I'm making this announcement in compliance with the open public meetings act being chapter 231 public law 1975 laws of the state of New Jersey. The planning board secretary has prepared a schedule of this meeting of the planning board of the burrow of Kennaworth for
the year 2026 and has posted a true copy of this schedule in the bulletin on the bulletin board located at the front entrance of Burrow Hall and has mailed true copies of this schedule to the local source and star ledger and is maintaining a copy of this schedule in Burough Hall. Accordingly, the notice
requirements of the open public's meetings act have been satisfied in regard to this meeting. Can we stand for the pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance 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 here. >> Councilman >> here. >> Mr. Perna >> here. >> Mr. Davis >> here. >> Mr. >> Here, >> Mr. Ina >> here >> did you get?
>> Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't hear. >> Um, okay. Uh, that's all. Is there a motion to approve the minutes of uh our last meeting and our reorg? >> Motion. >> Motion made by Mayor Cage, second by Mr. Scaderi. All in favor? >> I.
>> Kathy, are there any communications? You have no communications. You didn't receive any letters. >> I just think I should say swear. >> Oh, okay. >> I'm sorry.
>> We needed you to pay. You're telling us what to do. >> Well, even though he did the second back in time if I can, Mr. >> Yes, sir. >> All right. I state your name. I, Mike, >> do solemnly swear >> do solemnly swear >> that I will support the Constitution of
the United States >> I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and bear true faith and allegiance to the same >> true faith and allegiance to the same >> and to the governments established >> to the governments established >> in the United States >> into the United States >> and in this state >> and in this state
>> under the authority of the people >> under the authority of the people. I do follow do further solemnly swear >> I do further solemnly swear >> that I will faithfully >> that I will faithfully >> impartially >> impartially >> and justly perform >> and justly perform >> the duties of Kenowart planning board
members >> the duties of Kenward planning board members >> according to the best of my ability >> according to the best of my ability >> so help me God >> congratulations Mr. Good. Okay. Um, what I am going to do is I'm just going to backtrack for the record
because m Mr. Scaderi second that motion. So, we're going to go back again with the same approval for the minutes and the motion is made by >> motion. >> Mayor Carlo, seconded by now the member
of Mike Scaderi. All in favor? Okay. Then I asked about communications. Kathy says she received none. So I'm going to leave it at that. Um so what we're going to do next, just let me see real quick.
We have um an error that I may have made. Not really an error, but I like a little bit of house cleaning. at our Rio meeting when we introduced our planner, our attorney, and our engineer. Yes, we saw them in, but we did not read the
resolution into uh the minutes. So, uh, Vice Chair Greg David would like to do that at this point. Right. So we're going to start with the planning board attorney and I'm going to read the resolution whereas affirm was responsive to the request for
proposals due October 24th 2025 at 11:00 a.m. for the position of 2026 planning board attorney and whereas the planning board is selected to firm Hanback as planning board attorney for the year 2026 and whereas the firm's currently Hanbeck shall perform all services as planning board attorney of the barrel of
Kennorth consistent with responsed by said firm. Now therefore be it resolved by the Kennorth Planning Board of the Bureau of Kennorth County Union of New Jersey that the firm's Quincy Hollandback be and is hereby appointed to the position of Kennorth Planning Board attorney for a term set to expire December 31st 2026 pursuant to a fair
and open process under NJSA194A-20.4 sector. Um, be it further resolved that a professional service agreement is hereby authorized so as to include compensation in accordance with the RFP as submitted by the caption firm for their services as planning attorney be it further resolved that notice of this
award be published in a newspaper authorized to receive legal advertisements on behalf of barrel within 10 days of this date in accordance with New Jersey law. The resolution was um the motion was made to approve by Mr. Lady was seconded by Mr. many and all members. It was passed
unanimously. Thank you. Okay. Moving on to planner. Um whereas the general planning board is an autonomous statutory board that is coordinated under the division of planning and zoning in the department of planning and engineering. Whereas the firm hired rule and associates PA was respons to the
request for proposals due October 24th, 2025 at 11:00 a.m. for the position of 2026 planning board planner. And whereas pursuant to the fair open process rule advertisements for proposals were published in the local source and posted on the bureau of Kennorth's website and proposals were received and reviewed for
Kennorth Planning Board Planner for the year 2026. Now therefore be it resolved by the Kennorth Planning Board of the Bureau of Kennorth County, New Jersey that the firm hired rule and associates pad and is hereby appointed to the position count planning board planner for return to set set to expire December
31st, 2026 pursuant to a fair and open process under New Jersey law. We have further resolved that a professional service agreement is hereby authorized so as to include compensation in accordance with the RFP as submitted by the caption firm for their services as planning board attorney. He had further
resolved that notice of this award be published in newspaper authorized to receive legal advertisements on behalf of the barrel within 10 days of the date of this in accordance with New Jersey law. This motion was made by Mr. Kmeni and was seconded by Mr. Lady and again
all members um voted unanimously. And lastly for engineer whereas the firm center state engineering was responsive to the request for proposals due November 19th 2025 at 11 a.m. or the position of 2026 planning board engineer. And whereas the planning board has selected the appointment of center
state engineering as planning board engineer for the Kennorth planning board, the bureau of Kennor here and after burrow for the year 2026. And whereas the firm center state engineering shall perform all services as 2026 planning board engineer for the barrel consistent with the response submitted by Sid Fern. Now therefore be
it resolved the Kennorth Planning Board of Barl Kenn Union State of Jersey that the firm center state engineering be and is hereby appointed to the position of planning board engineer effective immediately for a term set to expire December 31st 2026 pursuant to fair and
open process under New Jersey law and further reserve that professional service agreement is hereby authorized so as to include compensation in accordance with the RFP as submitted by the caption perm for their services. It further resolved that notice of this award be published in a newspaper
authorized to receive legal advertisements on behalf of barrel within 10 days of this date in accordance with the European law. This um resolution motion to adopt was made by Mr. Lady seconded by Mr. Kello and again all um members voted unanimously.
>> Well, thank you Mr. David and thank you again to the professionals. We just wanted to put that as a matter of record so we could just follow our procedure. Um, moving forward, uh, we have, um, resolution application 24-9,
Eric Shave, 61 South 19th Street. As a matter of procedure, what we normally do with resolutions, the attorney usually reads off some of the pinpoints of the resolution and uh, for us to vote on the resolution. Um, Lou Rego was our
attorney last year, so he's not here. So, what I'm going to do is have the pleasure of just highlighting a couple of things for you in memory. And if you found it in order, then you could go ahead and vote on the resolution. Okay. So, if you remember, this application provided adequate notice. The applicant,
Eric Chavez, representative himself. Um, some of the things we asked is the applicant requested a dimensional variance and relief in order to remove uh to renovate a single family house in R5. It's an R5 residence. Um, as previously discussed, a five-
bedroomedroom home requires three on-site parking spaces. We talked for hours about how they could achieve that. And uh the board has determined that the benefits of the application substantially outweigh the negative impacts in the in the uh residential and
the residential uses permitted. There's a whole litany of items. Uh but two or three that stood out is probably um let me say 13, but the two that uh I want to read to you is as agreed by the
applicant prior to the issuance of a permit, any permit uh the zoning officer and burough engineer shall review all plans submitted by the applicant. So our new um engineer will now well that's the
burough engineer so they will take care of that as agreed item six as agreed by the applicant as agreed to by the applicant the the seller or the basement area shall not be used for bedroom living areas. So those
are the two um highlighted areas. So, if you've all got this in your packet, if you find that the resolution was put together in order, we need a vote to approve um the resolution. Motion made by >> No, I I did not hear the case.
>> Oh, you weren't here. I'm sorry, Mr. David. It >> should be I by the >> Motion made by Mr. Mazio. Did you >> I'm sorry. Second by Mayor Carlo. Roll call. Uh, Mayor Gage,
>> yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Clinty, >> yes. >> Mr. Matthew, >> yes. >> Mr. Mr. >> Only the people that were here. Was anybody here to hear that case that
could vote that didn't hear any? >> The police officer. Yes. >> Okay. Mr. Pandina. >> Okay. All right. So, that's that that's off our our desk. Now, we're going to go to
this. Um, it says appointing planning board secretary. We did that um uh at the reorg meeting, but tonight we uh talked about in our workshop a resolution uh to increase the salary for our planning board secretary. And we
have a resolution here. Mr. David, would you like to sure read this? Okay. So whereas excuse me whereas the planning board employs a secretary to perform essential administrative clerical and records keeping functions necessary for the
effective operation board. And whereas the planning board has reviewed the duties, responsibilities, performance and workload of the planning board secretary. And whereas the planning board finds it is appropriate in the best and in the best interest of the board to adjust the secretary's salary to reflect those responsibilities and
performance. Now therefore be resolved that the planning board hereby appoints Catholic as planning board secretary effective January 1, 2026 for a 4-year term at a rate of 6,000 per further resolve that the chairman is authorized to take all actions necessary to
implement this resolution. Is there a motion to approve this resolution? Motion made by Mr. Scaderi. Seconded by Mr. Aladd uh the roll call, please. >> Mayor, >> yes. >> Councilman, >> yes.
>> Mr. >> Yes. >> David, >> yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. Well deserved. Thank you very much.
Okay, we're going to move on now. Let me just take a look at what's next so we don't make a mess here. Application 20. Oh, before we do that, um, Mr. DeMarco, maybe we should just swear in our professionals first. Get that out of the way and then we can move
on. Okay, sure. Stand up. I state your name. You swear that the testimony shall give before the court. >> I do. >> I do.
>> Thank you, Mr. DeMargo. Okay. Application 2510 minor subdivision, 252 Boulevard, block 2, lot 2401. It's an R5 medium density residential zone. Steven Hail, how are you?
What do you want to do? You want to turn it around? >> It's fine. >> We can do it any way you want. >> I don't mind looking at the back of your head. >> Thank you all. Stephen Dale representing the opportunity board professionals
council and reappointed uh board members and new board members. Always a pleasure to be here and uh you want to thanks for always getting us reports on time. So just uh by way of brief overview this is minor subdivision piece of property
historically actually was two lots of merge and now we're looking at the head for a minor subdivision. Uh the property is located as indicated Boulevard. Um the lot size is complied with all the dimensional bearing or dimensional
requirements area uh and uh dimensions and the like. Uh the there was noted by both your engineer and your planner uh that since we're removing the garage and the driveway um that would
have triggered variance. We submitted and we'll show show an exhibit this evening. We are going to install a new driveway and garage to service the existing house. So there will be adequate off street parking and a garage comp
of the ordinance. The only variance is a pre-existing setback for the existing home that's not being exacerbated or intensified in any way. So, uh, what I'd like to do, please support first have our engineer, John Lily, take us through
the plan, the subdivision plan, and the show the exhibit we did send. I think everyone's received a copy of the the exhibit we plan to show this evening showing the addition of the garage. We also uh was noted the requirement of street trees. So we're going to comprise
the street tree requirement and then we do have our professional planner just to briefly provide the justification for the relieving. I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. Mr. G, have all the notices have all the notices been met? >> Yes. >> Okay. I'm sorry.
Um, no. What he's what he's saying is when he recognized that there may have been a a variance uh for this garage in the back >> that you got that today. And can I just address this real quick if I may? Yeah.
Take a look. Um, the reason >> Yeah, you all got it. You all got >> Yeah, I'll take it. >> I'm sorry. I'm sorry. I'm getting waved off by Mika. >> Mr. Chairman, if you want, I can probably explain. >> Oh, yes, please do. >> Please do. >> So, um, just to bring the board members
up to board, uh, the applicant is seeking a minor subdivision. There is an existing house on the property and, uh, with this minor subdivision, they were looking to remove the existing detached garage on the property. What that created is in our ordinance, we require
every single public house to have a garage and that's what was creating the variance. The applicant has now submitted the exhibit to show that they would be proposing a garage along with the driveway and that's what this is there to show >> clear.
>> Yeah, just there. I I blew it up for you because I knew you would want to see it. You wouldn't be able to see that little one. I also wanted to make this quick statement about this particular application. Um, it has been kind of hanging around for quite some time and
what we're trying to do is u move some things along uh and working with the applicant with the board with the new planner transitioning. Usually there could be what we would call a TRC meeting. So some of these things could
be rectified before they get to us. And um with that being said, you might see it for the first time today, but what it really is is saying, "Well, you need a garage, go back and have draw us a pretty picture of the garage." We have
it. So that's what we try to do. We try to um shorten that path to the goal line. >> It's your call, right? Thank and one thing I forgot to mention like thank Kevin O'Brien for many years of service and always a pleasure to work with him
this board and other boards throughout the area. So thanks Kevin. All right. So, as I indicate, I'd like to call Tom John Millio, our engineer, to take us through the proposed uh subdivision and uh attend the exhibit and further expand
on the exhibit showing the garage, uh the driveway, and the street. John sworn in. >> Sir, how are you? Do you swear or affirm that testimony shall be given?
>> I do. Thank you. All right, Mr. Millio, if you could please give the board and the public the benefit of your work, educational experience, area of expertise, and whether you've been accepted as a professional engineer before the program to the state. >> Definitely. So, I have a bachelor of science and civil engineering from
Syracuse University. Have been licensed in the state for 17 years, licensed in good standing, testified for numerous boards throughout the state. We last count at 75 municipalities throughout the state. I haven't touched enough work in my past but my first time.
>> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Just so you know, I've worked with this engineer on other applications in Franklin Township as well as South Lake building. >> So, thank you very much. >> Great. All right. Uh so if you can take
us through uh the subdivision plan and then also expand on the exhibit that we submitted electronically to the board. >> Sure. I'll push the exhibit up. I'm not sure where you guys like put this is in the way or >> usually we push it off to the side but >> and then I have handouts too
>> if that's something. Well, we would like those those are the seams as the exhibit right because they're a bit larger. We don't have to mark these since the other ones are marked. Is that the right Mr. Mark? That is correct. This was submitted. >> No, we should mark >> ahead of time,
>> but it wasn't time period, right? Should be marked today. So, >> you want to mark it? >> Oh, so the entitled >> I think you got to give it. >> Do we need to mark these Joe or >> No, just the one just the one of that
copy of those. >> We'll take them back out. So, the exhibit is entitled 252 Boulevard exhibit. Uh, today's theme is ready. All good. All good. >> All good. >> All right. So, as mentioned earlier,
property is known as 252 Boulevard. uh block 72, lot 24.01, uh located in the far five uh residential zone. Uh it's a corner lot on the corner of Boulevard and North 8th Street on top the north uh west corner
of of that intersection. Uh surrounded by residential uses and then to the west I believe it's a restaurant um so but for the most part they also residential in that area. Uh so currently on the property is a twostory
uh single family dwelling with a it's a one park that only has one garage door but it looks like it was previously a twocar garage. One of them is ported up um and with a driveway that comes off the north gate. So part of the the
proposal for the existing and removals what we're proposed to do is remove the garage that's out there and the drive will remove it as well. Um, I do want to note that the garage that's out there is actually non-performing for the current standards. The current standard says garage can't be more than 500 ft. Uh,
this garage is 641. So, we are going to remove that pre-existing nonformity that's not out there. They make it fully conformant with the garage. Um, the only other nonconformity on the site is the project art setback off of Boulevard. Uh so the
requirement is for a uh first floor uh to be 25 ft off the property line. Uh the existing front yard setback that's shown right here is 19.4 and that's not changing as part of this application. I do want to note there's
no wetlands or any flood hazard areas on the property as well. As far as the proposal proposal is to subdivide the lot from west to east. So the line kind of correct right here. Uh we'll have one property on the corner of Bard North 8
and then one property uh solely on North K. Uh it'll be considered a minor subition. Um right now we're calling them 24.02 which is the north block and 24.03 which is the south block but that's to be confirmed by the tax
assessor. They decide that those will change we'll change those numbers. Uh so I'll start with the top of the north lot. Um you know on our plans it's 24.02. Um that lot is going to have dimensions of 50 ft wide along North A and 100 ft
with a total lot area of 5,000 square ft. As of right now we're not proposing any improvements on that site as far as house or driveways or garage. um it's just going to be a vacant lot and then when the time comes to approve that lot zoning permit will be submitted and if there's an engineering permit there'll
be an engineering permit as well to uh build the house. Right now we don't have a design for anything to be built on that lot. Um and obviously everything will conform with the zoning regulations for the R5 zone or it would have to come uh in front of the zone.
That's not intended. And then the existing lot which is being subdivided off of um shown here uh it's going to be known as lot 24.03 for our plans. has a lot width of 100 ft along Boulevard and
75 ft deep along North A with a lot area of 7500 square ft. The single family dwelling will remain. Um and the only difference that um that showed on this plan and what was originally submitted as part of the application as mentioned earlier was that it was noted that a
garage is needed um for all dwellings. Um so we are proposing a detached garage 12x 20. 240 ft conforms with the setback requirements from sideyard to rey yard. We'll have a driveway uh that is generally in the
same location as the previous driveway. I believe it just shifted over 1.5 ft. Uh so very very minor uh relocation of that driveway and that driveway varies in width between 10.8
and 12 ft. under the ordinance. Additionally shown on this plan, which wasn't on the original plan, is that street trees are required. We're proposing seven street trees and we'll work with four professionals on a variety of those street trees as well to
show that they're acceptable and if they're not, we will competition professionals. Uh no new variances are being proposed but we do still have that one existing variance which is the pre-existing nonformity of the front 19.1 where 25 is required
again that's not being caused by the subdivision the subdivision is on the opposite side even if the stop wasn't sub that 19.1 still being that concludes my test and just briefly from an engineering standpoint any complying with any of the uh comments or
conditions outlined in the computer for engineer or planner. >> Uh no, Mr. Chairman, I have no further questions of Mr. >> Does the board have any questions? Just want to make comment or observation. So,
thank you for your testimony. Um so, it's just simple minor subdivision. You're going to take out the driveway in the non-conforming garage. and put up a driveway in a garage and you're going to come back for 2402
with architect plans and for sub uh I don't believe it'll come back to the board uh as long as it's performing zoning and building purpose. So what he's presenting is that he did not prepare any uh dwelling um to go on
any house to go >> right now. Right now >> um and I I think where we're going with this is that when this comes before us, we want usually an idea of what's going to be built because we don't want houses to match. Correct. all that. And yeah,
it's a typical 50 by 100 lot, which you should be able to fit a house, a driveway, a garage in, but it would have been nice to have even a um concept that it works because, you know, because of,
you know, you're going to come off a like everybody else comes off with a where garage, the driveway is going to be in comparison to you going to be on the right side, left side, too close. So my comment my other comment is um and I
I'd asked the board engineer or I'll ask the rest of my colleagues here is does the burrow have any ordinance that would um you know for fencing walls
uh hip structures in the rightway. >> Yes sir. typically other places you wouldn't put them in right away. You wouldn't put a fence in right away. I get it. This fence has probably been here for I don't know 100 years or however long the house is. I'm
just curious as if we have anything since we're here and have you moved. Just saying. Do we? >> So, we we do have order in suspense, but I would like to yield to our plan to hear what she has to say about the your two-part question.
So um thank you um Mr. Chairman. Um the there is a fencing ordinance and it does require um um certain setbacks and uh need be and I think one of the questions was that uh is the existing fencing going to be removed that is along the
boulevard. >> It's a change is is the existing fence that's along the board going to remain. >> So let me make it easier. you will have to remove it. >> So I think that can be the condition.
>> So your answer is if it's nonconforming, you're going to remove it. >> Correct. >> Okay, that's number one. Number two, you had something else that uh Nick, what was the first part of your question? My was an observation that that although
it's just a minor subdivision and you're making a standard lot, 50 by 100 lot, it would have been nice to see a concept to see to make sure that a anything a house whatever 50 is going to be 40 by 50.
>> Yeah, I know. The window is, you know, how big is the house going to be? Is it going to fit in here? Is the driveway going to fit? It's going to fit, but it would have been nice to see it on the plants, right? Well, yeah, it's always nice to see more than less, but 50 by 100 is a lot in size and but ma did you have something
to say to that? So following what uh a board member has suggested there are as pointed out in the memorandum also there is the building site design standards which requires you know uh if a subdivision is being made and two units are being put single family units are
next to each other they have to be differentiated architecturally and that is the reason uh you know even in a minor subdivision the board likes to see what is the difference between now you have an existing unit and it is uh
assumed that the new unit would be very differentiated. However, we do not have that in front and that's the hesitation board members have that they don't see this design uh or this elevation right now in front of them. So, Mr. if you can talk a little bit as to how
different uh you know the design would be what the existing building looks like and if it is bird's per either they want to see the elevation or they would leave it up to the professionals to see it is different enough uh from the existing building. Thank you, Ma Frank Mazio.
>> And just to add to that, um it would be nice to know if there's any um uh improvements planned for the existing home just to give us a feel. Are we are you putting any addition to it? Are we just here just listening to testimony on the lot on the subdivision? >> Okay. So, I can touch on both. So, for I
think that was easy. There's no proposed improvements inside the house or any renovations. The only improvements to uh the the current lot will be the new garage attach garage and driveway and removals of features that we talked about earlier. Other than there's no
other addition of the house. Um speaking about the visual architectural styles. So as planner had mentioned this is an older home that's on an existing lot. Um look again I'm not an architect but it looks
like it's a four square type of style. So, it's an older style home. Um, all the the homes in that general area seem to be in older housing stock. So, anything that goes into that new um lot will be something newer, newer design, something more within time that are
selling as far as something. >> Anyone else? >> You mentioned something about you had some concern about the driveways or whether we're going to be placed close to 8 Street or not. Um, well, it's just maybe somebody can ask.
>> Listen, I I I get it either way. Uh, but the applicant is coming in to propose a subdivision and promote it and and create a new lot again. Okay, it's 5500 lot. We're never going to see that what's going on. That's going to go to the zoning department. So, is the
driveway going to be too close to the new driveway that they're putting in that they are showing on here? Is it going to be on the other side of of of the uh the lot? It is just nice to see what's going on on this. And then, you
know, all that's >> you know, we projected applications in the past. >> Show us what the house is going to look like and the levels. >> Oh, I get it. and that's why I went to come. >> So, in in light of uh this particular
application, I don't know if that was the right way to put it with this particular application, it almost stands alone because if you have a subdivision where there's going to be two lots, two empty lots, then it would be more amicable to the board to take a look and see what the two houses look like. So,
they are not um a person wearing the same dress. And that's what we always uh didn't want to do. But the uh with this particular situation and everyone is unique, right? You do have an older home on the boulevard. You're not going to I
don't think somebody is going to build to match that home. They're going to build something new um in that design. However, I wouldn't have a problem with that design being brought over to the uh the planner and the engineer to take a
look at that uh and and see what that would look like as as a request um to the applicant. Um and yes, the board always likes to get involved. And this board could actually say at this point if this was to be approved, yes, your
your driveway is where it is on 8th Street right now, that's fine. Would the board be feel better that the two driveways are together or would the that driveway be on the other side? Maybe we could ask the applicant if they would uh
consider with the new construction of their house, be it on the the the north side or the south side. I think it should be on the other side closer to the house on 8th Street >> towards further down. So the two driveways
>> preferably the two >> preferably the two driveways being >> away from each other, >> right? >> So now looking at it and I'm sorry I didn't notice it before. So on the right side on the north side of 2402, you got two telephone poles. So the driver's not
going there. You got two proposed trees that could be anywhere really, but they have to be separated by something. The driveway is not going on left or right, south or north. It's going in the middle at some distance separated from the other driveway. So that's the only place
the driveway can go. So if the driveway is going in the middle of the house, then the garage's going to go in the middle of the house. Is that what was planned? Not planted and the trees are going to be a different spot. I'm not making a big deal out of it. It's just that with not with with minimal
information. >> Let's hear from our engineer. >> I just want to bring to the board's attention. There is an existing curve there already. I don't know if the engineer would like to make that a little more. >> I'm sorry. What' you say? There's an existing existing >> for the existing house
>> for the empty lot. >> You can see it on the site plan and you see it's on closer to the north property. So re that again I don't think that the has a preference for site they go to obviously
go the house right so that and also we don't have any problem stipulating and I agree with the chair's comment that it's it's different than when you come in with subdividing two vacant but even if the resolution was included we'll comply with the localized
ordinance so >> okay I I just don't want to I'm sorry Mike go ahead >> just the house directly to the right of this is a new construction house. >> Yeah. Two or three years old. So, we just want to make sure it's a little different from that. >> Okay. So, I I just don't want to get
caught up in in someone coming back to us saying, "Well, you your your protocol is that we need to see the houses so they don't match." But I think maybe I think maybe I don't
know what this is that this could come under a unique situation. There's already a house built there. We could also say don't build a house that looks like the one to the left and to the right, which I know you're not going to do, but um you know I I I don't know. I think it's just a standalone model at
this point. >> Anyone else? Yeah, I I mean I think the same lot curb cut and maybe we could if we get further into the application talk about the curb cut and any any use of that that's going to basically predetermine where your driveway is going to go unless I get
clear of the telephone calls that I don't particularly think that's an issue. Um and uh and the fact that there's an existing home there that they're not renovating. Their testimony is then um it's obviously this this newer home is going to differ from that.
Um but I guess we're kind of getting ahead of ourselves. It's probably more. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Mr. >> I'm sorry. Ma, go ahead. >> A couple of followup questions also. >> Sure. >> Sure. >> Uh Mr. of the existing house. Do we know how
many bedrooms it is? >> I don't. >> The reason I'm asking is >> okay. So, uh, as per our ordinance for the three bedroomedroom house, you do need uh two parking spaces if I'm not wrong.
>> Yes, your garage is one and eight and a half driveway. All right. So, I wanted to put that in. And uh the new house um I'm assuming it will be three, four, but today your testimony is whatever garage you're going to propose is and driveway is
going to comply with the number of parking spaces. >> Correct. Correct. >> Uh where would all the HVAC equipment be located? Where is it for the existing house? Is it >> plans?
But there is >> so >> there's no like >> so would that be something you would be updating the house with for to bring it modern up to up to code standards? >> No. >> Is it not required by the building code that >> have central error in the existing building?
>> No. >> So all right and uh the next the new building would everything would comply because you do need visual buckles and 3 ft of buckling and everything around. >> Correct. Um there are no existing uh sheds or accessory structures on the
existing >> that is correct >> building >> other than the garage >> other than the garage and none are proposed. >> And for the new lot everything would comply with the setbacks which is 3 foot setback requirement.
Um >> um in terms of uh impervious coverage, is it the testimony that both are being met? >> Yes. >> And will combine >> Y and provide the updated um for the driveway and the garage to ensure that. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Just have one question for you. Just is it the intent to uh to get the minor subdivision approval from the board to file by map or by nature? >> Uh the minor we would submit obviously that to council and and board
professionals to review. >> Thank you. There was a comment about adding a monument and we have no issues with that. >> Okay. Mr. Mazio. >> Uh I know you you mentioned it but is the parking requirement based on the num number of existing bedrooms? a number of
bedrooms. >> So, isn't it reasonable to um assume that, you know, based on the age of this house that eventually at some point maybe post the development of the new lot that this house would be improved that we should think about parking and
but and you're saying that we have enough for four spaces? We have four spaces and then if somebody comes in let's say they want to either renovate add more bedrooms or knock it down and rebuild the house that would reszoning and building and that's what >> and currently you're proposing the
driveway would allow for four spaces and that would be enough for how many bedrooms? >> I think that's five bedroom. >> Yeah, we just heard that for five. >> I think that's where I >> can I just one more question on
>> Mr. Pina >> on that note. So, um, yeah. So, the max is at four, right? >> Yes. >> So, um, and the extra lot, it cement lot, you're going to have a driveway and garage, one in the garage probably. And,
um, with only a 25 ft setback, you're probably only going to have one driveway. So, are you going to limit the house to bedrooms or would you then have to go for like a double driveway? Uh yeah, I should ask it.
>> Yes, I understand the question. Um I don't know if it would be a single garage or a double garage. I mean double garage will fit 20 ft. >> I mean that would go for the zoning form, right? So you wind up that correct satisfy that >> right? They can't satisfy the more they
have to scale back their >> anyone else. Anyone? Okay. Uh do you have anything else, Mr. Yes. Uh we do want to briefly call upon our our planner to adjust the we did eliminate the variance from parking and garage but
like call upon Strand. >> Yes, I do. >> Thank you. >> Mr. Demarco, can you ask the applicants or the professionals, I'm sorry, to um repeat their names and then spell so we could also uh write them down up here. It's a little bit difficult uh to hear
too if you could project a little bit. >> Sure. I also have a unique name so I understand. Uh my name is Stack S P A C H. Last name is TR T R A H A N >> for sure.
>> All right. So, uh, Mr. If you could please give the board the benefit of your work, educational experience, area of expertise, professional planner, and whether you can accept it as a professional planner before the board's report. >> Sure. So, I'm an associate principal at Phillips Price Ryold Lane and Keller
LLC. We start at home. Uh I have my masters in city and regional planning from the Ruckers University's Globian School of Planning and Public Policy. I am a licensed professional planner in the state of New Jersey. I also have my uh lensure with the American Institute
of Certified Planners since 2019 and I've been accepted as a planning expert in other uh municipalities. >> We're fine. We're fine. We can proceed. So, uh, Mr. We know based upon the testimony that you heard this evening, I
know you're all familiar with the project that we've eliminated the garage, eliminated the variance for garage and parking, uh, added the street trees. So, we're focusing on the one variance or the existing setback, but if you could touch on the justification for that, >> right? So, I won't go into a lot of
detail, but obviously we are at the corner of North 8th Street and Boulevard. Um, and I think it's important to note that this was previously uh two lots. They were equalized lots side by side, both facing Boulevard. Um, so they were both uh
longer lots, 50x 125 uh feet. Um, and now and at some point those were consolidated. So now we have this larger property. This existing dwelling has been on the site for for many decades.
And uh and the existing variance that we have here is the front yard setback which is from boulevard. The setback is 19.1 ft. Uh whereas 25 ft is what the requirement is. Um here we are in the R5
medium density residential zoning district. Um and uh in that district you know we do have the other lot requirements for the subdivision. Thankfully the uh the design has been uh
created so that there are no other bearings is necessary. You can create two completely conforming lots both in terms of the dimensions the total area of the lots. Um all of the other setbacks including for any new dwelling that would occur on the northern lot. um
the parking can be compliant and obviously we've had some discussion about the design and and you know the applicant is certainly willing to uh confirm and commit to uh complying with the design requirements um should that become an issue. Um so in terms of the
variance for the front yard setback um the board can grant variances these are C variances based on two different criterias. The C1 criteria is for an undue hardship or practical difficulty that's associated with the strict
adherence to a requirement of the zoning ordinance and a C2 justification says that a p purpose of uh zoning would be advanced and the benefits would substantially outweigh the detriment. In this particular case, the uh positive criteria can be met under the C1
criteria because this dwelling has been here for so many years. And in fact, the property line through this subdivision is not changing. The the property line that's changing is uh to the north. It's the rear property line for this dwelling. Although the corner lots and
they call the side property line, but um essentially the distance is unchanged. And in fact, I, you know, when we look about if if this could be improved at all, is there something that the applicant could do to improve this, they would have to demolish parts of the
house? And I think that that is under the uh full intent of the C1 criteria, saying that this would be a hardship to strictly comply. Now, one of the benefits of the way that this property was designed is that it actually is set
back quite far from the street. So, if we look at the plans, it is set back um I measured 29 ft approximately from the sidewalk, the front of the house, and it is approximately 50 ft to the street. And so, even though the setback
requirement is 25 ft, um it for a pedestrian or a car going by, there is substantial distance. And I also in doing the site inspection the homes across North 8th Street which is to the east those homes on that next block are
set back similarly from the street. So I think that it is compatible with the neighborhood and there's no need to uh you know present a hardship to make this house comply. Now in terms of the negative criteria uh you know would there be any substantial detriment to the public good? I don't believe that
there would be by allowing this to continue. It's been this way for many many years. Um, in terms of the master plan and the zoning ordinance, would it be substantially impaired? Uh, I don't believe so. The 2011 master plan, uh,
recommended that your R2, which was a a low density residential district, be renamed and reclassified as the R5 medium density district, which is what we are in here. and that it uh the intent of this was to reflect the
minimum lot size in this neighborhood uh which is 5,000 square feet uh typically and the zone continued to permit single family dwellings and public park land um and so in this way there would be no
substantial impairment to um the ordinance or the master plan intention now I'd just like to speak a little bit about the minor subdivision and whether it is appropriate ate overall in the neighborhood. Um, so you do see um uh
that this design is uh a two family design uh or or would allow for two single family dwellings. And I just wanted to reiterate that this was previously two single family lots that they were two sidebyside lots that face boulevard. They were consolidated. And
so essentially the design of the neighborhood already contemplated this density from the outset and this corner just happened to be an you know an oversized lot for um many many years and now it would return basically to the
original uh density that was for this corner. I do think that there's benefits to having the lot configurations the way they are proposed tonight compared to the original side by side lots facing Boulevard. Um I think that one of the
benefits is that you have driveways that stay uh facing North Date Street as opposed to Boulevard which could inter you know be more likely to interrupt the free flow of traffic along boulevard. So I think that this is an improved design overall. Um if we want to look at the
purposes of the municipal land use law and if this is aligned with those purposes um purpose A is to guide appropriate use uh of all land in the state that will promote public health, safety, morals and general welfare and this is uh in planning area one which is
in of an estate plan map which is intended to accommodate growth. Um purpose C is to provide adequate light and open space. Um so the the northern lot that is being proposed is fully able
to accommodate a new dwelling. Um there is uh when you look at the building um uh footprint that could be posed here. It is perfectly reasonable and comfortable in size to accommodate a a
typical dwelling in this neighborhood. Um it's not an irregular lot. It's a completely 50 by 100 foot lot. So it it provides a lot of of opportunity for a a very reasonable house to be built that would
uh be compatible with the neighborhood with the you know sufficient rear yards and sideyards um to be respectful. Purpose D is to promote establishment of appropriate population densities. And again, this the two family uh or the two
unit two single family homes that would be on this corner is exactly the same as what was originally designed for this corner. Um purpose G is to provide sufficient space and appropriate locations for a variety of uses including residential uses to promote
the needs of New Jersey citizens. Um, and purpose H is to encourage the location and design of transportation routes that promote the free flow of traffic. I think that the driveways being oriented off of North Gate Street is a benefit um for traffic flow in this
area. Um so again, I don't think that there would be any substantial detriments to the public good. Uh if I did, you know, want to bring up any other uh aspects of the master plan, I just wanted to point to some of the goals and objectives that I think are perfectly aligned with this subdivision
tonight. Um one objective is to protect residential neighborhoods from non-residential encroachments. Um this keeps it residential. Uh preserve single family neighborhoods from any two family or multif family encroachment. Again, keeps uh the
neighborhood single family. uh ensure that new residential development is consistent with and compatible to existing neighborhood character. Um as I mentioned, this is you know provides normalsized blocks that are meet all of the minimum requirements to be uh
fitting with the neighborhood. And for the boulevard and downtown area, um it requires that all one of the objectives was to require that all visible facades of any building be aesthetically pleasing and meet property maintenance standards. And this older home uh is you
know interesting in design. I think it adds a benefit to the neighborhood to keep it there. Um and the other home um you know can vary in design. They would be different designs because of the age of the dwellings. Um so I do think that the variance can be granted on the C1
basis and the minor subdivision can be granted as well with no substantive. >> Thank you very much. >> No further questions Mr. Chairman. Anyone from the board wishing to um have any questions? Nothing. Okay. Our planner.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh Mr. um the property today is one lot, right? >> It is one lot. It was consolidated at some point. >> Do you know when >> it was uh indicated on the I believe the uh survey indicated it and I don't have
the exact details, but it did come up. >> Quite a while ago. And in terms of uh this being a conforming use, there's the the subdivision is proposing it to be a conforming use, right? >> Yes, exactly. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Any uh anyone else? >> Water runoff is going to be an issue there. I don't know if we covered that or not. the >> the addition of the driveway in the house >> from the engineer standpoint, the water uh impervious coverage, the water
runoff. Have you looked into that? >> I've looked into it. It looks like this is a formal object only contemplated. It's they're not going over the previous coverages of testimony. So, there shouldn't be an issue with the amount.
>> Thank you. >> Anyone else? Okay. If that's your testimony for now, >> no further. Okay, I think we are going to open this to the public. Is there a motion open to the public? >> So moved. >> Moved by Mr. David, second by Mr. Pantina. All in favor?
>> Is anyone from the public wishing to speak on this application only? Seeing none, >> make a motion to close the public portion of the hearing. >> Motion made by Mr. David, second by Mayor Carlo. All in favor?
>> Okay. So, it's up to this board to figure out uh what we would like to do. Is there any more discussion on this? Have we exhausted it? Okay. So, um we're going to uh as of tonight, we have
accepted this uh exhibit this exhibit um that was put to us today and and you're right, we normally would want this two weeks ahead of time, but uh to eliminate a variance, um I'm glad that this came in and we saw it. I wish that there was
a uh a picture or a drawing of some kind of house on that particular property. It would have made it a lot easier because what this board does not want to do if this application is approved is set a precedent that it was okay to do it this time and why not all the time. And the
only reason that this would be considered is because there is an existing dwelling on the other property. And it would not behoove someone to build a house exactly like that. Yes, sir. >> Yeah, Mr. Chairman, to that point, I think Mr. Skinner made a good point
earlier when he um advised us that there's a relatively new home to the north of what will be the vacant lot. And so I think we should put in as a condition in a resolution if the board moves in that direction that the house
in new home be differentiated from that home and that we would leave it potentially up to our planner or engineer to ensure that the new home would be differentiated from that specific home
>> to that point. Exactly. >> Okay. You get what they're saying? >> They don't want it to know their new house to the right. >> No problem. Yeah. >> Can I ask a question? >> If board
planner doesn't come back to the board, how will the board know there? >> No. But we're Mika, would you like to answer that? So >> did you hear what he said? >> Yes. So I think uh if the board works
that as a condition as part of the resolution compliance, the applicant will have to show us the proposed at least the concept of the new house that's going to come there to uh show us what's changed between the two lots as
well as the new uh work that's coming out of the block. >> I would expected that answer. I just didn't know what the time frame would be between we're selling the environment lot. We're not building anything now and resolution compliance. Resolution compliance would be in a couple months
or they build a house couple months or they sell a lot. You know what I'm saying? Like it might what if it's down the road? What if what if you're going to sell a lot and >> so my my understanding is the existing zoning already requires that variation.
>> Yes, it does. >> Right. So when that applicant comes and I understand your fear could be 3 years from now, 5 years from now, they would have to present that plan to your zoning office and they would have to make sure it complies with a variation. Okay?
>> If that zoning officer said no and they still wanted to proceed with it, they would have to come back and get a variance not to apply. >> Right? So I understand the fear that >> Right. But if it was just an empty lot in the middle, I would still have to comply with that. >> Yeah. It's not really a fear. It's just
reality. >> No, I was just saying. Yeah. >> Right. But what what what I'm suggesting is not leaving it to the zoning department to make that determination. >> I want it stipulated in the resolution. >> They agreed to the stipulation. >> Yeah. Mr. H.
>> Yeah, no problem. Okay. >> Yeah. But you know, there's another stop gap an officer to pull that up and now has that resolution compliant with that in that file and understanding. >> Thank you. >> So, Mr. Marco, if if the applicant in
two years went down to the uh building department and uh said that, okay, we're ready to build a house. When he pulls up that file, they they are going to see the conditions which would trigger going back to the uh engineer and the planner.
>> All right. Right. So, that's the condition. What? Well, is there a mo are we done with questions? Okay. Is there a motion to approve this application set forth with the condition of the application
um with this application for the house that's going to be built eventually? Uh have to go before our planner and engineer to make sure that it complies with everything that we said that it doesn't look like the house next door
and it complies with everything that we say here tonight. Is that what we're looking for? Did I say that so graciously? You go too many too many. >> I'll clean it up in the res. >> You also mention the fence is not conforming. >> Is there a motion? >> Motion.
>> Motion to approve the application with the conditions set forth by Mayor Carlo. Second by Mr. Sciri. Uh, roll call, please. >> Mayor Carlo, >> yes. >> Mr. Perna, >> yes. >> Councilman, >> yes. >> Mr. Davis, >> yes. >> Mr. Yes,
>> Mr. >> Yes. >> Mr. Mazio. >> Yes. >> Mr. >> Yes. >> And Mr. Speaker, >> yes. >> Okay. Thank you all again and have a great great night and keep warm. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Um,
next application is 25007 530 Monroe, >> Block 42, Lock 12. Mr. Chairman, I'm going to set this one up. Let the record show that Mr. Mazio needs to recuse himself because of he is in
that 200 radius, right? Okay. Thank you, Frank. >> All right. Just give us a second to get together. >> Yeah. small. >> Okay, give us just one second so we're not
fumbling up here. You want you want to get Okay. Are we settled in? >> Okay, >> it's all yours. Gary
subdivision two live subdivision. The address is 530 Monroe Avenue and uh it's on the corner of New York 22nd Street. Um these two lots have approved fully uh
comply with all public standards except for the fact uh that it's a corner lot and your ordinance requires uh that uh a corner lot have two uh two front yards which would require 25 ft where uh our
house has 15 other aspect that the two rocks that are being created are larger than is required. Uh they have less coverage than allowed and they comply fully with
the full standard. So our our only variance that we're asking for is the variance for one of the houses to have a uh a side yard of 15 ft or 25 ft are required. Uh my
witnesses this evening are Ed Deck, our engineer surveyor, and uh our builder Daniel Sheep. So I'd like to call Good evening, Mr. Deck. How you doing? >> Good. >> Good, thank you.
We're just going to wait for that truck to go by. We just want to get this paper so she can you good Nick. Okay. Go ahead. Mr. Duth the whole truth nothing but the truth. >> I do and just
sure know this last name. >> Mr. Deputy give your background education and qualifications to testify as an engineer and planner. >> Mr. Deck has appeared before us many times. I think we could
>> you license anywhere? >> Yes. >> That's all we need to please walk the board through the existing lot and what is proposed. >> Um I have my laptop here screen. Well,
if you plug it in right here, >> you want to use this screen here. Is that what you're doing? >> I Let me first see if I can get this connected or I I have my display here. So, >> whatever you want to do, Mr. Deuse that for now. You want me to be an eagle?
>> Um plan score sheets. Uh it's the uh single family life subdivision 530 M Avenue, lot 12, lot 43. That's cover sheet that you see now has the uh list of owners within 200 ft. A small zoning map which
shows that we're in zone five and uh also that 200 radius map which uh file names. Um, we uh also have notes here and they're repeated on sheet three. So I won't go
through those as Mr. uh Goodman um before the board is that we meet all of the bulk requirements for each new lot except for and that is what we're discussing
tonight. Um the next page is the existing conditions page which shows uh the building there which is no longer there. Mr. received a general permit and done
building. So right now it's a vacuum which shows on the right hand side of the lot showing power subdividing group dividing it into two equal 6500
square foot lots of >> Mr. that. Can you hold on for a second, please? case. >> Sorry for interruptions that you were loud in the hallway, but good to hear what you were saying. >> Uh, thank you. Appreciate that. Uh should I grab the microphone?
>> If you could bring it closer that would be helpful. >> Uh sheet three shows on the right hand side schematic of the lots being subdivided to equal 6500 square ft lots
50 65 by 100 which gives a total of 13 uh,000 ft. And that's how we'll get equal two equal lines. They again meet all of the bulk requirements except for the setback which I'm pointing to here
now which is at the lot at the corner of North 22nd and Montro Avenue. We're holding a 15t uh we call front yard setback. We have 25 ft setback off of north 22nd Street. We have a fiveyard uh
5 foot sideyard setback and a 20 foot rear yard setback. And on the left side of the sheet, you'll see uh our proposed buildings. Um the architecture is different uh which we're very concerned about. We have two
driveways one wide and twocar garages. We have patios in the back and we again meet all of the bulk requirements for coverages, setbacks, um driveway locations. Um we also show the
air conditioning units which is a comment we interview and plan which we will agree to uh those those requirements. Um, we got street trees. Two in front of lot 121
and two in front of lot uh 120 I'm sorry on the side of 122 which would be on a we uh also did a uh calculation for the coverages what's shown here and it's also pointed out in the review letter um
this lot 12.01 one should have been lower than lot 12. That is the total coverage per coverages for the total lot uh of 12. Uh it would be the 4,000 or u
400 uh and change square foot total impervious prior to any sub. And then over here on the left hand side we show the total impregnous coverages for the two subdivided costs. And then I uh show
the impact of those coverages. And uh as you can see the the rational method generated or the runoff generated by the impervious coverages are the minimums. Um, we have all of the uh utilities
shown as far as what's in the street. We also have the utilities shown to the proposed lot. The uh lot from the left we use are 1202 use the existing utilities uh that are pres. Um,
I'd like to go to sheet four. Uh, just to explain that uh that sheet that sheet is a a plan upside down is a plan
that shows all of the lots uh and also all of the infrastructure. um for uh the surrounding areas. So the large circle encompasses all of the structures where
existing areas and the smaller circle shows what uh storm and sanitary sewers are uh within that area. And um we have to create some
holes in the one that uh the note on page one says here and while you have math I I ask you to uh do an eyeball survey of
your capacity as a surveyor to uh determine uh if uh corner lots uh were being built with uh front yards less than a 25 ft required. Were you able to do so? Yeah, I've done a uh
a review of what's shown on Google Maps and I was able to also get a link from Google Maps, but I also did an observation by going to the uh site itself along Monroe Avenue and looking
at uh the houses that line Monroe Avenue all the way to uh 16th Street. And um without doing measurements, I I certainly uh testify to the fact that
there are at least four houses that are approximately 15 ft closer to the property. So uh if you like Yeah, are we done with the uh diesel
portion? would like to do the engineer for the engineer. Okay. Um um all the comments uh on the reports we have no issues with and we'll be getting
the tax assessor to assign u tax lot numbers if we do receive subdivision tonight. And he still we will notify the county for a nonable applicable um comment from the county
for a subdivision which is required to all subdivisions. Um uh as stated the front set that issue at the corner uh item number six we will address all those issues. Uh and most of
those will be uh done in the plot plan. Um again I think I clarified what we were saying as far as what they explain are they are u number eight just the plan stage
monuments will be set at that line on northn street signatures will be provided meridian references to arrow will be provided beginnings will be provided And um you've already received Somerset
Union. >> So I just want to ask this real quick question. I don't want to interrupt too much, but everything on the engineers report you are going to comply with. There's nothing here that you're going to alter, trim. You're going to comply with every one of these items.
>> Everyone can Okay, you go on. I just want to be clear because it's it is a little difficult to hear you up here. I don't know why tonight, but it is. >> I guess we go down to the uh planner. >> This is the plan.
>> Yeah, that first item that planner pointed out, I believe on its plan review, it said six and I think both of us were a little confused. Maybe you can clarify uh what uh those calculations.
Oh, sure. The uh under 6A the uh square footage as I pointed out earlier uh on the right hand side of sheet three uh was referred 4,453 to the total coverage for lot 12 prior
to any changes to the existing conditions. So that's that is really that notice I told should have been 1201 should have been lawful.
I think um uh C and D and E are for Mr. Elshik, but I'll go down to F. Can you uh confirm measurements there? Yes, we are proposing a 20 foot wide drive with a
twocar garage. the access to that >> and street trees on G >> Street trees. We do show two on lot 121 facing uh North 22nd and two on 122 facing um um Monro
and uh HBAC equipment >> right we do show HBAC equipment for the proposed building uh we show it that it is buffered with screening u more likely uh and uh
any changes have to be made to that we would uh agree to that and do required >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes. Uh >> going back to the trees um our calculation showed that you would need
at least four trees. Um um I believe uh four along North 22nd Street and three along Monroe Avenue and currently there are only two and two show. Okay, we certainly would agree with that. 70 total.
>> Yeah. >> And regarding the HVAC equipment, um, so currently the way it's shown, it shows like it's set back only 2 and 1/2 ft from the property line. The ordinance requires that HBAC have buffering
approximately 3 ft wide around it. So would you be moving the entire building? Then no set back is going to get even smaller. >> Well, we would have to look and see what size you may see in this closing
building or position of the building >> because then you'll have to come back before the board if there is change in the setback. That's what I'm trying to get out. change the building set back >> like if if you're moving the entire building more towards Monroe Avenue.
Currently, you're asking for 15t setback. If the HBAC has to get adjusted and you're moving the building as uh I I guess that the option would be it's not on the side when you put that in the rear
>> in the rear of the building. Yes. Okay. >> And you would comply with all the buffering requirements? >> Yes. >> Um, Ma, if I may, can you repeat your concern? And and Mr. Deck, I didn't hear what you said. Is anybody else having
trouble hearing tonight? Uh, or is it just me? It's very, very difficult. I don't know if you can just >> I don't know. Is that microphone on? it is. If you could speak into that because I'm hearing what she's saying but not quite all but yours almost none. So yeah, I'll
>> start Mr. Chairman. I think the question was the HVAC equipment especially for the uh proposed lot 12.02. Um currently I believe u the ordinance requires approximately 3 ft wide
buffering around it when they're in HVAC located. Um currently the way the setback is shown it's only two and a half feet. >> Okay. >> So my question was how are you going to comply? Uh the answer was we'll comply
and we might have to move if if the building has to be moved then you know the setback around Monroe Avenue would be have to be reduced and that's what I was bringing. uh to which I believe and please correct me uh the applicants engineer said we will put the HVAC to
the rear of the building >> okay >> and comply with the buffer requirements >> so if the application was approved that would be a condition of the application sorry >> condition >> a condition >> I didn't think they were allowed to be on the side >> that was what I was thinking there that
I thought that code required >> Hback to be at the rear of building unless it was an existing um >> existing >> right then it could be replaced they could have put in the back >> I believe they change that I believe it's if it's they have decibels and
there's certain setbacks and everything certain decision I'm not feel I can just have two minutes rest >> absolutely Thank you sir. >> How about I make a motion that the board adjourned for five minute breaks?
>> Second. >> Motion made by Mr. Davis, second by Mayor Kovich. All in favor? >> We need five minutes. This way there's no chatter in between the application. All right. Is there a motion to open? >> Yeah. Motion to uh reconvene the meeting. Motion made by Mr. David,
seconded by Miss I'm sorry, Mayor Carloic. All in favor? I >> Okay, let's pick up where we left off. And if we could project a little bit, um, we were in the middle of the air condition setback, correct? >> Does every you want to complete that statement or are we good for now? We all
know that the air conditioner has to be >> uh 5t away from that setback. Correct. The air conditioner has to be 5t away from the sideyard setback >> if it's on the side of the house. >> And then there's a 3 ft zone around that. >> Okay.
>> The buffering has to be 3 ft wide around it. >> And it has to be 3 ft wide around >> and 4 ft high like some kind of evergreens or fencing or something. >> Okay. >> Oh, wait. M. Did you say it has to be elevated 4t off the ground? >> No, the fencing the visual box around it
has to be 4 ft high and 3 ft wide. >> Yes, sir. above the condensing unit. >> I thought it had to be nine feet from the property line. >> Well, if you have the five feet set back >> and then you could start the air condition at that point, which is what they're telling us is 3 ft around. It's
really eight if you want. >> And then the fence has to be higher than the condensing unit. So, you don't see here where all of that kind of stuff. >> Okay. >> Right. the street trees we discussed that I
mean treat so uh at this point I think the only outstanding issue which has to be addressed would be the quarter lot as far as okay questions
or should I all say really is in your as a surveyor is that the other houses in R5 zone that either through through variance or through permission have been allowed to be built uh with less than
the 25 ft setback. Correct. >> Well, I don't know how the >> Yeah, I didn't say whether it's by variance or by >> Well, that could be existing non-conforming uses, right? >> When when you mentioned >> zones change, >> sorry,
>> when you mentioned earlier, Mr. deck. Uh you said that there were four houses or at least four houses uh alone Monroe within a uh you know with a 15 ft setback. Um you didn't really provide an exhibit or you didn't really show it on
that key map that's on sheet four out of four. So my question is at least four houses with a 15 ft set back along one row within how many feet of this particular property? lock, two blocks, nine blocks.
>> Uh actually the first one is within a lot uh and across the street. Uh there are probably two blocks. We start hitting one on each one on the corner, one one ft, one dozen. Then we go down to the next street. There are two right
on corners. >> Are there any on the north side of Monroe? >> Yes. >> So there are like But none of them are continuous in this lot. Uh continuous lot. >> Yeah. Or you know like >> uh Mr. Scaderi.
>> So the lot that did not that were did not have the 25 setback. Did you happen to notice the size of the yards of the size 50 foot wide lot that they couldn't move the house at all? >> No, they were saying about 50 foot wide.
Any any board members have any questions for Mr. Dak at this point? Okay. How about our engineer and our planner? >> Um I do have questions on the other but I believe the second business is the
>> Yeah, I think the owner answer those questions report. >> I just have one question on uh sheet three for lot uh 1201 on the side setback. There's an empty box. Could you just explain what that's for? It's uh
last is that a window well or >> the one next to it >> that would be um >> I believe it's 55. So Darren, I have to ask you and I'm
sorry I couldn't hear your question and I don't know what you are referencing and I just have to take a moment to express this. Um I know we're very eager to everybody having their comments and things, but if you could just cover the microphone, talk softly because Kathy is
not going to be able to get this into any type of transcript. So, we we really have to respect the person that's talking and as the chair, if you need something to say, we want to hear from you. I'll announce you and then we could go from that point. I I think that's the easiest way so we could hear. And I'm
going to ask everybody again to speak up. >> Yeah. Well, I mean, our professionals have microphones in front of them. Are they working? >> Yeah. So, >> speaking to the mic. >> Speaking to the mic. >> Can everybody hear me now? Better. >> Yes.
>> Much better. So, on lot uh 1201, there is a blank box in the sideyard just to the west of the AC units. I was asking what that box is for. >> Okay. And what is the box, Mr. >> Box is a chimney? >> A chimney.
>> Okay. >> Sounds like Mr. comes up. >> So, you said that Mr. Chic will uh answer C, D, and E. I would imagine. Right. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, when we get to that point, we could ask that question, but um let's continue.
>> Darren, did you have anything else? >> No, that was it. I'm sorry. >> Ma, >> I don't have any questions. >> Okay. How about our board members here? You have anything else you want to say? >> No. Um Mr. Pantina, >> just to be consistent, if there's a chimney on Outlaw, where's the chimney on lot? >> It wasn't shown on the architecturals.
>> Okay. >> Okay. >> Although Mr. I should find out a better >> I'll follow just >> it's there too there is one maybe he missed it but it's there >> right >> just looking for
>> so now we see some architectural >> right >> any architect drawings aware Mr. >> Mr. They should have been submitted with the plans. >> We don't have them. >> We don't have them. >> I know they were. >> They have. >> They were submitted. >> What?
>> The architectural computer. >> So, we don't have architectural plans here tonight. my knowledge. No, >> they weren't submitted. >> I'm sorry. >> They weren't submitted. So, they weren't correct. >> So, >> there'll be no there were no comments
made by any professional because they were not submitted in the time. >> Interesting. >> So, from my perspective, this this hearing should be postponed until we have those architectural remedies.
That was not asked by a second. >> Mr. Chic, if you're going to speak, I'm going to ask you to come on up and swing. >> Um, and I don't mind doing that at this point. >> Sir, if I may, um, you swear or affirm the testimony, you shall give the truth, the whole
truth, nothing but the truth. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Just spell and state your name for the record. >> Henny L. >> You got to spell, sir. Uh, h a n y e l s h i i e k h. >> Thank you, sir. You're welcome.
Unfortunately, uh, Mr. Chairman, nobody asked for the architectural plan. We don't have it on our list. This is the architectural plan right here. I don't know how that get missed. >> We don't have those. >> We don't have it. >> I understand. But was not requested. I
don't believe it was requested by us by anybody. >> It was my understanding. It's my understanding, Mr. O'Shik, that you were coming here basically as a builder to indicate that you wanted to subdivide two lots and that you were going to give testimony based on your house
construction in Kennallorth as to the type of houses you were considering building. >> Correct. >> And that was what you were planning on doing. >> Correct. >> And with all due respect, we've had Mr. a sheet before us in the past for minor subdivisions where we've required
architectural drawings. So again, from my perspective, I feel the hearing should be postponed until we have those in our possession. >> Mr. Elshik, it it's it's very very difficult to proceed with this tonight without architecturals here.
>> I really don't know what to tell you, Mr. chairman because I was not told to bring any architect but this is the architect of land I'm going to live by in this block correct but the challenge sir is that those
plans should have been submitted at least 10 days before they should have been at least looked at by the planner and and the engineer so they could have some comments >> understood but our list what we need to supply >> I I understand that
>> not you that may or may not be true, but it's your application and it's your obligation to commit support when you come here when you're seeking something. So, the more information you provide is always better. And my understanding is it's not your first time in front of this board. And if you sat through the
meeting right before it, you understood the questions when it comes to subdivisions and the concerns on how the houses look like. So, you were fully cognizant of that. >> Okay. >> All right. Okay. >> So, there's a motion or request, I
think, by one of the members to postpone it, and I think they need to decide that. >> So, I I think, Miss Elshik, that we um are going to take Mr. Greg David's lead uh to postpone this to give you guys
enough of time to get your architecturals and everything in order so we could hear this case on another date. >> Yeah. So, I'll make an official motion then to postpone this hearing until next month, assuming um Mr. and Mr. Attorney, you have you know your professionals
have sufficient time. It sounds like you do because you already have them that you could get them in in time for our next month meeting. >> Okay. So, I understand and Mr. My only question is the uh issues that we touched upon. Do you want them
postponed as well or you want them answered tonight? >> I if I may, as chairman, I would like to hear this case over again. Uh let's put the package together the way it's supposed to be and we could we could
revisit this as one whole play. >> Okay. So, Mr. Chairman, there is a motion on the floor. We haven't we haven't received a second. >> Second. >> Oh, okay. >> Oh, but he but he did ask the question in between that. So, I just wanted to be courteous to the attorney. >> No, I I agree. I and I actually >> motion made by Mr. David, second by
Mayor Carlo. Roll call, please. >> We just needed >> Oh. All in favor? >> I >> I got it without any further notice. >> Yes. Yes. >> Did you hear that, Mr. Chief? >> No further notice. >> No further notice.
>> The date is the next, >> Mr. Chairman. There there are um >> people in the audience I believe here for this particular case. So if we can just make sure that they understand that no additional notice will be provided in
case they want to come to the hearing next month. Okay. >> Yeah. When is that? >> 24th. >> Okay. So is there is there anyone in the audience here for this particular application?
Yeah, there was >> there was Okay. So, just so you understand what's going on, what the applicant is going to do is prepare more documents and he's going to revisit this application on February, what's >> February 24th. So, we'll have this
hearing again on February 24th if the applicant and the attorney and their team are ready >> at 7:00 p.m. The meeting starts at 7:00 p.m. on February 24th. Assuming this would be first on the agenda. >> Yeah. >> How many architectural plans?
>> What is the requirement for architectural plans, Kathy? >> 21. >> 21. And to be submitted to who? >> Wanda Baldi at the building department. >> Wanda. >> Wanda. >> Wanda at the building department.
>> Yes. Okay. >> Electronic. >> I'm sorry, Kevin. Electronic. >> Electronic. Electronic. Okay, I think we're going to move on. Okay, thank you. >> Okay.
Okay. Um, we're going to get back in session here. And gentlemen, please be courteous to the rest of the meeting. Any comments for the good of the board? None. >> Okay. >> I have no comment. Just getting prepared
again for with plans and architectural plans twice tonight. I don't know. So when we get the application in, we review for that when they send all our documents in any plans.
>> So check this. There's a list. >> Okay, we're gonna >> we're going to double check to see if architecturals are on that list and if they're not, they should be. Um I believe that I don't know how they're
not because they usually bring them in with this application. It's always been the protocol and we're looking for this. This is >> some of us know better. So, it should be done. um motion check. >> So we're going to double check that and
if not we're going to implement that make sure it's done right. >> Okay. Is there a motion to open the meeting to the public? So >> motion made by Mr. Sabino and seconded by Mr. David. All in favor. >> Anyone from the public wishing to speak?
>> Come on up. State your name and address. >> My name for the right. >> John Liano. >> John Lobiano. >> And I live at 540 Monroe Avenue. >> Okay. right across the street from the house we're talking about. Okay. >> Okay. I've lived there for 60 years. I I
was raised in Kennorth. My kids were all raised here. My grandchildren were raised here. I love Kennorth. I love the layout of Kennorth. I love the way the houses were in Kennorth. And uh if you look at other towns and you see how big pieces of property they have and all that, beautiful. We have
small pieces of property, but we're going to take those small pieces, if they're just a little bit bigger, and we're going to parlay that into good bucks for builders. This piece of lot that we're talking about, Cares lot, which was Mr. Conton's ranch at one
time, he made a magnificent house here, it was beautiful. It was picturesque. Everybody sitting up here knows the house I'm talking about how great it looks. Now, we're going to have two great big kashabons sitting on the corner there. Okay. Am I right or wrong? >> Can I just for the record, can you spell
Kasha? Let me tell you something. I'm 84 years old, John. >> Okay. God bless you. >> I really don't care what they're going to do. The big thing to me is my father-in-law and my actually my wife's grandfather was a second mayor of Kennaw. So they were all her ancestors
were all in the first planting war. Okay. 1907 Kissins and Boils. But at any rate, my father-in-law always told me, Alan Kusen, his name was that you have a setback. He said, "Johnny, you buy this house on 540 Monroe, my house, you have
a setback. You're on a corner." >> What? You're getting a double whammy. You're getting the one from Monroe, 25 ft, and the one from 22nd, 25 ft. When I did my additions, I did just like my father-in-law said. I stayed in the lawn, 25 ft. Couldn't go any further. I
wanted to, but I only put a 14T addition because it's 25 ft. Didn't think about any variances or anything. I have no problem putting that. I told the lady that lived in that house, Mitch Cares, I told her someday going to build two houses there. But what's with this
varian thing? We're going to have we can make Monroe Avenue. We're all going to be gone 30 years from now. But 30 years from now, it could look like Brooklyn. Okay. where you want to put the houses to 15 ft from the street. That's what it's going to look like. Now, we have we
have rules. 25 ft from the street. Somebody wants to buy Mitch's house, Caresy's house, they buy it, they got to go by the rules. 25 ft set back. One lot could be 80 ft. The other lot could be 30, 50 ft. There's your your uh that 130
foot of lot that we're talking about that these men were just talking about. Okay. Here's your your 130 ft. 80 and 50 and the 80 would take away was talking about to make that 50 that that 25 ft. But as far as I'm concerned,
build two miles a house right out by Monroe. Now listen, Monroe, you can't park here on Monroe until 4:00 in the afternoon. 22nd Street, you're not going to be able to park on half of this lot because you can't park how many feet from this from the corner. And we're
going to have two driveways. So all of my neighbors, they're going to have cars. I have two driveways, so it don't matter to me. Okay? But all my neighbors, they're going to have cars all lined up up and down the street. But this is progress. My beef is they should
be within the law. No variance of only. It should be 25 ft from the street. Build what you want and make your 1.3 million. The end. >> Well, you are refreshing, Mr. Luka. I have to tell you, I I wish I could have
spent most of my night listening to you speak. And I'm not kidding. I really really enjoyed that cuz pretty soon you're going to take me to Arnold Dav and you get some what's it? I'm going to have my >> Thank you, Miss Liano. Anyone else? Are you done, sir?
>> Anyone else from the public wishing to speak? >> I live two houses away from this. >> Your name, sir? >> I don't I couldn't hear you. I'm sorry. I don't agree with John all the time, but I agree with him 200%.
>> All right, here we go. >> Just I was just going to say, gentlemen, you you you obviously this portion of the meeting, you're allowed to say anything on the record, but the actual hearing where your testimony would probably be more beneficial has been
postponed until February 24th at 7:00. So, >> Oh, he's ready to do it again. Sure. No problem. >> Oh, yeah. That's fine if you wanted, but I just I just want to make sure you you were aware. >> I'm just figuring that this guy's got the bread. He's got the mozzado. You got the wine.
>> Go ahead. What do you got? >> What's your name, sir? >> I'm David Gonas. I'm I'm a Greek from Follow me. >> Oh, okay. >> I live next door to uh 53 uh the property that's going to be put up >> on Monroe or on
>> on 22nd Street. 212 North 22nd Street. >> And might I ask a question? >> Surely. >> Um I uh the other gentleman said that there were there are other houses on Monroe that are have less variance. Uh how did they get put up? Um
>> well, they could have been non-conforming. They could have been built before ordinances were in place. There's so many variables, you know, and I'm sorry if I may to finish. And I think to I think it was Mr. Pantina's question, uh, he was saying, well, was
somebody's question, how far away are they? Because in a lot of ways, maybe it didn't have relevance to this property. Yeah, I was going to say I think the development that requires two front yard setbacks on a corner lot, so 25 on each
front and the actual side is a more recent development in Kennorth. >> Well, this zoning, so many of the homes that they're referring to are non-existing, I mean, existing non-conforming uses. >> I think we I think a couple he was talking about have recently been built.
That seems to me cuz I go to work. >> Yeah. and they they probably receive variances, you know. >> Anyway, that answers my question. Um there's a couple other things. They uh >> Oh, I'm going to agree with Mr. Lo Biano
because uh he says what's right is right and he had to abide by it. So, I guess I would agree with him saying the next person would have had to abide by it. And then the other two things I had were they started off saying they were going to put two trees, which seemed fine to me.
Then they made it four trees on North 27. It seemed like boy that's a lot of a lot of trees for I like trees but it seems like that would be a overload of trees but I don't I don't know just my comment. And the other thing was the uh
HVAC unit. Um they said that in originally you mentioned that they would they mentioned that they would put it on the back of the house. Um and then they started talking about back to the side. I live right on the side and there's not much room there. So, if they would put
it in the back, that would be more beneficial to me, of course. >> Well, they're going to visit that. Um, they they know now what they need to bring us. And if they don't have it right, then they're going to have to do it again. >> Right. Okay. >> Because this is a very important piece of property right where we're talking.
So, we we know the property well. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you for your time, sir. >> Anyone else wishing to speak from the public? Seeing none, >> make a motion to close the public portion of the meeting. >> Motion made by Mr. David, second by Mr. Clemente. All in favor? >> I.
>> Okay. Make a motion to adjourn. >> Motion made by Mr. David and seconded by Mr. Scaderi. All in favor? >> I. >> It's been a wonderful night and thank you all very much for coming. What time we eat? I'm dying. I'm going to make some William B some night. Is he going
to make that? Heat. Heat.