stands one nation under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all, please read the statement of public notice. The Little Falls Township Planning Board meeting of Thursday, October 9, 2025 is called to order.
Please take notice that adequate notice of this meeting was provided in accordance with NJSA104-8 and NJSA104-10 as follows. A notice of the meeting was promptly posted on the bulletin board at the municipal building located at 225
Main Street, Little Falls, New Jersey on January 9th, 2025. Copy of the notice was sent via email to the North Jersey Herald and News and a copy of the notice was filed in the office of the township clerk on said date. Please note that this meeting is being taped. Therefore, we ask that you speak loud and clear
into the microphones. >> Mr. Barry, Mr. Kash >> here, >> Mr. Luke Damiano, Miss Gataldo >> here, >> Mr. Saburn, Mr. Posious >> here. >> Mayor Damiano >> here. >> Councilman Scoba >> here.
>> Dr. Abdi, Mr. Wade, >> Mr. Dolan, >> Mr. Rama >> here, >> Mr. Brigliodoro >> here, >> Mr. Cobblars >> here, >> Mr. Kilpatrick >> here. Uh, thank you. Um, before we
begin, we have an award presentation. Mayor, if you will. >> Thank you, >> Chairman. Uh last meeting we were able to present a couple of the certificates for the successful completion of basic course in land land use law and planning
and we had one member who was unable to join us last month. So we are here this month to present Darthy Catalo with her certificate for the successful completion of her basic course in land use law and planet. So join me in the front or right here. Here's perfect.
Uh, council presidentco, any comments from the council? Uh, chairman, good evening. Uh, no residents came before us uh at the last council meeting with any of the current applications concerning this planning board. Residents did a resident didn't come before uh council concerning our chicken ordinance that
we're trying to pass. Hopefully, we'll pass that in the next meeting. Thank you. >> Is it chicken or rooster? >> Chicken and rooster. >> Thank you. world change, >> right? >> I was gonna May >> I have a >> May I have a motion for the approval of
the minutes of the meeting of September 4th, 2025? >> Excuse me, Mr. Kilpatrick. Should we do roll call? >> Oh, I thought we should. >> Okay. Sorry. Yes. Minutes. Sorry. On the roll. No problem. >> Uh, may I have a motion for the approval
of the minutes for the meeting of September 4th, 2025? Make a motion. >> May I have a second? Second. All >> um please pull the board. >> Mr. Kash, >> yes. >> Mr. Poses,
>> yes. >> Mayor Deiano, >> yes. >> Council Miss Gcoa, >> yes. >> Mr. Arma, >> yes. >> Mr. Kilpatrick, >> chairman votes. Yes. Minister approved. May I have a motion to memorialize resolution present real estate LLC 75
Harrison Street? >> So moved. >> So I have a second. >> Second. >> Please pull the board. >> Mr. Barry, I'm sorry. >> Mr. Kar. >> Yes. >> Mr. Posus. >> Yes. >> Mayor Damiano.
>> Yes. >> Councilman Scoba. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kilpatrick. >> Chair votes. Yes. The resolution is memorialized. Um, may I have a resolution? May I have a motion to approve memorializing the resolution for Richard
Holmes LLC? >> I'll make a motion. >> Second, >> please pull the board. >> Mr. Kash, >> yes. >> Mr. Posious. >> Yes. >> Mayor Demiano. >> Yes. >> Councilman Scoba. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Kilpatrick. Chairman votes yes and resolution is memorialized. Um applications our only application tonight 188 MPT Realy LLC 188 New York Pton turn
>> chairman I uh myself and the mayor can't hear this application so we're going to be leaving. Correct. >> Thank you for attending. >> Thank you President Mayor Mr. Chairman, members of the public, John Better Jr. entering my appearance
on behalf of 188 Newark Pompton Realy LLC and its principal Marish Ladoska and his son Christian is here as well this evening. So just a um a little uh a little overview. We have uh we have properly noticed and sent the notice
information to Mr. Di Maria and to Mr. Brigliadoro. All good >> chairman. I I did review the notice that was provided to me by Mr. Battery and the notice is in conformance with the requirements of the municipal landing law. So the board has jurisdiction to
proceed with the application committee. >> Thank you. Thank you Mr. Brickladoro. So just a little brief summary about the property. >> Before we begin, can we just point out we only have five members of the board of adjustments? >> Just for the record, Mr. Veter, as you know, your application requires D1 use
variance relief. So in order to secure an approval, you would need to obtain the affirmative vote of five board members. We only have five board members here tonight. So if you receive less than five affirmative votes would be a statutory denial. >> Understood.
>> We want to proceed with proceed. >> Yes, we will. >> And chair, I think it's only fair. At the conclusion of your case, we can revisit [clears throat] the issue >> and you can make a determination at that point. Yes. whether or not the proceed. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. Thank you. So, uh a little overview of the property. So, we always go back and look at this property. The property was um home was built many turn of the century probably and um now I know why Strickland Avenue is called
Strickland Avenue. Uh through some help by Maryanne Basic was on our historic society board. Uh it was the Strickland's home. So hence Strickland Avenue, they had much of that property. So it was built as a single family home and um when Joe Trap, the former
attorney for the township, bought the property, it was converted into an office. That was probably sometime in the 1980s. Uh prior to Mr. Trap selling the property, he came before this board and sought approval to convert the property
into a mixeduse building so they would keep an office. I think there was a home healthcare company which there home care LLC and they uh got approval to have an office on the first floor and an apartment on the second.
So the uh folks who owned home care sold the property to the applicant here this evening and the applicant looked at um some options with the property. The property is in good structural condition. It's just very very dated.
Um, as this board knows, there's quite a bit of new development in that corridor that involves a lot of retail. When this property was looked at by the applicant, um, it we made a determination that um, you know, perhaps there's a little too
much retail in this corridor. There's quite a bit going on starting at um, 178 that is now uh, open and functioning with the new coffee house and a salon and spa. And there's 194, there's 198,
there's uh 208. These are all either under construction and they all have retail on the um on the ground floor in addition to um what was approved by this board in the other direction in the northern direction at 8284 and also 3038
the um the subway location. Both of those are not um constructed yet, but they were approved by this board. So, in looking at that, looking at what else is in the area, there is a uh to the immediate left of this property, to the immediate north of this property is the
old Riley house, which is at um I think 182 and 184. And that is um a two family home, which is what is being proposed this evening. Um the site can certainly accommodate that. As you'll see, uh this site would be overparked based upon uh
what you would need for two units would be large enough to fit probably a three or four unit, but in looking at uh what was done and the motivation frankly of uh Mr. Shojosko was to try to improve the corridor. It's uh was had a very
unattractive sign. It's not a very attractive property. Proposing substantial architectural improvements to [clears throat] this property and the architect's going to speak to that tonight. Not significant site differences that are going to have from the prior use to this use, but
completely redone, new curbing, new driveways, new sidewalk. Uh, and it's essentially will be rebuilt from uh from the ground up. Essentially keeping the footprint. There's a very tiny bump out, maybe less than a foot on either side just so that um everything is
straightened out. So, uh we have one witness tonight and that is Chris Blake, the architect. And um unless there are questions, I'd like to call up Mr. Blake and have him get sworn in. Please raise your right hand. You swear affirm the testimony that you're about
to give before this board is going to be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> I do. >> Please tell us your name is by your license for the record. >> Chris Blake, B L A K. >> You would be the board for educational professional experience. >> Sure. I'm Chris Blake, architect at 150
Engle Street in Englewood, New Jersey. Um, I graduated Ken State University in 1984 with Bachelor of Architecture. I have a I was first got a license in New York State in 1988. Got a license in New Jersey in 1993.
Became a sole proprietor. I'm working and pose counties since 1999. >> Licenses are up to date. >> My license are up to date. Everything's good. >> Thank professionally. >> Accepted. >> Thank you.
>> Okay. Chris, if you would uh give an overview of uh the plans and We're going to take a look at the planner and the engineers. Okay. Um yeah, what we're proposing is property on the
the separate street. Um it's it's just short of 5,000 square feet. It's 50 by 96 or you know 60 but 50 by 96 and change. Um so it's just shy of 5,000 square feet. There's an existing, we'll call it a a a dwelling
if you will. Um there's a existing house structure pretty much in the middle towards the front and it's a two and a half story and there's a one-story portion at the b at the front of the building. You can kind of see on the photograph I include and the rest behind
it is a kind of a twotory. Um, as as we we heard, it is a little bit of outdated. Um, nothing wrong with a building. Structurally, it's fine, but it's just outdated. It's been around. And what we're proposing is just kind of
pulling in that front portion, one stories, making it two stories. It has these little wings that makes it look like we were talking about a foot wider or so, but it essentially completes the square. I just square off the building and just kind of keep the same footprint it has with the couple build with
corners building. Um so what that does that gives us about a 1288 square footprint. Um again for a 5,000 foot property as eyesight as I used to that gives us
um the building coverage of about 26% or 40% is required in the district. So we're not an oversized building by any means. It's not too tall. It's not too many stories. Um we are complying with the well not when we are complying with the
front yard setback where 10 ft is required. We're proposing 12 require complying with the rear yard setback as but the side there is one sideyard setback of six 5.6 that is just from the the sideyard.
Um other than that all the bulk variances are kind of maintained. What we have in the rear is a parking area. There's again it's a 50 foot wide property. So we have five spaces across to make five parking spaces. What we're
proposing to do to the building is to turn it into a two family residence. One family on the first floor, one family on the second floor. Again, with the 1288 splits footprint, there are 1288 square foot each minus the stairs in the common
areas. Um, and that turns into a living, kitchen, three bedrooms, and two bathrooms on each floor. Um, we're going with a kind of a open
concept as far as the kitchen living dining area basically front with the three bedrooms and the two bathrooms for the rear. given them most given them each their own laundry closet if you will as well. So, I think
they're pretty well self-contained units and essentially we have a basement that'll be for mechanicals or storage that'll be unusable as far as living space. And again, as we spoke, the the site,
the building, everything of that matter will be upgraded. The house is again, it's dated. It's not necessarily falling apart, but it is dated. Um, so will be upgraded as far as the siding, windows, things of that nature, and the site as well with the sidewalks, the driveways,
the curbing, landscaping, things of that nature. >> And just confirming on the records, it did come out one of the review letter that there will be no living space as you mentioned in the basement, but that would just serve as the uh >> correct.
>> Yeah, it would give an overview of the elevations and materials to be used. >> Yeah. And then the exterior will be siding whether whether we choose um the cement board or vinyl, but it'll be a nice sighting nice working window. We were using bigger more um current kind
of double hung windows hanging them together. the gable style roof and things of that nature to give it a, you know, a a residential look, but they could easily fit within a I'm not gonna say an urban, but a suburban
surrounding. Um, and again, it's not too bulky. It's not in your face and doesn't look like a UFO. It looks like a house. Thank you. Uh I >> front and rear door uh access. You have you have a back door. >> Pardon me.
>> You have a back door. >> We do. Since the parking is in the rear, we've created a back door. We've also acknowledged that we want to, you know, address the street. We put a door in the front as well. So, the first floor unit will actually have the two the two accesses. >> How do you get to the upstairs
apartment? >> There to the back door. There was a staircase that go straight up to the second floor. Okay. Can you discuss landscaping at all? >> Sure. We got the uh currently there are these horrible white rocks that Mr. has asked me and the attitude doesn't like
them either. It's really thrown off the whole streetscape. And there was a big garish uh sign that was put up. Whether that was ever permitted, I don't know. But the sign's gone already. It's in the back. And the white rock will be replaced with uh very nice landscaping
and plantings in the front. and sort of matching Riley's property. And what I like about this is that uh going to give a little bit of an offset to the streetscape that's there. A lot of those properties are built closer to the road than the 10 ft. This is not being
proposed to do that and we use the opportunity to landscape that. Uh and also in the back as well. >> You're going to redo the driveways, walkways, the curving. >> Yeah. Yeah. Certainly. >> Um did you go over the engineers report? >> Yeah, I mean we can go over it. I have
we're in agree I reviewed it with the client we're in agreement comments there's some things that we have to look into there is you know some sort of a drywall system that you probably noted there right >> that seems like it um it was probably done at u you know at some iteration
seems like it will function well but it needs to that needs to be looked at we will take a look at that and uh we're in agreement with the other comments Mr. Kovalears and Mr. I have no further questions to the architect. Mr. Kovalear, you have any comments?
>> Just as far as the landscaping goes, can you provide some more uh specifics as to the type of uh plants or shrubs or trees? >> Well, I don't think there'll be any fullsize trees, so to speak. There are some substantial shrubs there now. So, it will be kind of more in the shrubs
and the and the you know, probably in the flowers and kind of little little lower plant things. [snorts] um probably I don't know how you describe it um layered if you will. So some of the taller ones are in the back but by by taller things I I mean less than 8 ft
tall. They'll be >> submit a plan and there is an intention uh for a street tree. So in front of 178 you see there there's two coler maples there. They're planned for one the board asked for that at 194 at 198 and also for Papus's property. So create some
shade trees. So there's room for a shade tree in between the curb and sidewalk. And >> that's different than there won't be a shade tree in between the sidewalk. >> Are you going to do that? Are you going to consider you going to meet with the shade tree commission? Give us some insight.
>> Yeah, I would think that we'll we would book the same the we did meet with the shade tree commission on 178th and they recommended the coler maples. they were planted and I think that we would probably do the same, but we're open to their suggestions and we can make this
conditioned upon that, you know, their approval. I agree with Mr. Blake. I don't think there's room for a tree actually on the property. I think we'll keep the streetscape so the trees, you know, create a bit of a canopy there. >> I like that. That's good. I think there's a good use of the property. Um,
any other comments? As far as lighting goes, um, wall-mounted lights proposed, are they going to be on a timer or a motion detector? >> Yeah, I think we would have wall packs on on the on the building themselves um on a timer or, you know, set to go off
when they're dark. Um, yeah, we'll make sure we do that and and it'll be the type that doesn't spill onto the neighbor's property property. >> Any questions while I have chairman? Right. >> Um, the attic, will there be any
accessibility or use of the attic space at all? >> No, I'm sure Well, not sure, but I imagine there'll be a air handling unit for the second floor up there, but that's all mechanical, not even storage, I would think. >> So, like a drop down staircase kind of deal or just >> again, if it needs one for the for the
mechanical access, but that would be the only reason. >> Okay. um >> the condensers uh that are outside along the uh the southerntherly u property line um how is that going to be local? >> Um we could obviously put pencing or
something like that around there. I would imagine they would want to stay in the same location for >> it's just it's the narrow side of your property so it's >> but the driveway takes up the other side so it's a win situation. Um,
>> I'm not saying remove I'm not I'm not requesting. >> No, you're right. We could definitely put up screening if if landscaping tight. So if landscaping is not the perfect solution, then some kind of little fencing three or four foot fencing. >> Screening is what we're looking for.
>> Yes, >> Mr. Chairman, you're speaking with the applicant. Have you shown on the plans a dumpster? And that was when this was conceived as uh >> that was my next question. >> I think that it would be unnecessary. You don't typically see that the two
family next door just uses uh large garbage cans. I don't think we need to have a dumpster here. The board wants it. The applicant and doesn't be maintained. If it could be handled through, you know, smaller garbage being wheeled out to the curve,
I think that would be acceptable. >> I accept that. >> Um, there aren't any further questions. The architect may have a motion to open up the meeting to the public. >> Make a motion. All those all those in favor I.
>> All those opposed, meeting is now open to the public. Anyone wishing to come up and address the board, please do so at this time. There being no one coming up from the public. I close the meeting to the public.
John, you got some uh news to discuss. >> Okay. So, yeah, let's chat about that a little bit. So, when I looked at the resolution from um 10 years ago, I thought maybe this board did what was done at the building. I think it was uh
61 Walnut where the star animal rescue is. So the board the board at that time approved a residence upstairs, but they also put in the resolution that you don't have to come back to the board if you want to make this a two family. That's not the case here. So that necessitated us to have to come to the
board and to ask for the um to ask for the D1 variance. But um I view it differently than having to ask for because we were like halfway there. But they didn't the board at that time whenever that was done and it was
probably more than 10 years ago did not put that in the resolution. So you know we're here under um 40 col 55D and we're looking at you know what are the benefits of the application and I think in this case under the code that we can
show that there are benefits here um it especially in terms of of the aesthetics. So, you know, we look at um you know, the advancement of appropriate population densities. We see a lot of multifamily that's happening here, but
this, I think, fills a niche. These are very high-end units, larger units. They can accommodate someone that may not want to be in a corridor building. They have their own entrances. So, they almost feel more like, you know, your own condo or townhouse. And I think
that's something that is unique and would speak to uh appropriate population densities. Then with respect to just a variety of uses within a neighborhood, um I think this also fits that bill. This is something unique and it gives a
variety of uses. We have a lot of mixeduse buildings. We do have some two families in this area and um in the in the neighborhood behind it and I think that also fills that requirement. And then also in section 2I that what would be advanced is to provide a desirable
visual environment. And I think that's I think that's the biggest justification and that the it definitely needs going to stick out like a sore thumb. You're going to have a corridor of all new sidewalks and new trees and brand new buildings and then you're left with you
know these white rocks that look like you're down the shore and this ugly sign and building that I think has exceeded its useful life. And this will give that a brand new appearance appearance. So with regard to the variance relief, I think that it's able to be granted
without uh forget a substantial detriment without any detriment to the public good and I think the board would be able to based upon the evidence presented tonight permit this application sufficient with the
requirements for the Dvariance. Um the C variance is so minor it's literally 33 square feet. it's just squaring off the building. But um but I think the same arguments can be made and that um
the board can grant this uh the same arguments for the D1 variance can be grant you know 2E 2 G 2 I all of these also would uh be justification for this tiny small C variance. Uh we have seen
that the applicant uh puts a lot of detail architecturally in and landscaping wise into the property and that will be continued here and it's a really very nice continuation of what we're seeing on Route 23. It's really it's made such a such a positive
difference and it's so nice to see um them actually get constructed. So I hope the board um agrees and we're here for further questions. the applicant is here and I hope the board sees fit to approve the application and we thank you for your >> uh you didn't identify the C variance is
the minimum side >> the C variance is for the yeah it's an additional 33 square ft on the minimum side >> uh you say 33 square feet but 12 ft is required 5.6 six and only deal with ENC means.
>> Yes. So if >> um and that's being caused primarily by the twotory addition on the top going in >> Yes. And also the ground and the grounds like as they're not up anymore but it was like their wings when when uh Mr.
Trap built the addition to the front for whatever reason he didn't square it off of the original house so it left a small area on either side. On the side of the driveway, we don't have the variance. On the other side, on the southern side, we do have the variance.
>> Any other questions for the board? >> Mr. Brigliadoro, would you summarize? >> Yes. So, the applicant requires D1 moose fairings because the moose is not permitted in the zone. Um John, so can
you just address how this site is particularly suitable for this convers the the site was originally a residence uh the board approved another mixeduse
building which was more intense. So this use is quite suitable uh with respect to justifying the Dvarian for this particular use. any negative criteria? >> No, chairman. Uh we don't see any uh any
negative. In fact, we think that these are >> you state that for the >> Yes, these are substantial substantial positive attributes of this building and um I think that it's going to fit in quite nicely given that there's the identical use right next door.
>> Thank you. >> Thank any further questions to the board. So you need a D1 use variance to convert this to a two family residential dwelling. The C variance to move this room
to the side. >> Correct. 6.2 ft rating 12. And I guess it's an existing setback of 5.6T on the other side. Right. >> Yes. >> So it was the 5.6 ft. Has that been
granted previously or you need that too? >> It's the the it was granted uh initially the now that we're squaring off the building. That's the you know that's the addition that we're asking for.
>> You don't need site plan approval because single family and two family homes are exempt from site. I know you took the step and actually noticed it but you don't. >> Yeah. Yeah. But we did that just to be conservative. >> Are you going to comply with all terms and conditions conveyed in the board
engineers review report as you indicated on the record? We contact um the tree commission calls to make sure >> we took their blessing to submit the landscaping claim >> subject to the review of the applause.
>> Correct. >> That's all I have. May I have a motion? >> A motion. >> May I have a second? No. >> I just wanted to get ah yes. Right. So you need five from the votes. So was any board member we believe that the
questions that you have all the answers. Is there any additional information you think that you need from the applicant or are you ready to go approval? >> Right. Uh, we have a motion and we have a second. Please call the >> second
[laughter] motion. >> Yes. >> Second time. >> I I believe I'm going >> I'll do it now. Just >> do it now. >> Second. >> Mr. Kur. >> Yes. >> Miss Cataldo. >> Yes. >> Mr. Poses. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Rema. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kilpatrick. Chair goes yes. The application is approved. >> Thank you. >> Thank you gentlemen. >> Uh thank you to everyone in the board that came tonight. I very appreciative game doesn't start this morning
forward to Yankees are over. Um is Barrena coming in November or heard. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh we are expecting the uh application by Kirks. Uh old business, new business. May we have a
motion to adjourn? >> Motion. >> All those in favor? >> I >> I >> we are turned. Thank you everyone. That's