances. You want to you want to have that sense of separate homes sometimes as opposed to it being you know a single family residence. There there is a move and there is there is um in the state for multigenerational living where you can
architecturally design a house that uh allows for separation and you do have room to do it. I built them. So, um, you know, so you're it's a big ask, >> uh, as far as as far as the, uh, the the
bulk the uh, the C bearings, >> uh, and and I'm just curious as to if that's been considered, did you did you look down on a piece of paper and say, "Hey, these are our options." And lay it out. And >> so, they're adult children. >> Yep. >> They're going to have their own families. You heard the number of
grandchildren that are there having a specific unit for them. Typically, >> are the children going to live on their own? >> I don't know how you I don't know how you designed them. Usually, when you're looking at these motherdaughter type of situations, they're usually limited number of bedrooms just for the elderly
that are living in the house. It's not really a unit for younger children. Um, they can pass this on when the parents pass on to their other children that are there with their own families. So there's more than just you know that type of situation right you want to be
able to do that as well as there's also equity and value in that where they can use to invest in the future right so understanding what you said and understanding the big ask it's very very similar to everybody around them so it's
not I'd understand if this was an anomaly this is very consistent with the other units in the neighborhood Anyone else with us? Young York Street. So let me ask this question with with
the separation with two apartments you would need four parking spaces. So off street we need two. Why two? if you have a separate apartment upstairs. >> So, there's two per unit that's required
under the code. So, because we can't fit them on site and tandem isn't permitted, right, we're requesting a two a two spot parking variance uh to accommodate the board's requirement of four parking spaces. So, uh basically the way it breaks down based on the number of
bedrooms that uh we're proposing, it would require two per unit and we're providing two very clearly, very easily meeting your uh meeting your uh backing up because it was 24 ft. We're giving you more than 24 ft on the backup to do the K turn which
then leaves because like you guys said clearly what stops them from blocking the driver, right? Um, we're asking for that to then be accommodated on site and my testimony based on the location, based on what's neighboring that
property that it can that roadway can accommodate two parking spaces that we're short uh on site. >> Right. You mentioned in the future that one of those apartments could be leased outside of the family and in that
situation you cannot rely on off streetet parking. You have to provide on-site parking for that apartment. >> How would that be done? So basically what we're saying is that there'll be one unit that'll have the two parking
spaces or or another option is that each each unit like let's say these are scenarios that I don't know will ever happen. I'm just running cuz I understand this goes with the land and you you know you got to look at any scenario, right? So let's take another
scenario. Let's say both of them are rented out, right? They're both non-family. the leases can say that each one of those units get one of the spa one of the spots in the back and then the other two spots have to go on the street. So
there's multiple ways to do that through a leasing arrangement. Um that is very common in two family houses especially owner occupied two family houses where you put in the lease you get this spot or you don't get any spot you have to go on the street. So that's that's how kind
of it would work out. >> Yes, Mr. So, you said there's going to be six adults in the house. >> No, right now there's going to be uh two parents. I know you said there was two kids and two other kids. No. So,
there's So, right now the other two children with all the grandchildren live in a house and they're not coming. The two the two uh other children are coming to be caretakers to the parish. So, right, it's going to be the I guess
brother and sister in one unit and then the parents in the other unit >> cuz I had 13 also. I had six adults and seven grandchildren. >> Yeah, that's what I had. So, >> yeah. No. So, so no, no, no. I'm sorry if I made that conf. What I'm saying is the grandchildren are coming over not to
stay but to like enjoy time with their grandparents and their aunts and uncles and they wanted the space. So, I meant that to clarify the reasons why there's finished spaces, why they finish certain spaces that maybe didn't want to. >> That just changes the parking when you're already having six people drive.
>> Yeah. No, no, no, no, no, no. I That's my next question. Now, I understand why you're asking the question. No, that's not that's not what we're saying. >> Well, the question also goes to that what's happening right now, we understand why this needs to be done. But the moment that changes and you
lease out the first indoor to second floor of both, then the ordinance now gets a little bit shaky because we're supposed to have two per unit. We're supposed to have four off streetet parking spaces and you're saying we can't get that. We need two. You're
you're saying you could only have two, but two off street. That makes it a bit difficult for the board. So, we're trying to balance the request that you have of no tandem spaces of K turning and coming out straight forward with the four spots, right? So,
>> turn the K turn to me is not an issue on North 15th Street. It may it may be in the ordinance, but >> so in the So, it requires it in the driveway itself. >> In the driveway. >> Yeah, that's what your ordinance says. So, then we were balancing
weighing that. Okay. we're going to comply and make sure that they can cater turn in our lot to come out versus the tandem, right? Which makes that K turn very difficult and and would almost require the backing out.
>> So, I mean, it's really up to the board if you want the K turn or you want the back out into the into the street, right? So, so, so the vice chair was just saying to me, where does that say that
you could K turn inside your driveway? Everybody backs out of the driveway. >> It literally says, in fact, it came from your planners report. >> Is that >> So, that comes from the engineering report. So, for a two family use, it does talk for turning, right?
>> It doesn't specify a specific K turn, but that's how he's referring to it as. The one caveat is this is also a pretty low volume street. So the need for the K turn might not be as practical as on a busier street. >> Not not as low volume.
>> Yeah. When I mean that little field having three kids that play that little field every night. >> Yeah. >> It's uh it gets crazy though >> and there's a couple spots at the end that are double gates that not supposed to block. So you kind of lose that.
Yeah, it gets crazy. There's kids running all over the place. Ask that back section. I have a question too. It is crazy. Sorry. I have a question. >> Mr. Pantina. >> Yes. Working on Mr. Mazio's comment about what you say multigeneration.
>> Okay. Um, another scenario obviously you know what you're providing and what you're suggesting uh is good for now, but we know how things work. Now is good. future sale, tenants, lease, whatever. We sell the building. We got a
two family house. We're short of parking. You can't use the tandem parking at parking. Use the street where it's a problem. So, um I'm not telling you what to do. Just throwing out another option. So, um RSIS says
requires the parking standard, right? So, it's what 2.3 for twobedroom, 2.4 four for three bedroomedroom. Anything over four bedrooms is still 2.4. So you'd only need three. And if it's only a one family with two stories or three
stories or however many I'm not a heart attack, but um you could have now I'm not going to say you'd have as many bedrooms as you want, but you could work it out where you'd probably only need three spaces. and three spaces controlled by one family is easier than
trying to coordinate two families with I'm in the driveway, I'm not moving, I'm in the back, I got to get out. What are you going to do? So, I'm just saying that's another scenario whereas if it doesn't work, >> Excuse me. Excuse me, Nick. The the Mr.
Fernandez is correct. Can I get Who's in the back? Can you help us out with asking the people in the hallway to um lower their voices because we can't hear up here and it's being recorded. Thank you very much. >> So, >> I'm sorry, Mr. Fernandez or Mr. >> So, what I was trying to say, I don't
know what what you heard, what you didn't hear, but if you have right now, if you have a two family house, you're required for four spots. And right now with the one family, it works. But in with with the scenario with two families where both where the owner leases out
both apartments, it could be kind of sketchy like chairman said like you know I'm I'm in the back. I got to get out the front. I don't want to move. It's 3:00 in the morning. I got to go to work. Whatever. If it's one family with multiple bedrooms on multiple floors
within the ordinances of 30 ft. I'm just saying anything over four bedrooms is the same on RSIS. It could only be like three, probably three spaces. In which case, the one in the in the driveway, I know you're smiling because it works, but the one in the driveway can work
because now it's only one family get move and I'm getting out. >> I'm smiling because it depends on the family member, right? Cuz I make it they may throw something at my head if I'm blocking in the morning, go to work. I'd be more likely to do it because it's my brother than if it's a neighbor. I may be a little bit more cordial than if
it's like my own family member. >> But you get it. Like right now it works. Right now it's and I'm I'm not saying it's a hardship, but right now it works for the family setting. But once it doesn't work or once that family setting moves, >> then we got two two two two.
>> But what we're really talking about is under your scenario, what we're really talking about the difference between one and the other is one parking space at that point, right? >> But no, what we're talking about is coordination of the parking spots on site. That's what we're talking about. what and what we're trying to say is that there's ways to do that through
legal documents that give it more weight than a verbal agreement, right? So, that's kind of kind of where we're at. And you're getting a much better product and you're raising uh the housing stock in the area and it's in my professional
opinion, it's it's consistent with what's there. You know what I mean? And we'll be just like the engineers discussion with me is we're going to be one of the very few that can actually come out head first on that block which I think is a benefit especially what you
just said uh commissioner with the kids playing back and forth. Nobody's backing out if there's a kid running after a game that gets in their parents' car cuz we're we're coming out uh Facebook. But I understand exactly what you're saying. I was just thinking of my own
brother and I'm like, "Oh boy, if that was me and he made me with >> any other questions from the board. >> Are you completed with your testimony, sir? >> I am completing my testimony and no further questions on the no further
witnesses. Uh, Miss Ayazi is here if the board would has any questions, but you know, she's not really here to testify specifically. We we didn't intend to have her testify, I should say. [laughter] But if there are specific questions, we
will. >> So, um, what we're going to do now is, um, someone's going to make a motion to open it to the public to discuss about this application and this application only. So, let's see what happens. I make a motion to open the hearing to the
public. >> Motion made by Mr. David, seconded by Mr. Clemente. Is anyone in the audience wishing to comment on what the testimony you just heard? Okay, looks like none.
>> Make a motion to close the public portion of the hearing. >> Okay. Motion again made by Mr. David, seconded by Mr. Scader. All in favor? >> I. >> Okay. Um, I guess we heard the testimony. Do we have to um make any
last comments from the engineer and the planner on any which way that you could advise the board so we can have a clear picture and then we could talk again amongst ourselves and make a determination of what we need to do.
>> Um thank you Mr. Chairman. Um so the applicant before you is seeking a uh is converting a single family use into two family. They require variances for the lot area. Uh the required is 7,500.
What they what the site is 5,000 square ft. Um they also need um variances for the off street number of parking spaces. They can provide two on the property. They require four.
um the driveway width uh which is it's required to be 12 ft in width. Uh this proposal does have a non-conforming driveway width at one area. It's almost 10.8 ft and uh it's not being changed.
So that variant is going to remain. Um lastly uh the applicant uh through testimony did confirm that they would need uh waiverss for the HBAC buffering uh of the three ft. They will be able to
meet it on two sides but not along the proposed parking area that they have on the site as well as the uh variance for the buffer width from when they're adjacent to another residential property. So those are the requirements
that are before you. Uh typically in this zone that they are in uh which is the R >> R5A >> R5A zone. Thank you. Um the requirement is for a two family you need a 7,500T
lot. Uh for a one family you need 5,000t lot. Uh the applicant through their experts, the architect as well as planner provided you the positive and the negative criteria as to why they think the board should look at this application favorably and they've made
some um arguments as to how the impact would not be substantial on the adjacent neighbors. >> Thank you. Uh Mr. Massie. Um, so we've gone over the Mik has gone over the parking requirement. This one
thing as I look at this more we should consider is that as the uh planner said there's only 24 ft needed for a backout right now with that front tandem spot being going away. The paved area is 20 almost 30 ft. I recommend a reduction in
that area to what's necessary for a proper K turn. And since you're going to have headlights pointing at the neighboring property at the border consider this. I'd recommend some buffering or planting to block headlights in the future. Um, and then the other comment that I
had still holds from before with access to the basement. So, there's three access points to this unit. The front which could is for the bottom unit and then the side watch goes to the top unit. Then there's still that basement access which gets me concerned because
there's the possibility of different tenant over time you take that basement. I know there's going to it's not zoned for it. There's no kitchen there, but there's a full bathroom in that basement. They have a full They have a completely separate access. So, something the board should wipe on.
>> Okay. Um >> Oh, there you were raising your hand. >> I meant Yeah. >> Okay. So, we just heard from our planner and our engineer, and I have a couple of concerns. Um parking is one of them. It's it's in a major one. Um, but I am
looking at your plan and I notice that you do not have any bedrooms on in the attic space nor in the basement. As part, if this application was to go forward and you were approved, part of
that application would be that there would never be bedrooms up on this up on the attic space nor in the in the basement area. if if this was to move forward and we would want that as part
of a condition that you cannot have bedrooms there specifically for safety egress and things like that. Now I did notice in the front in the front of the plan that those two windows in the front of the house look like egress windows
and they look like egress windows maybe for future plans of making that a bedroom. I'm going to really stress if if this is um approved that you do not make this bedrooms that you would come
back before the board. You would do something uh appropriate for the safety of the people that are living in the house. Um I'm not saying that it's going to be approved. I'm just saying that that would be some of um my uh additional requirements. It also looks
like you have a separate entrance, not just a way to get into the backyard, but that that downstairs dwelling to me it's clear. It looks like an entrance. You could call it a way to get to the backyard and have the children run up to
the second floor. But also part of that condition that would never ever be a three family third apartment whether legal or illegal it well illegal apartment let's put it that way it cannot be uh it needs it needs to have
all the requirements set forth by the board should it be uh approved those are my statements combined with the planner and the engineer here. Anyone else need to add to that?
>> Okay. >> I'm sorry, Mr. Clement. >> So, we have some concern about the basement access eliminate the door. >> Well, um I am a little apprehensive with
eliminating the door for a second means of egress. Um there is some safety issues that I would you know I'd like to see but you know you know that's that's a consideration uh from the planner and the engineer side that um Mike can you
weigh in on that uh taking that door out of there. >> I mean there's lots of houses that have doors there but >> you know the more existent you know the better off. >> Yeah. >> Especially if there's going to be a lot of children playing in there. >> I'm sorry.
the door. >> If you don't leave the door, take away the bathroom. >> Make it half bath. >> Make it a half bath. >> Interesting. >> Interesting. >> Mr. Chairman, if I could propose a suggest I'm I'm sorry. If I could
propose a suggestion if you'd like. >> Sure. uh we'd be totally amanable to a deed restriction specifically outlining what you know restrictions you'd like to impose. Uh but I also believe the applicant was also considering if you'd like to reduce it to a half bathroom, you know, that's also agreeable.
>> Okay. I I have to go back to the planner and the engineer to that request because a half bath is a lot different than a full bathroom which could later on throw in that little kitchenette and have that. First of all, let me be u perfectly
clear. I don't think anybody is going to do that in the in the way that you presented your case. And I know that these are very honorable people and they probably would not do that. But in the future, if somebody decided to um move out and do whatever they have to do, a
deed restriction would be very very very amicable uh for this application. Um Mika, >> I agree with you, Mr. Chairman. I mean, as a condition, um if the board were to look at this favorably, putting it on a deed is much easier to find rather than
it remaining as a condition of approval at some resolution. The second part of it is um asking the applicant to make it into a half bath. How do I put it? Like it at least it it deters somebody from making a full
bathroom, adding a kitchen for what it uh what it made, you know, it delays the process a bit further if somebody has to convert the third and single unit. But uh that would again add a little more of another restriction on the property
keeping it as half path keeping it as half path in the attic so that it's not an easier conversion without going forward. >> Thank you. So these are just my suggestions and recommendations as far as the conditions are concerned but now we have to put it before the board.
>> I just have the same questions that you concern the >> sorry we have about 70 people here been waiting over two and a half hours. let us know when if we're going to be able to speak or not just for the convenience of everyone here. >> When you're here at the beginning application, you've now slowed the
process up that you wanted to go. >> Oh, absolutely. I apologize. >> How how when are we are you prepared to let people speak or something? They don't want to know so they can go and then they can get back to you. >> Continue to talk. We're going to take a recess. >> I just want to answer a question.
Respect the respect. Respect. >> Respect the audience that is here. >> Show respect. It's disrespectful. Take 2 and 1 half hours for two cases. You can't get a a canopy over a a uh waste time. Let us know when we can meet for
[applause] Is there a motion on the table to adjourn for 5 minutes? >> Okay. Motion made. Okay. We're going to journ for 5 minutes so everybody can control. >> Motion is made to open it again by Mr. Scaderi, second by Mr. Pantina. All in favor? >> I.
>> Okay. We were at the point where we were talking about some conditions and the conditions uh I don't know if our planner engineer or the attorney wrote them down before uh we had a wait uh five minutes. However, I think we were
talking about a um a smaller bathroom in the basement. >> Correct. >> Uh we were talking about um uh deed restriction uh for the property and we had what else was there? Another item
>> deed restriction about the tandem parking >> and deed restriction about the tandem parking. You said Mr. Mantina said that. >> Is that right? >> In the basement. >> Sorry. No bedrooms in the basement. >> No bedrooms in the basement any attic. Okay.
>> Um those were some of the conditions combined with what the planner and the engineer had to offer. And um to the attorney, are those things amicable to your clients?
>> Yes, they are chairman. >> Okay. That doesn't mean you have been approved here or or denied. It's going before the board. >> Just one question. I think our planner mentioned a way to be more restrictive on the attic apartment and basement apartment. Was that the team restriction we're talking about?
>> Yes. >> Yes. >> So they the the condition is that the uh board is looking at this they can say that as a condition we ask the applicant to have a restriction on the property so that the basement cannot be converted
into an apartment and the attic cannot be used as a bedroom >> or an apartment either. Right. Yeah. Or you can have the basement to be used or apartment that becomes a little difficult because it doesn't have a separate entrance.
>> Okay. >> But that's got to be monitored after it's out of here. That monitor is monitored by the building department. >> The deep restrictions is more restricted than us just saying this. >> Oh yeah. Oh yeah. We can say anything we want. >> Thank you.
>> Yes. Okay. Well, now it's up to the board to make a motion. how you want to look at this. >> The board members have to make a motion. >> I'll make a motion with the deemed with all the restrictions we just put on. >> Okay. >> To approve. >> To approve.
>> Motion made by Mr. Lady to approve. Is there a second? >> I make a second. Pantina. >> Second by Mr. Pantina. Roll call. >> Mr. Berno. >> Yes. >> Mr. David? >> Yes. >> Mr. Ki? >> Yes. >> Mr. Pantina? >> Yes. >> Mr. Madia.
>> No. >> Mr. Lady. >> Yes. >> And Mr. Scader. >> Yes. Okay. Um, congratulations. >> [applause] >> Also, I would like I would like the attorney
andor I would like the attorney, the planner and the engineer get together to combine those uh conditions and everything. Get it off to the um attorney and the applicants and
congratulations. Well, thank you very much. council just if you could also draft what the deed restriction would be. >> Absolutely. >> Um so that we can see that >> um in the interim that would be very helpful. >> Absolutely. >> All right. Happy to. >> Then when you and I can go back and forth on that.
>> Sounds good. All right. Thank you very much being here. No problem. >> Here we go. Did you give Marco? >> He already he made the announcement when he was He said he's going to use He's got his
He's got his He's got his phone. >> Okay. Okay. We ready? Everybody ready? Okay. Here we go. Uh we need a um a motion to open the meeting to move. >> Moved by Mr. David, second by Mr. Scaderi. All in favor? I.
>> Anyone from the public wishing to come up and speak? Just a reminder, it's a 3minut limit so we can accommodate as many people as we can. >> Uh to confirm, did you pass a core uh
agreement on May 15th of 2025? >> Are you asking us that question? >> I was asking for confirmation. Was it was it No, I had the date. Is it was it May 15th, 2025 that that planning was asked here? This is public comment.
>> I'm asking Yeah, I'm asking a question. >> I understand what you asked. It's public comment. >> Could you could you answer it? >> We're not sure. >> So, there was a there was a resolution previously passed for the uh for Reed in last year in 2025. Yes.
>> Okay. Um I live on the border of Kennorth and Cranford. I want to know uh at that time, as I understand it, you then informed Cranford. Is this correct or not? Well, not I'm not going to ask answer all these questions. So make
public comment, not public question. >> So we don't have right. >> There's no difference. There's a big difference. So continue on, sir. >> I I need I need to know for the record if Cranford was informed at that time or not. >> Is your answer?
>> Do Do you have a Is there a reason? What's your problem? Why are you not answering? >> Why don't we have Okay. What's going on? >> I just need to know if you informed Cranford. >> I'm freaking paying this guy. >> Did you Did you Did you
>> Did you uh inform or not? >> Sir, do you have any other comments? >> Yeah, I do. >> Okay. I'm here with an attorney playing board that refuses to tell us
and all 100 people waiting here tonight for two and a half hours if he informed Cranford the town next door about the four-week project that was uh passed here May 25th of 2025. He's refusing to answer. I'll give you another chance so everyone can see you. >> What is Did you pass it on? Did you
again this was the public comments section open >> to the public open to the public >> correct >> no comments >> sir you got uh 40 seconds left >> kiss my ass
on respect for your for the people here two and a half hours answer the questions you're now 30 seconds >> oh really They can't answer yes or no. >> So two and a half hours you want to answer our questions that we're waiting to ask. Answer must be
>> so you >> hid this. >> Did you hide it from the neighboring towns? Yes or no? >> The agreement with four weeks. SIR, >> YES OR NO? ANSWER THE QUESTION. >> SO THAT'S your time. >> Don't call. Yes, >> that was your time. Next person, please. >> Thanks for coming.
>> Next person, please. >> Is there no one else who wants to speak? >> Everybody want to speak. >> I'm just curious if you please. >> Um, I would like to know if you have errors of omission insurance because I have a feeling every single person sitting up here is going to need it. And
do you know insurance for that matter? >> I guess we don't answer. >> I guess when we get an attorney, you'll have to answer it when you all get sued. >> Darius is errors of admission of short and you are omitting.
>> Can't even answer a question. >> I asking I'm asking I'm asking the board up here if they have that insurance cuz they're going to need it. This is the planning board. Ma'am, this insurance is procured by the township. I do not know
what policies the >> they could answer. They would know if they had it cuz they >> they might not know. >> Errors of omission insurance. >> Can we request certificates of insurance? >> You can make an open request to the clerk for all insuranceances available to the town.
>> To the public. >> Hello. Well, I don't have any questions. I'm putting something on the record. So, I have brought this to the attention of the burough council and tonight I wanted to bring it to your attention for the record. Um, this is in relation to
application 26-002. The current applicant is coreweave. Um, they are not currently the designated redeveloper for lot 1.012. designation lapsed for CW Grow Speaks
Nest Urban Renewal LLC April 13th, 2026. This application was voted on April 28th, 2026. There are no minutes available for the April 28th planning board where the vote was taken. So, there's no presentation
for the constituents to review. The application was not submitted under the proper named designated redeveloper. And regardless of that, designation laps 2 weeks prior to voting. Currently, there is no executed
redevelopment agreement. And with the lapse of designation, they are barred from construction without an executed agreement. [snorts] This is not the first time that this has happened. The redevelopment agreement deadline lapsed in September
of 2025 and again after the single permitted extension on April 13th, 2026. No agreement has been executed and yet construction continues and approvals are made.
I request that the board defer action until the designation and agreement issues are resolved and that any approval be conditioned on a community benefits agreement. Any show of good faith has certainly expired.
I will also request that the resolution today and the full application packet be provided in the minutes for this to review for the public to review. Um, all plans and application materials must be
on file for the public to review. That's law. Um, I also would like to request um, Robert's rule be suspended today by a 2/3 vote as everybody was waiting. So,
I would like to pose that to you. A 2/3 vote to suspend Robert's rule tonight or at least push it out another hour. Anybody want to pick that up? >> Just in terms of the time of the meeting, >> the ending time.
>> Well, we might get to that ending time depending on >> that is 10 p.m. You can suspend that the lift of 10 p.m. >> We're not there yet. And I don't know where we'll be in the next. >> You could choose to do that now.
No. Any concerns about the fact that you approved an application for a non-desated redeveloper? They're not the redeveloper for that plot. >> So, you're at your 3 minute 10second mark.
>> I don't know yield time. >> THEY'RE NOT GOING TO answer any questions, but I wanted that on the record for the Superior Court of New Jersey. >> Thank you. >> [screaming] [applause]
>> Good evening. My name is Annette. I'm from Cranford. I understand that tonight concerns the memorialization of the subdivision approval for Cororeweave and that the board is not being asked to decide what may ultimately be built on these newly
created lots. However, I respectfully asked the board to consider what this subdivision represents in the broader context of the project. On April 28th of this year, I asked the board attorney here to explain the applicant's options.
The word being options here, there were choices afforded to coreweave. There were no choices afforded to the community. He explained that Cororeweave could have come before the board with a complete package, a subdivision together with a site plan showing what it
intended to build, allowing the board and the public to evaluate traffic noise operations, water demand, electrical infrastructure, and other impacts together. Instead, the applicant chose to bifurcate the process and seek
subdivision approval separately. That raises a simple question. I've raised it before and I'm raising it again. Why? The subdivision itself may appear routine, but there is nothing routine about the consequences of
expanding a 40 megawatt data center five-fold. There is nothing routine about a project reportedly approaching 250 megawatts of power demand. And there is nothing routine about dividing a project of that potential scale into
separate approvals that prevent the public from seeing the full picture at once. From understanding how these pieces will affect their lives wholly, not in parts. Each piece of this project has come before the board on its own. A
substation, then a building conversion, and now a subdivision. Viewed separately, each application appears modest. viewed together. They suggest a project substantially larger than the single facility that has been discussed publicly. We know this because Corweave
has spoken about quote first 40 megawws unquote about quote landing and expanding unquote and about bringing the project quote to scale unquote. The company later accepted a state incentive requiring 143 jobs and burough
resolutions describe approximately 550,000 square ft of data centers even though the current building is approximately 247 square ft. I'm not asking the board to speculate about future applications. I'm asking
the board to acknowledge that the public record already points to a project that may be significantly larger than what has been presented one application at a time and this is the reason that the other communities were not notified. I'm
asking whether or not this is occurring pardon me whether or not this is occurring here the concern is legitimate. When projects are reviewed in pieces, it becomes difficult to evaluate the cumulative effects, the impacts, including infrastructure demands, environmental consequences, and
long-term quality of life impacts. >> One example is noise. Not simply not simply whether a single building compiles complies with today's ordinances, but whether the communities prepare for the cumulative effects of a
large-scale AI data center campus operating around the clock. These are the questions that deserve consideration before the full buildout is realized, not afterwards. Because I have to say, and I'm finishing now, there is no fire truck, baseball
field, or shortterm financial benefit that can adequately compensate for the long-term impacts if the ultimate project changes the character of this community or places burdens on residents that were never fully evaluated. I ask
to be put in this record as this resolution is memorialized tonight. This is my last sentence, I promise. I respectfully ask that the record reflect the continuing concern of residents that the ultimate scope and cumulative impacts of this project have not yet
been presented in a single comprehensive manner. Thank you. [applause] You need a sign holder. This is very important. Okay. This is for the record. On June 17th, I
was at the council meeting and I asked Miss Perno, the council woman, about a bid put in for around $46,000 from the company Perno Giodarno Construction. The project that they bid on and were awarded was the Orchard Brook Water
Restoration Project. I'm sorry. Orchard Brook Stream Capacity Restoration Project. So, when I asked this question on June 17th, I was told, "No, no. Why are you asking me that? What do you do for work? What do you do for work? Is it
anybody's business up here what I do for work? >> No. Thank you." So I will read for the record from the city of railway the public notice. The municipal county the municipal council of the city of railway has awarded a contract through the fair
and open process pursuant to NJSA 1944A-20.4. This contract and resolution AR-128-26 authorizing it are available for public inspection in the office of the municipal clerk. The contract has been
awarded to Perno Jarno Construction LLC for a fee not to exceed 46,500 for the Orchard Brookstream capacity restoration project. This company complies with the requirements of PL.204C19. Um that's Heather Capone's a city clerk
of railway. So is the city clerk of railway lying about a bid? Anybody? Did you win that bid, Mr. Perno? >> So, you're asking me if I win a bid. >> You're asking me about my personal life.
>> You're you're you're a planning board member. >> This is on the public website for Rowway. So, can you answer to me how that is your personal life? >> Because the this is not Rorowway. This is Kennaw.
>> So, he's right in front of me. So, what I'm asking cuz he is for Kennaw's planning board, correct? The Orchard Brook restoration project was one that was in Rawway, right? That's technically what? Cranford. >> The contract that you just read
>> was from the town of Broadway. >> So why did Miss Perno tell me no. What do you do for work? >> Mr. Perno, did you win the project? Yes or no? It's a very simple question. It's public. I'm going to post it anyway. You know, I'm going to put it up there. So
just answer the question. DID YOU WIN THE PROJECT? >> MRS. Perno answered the question. >> She said no. What do you [laughter and screaming] do for work? >> He answered she answered the question. >> Yes or no? Did you win? >> So the counselor
ANSWER YOUR QUESTION. >> DID YOU WIN the project? Did you win the bid? $46,500. Did you win the project? Or restoration project. I'm asking the MAN IN FRONT OF ME IN Are we in Count? >> YES. >> YEAH. OKAY. SO, I'M ASKING FOR THE
PERSON IN COWORTH. >> NO, that's fine. YOUR TIME IS UP. >> YES OR NO? >> YOUR TIME IS UP. >> DID YOU [screaming] WIN THE BID FOR THE LARGER BOOK RESTORATION PROJECT? >> Your time is up. >> IT WOULD BE WAY BETTER [screaming] FOR YOU IF YOU SAID YES, HONESTLY, BECAUSE IF YOU IF SHE TOLD ME YES, I WOULD HAVE
LEFT HER ALONE. But if she said no and asked me what I do FOR WORK, >> SO HERE'S MY QUESTION. >> I UNDERSTAND. IT'S 950, RIGHT? >> YES OR NO? >> DID YOU WIN, MR. PERSON?
Did you win? >> Is your wife a liar? Did your wife lie? >> Did your wife lie? Did you live? >> THERE IS JUST A >> I SHOULD DESERVE AN ANSWER TO THAT. IF I'M TOLD no and the answer is clearly yes, there's no explanation as to why a
an elected official [laughter] is lying to people asking questions about our public record. YOU ALL SWORE TO SOME OF CORRECT TO SERVE AND DO YOUR JOB JUSTLY and fairly. Correct. >> And all the council serve they right. There's an OATH THERE.
>> I'M SURE honesty is in that oath somewhere. AND YOU DON'T LIKE IT. >> SAY YES OR NO. >> YOUR TIME. >> OKAY. I DON'T CARE. What I'm asking you is yes or no. >> What will happen is no one else will be able to speak. >> OH, OKAY.
>> SO, FOR THE RECORD, IT IS VERY VERY PUBLIC that Miss and Mrs. Perno, Mr. and Miss Perno, won the bid. Miss Perno, an elected official, related to me live on record and then had the audacity to ask me what I do for work. I think that should be clear. THANK YOU.
>> [applause] >> GOOD EVENING. >> The uh anonymous planning board attorney um they made it very clear that we only have 3 minutes, but you guys did a masterful job of wasting 2 and 1 half hours on a 10x10 gazebo and someone converting a family into a two family
home. So kudos TO ALL OF YOU. MASTER. Almost [clears throat] two months ago, I stood up here and very respectfully expressed my concerns with Cororeweave requesting that the sub a subdivision of the lot into four and expressing that it
gave the appearance of potential well let's say skirting around some things, hiding some things because it's kind of unusual to subdivide a land into four and simply say we don't really know what we're going to do with it. We don't have any plans. Even though here's the
specific borders we wish to have. Here's the specific lots we wish to have. But lucky for me, it turns out public records answered the question for me because you people did not. You refused to answer the questions at that time. You refused to tell the public what core
we've intended to do at the lots. So, you made it clear that I we're not you're not answering any questions tonight. So, I'll use this time to make sure that the public is properly educated. We have public records that Cororeweave plainly and clearly informed officials of the burrow that they
intended to build a total of three data centers on the four subdivider lots plus a megaized substation with one the one single data data center being converted now sitting on one of
those four subdivisions. Interesting, isn't it? And yet this board has repeatedly repeatedly this board and the council has repeatedly refused to answer the public's questions. Many of them very specific to this. Are there additional plans? Are there additional data centers
coming? What's more interesting, Corre's application to this board states within the application their intention to build additional data centers on the lots. It's said in the application itself and had writing. It's said in the attached
letter specifically, it is mentioned in emails as far back as July of 2025 in which Michael Ash, a burough attorney, emailed the mayor of this town and told her they just bought the whole lot and they plan to add two more additional data centers.
>> How dare you? >> This is a shameful display. An absolutely shameful display. And this will spread. We will make sure everyone in this town knows exactly what you guys do and what you refused to tell them. We
will make sure of it. We will make sure of it and WE WILL MAKE SURE THIS DOES NOT HAPPEN. This will not happen. There is no redevelopment agreement in place. They are not a designated developer as it currently stands. This is not happening guys. It's not
happening. >> We refuse to allow this to happen. I don't get caught. >> You cannot sit up here and not tell the public the truth and then get to approve these things. That is not how that's going to work. >> So,
we're not we're not aware of this either. In fact, we have emails showing as recently as just a few weeks ago, officials from Rosal Park emailing this burrow REQUESTING SPECIFICALLY, "ARE THERE PLANS [screaming] for additional data centers?" And a reply back,
avoiding the question, stating nothing in relation to additional data centers, not a word, implying that the only knowledge is of the current conversion. Incredibly convenient. liars >> and the corruption.
>> Yeah, >> that's my time. >> Yeah, >> you love wasting time. You spent two and a half hours harassing homeowners over parking spaces, but something that is literally hundreds of times bigger with hundreds of times more impact to tens of thousands of
people, not their block with like a 100 people on it. >> That does not deserve 2 and 1 half hours of scrutiny. >> Correct. SYSTEM just came up here with a billion dollars >> and an army of lawyers. It's a damn shame they even needed two to begin
with. >> They worship money. >> Thank you. Good night. >> [applause] >> Okay. Hello. So, May 8th at 7:56 p.m. there was an explosion. I spoke to the fire chief about it. He said it was the
turbines that they turned on those generators. There's going to be 31 generators at that site, diesel generators. It said they're doing testing and it turns out they need to test them once a month. If you look at Sterling, Virginia, people watch this at home. Sterling, Virginia. Look it up. That's what they told the residents in
Sterling, Virginia that it was just a test to be on for 24 hours. Guess what? It's only a year later. Hasn't turned off. Guess what's going to happen in Kennorth, New Jersey? >> Same thing. >> The lack of answers. Hello. The same thing. In addition to that with the fire chief, right? I asked him at the street
fair. I said, "So, what's going on going forward for data centers? When there's a fire, are you guys equipped to deal with it?" I didn't even know there were a volunteer firefighters. You guys are amazing. Thank you for volunteering, but you're not even paid. So, in addition to that, the fire chief said, "Oh, we're doing trainings for that." Okay, cool.
You're doing trainings for that. In January of last year, in January in Mosul Park, there was a fire that took over a whole warehouse. It took over four hours to contain with multiple fire departments from various towns. There we go. So, with that said, when there's a
fire at the data center, is Kennallowick volunteer firefighters going to be prepared? Are the surrounding towns also going to be prepared? It's noted that after after the building is up in Kennorth that the fire department is going to do a walk through. A walk through
[laughter] a walk through, right? A walk through. A walk through is not training. >> Yeah. when they die. >> Correct me if I'm wrong. >> But they have other towns. >> There has to be other police officers,
fire department that is equally as concerned that they cannot speak up about this because they work for the town. How do you think they feel learning what they just learned from residents who are not paid protesters who are devoted to this? How do you think they feel? You
don't care because they get paid, right? So, what about local fire departments? Are you guys going to prompt them on how to be prepared with fires at AI data centers? Keep in mind to people at home, data centers, a one mega one data center and an AI data center are very
different. All right? So, let's call it what it is, an AI data center, and let's call it really what it is, a surveillance center. [applause] Just look at >> show THEM ANY RESPECT. >> THEY DON'T RESPECT THESE PEOPLE. >> THEY don't respect us.
>> THEY WON'T CARE. GO IN THERE and get sick or killed. >> Good evening. >> I'm going to just say this for the record. In reviewing the Oprah, there is mentions of NDA ass that were signed. So
I need to understand about these NDAs and whether any of you have signed those NDAs because the fact that it's mentioned over and over in the public records I need to understand who signed those NDAs. So u Mr. Perno, did you sign
an NDA? >> Planning board members are not permitted to sign NDAs. >> There's an email from a lawyer. So >> the mayor, >> you know, there's >> Yeah, the mayor's on the on the um planning board as well. So there's a lot
of contradictions about these NDAs and I don't understand why there's even a need for anyone to sign an NDA is there's no lawyer tonight, right? We only have engineers and Yes. So why what's the purpose of an NDA? What are
we what are we not wanting to disclose? trade secrets, patents, sensitive data. There's we're a public chemist public entity. Things are transparent. We're not we don't have secret chemicals to hide or anything or
secret patents on how to build or or make anything or even design anything. So, I need to understand about NDAs and why anyone would sign an NDA for a project like this. >> I I don't know. There was no request for
NDAs for any of the planning board professionals. None of us signed NDAs. We weren't presented with anything. Applications are made in public and they're heard in public. That's how a planning board operates. A council is totally different. >> The council said no. Council said they
>> the council also I it's a different it's a different body. It's a different me. >> Okay. So, for the record, the planning board and the town council have all denied signing NDAs even though they're in the public record documentation.
Thank you. [applause] >> Hi, good evening. So, I have a question for all of you and I would hope you would give me the courtesy like I sat here for 3 hours and listened to your your your spiel here. What do you want to leave as your legacy?
>> What do you really want to leave? I mean, all these people are concerned about this and you all are just basically stone coldfaced. I'm talking from the heart, Mr. Persona, Mr. David, and the rest of you. Attorney, you're just sitting there.
It's It's like these are all in empty seats. There's like nobody there because these people are asking for answers. Okay? These police officers put in three, four hours a night right here, just sitting listening to all of us, listening to two hours of the meeting before. You're you're counting the
clock. The mayor was so weak the last uh meeting she took that clock and she threw it to the ground. And I'm going to tell you what else she threw. She threw all of you under the bus. >> Okay? She said the planning board is the one that approved coreweave. Okay? But where were these question?
>> But where were these people here when you guys approved it? You you did what? Two houses today or whatever. I don't I don't even know. A house and a gazebo. Okay. Telling the one lady, "Put up a net." >> Why should she put up a net at a public
park when the park department should be putting up the net for that soccer ball? >> I'm sure all of you have beautiful homes and you like to live comfortably, right? >> Just like she wants to live comfortably. And you're going to worry about a 30x 25
um cazo. Okay, that's probably very expensive that I probably can't even afford. >> Okay, >> but again, I I just want to know where where do you want to leave your legacy? >> Nothing. >> I mean, I'm asking you. I mean,
>> I'm just I just got a question. >> Mr. David, I know you want to answer, but you're pretty much tied. And I know all of you is most nobody wants to really just speak out and and I get it. you know, you afraid of peers, you know, about peership and all of that stuff. I
get it, you know, but at the end of the day, you got to go down. You got to live. You got to go to sleep at tonight. Put your head on the pillow. I hope you sleep comfortably. I mean, I I will, but this has always been in the back of my mind cuz I got an 18-year-old kid right
here that I got to worry about that are these brain waves. I got a dog at home. She hears plenty times more than I can hear. She's going to hear that hum of a refrigerator that your mayor said. >> And again, I'm not here to make a
mockery of any of you. I just want to know, you know, do you want to be a leader like they taught us in the army? Do you want to be a leader or do you want to be a follower? >> I'll leave you at that. [applause] Hi, my name is Sue Vidanzi. I'm from
Rose Park and um I started uh looking at the map and counting the number of schools which are in a two-mile range of these data centers >> and uh our high school in Rosel Park is only a half mile away. Your uh Harding
School is 1.9 miles away. Aldine Sherman and Robert Gordon are all within the two mile range of this data center. These are my elementary schools in Rosel Park. We also have a middle school next to Robert Gordon. Same range. There's a a
school in Washington um about a a mile and uh 3/4 in Union. And there's Orange Avenue School in Cranford, which I'm sure is is between uh 3/4 of a mile. I want to know what uh regulations you
have um or what the state has told you or have they told you yet? And why are you doing why are you making these data centers before you even get the information of how these schools are going? What how far a school can be when it's safe from a data center? And then
I'm just shocked that I didn't realize you you're making more data centers. You haven't gotten the one done. I just I'm just I'm floored. So, can anyone tell me have you talked to the state? Has the state talked to you about what's safe
for a school to be near a data center? >> What's the plan? >> Do we have a plan? Are we going forward with Are you talking to Cow Weave and the state? I I don't understand what you
guys are doing. >> I mean, there's got to be there's got to be a plan, but no one's saying anything. >> The planning board doesn't operate that way. >> What? >> The planning board doesn't operate that way, right? We don't
>> Okay. But but they I was at the other meeting and they seem to think that you guys had all the power. >> No, I I understand. [applause] >> So who are who are we are are you guys going to meet with the other towns in Union County to talk about this because
what you're doing is affecting all of us, but we don't get any not that we need we don't need the money this badly for for it just it doesn't make sense. You you guys are not going to have any taxes, but you're not going to have your health. You're not going to have your youth.
>> So, if I may go ahead. >> Okay. So, the redevelopment agreements, the designations of the redevelopers, those agreements are not done in this form at the planning board. Those are
all done at council, right? They just they just sent us redevelopment is the designation. What the planning board does is hear the application, right, for the actual project, right,
the budget and things of that nature, right? So that's what we get and that's what we >> and they're not supposed to approve. They have an agreement with the red developer and they don't
>> but they approved. >> So they did. >> I mean it just feels like we're in the dark. I have no idea what's going on here. But I'm just I was just trying to answer your question. >> So what's going h going forward? What >> you know are you Rosel Park is is asking
you questions and you're not even you know replying >> that they're not asking questions of the planning board. They're asking questions of the municipal council and and the city. >> Okay. So the municipal council just shoved them off >> which is but that's a different entity, right? So I can't answer that question.
>> Okay. >> So who do we go to to get answers? Are you having meetings with Craford and California? And you know being blackf Please show me that black light show.
Show me where it says I can't speak. So my question again is where was the planning board? Where were the people of the municipality? You guys again saw two clients today. Where was the planning board? Where were
these people in this room when you guys I'm only asking you because back in 2025 so is it closed >> and then one that happened in 2020 26
is a subdivision just the division of the law. So it be project. So this multi-billion dollar company that forc basically >> is the public going to be in on that
next three development phases or four days they will have to file applications for this and similar to the hearing that runs that structure bring their experts
experts ask questions that ask questions to ask specific questions of those experts that times ago sub
to Heat. Heat. Thank you for coming down for me. But my next question is again all you were these clients earlier you had questions you had answers. Okay
Mr. How you say Mio you're nodding your head sorry obviously you why aren't you answering these people just like you answer those two I understand these people they don't have game
I see me. Why can't they answer? Cuz your mayor pretty much said no planning planning applications. If you would have come a week before and said, "Hey, before that
hearing, I want to ask this one question about that case." We would have said you have to wait until the hearing, right? And so this board is very cautious. has to make decisions not to answer questions, reach out things
that I was living here probably would [applause] not question that it's not is it specific control a specific function and it's different than than council or
state or any other government. It is judicial hearings testimony treated as trial. You cannot answer or comment on those things before you trial again. But just so you know, a lot of your surrounding
communities, they shut it down, man. HEAT. HEAT. You're saying that no more dat doesn't understand you so many lies back in
the lady that we come to the >> so we hold Whatever you tomorrow. There's a time that when I file we do this [clears throat] first I think you
should exactly as that under construction. Heat. HEAT. Was that approval? >> I don't know where that was actually without approval and that
pass from the council that most most 2025 and I'm not sure does anyone know the answer that approval was shared with other
I comment so much. Oh my god. She was relationship and honestly like honestly really bad like you guys a like everybody. I receive
everybody. [clears throat] I know you stressing like this doesn't happen like this is serious I think
he was right here. Somebody in the house 19. Yeah. Heat. YEAH. HEAT. [music] >> [music] [music]
>> HEAT. HEAT. [music]