Good evening and welcome to the public hearing for the Livingston zone zoning board of adjustment. Today is what is today? Octo October 28th. >> It's been a long It's been a long day. Sorry about that. October 28th, 2025. If
you're an applicant for a D or use variance, you should be aware that such a variance can only be granted after showing that special reasons for the grant of that variance exists and that variance can be granted without substantial detriment to the zoning plan of the township of Livingston. You should also be aware that in order to be
granted such a variance, you will require affirmative vote of five members of the seven member board of adjustment. Other variances require a majority of four members to grant that variance. If you're an applicant for any variance and your variance is denied by this board, you have a right to appeal to the
superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of notice of decision and that court may overturn the decision of this board. If you're an objector to any type of variance has been granted, you too may appeal to the superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of the notice of
decision. If you file an appeal, I do ask that you provide a please provide a copy of your complaint to the planning administrator, Jackie Hollis. Pursuant to the requirements of the Open Public Meeting Act, also known as the Sunshine Law, adequate notice of this meeting was
provided to the Star Ledger and West Essex Tribune, and a copy was also posted on the Bolton board of the municipal building. In addition to having notice posted, notice of this meeting was placed on the township's website. Members of the public will have an opportunity to ask questions or to make statements regarding each
application at the appropriate time. When the time comes, if you'd like to address the board, please come to the front and use the microphone so we can make sure your comments or questions are part of the record. before we get going. Uh >> so, uh in the chairman's comments, uh
when he began, he talked about uh anyone who has a Dvarian uh will require five affirmative votes of the board. Uh as you may see, we have six members tonight. So, uh normally we would have
seven. Uh in such circumstances, we uh make it a habit of letting the applicants know that ahead of time and um it's up to the applicants to decide if they wish to proceed forward tonight.
They certainly have that option. But if you are seeking a use variance such as uh habitable floor area ratio, you will need five a five affirmative votes of the members who are present tonight on
the deis. Uh with that chairman I appreciate being able to make that statement. >> Thank you. Um Mr. Kenya, can you please call the Okay. >> Mr. Kenya here. Mr. Shaw >> here. >> Mr. Sherman >> here. Okay, Miss Wisman
>> here. >> Miss Khan >> here. >> Mr. Beer >> here. >> We have a quorum. >> Okay, please call the first applicant. >> Okay, sorry. Uh, block 451, lot 1820, Cambridge Road application number
2025-51-V Adita Shetty application seeks approval to finish attic space in violation of the following section. 17087 CC4 habitable floor area ratio 30% allowed 31.73 proposed 1.73 person variance
requested. >> Good evening. Oh, >> you can come have a seat over >> here. Same same cost. >> Sorry, Mr. Klein. >> That's right. from the law of Gross.
I'm very green here. I'm also It's green the uh the light on the on the microphone. Um Corey Klein from the law firm of SS Kummus and Gross filling in for Mr. Pada on behalf of the applicant Aditia Seti. Uh, we submitted an application for a habitable floor area
ratio variance pursuant to NJSA4 55D-74 in connection with modifications to an existing single family home on property located at 20 Cambridge Road and identified as lot 18 in block 451 on the township tax maps. The property is located in the R4 single family zoning
district. And uh, my client has served notice by certified mail and published notice of the hearing. and we um or I understand that my client has submitted proofs of such publication and service to the board and I would ask that the board acknowledge receipt and that jurisdiction is properly before this
board. >> So acknowledged. >> Very good. Tonight uh we're presenting uh one witness, Mr. Nick Graviano, a licensed architect and professional planner who will testify in support of the requested variances. If we could have him sworn. >> I I'm just I'm a licensed professional
planner. >> I was going to say >> Oh, I'm sorry. I made you an architect. >> Now, if he was an architect, it we'd have to choose a whole different wardrobe. >> Do you do you swear affirm Mr. Graviano, good to see you tonight. Do you swear
affirm tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do. >> Okay. Can you please state and spell your name for the record? >> Yes. First name Nicholas with an H, last name Graviano. G R A V is in Victor. I A N O. >> Okay. Mr. Graviano, you've appeared before us multiple times. uh been
accepted as a planner on multiple occasions. Your license in to practice as a planner in the state of New Jersey is current. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Mr. Chairman, >> does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness? >> There being no objections, the witness is accepted as an expert in professional
planning. >> Thank you. Uh Mr. Graviano, if you could please describe your responsibilities in connection with this project. >> Um if you could just give me one moment, Mr. Fine. Um the plan is not showing on the
>> we incoming technical support on the folder and bring up the plan. It's not I know it stays at the previous screen. Yeah, that's frozen. Give me a second. There we go. >> That's why he's the best.
Okay. So, so the applicant is before the board this evening for a very simple application. Uh the applicant is seeking to finish a part of a attic over a garage. It's not a third level attic. It's a second story attic to provide a
better uh walk-in closet for the master bedroom that was proposed for the dwelling. Uh previously, um the applicant proposed um if you see here, this was previously the walk-in closet for the master
bedroom, which is pretty small in size for a for a house of this type. So, the applicant seeks to finish only 178 square ft of that attic above the garage to accommodate a better walk-in closet for the master bedroom. Uh the applicant
requires no other relief. The relief being requested before the board this evening is for a 1.73% F variance. Um, no exterior changes are proposed for the dwelling. The house will look exactly as it was approved by the zoning department and as exists
today. The applicant, this is the applicant's home. The applicant lives there. The applicant has a TCO and is seeking to finish this uh second floor attic space for the walk-in closet. As you know, for the F variants, the applicant must demonstrate that the
positive and negative criteria could be met and that the site can still accommodate the proposed use withstanding the request for an F variance. Uh certainly uh this applicant uh advances purposes of zoning in municipal land use law specifically
purposes A, G, and I. A promotion of the public health, safety, general welfare. G sufficient space and appropriate location for variety of residential uses to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens. And then lastly, I do feel that this is a better uh desirable
visual environment and creative development technique purpose. I certainly there's no substantial impairment of the zone plan or zoning ordinance with this request. The applicant is meeting the uh maximum habitable floor area requirement. Uh the
requirement is 3220 and the applicant with this closet addition is at 3219. >> Does anybody on the board have any questions for this witness? Um I'll just ask one question. So the you're removing a few walls, you're
pushing them back and that's just going to become more I guess roof area from down below. said remove existing 5 foot high wall. Yes. >> Exterior. >> Yes. So that that will be one continuous closet for the master bedroom. >> Okay.
Does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness? >> Back to you, counselor. >> Um so Mr. Graviano, in your professional opinion, has the applicant satisfied the required proofs for the requested variance? Yes, I believe this F variance
request can be uh satisfied advancing purposes of zoning and the site can accommodate the increase in F uh given that there's no uh substantial changes to the facade floor plan uh of the dwelling. >> Okay, unless there are any further
questions from the board, that concludes my case. >> Does anybody in the board have any other questions? Does anybody in the public want to make a statement regarding this application? Does anybody on the board want to make any statements? Does anybody on the
board want to make a motion? >> I'll make it. Motion to approve. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Mr. Kenya, Mr. Sherman. >> Yep. >> Mr. Sha, >> yes. >> Okay. Mr. Wiseman, >> yes.
>> Miss Khan, >> yes. >> Miss Bear, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Excellent. >> Thank you. Thank you, board. >> Okay. Block6001, lot 2,10 Twin Oak Road. Application number 2025-55-V. Uh Joseph Ferry. Application seeks
approval for a first floor first and second floor floor rear yard edition and front yard part in violation of the following section. 70-96 C2 front yard setback 40 ft required
28.9 ft proposed 11.1 ft variance requested 170-87 CC4 habitable floor area ratio 30% allowed 39.81% proposed 9.81% variance requested 170-9
C3 aggregate sideyard 30% required 23.8 8% proposed which is existing 6.2% variance requested. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I just Okay. So, uh I assume you
are the uh the fairies. >> We are. >> Okay. Wild guess. Okay. Uh now uh you are uh the owners of this property. You are not you're here with your architect. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. Um now you heard my statement
before about if anyone has a devariance they need to have five affirmative votes from the six members of the board. Your application part of your application will require that. You understand that? >> Yes. >> Okay. With understanding that I'm just
want to be be fair to you. Sure. uh you know you understand that and you want to proceed tonight. >> Yes. >> Okay. No worries. As long as you know that and understand that. All right. And uh All right. So, you have one um you have one witness tonight, your architect, Mr. Astral.
>> Yes. >> Okay. All right. Why don't we uh get you uh we have to get you on the mic to get sworn in. So, why don't you get close to the mic? >> All right. >> Okay. >> All right. Do you do you swear for tell truth for the zoning board tonight?
>> Yes. >> Okay. Uh can you please state and spell your name for the record? >> Douglas Oswall. A S R A L. Um my office is in Whipony, New Jersey. And I've been a licensed architect for since 2000. >> Okay. And licensed in the state of New Jersey.
>> In the state of New Jersey. >> And that's current. >> It's current. Yes. >> Okay. You haven't gotten an email. >> Um >> didn't you didn't get anything in your email today? No. >> No. Not today. No. >> Okay. Not today. All right. And uh your education >> uh uh Bachelor of Architecture uh New
Jersey Institute of Technology 1991. >> Okay, Mr. Chairman. >> Okay. Does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness? >> There being no objections, the witness accepted as expert in architecture. >> Um I'm sorry, I should have asked this
question. Uh will the fairies be testifying at all or we're just going to have the architect? >> Um they may be giving commentary, so they probably should swear. All right. So, why don't why don't we get you sworn in? >> Sure. >> All right. Uh, so I'm assuming uh we have Okay. Joseph and >> Katherine Ferry. >> Katherine Ferry. Okay.
>> Do you swear and tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? >> We do. >> Okay. All right. No hesitation. Good answer. All right. Uh, and uh, Katherine, can we just have with a C or K? >> It's Katherine K. >> K A T H E R I N E.
>> See, I the chairman and I were thinking the same thing. C or K. Okay. All right. Okay. Well, take it away. It's all yours. >> Oh, okay. Um, hello board. Thank you so much for for hearing us uh this evening.
Katherine and I have lived in Livingston now for 15 years. We have three children. Uh, all go to school locally at our public schools. Uh, Harrison is where the elementary school all three of our kids have attended and we plan on staying here obviously for the long
term. So, um just our our request um to hear out uh what our proposed plans are is just to expand some living space for us. Uh nothing in in the the the front part of our our house uh will radically change and everything will be expanded
in the back portion of our our our our current uh setup. So, um but thank you for hearing us out. I don't know, Katie, do you want to say anything? >> Um we've lived in this house for 15 years. >> Yeah. So, we would like to stay in this neighborhood and in this house. Stay with our neighbors.
>> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. So, um uh th this project entails uh a two-story addition uh in the rear yard uh on the first floor family room and kitchen um addition
alteration uh to create a more unified and open plan uh for the growing family, the grown family that the fairies are. Um and um then on the second floor uh the only addition alteration is for master suite out the rear uh above the
proposed first floor edition. Um the uh uh uh the variances that we're seeking uh for front yard setback are for the proposed um unenclosed uh portico uh to create a a more announced entrance um
that I'll show on the front elevation. The only modific uh the the existing front elevation is to remain exactly the same. No change except for the portico uh just to create a safer entrance uh for the stairs that have to be uh ascended. Um and um so from the
streetscape uh that's the only modification is is for that porch to give a little curb appeal and announce the entrance a little better. Um the addition is primarily in the rear as you can see here. Um here's the rear elevation uh on sheet Z2 uh drawing
number three rear elevation the upper right corner of the page. And um so we have the master suite above and the family room below leading to the patio um through these um uh sliding doors at the family room. Um and then what you
see is uh on the side elevations um uh whereby um the uh existing uh building is in non-conformance with sideyard setback but the proposed addition will be in conformance uh with regard to sideyard setback both minimum and
combined. Um the um um so just to quickly um uh go through the plan again uh kitchen uh alteration uh for um an Eden kitchen with an island and a larger family room um and a mud room off the garage uh
which is um you know with its own side entrance. the uh second floor with the master suite above the addition. No other changes are proposed to the existing bedrooms. Um so it will be a um um a a four bedroomedroom home uh in
total. Um and but and the other variance we're seeking is for floor area ratio um uh for which um we would be in compliance if we had the minimum lot size. Our hardship is that we have an undersized lot at 6,250 square feet
where 9,375 is required. Uh but if we had that, you know, the minimum lot size, uh we'd be well under the uh the ratio in for such a lot. So, we're hoping that um considering the um the placement and location of the addition
in the rear um and no change noticeable uh from the front other than the um announce u the the portico the decorative portico. Uh we hope that the board would see this as a favorable application. >> Does anyone in the board have any
questions for this witness? >> I just have one quick question. So, there are stairs in front of the house right now, right? So I I don't know if you're leaving the stairs, but you're basically just building the port to go over the existing stairs that the stairs so it won't extend any further than the stairs where they are right now. Was it
going out further than that? >> It will go out a little further. Uh we want a sixoot landing. Uh it's a little >> tight. I saw that it's tight. >> That's all again it is not living space. It is open space for the public. >> Stairs in the portico and but the building itself isn't the same.
>> Exactly. Okay. Yeah. >> Thank you. Um, so just to be clear, you're the the addition is stepping in on both sides, which is how you're getting the sideyard setback requirements. >> We're trying to conform as best as we can in every other regard. The one thing that's out of our control is this is the
floor area ratio, >> right? And you're keeping the habitable floor area looks like to under 2500. So 2488 is your total. >> Exactly. Correct. >> So trying to make it a little bit more reasonable without Yeah. >> Yeah. If you want to get your mind around the numbers, that's about right.
Yeah. >> Okay. Um, anybody else have any questions? >> Uh, anybody in the public have any questions for this witness? Okay. Um, does anybody in public want to make a statement regarding this
application? No. Uh, do you guys want to make any sort of a closing statement before we close our statements? You don't have to. >> You don't have to. >> No pressure. No plus or minus. No
scoring on that. >> Okay. Would anyone on the board like to make a statement? >> Would someone on the board like to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second it. >> Wait, wait, wait. Who made the motion? >> I made the motion. >> Mr. Sherman. >> I was going to ask that it's also an I
think in terms of the the hardship, you also have a smaller you're only 50 feet wide this lot also. So that's another hardship. You have two hardships here. So >> yes lot is narrow I meant. Yeah. >> Mr. Sherman. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Kenya. You have Mr. Sha? >> Yes. >> Okay. Mr. Wiseman. >> Yes. >> Okay. Miss K. >> Yes. >> Mr. Bear. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Congratulations. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh block uh block 251 lot 749
Westlon Road. Application number 2025-65-V. Feliz and Dave David Nazbomb applicant seeks approval to build an ingground pool in violation of the following section 170-96A
sideyard setback 20 ft allowed uh 17 ft proposed 3 ft variance requested. Okay, these architects, they always take forever because they got their movable e easels. Have easel will travel.
>> Take care. >> Have a good night. >> Okay. So, uh I'm uh going to make a wild guess and you're Feliz and David Nusbam. >> Yes. >> Okay. And you'll be testifying on your behalf. >> Okay. Um this does not require Dvarian
so I don't I don't have to give you the same warning. Um, okay. So, let's start by swearing in. Do you, uh, swear and tell the truth before the zoning board tonight? >> Yes. >> Okay. Oh, very quick. Okay. All right. Um, so, uh, chairman.
>> Okay. It's all yours. Why don't you tell us what you got and why and how and everything else? >> Well, uh, thank you for, uh, seeing us this evening. We've been living in town for over 20 years. We put two kids through the entire school system, and we have a third in the high school. Um and
we intend to stay here for quite some time and we're here um to um uh we're installing a pool and I guess the setback is such that um there's a few feet that um we are uh not
able to conform because of the very very narrow lot size that we have. Um so that's why we're here this evening. Okay, one second. >> So, you're essentially kind of in the middle of the yard, a little skewed to
one side, so you can make one side. You could you couldn't make both sides work. No, unfortunately not. >> So, >> you got one side to work and one side's not too bad. Okay. Um, does anybody on the board have any questions for this these witnesses?
>> You have a neighbor to the uh the side you're seeking the variance? >> Yes. >> Uh, yes. We've we >> we're in the middle of We have two two neighbors. >> Yeah. >> Okay. All right. Does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness? Does anybody in the public want to make
a statement regarding this application? >> You don't need to. Do you want to have a closing statement? Not much has happened. So, >> no. Feet. We're We're hoping to uh you know, >> does anybody on the board want to make a statement? >> Does anybody on the
>> I'll make I I just want to recognize for the record, depending on how the vote goes, that it is a narrow lot. uh to only 50 feet. I think from if you had the the pool person here, they probably testified from just from prior knowledge, it seems like 12 feet seems
to be the minimum width that these pool uh installers say is usually the minimum size pool. Um so it seems like there's no other way to put a pool in this property is from what I'm I'm gathering. >> That's been a challenge.
>> We do have our pool installer. >> Yeah. If we may correct we can certainly answer some questions. >> Sure. Yeah. >> Let's get you like let's get you sworn in very quick. Do you swear for entail truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do. >> State your name, please. >> Michael Panotu. I'll spell it. It's P as
in Peter. A N as in Nancy. A Y I O. T is in Tom. O U. >> Okay. Thank you for spelling it. Appreciate that. I know Miss Hollis does. Um, so uh you're you're the uh you're you're the pool guy. I'm the pool guy.
>> You're the pool guy. Yeah. So, uh, Mr. Weisman brought up an issue with regard to the, you know, >> usable size of of a pool. You have some information to share with the board. >> So, originally they wanted a 14 by30, which I I we kind of brought it down so it could be a little bit more
conforming. The lot itself is a non-conforming lot. Um, it's a little bit smaller. I believe in an R3 zone. It's 15,000 square ft. This is around nine and change. Um, so we were trying to make sure that they got a big enough pool that they didn't put a bathtub because they would have only been able
to foot fit a 10-ft pool. But as a pool builder, we want an additional minimum foot uh away from the setback line as to create some space just in case for human error, anything like that because if we go a little bit too close, then that could be a different variance meeting.
So we have the we have on the right hand side, you'll see that the pool goes 21 ft, not 20. It's not directly on this on the setback line. And we're asking for a three-foot variance rather than a twoft variance because we feel like that's the best way to go. So it stays center in the yard and we don't we don't run into
any issues with the neighbors. >> And I'm curious why you thought the uh I'm not saying you're as opposed to seeking two var you just didn't want to seek two variants as opposed to putting it right. From >> my experience having two variances could be more problematic. So we wanted to minimize the amount of uh things that
were going to be under scrutiny. Okay. >> Does anybody else have any questions for any of the witnesses? Okay. Would someone like to make a statement? Someone like to make a motion.
>> Oh, Mr. Sha. >> Hey, you can just force here. >> All right. Mr. Wisman, you want to read the second? >> Yeah, I'll second. Thank you. >> We got to get participation on that half of the room. >> We get we get participation points. You know the grading.
>> Now you tell the whole >> All right. Um M Mr. Cha. >> Yes. >> Mr. Wisman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kenya. Yes. Mr. Sherman. >> Yes. >> Okay. Miss Khan. >> Yes. >> Miss Beer. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Congratulations.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> We can swim in January. >> Come on over. Winter swimming. >> I notic you wait till after the kids moved out. >> Exactly. We're done. We're done partying like that.
>> Okay. Block 301, uh, lot 35, 24 Cliffside Drive. Application number 2025-81- Lakey Johnny. Applicant seeks approval for decorative retaining wall in violation of the following section
170-72C 5C retaining wall side setback 5T required one foot proposed 4T variance requested. >> Okay. Uh, I'm going to once again I'm I'm
tonight I'm making tons of wild guesses, but I'm going to make wild guess that you are uh Leaky Giani. >> Yes. >> You have to just hit the button. There you go. >> That's correct. >> Okay. So, you're the owner of the property, correct? >> That's correct.
>> Okay. And you're here to uh to explain to the board tonight. So, we're going to swear you in. Okay. Do you swear affirm tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do. >> Okay. Uh sir, so one chairman, go ahead. I'm sorry. >> That's quite all right. You get all excited. I think you get on a roll
there. >> Please tell us why you're here and um fill us in a little The reason I came here tonight because we did want a decorative wall the zoning officer he he say it's necessary to come here but one
of our neighbors he concerned because the retain it's not retaining walls decorative wall it's his property but it's not that's the reason I'm here tonight. >> So so this um retaining wall is is is
decorative in nature. That's correct. >> Okay. And uh it is absolutely on your property. >> That's correct. >> Okay. And um so the the relief that is
could be applied here is that uh you are uh that that retaining wall should be placed at a five- foot distance and instead it's placed at a 4ft distance from the the uh lot line.
>> But it's >> it's not height. >> It's not no height. I'm sorry. Hi. It's it's uh I >> you talk about >> this is Yeah, I know. I know. Those 11 o'clock meetings. Um so it's it's
okay. So it's at it's at a a height height. You know what? Why don't I just give it over to the chairman? >> Okay. >> Okay. So >> I'm I'm I'm going to walk out and I'm going to walk out and come back in. Where's Graviano when I need it? So to
let's let's be clear. The wall is you're attesting to the fact that the wall is one foot off of the property line. >> That's correct. >> Right. And the height of the wall. I'm not going to mess it up. Is required 5 foot
proposed is 1 foot. And I don't I'm actually >> I don't think it was about the height. >> That's not the height. That's not the height. >> It's four. He's he's one foot. >> Yeah. Oh, you're right. one foot from the lot line. >> That's right. The mostly is decorative wall. It's not I try to protect the
water doesn't go to neighbor property. That's the reason we did it, you know, because I don't want the neighbor to complain because the slope, the dirt, the the grade. >> Yes. The grading and the wall. >> That's the reason I try to protect the neighbor property because >> not a usual one >> and the the wall is at the ground level.
The ground is whatever the ground level is, that's the height of the wall. The right. So, >> okay. I think we established that. Is there anybody in the public who would like to make a comment or talk about this wall?
There's no one here, it seems, that's interested in this application besides the applicant. Okay. And no one wants to make a statement, right? Good. All right. I think we we got the story. >> Okay. >> Does anyone want to make a statement on the board >> motion? Well, I'll make a I'll make a
statement on what because I went and visited the site as well. >> Um I I was anxious to hear the what the neighbor would say because um looking at it, I thought this made it beneficial for the neighborhood the neighborhood and the neighbor because effectively by
putting that wall >> it it's they've got more yard. Not legally, but it's as if they've got a bigger property with this nice new wall up what looks like on their property. Um, it seemed like to me a benefit for the neighbor and and a benefit to the
community. I don't know if anybody else wants to go, but I'm prepared to make a motion to approve. >> Only other thing I would have said is it also prevents any of the runoff onto that property. So, it actually helps the neighbor. >> Yeah. And and and it's very it fits the whole house, the building and
everything. So, it's pretty good. Yeah. You know, if you want, I'll make the motion. >> You could I'll make a motion and for you could second the >> Okay. Oh, you make >> Mr. Wiseman. >> Okay. Mr. Kenya, second. Okay. Mr.
Wiseman, >> yes. >> Mr. Kenya, yes. Mr. Sasha, >> yes. >> Okay. Mr. Chairman, >> yes. >> Miss Khan, >> yes. >> Mr. Bear, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Congratulations. >> Thank you. Thank you for coming by to try to take care of this. Yeah. Okay,
that was easy. Block 3802, lot 2142 Charles Street. Application number 2025-85-V, Rodak Homes, Inc. Corporate. Uh, applicant seeks approval to demolish an existing single family home and construct a new single family home in
with related improvements in violation of the following section. 170-87 CC4 habitable floor area 30 uh% allowed 35.99 proposed 5.9 in variance requested.
>> Okay, welcome back. >> Thank you Corey Klein again from Silskum and Gross on behalf of the applicant Roach Homes Inc. We submitted an application for a habitable floor area ratio variance pursuant to NJSA45D-70D4 in connection with the demolition of the
existing single family home on property located at 42 Charles Street and identified as lot 21 in block 3802 on the township tax maps and its replacement with a new two-story single family home and related improvements. The property is located in the R4 single
family zoning district. The applicant seeks uh the variance relief which I just uh described. Uh we have served notice by certified mail and published notice of the hearing and we have submitted proofs of such publication and service to the board and would ask the
board to acknowledge receipt and that jurisdiction is properly before this board. >> So acknowledged. >> Thank you. Uh tonight we're presenting the following witnesses. We'll start with Mr. Aean Cedra, a professional architect unlike Nick, um who will testify regarding the proposed
improvements. >> Okay. M Cedra, do you swear for untelled truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do. >> Okay. M Cedra uh appeared before this board on numerous occasions uh qualified in the field of architecture. Mr. Cedra, your uh qualifications uh to or your
license to practice in the state of New Jersey is uh up to date. Correct. >> Correct. >> Chairman, >> no. I don't know. I know. I I know. He checked the email. I told I got him. >> I checked it right before I came here. >> Uh does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this
witness? >> There being no objections. Uh the witness accepted as expert in architecture. >> Thank you, Mr. >> Take it away. Uh Mr. Sedra, if you could please describe your responsibilities in connection with this project. >> Sure. Um we designed this uh single
family house. Um the first floor of this house consists of the living spaces and also we have a guest bedroom. Uh at the first floor the total uh livable area for the first floor is 1,381
and the garage being 427 square ft. Uh the lift of this uh first floor we have the basement um open space at the back for recck room and also we have an office and playroom.
uh bathroom and also we have uh a bedroom with its own uh egress access. Uh the area for the basement is 1,381. The second floor consist of the bedroom
spaces with closets and bathrooms and also we have a laundry room up there. Um the attic is only accessible with the pull downstairs from the second floor. Um the exterior look of the building, it's a colonial style home. We used the
uh board and baton uh on the front wall and um horizontal James Hardy siding and also we have a stone at the base of the building. Um and uh we also have
casement windows for this house. Um the the height for the attic from the attic floor to the lowest point of the ridge is 9 ft and the collar tie is
being at 6 ft. Um the second floor area also is 1,297 with a total of floor area ratio of 2678. That will take us to a percentage of 35.99.
Um, also I would like to mention that we have a 30 square ft of open space at the second floor. Uh, this open space is only uh used at the first floor and not used at the at the second floor.
That's all. >> Does anyone in the board have any questions for this witness? >> Yes, I do. >> Please. >> Uh, the one questions I have, you are demolishing the house completely. Am I >> Yes, correct. Right. So, how can the pre-existing condition applies to the
new house? >> In terms of what? >> I'm sorry. >> In terms of what? >> Yeah. >> The size or what? >> No, the pre-existing conditions you have, if you look at your uh zoning table.
>> Yeah. >> The site plan. >> Yeah. >> There are pre-existing condition for the uh lot width, lot depth, front yard. >> Uh the lots. >> Just a lot. Yeah. And and then yeah, >> Mr. Sha, if I may, I think um our
planner, Mr. Graviano, is probably better suited to answer that question. But I think the short answer is going to be that you know when we when we create these plans um the existing conditions is always what exists on the site today
but for the um >> but for the approval >> the the lot width >> the code requires 75 ft but the existing uh lot width is 62 53 >> which uh unchanged I mean that's the
width of the Yeah, I I think I think uh just just for clarification purposes um probably because Mr. Sedra is so thorough is that he puts on all the information that's required which would
be um items such as lot area. Obviously, the lot is the lot. Lot's not going to get any larger. >> Okay. I maybe I misunderstood the question. >> No, no, it's it's it's it's fine. And the same thing happens when Patada is here. It's it's not it's not because of you, Cy.
Um so, you know, when when we when we see these things, um those are they're noted as relief, but they're not necessarily relief because it is what's already there. We can't you can't make the you can't make the lot any bigger.
You can't make the lot width any wider. And this is also goes to some of the comments that Mr. Weissman made about the narrowness of certain lots. you know that's that's the existing condition right so it's not so yes they are building a new home so all of those
other bulk issues in including here really you're only looking at well be clear mra you're only looking at a at a h have a floor ratio you don't have any uh new bulk variances correct as a result of this area um applications
>> correct as a matter >> that's really what Mr. Sha's question is yeah thank you no new bulk variances >> as a matter of fact the existing structure had some nonconformity with the front yard and the sideyard we're bringing this to conformance with the
code like the front yard uh was 26 ft or 7 now we're at 40 with the new structure so we we are eliminating the nonconformity in some aspect but uh regard the one that related to the lot uh widths and depth and That's that's
the size of the lot. So that's nothing much we can do with that. >> And that's we'll hear probably hear from Mr. Graviano about that. >> Thank you. >> Did we ask the public does anyone in the public have any questions for this witness?
>> Yes. Okay. I think that's it. Back to you. Okay. Um, seeing that there's no further questions for this witness, I'd like to call my next witness, Mr. Graviano. >> All right, Mr. Graviano, do you swear for tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do. >> All right, Mr. Graviano was previously
qualified in the field of planning >> and we can accept them as such. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Uh, thank you, Mr. Graviano, if you could please describe the site from a planning perspective. >> Certainly. Uh, this is a application for block 3802, lot 21, a street address of
42 Charles Street. Uh this is an undersized lot in the district which really triggers the need for the F variance. Uh it is an undersized lot. It's 7638 square feet whereas 9375 is required for the district. It's a little
over 1,700 square ft less than what's required by ordinance. Mr. Sedra did steal a little bit of my thunder. Mr. Shaw had a very very valid question. The applicant with this application is uh fixing a deficient sideyard setback to a
conforming sideyard setback. A deficient aggregate sideyard setback to a conforming aggregate sideyard setback. And then lastly, he mentioned the uh front yard setback which currently exists at 26.07 ft today and is going to meet the 40t
required of the district. So this is an application which does uh remove many existing nonconformities on the existing structure today. Um I would also like to note that the 2678 square ft proposed with this dwelling is
542 square ft less than the 3220 permitted by the district. So at 2678 this is a very modest uh structure that's respecting the undersized nature of the lot. while respecting all the
required setbacks of the district. Um so the request for the F variance 30% is required 35.99% is proposed certainly could be granted uh under the uh municipal land use law
purposes of zoning purpose A G and I uh without substantial detriment to the zone plan or zoning ordinance. uh the applicant meets all the required setbacks uh also meets the required off- streetet parking. So uh the site could certainly accommodate the proposed
dwelling withstanding the request for the habitable floor area ratio variance. >> Okay. Thank you Mr. Craviano. And in your professional opinion has the applicant satisfied the required proofs for the requested variance? >> Yes. And and I certainly think the removal of all those deficient setbacks
regarding the sideyard, aggregate sideyard and front yard go a long way towards advancing purpose I I mean purpose A of the municipal land use law promotion of public health, safety, morals and general welfare. That's really zoning mechanisms fall under that
purpose and this is an application which furthers that. >> Thank you. I have no further questions for this witness. Does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness? I'm going to take in no one in the public has any questions for this witness. Just an assumption. Um, does anyone in the public have any uh want to
make any statements regarding this application? Back to you, sir. >> Um, I I just wanted to note for the record, we did speak with two of the neighbors about this application. There was a concern that um about an existing fence that apparently encroaches onto
our property that belongs to one of the neighbors or one of the neighbors put up. Um, as shown in the plans, we have no intention of touching that fence. And I've uh will advise my client of that conversation I had. I think they they went home. But I just wanted to note that for the record. >> Will you make that part of the
resolution? >> Um, I'm hesitant to make it part of the resolution. It is an encroachment. If we sell it to somebody else and somebody wants to do something, >> you know, uh, and I had that conversation with them as well and they understand. >> I think the important part that perhaps Mr. client is trying to convey is that
conversations were had with the neighbors and obviously they're not here tonight to voice any >> objection there too. So whatever whatever was discussed was worked out to the satis parent satisfaction neighbors
because if it wasn't they would certainly be here. >> Correct. Thank you. Okay. Does anyone in the board want to make any uh statement? Anybody at the board want to make a motion? I'll go, please. >> Um, so I drove by this property and I
just want to say that I appreciate this thoughtful design. It's an undersized lot and I think the placement of the lot is um is more suited for this the placement of the house is more suited for the lot. And I appreciate the fact that the two deficiencies have been addressed um and
it's only 2678 square feet. It's definitely under the um requirements. So, I I think that it's um it's a good addition to the to the street and to the neighborhood. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other statements? Someone like to
make a motion. >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second. >> Okay. Mr. Sherman, >> yes. >> Mr. Weissman, >> yes. >> Mr. Ken, yes. Mr. Sha, >> yes. >> Okay. Miss Khan,
>> yes. >> Mr. Beer, >> yes. carries. >> Okay. Block 4700, lot 34, 14 Hazelwood Avenue. Application number 2025-68-V. Oop, sorry. I went I skipped the wrong
one. I missed the uh Elmwood block 16002, lot 3577 Elmwood Drive. Application number 2025-79-V, Rodak Home Inc. Incorporated. Applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family home in violation of
the following section 170-99 C2 front yard setback 35 ft required 20 ft proposed 15 ft variance requested uh 17087 cc habitable floor area 30%
required 36% proposed six person variance requested Thank you, Mr. Kenya. >> Do you want to >> Cory Klein again from Silsk and Gross on behalf of the applicant Rodak Homes, Inc. We've submitted an application for
a bulk variance pursuant to NJSA405D-70C and a habitable floor area ratio variance pursuant to NJSA455D-70D4 in connection with the demolition of the existing single family home on property located at 77 Elwood Drive and identified as lot 35 in block 16002 on
the township tax maps and its replacement with a new two-story single family home and related improvements. The property is located in the R4 single family zoning district and we have served notice by certified mail and published notice of the hearing and we have submitted proofs of such
publication and service to the board and we would ask the board to acknowledge receipt and that jurisdiction is properly before this board. >> Notice good. >> So so noted. >> So noted. >> Thank you. >> Sorry. >> Uh tonight we're presenting uh Mr. Cedra
again, our architect, who will testify with regards to the imp the proposed improvements. >> All right, M. Cedra, do you swear a friend tell truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do. >> All right, Miss Cedra, literally minutes ago was qualified in the field of architecture and I'm assuming nothing's
changed. So, uh, chairman, >> therefore, we can accept you as expert in architecture. Thank >> Okay. Uh, thank you, Mr. Sedra. uh if you could please um uh orient the board and the public to the property by the surrounding streets
and other characteristics and uh describe the uh the proposed improvements. >> Sure. Um we designed a single family house for this property. This is a corner lot. Um the the first floor consists of the living spaces and also
we have a guest bedroom. And um for the first floor we have uh two entrances. one from uh each street to enter the house. Um the area for the first floor is 1,572. The garage area is 428.
Uh the basement on the left uh side uh has a rec wreck room at the back, office spaces, office space and media room and also we have a bedroom with uh egress window. Uh the second floor uh consists of the
sleeping area with bathrooms and closets. Uh we have a pull downstairs uh for the the attic accessed. Um the house is a colonial style house uh with a a hip roof as being the main roof and also we have some gable roofs
that intersect with the hip roof. Uh we used the AAC um uh horizontal Hardy and Bord and Batton for the front. Um and um horizontal board and uh
horizontal uh lap siding for the rear and the side uh also for the side that faces the street. We designed the elevation just to improve the static appearance of this uh uh front view.
Um the the second floor area is uh 1,560. We have a total F floor ratio of 3,132 with the 36%. Um, also I would like to mention that
there is a 70 square ft at the second floor in the foyer. It's a open space used only uh at the first floor but not used at the second floor. The attic um is as I mentioned only accessible with the pull down stair with the with the
height uh being 8'9 from the attic floor to the underside of the ridge. Uh and also we have the collar tie at 5 foot 10. >> That's all. >> Thank you, Mr. Sedra. Does the board have any questions for this witness?
>> And I'm guessing the public has no questions for this witness. >> Stab in the dark. >> Okay. I'd like to call my second witness, Mr. Graviano. >> All right. Mr. Graviano, do you swear and tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? I do. >> All right. Mr. Graviano was previously
qualified in the field of planning and was accepted mere minutes ago in the field of planning. >> No emails from the DCA. >> Oh, yeah. Mr. Graviano, you had to check. >> No, I didn't. >> No. Okay. >> We can accept you as an expert in
professional planning. >> Thank you, Chairman. Uh, thank you, Mr. Graviano. if you could please um explain for the board the uh the reasons for the requested relief tonight and the justifications for the requests from a planning perspective. Certainly, this this is a very similar
application to the last application in that the applicant uh with the proposal is uh eliminating uh numerous existing nonconformities on the site. Uh this is an application for lot 35 and block 16002. Um, this also is an undersized
lot. Uh, 8702 where 9375 is required. It's 673 square ft less than what's required by ordinance. This application is improving a currently deficient front yard setback of 35 ft. 40 ft is proposed. Additionally, there's a
deficient sideyard setback. Uh, that is to the neighbor on Elmwood. um 6.51 exists today where the ordinance requirement of 10 foot is being met by this application. The applicant is requesting the uh front yard setback for the secondary street
whereas uh 35 ft is required and and 20 ft is proposed. However, I would like to note that this is an improvement over the 17.33 feet which exists today. This is a 70 foot wide lot. Um, I think the
applicant's design does respect um the uh built pattern of Elmwood Court, which is the side street. And as you saw on the applicant's uh architectural, great care was made into making this house appear like there are two front facades
to the dwelling. So, there's a facade uh front a front looking facade on both of the Elmwoods in this circumstance. Um the only variance that the applicant's requesting with this application is the habitable floor area ratio whereas 36%
is proposed 30% is required. Uh the applicant's home at 31 32 square ft is under the 3220 uh required by ordinance. So this is certainly a house that meets the habitable floor area requirement uh of
the district. Um the F variants can be granted advancing purposes of zoning uh AG and I A relating to uh making the uh setbacks conforming and increasing the uh setback on Elmwood Court. Uh
additionally, it advances uh purpose I a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangements. >> Sorry, that's Elwood Drive, right? Elwood Drive. >> There's two Elmwoods here. >> I'm sorry. >> The side streets Elwood Court. confusing myself. >> Elwood Drive is the house, the address
of the house, but it fronts on both streets. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Um, sorry if that wasn't clear. Um, so certainly with respect to the D4 variance, um, it meets both the positive and negative criteria. There's no substantial impairment to the zone plan
or zoning ordinance. And then looking at the uh requested sea varants for the front yard setback. Um that certainly advances uh purposes A and I of the municipal land use law. Um case law tells us that in terms of aesthetics
that aesthetics alone could be a reason for granting uh the C2 variance. And I think the design of this home certainly provides a benefit to the community by providing beautiful streetscapes on both streets by which this house fronts. As
with the D uh D4 F variance, the C2 variances uh varants could be granted without substantial impairment to the zone planner zoning ordinance. >> Thank you, Mr. Graviano. Um, so in your professional opinion, has the applicant satisfied the required proofs for the
requested variances? >> Yes, for both the D4 F variance and the C2 variance for the front yard setback. Board have any questions for this witness? >> And we can assume nothing from the public either. Okay.
>> Okay. Thank you. I have nothing further. >> All right. Does anybody in the public want to make a statement? >> Does anybody on the board want to make a statement? Does anybody on the board want to make a motion? >> We make a motion. Um, so this area of
town, the lots are small and there are many houses on the street and I had to like honor going there during school pickup in that area. It gets very very crazy. So there are cars parked on both sides of the street and then it's a very narrow street and cars are trying to
pass. So, I know it's not the purview of the zoning board, but I think um I would just like to say that it's really important that the silt fence go up and that debris is removed regularly and you're just aware of the cars and the traffic on in that area, especially
being on the corner because it's a lot of construction going on on that street and streets around there. So, um I almost scrape my wheel parking. It's really hard. So, I just would I you know, it doesn't have to be a condition of approval, but I just would like that you would respect the neighborhood. Um,
and there are a lot of children in that in that area, too, coming in and out of cars. So, >> we'll make a note of it for the applicant. Um, I would think that the township has an ordinance that should be um complied with and um >> Well, there is, but it's not always applied. >> Yeah, it should be. It should be.
>> Bless you. >> Um Yeah, there should be better. It sounds like there should be better enforcement, but we I I will make sure to uh to pass that message along to the applicant >> because the onus is also on on the construction. So, yes. Okay. Thank you. >> Sure.
>> Anybody want to make a motion? >> I will second. >> Okay, Mr. Shaw. >> Yes. >> Mr. Wiseman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kenya. Yes. Mr. Sherman. >> Yes. >> Miss Khan. >> Yes. >> Mr. Beer. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> The last one. Block 4700 lot 3414 Hazelwood Avenue. Applicant number application number 2025-68-V. Elaine and Scott Hamman. Applicant seeks approval to construct a new single
family house, new garage in violation of a following section. 170-99 C2 frontier setback 40 ft required 31.75 ft proposed 8.25 variance requested 170-9
CC3 left side yard set back 10 ft allowed 5.75 ft proposed 4.25 25 ft variance requested 170-87B4 habitable floor area 3220 square ft
allowed 3440 ft proposed 220 var ft sorry 220 ft variance requested 170-87C4 habitable floor area ratio 30% allowed 52.3% proposed 22.3% variance required
170 0-87E1D4 rear yard setback 5T allowed 2 feet proposed 3 ft variance requested 17087E1E side yard setback 5T allowed 2.5 ft proposed 2.5 ft variance required
>> okay uh so uh I assume that you are uh Ela Hammond >> yes Okay. And you're the owner of the property. >> I'm the applicant. >> Yes. Okay. You're the applicant. And you're here tonight. >> My parents are the owner. >> I'm sorry. >> My parents are the owner. >> Okay. Okay. Uh but you're the applicant
for tonight >> and uh you have your architect with you tonight, right? Um now, uh I made I think you were in the audience. I made the announcement. Uh but I'm going to just do it again just to be sure. Um, so one of the variances you're seeking is
what we call a Dvariance, which does require five affirmative votes of the board. We have six members tonight. Uh, so I just want to once again just so you're aware uh before we proceed uh and
you still want to proceed, correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. All right. And uh so will uh you start with your architect or do you want to start? Are you going to be testing? start really briefly and then my architect's going to take you through the plan.
>> Okay. So, let's let's swear you in. Okay. Uh do you swear for tell truth before the zoning board tonight? >> Yes. >> Okay. And we already have your name as Elen Hman, right? >> Yes. >> All right. Uh so, um just uh Miss Hman,
just explain to me your your parents own the home, but you're the applicant. >> Yes. >> All right. Can you just explain to the board? >> So, um, my elderly parents, they're 84, 84, um, and 88. They've been living in the house for 20 years. So, they first moved in cuz I moved to Summit and they
wanted to be near my, um, baby. And they're aging out and that house is still pretty much like the original build and they would like to stay in the house. So, what I'm looking to do is be able to expand this house so that we
could do some multi-generational living, right? So that I can live in the house with them and be able to have this house have first level floor um living that they don't have to do stairs, you know, and they can stay in the house because
that's their first choice. I guess that's my simple rationale >> as a point of correction because I thought the application says you're demolishing the house. >> Yes. >> Oh, you want to build? Yes. Sorry. So, I I would like to demolish and build a new
house that can fit us to be able to live comfortably. So the overall goal is is generated by the fact that your parents uh want to uh what they call today age in place. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Age in place.
>> Okay. Yeah. Does I guess Yeah. You I guess you're an applicant then. Yes. Does anyone on the board have any questions for this applicant? Okay, let's You wish to proceed with your architect, right? >> Yes. >> All right. So, uh, let's get you one. Do
you swear for and tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do. >> All right. Can you please state and spell your name for the record? >> Robert Emert Jr. E Merrt. >> All right. Um, Mr. Emirit has been before this board numerous occasions,
qualified in the field of architecture. Uh, you're licensed to practice in the state of New Jersey. I got to remember what state we're in. State of New Jersey is up to date. Correct. >> Current and valid. Yes. >> Current and valid. There you go. Um, Mr. Chairman,
>> does anybody on the board have any questions or objections to this witness? Uh, there being no objections, we can accept you as a expert architecture. >> Thank you very much. Um, all right. So, as Elaine mentioned, you
know, part of the the intent here is, you know, for her to live there, you know, with her family and her parents, but it's also that the, as she mentioned, it's one of the original houses. Um, I mean it is built I don't even know the
>> but it's um it, you know, it's an older home, older lifestyle has not been uh maintained and you know kept kept up. The garage the detached garage in the back is deteriorating. So in addition to
the lifestyle, it's it's also just the quality of the existing house and the existing construction. So the plan is to demolish the house, demolish the garage,
and to situate the house. I mean, all right, number one, it is a um significantly undersized lot. I mean it it's uh about 30% undersized.
Uh it's only a 50 foot wide lot where 75 foot is required. It's uh 6577 square ft whereas 9375 is required. So it it's und sized. Um, so when taking
the house down and positioning it, we we took care of some of the existing non-conforming issues. Um, as far as the front yard setback, we are asking for a variance even though
I'm not really sure that it's required because we do comply with the established setback requirement. So, but in talking with the building department, they said, you know, please just go
ahead and get it memorialized even though you do comply with the average setback. And so that's why we are um the average setback is 37 um 37
feet and we are doing 37 or here. Let me get let me get the right number. front yard 40 is required. We're the existing established setback is 31.7. We're 31.75. So, we're farther back than
the established by just a few inches, but which is good. I mean, because if you, you know, drive down the street, these houses are all pretty much in a row. And so we will be um maintaining that uniformity uh with that um with the
the front corner of the house, you know, we're you know, we pulled that away. So now we are the 10 ft away. I'll see if I can zoom in. So in the the front corner is um 7 foot
something. And now we're going to keep that at 10 ft. Um, and then we will have 10 feet on the opposite side. So in the front areas it conforms. Uh, we are asking for a sideyard variance at the back uh left corner because we're trying
to maintain a a a drive um a a little bit wider than the existing drive, but maintaining the drive on the right side. Um, so we have that. Um, as far as the layout of the
house, it's a three bedrooms on the upstairs. So on the upstairs, the we have the master suite in the back, you know, the bedroom facing the back. And you know,
again, due to the limited size of the property of the house, it's only a three-bedroom house on the second floor. So, we do have two bedrooms up there with a with a hall bath and a laundry area. And then we do have the primary
living space. Again, we have the we are going to have a detached garage at the back, which is shown on the site plan, and we'll get into those variances in a second. But um so we have the you know the family room,
the great room facing the back. We have a mud room cuz they are going to be parking in the back and coming in this way. So a place to take off your shoes, drop off your coat. We come into the kitchen. Um and then at the front of the
house, we have a bedroom number four which is laid out for the parents u with the separate beds. Um, and then a small a small study at the front and a you know a nice uh covered front entry porch
uh coming up to the house and many of the houses on the block do the the new ones but the existing ones have front porches. Some of them have been enclosed. This will and some of them are still open and this one will uh be an
open porch. Um, and then one of the issues with this neighborhood, with this house, is it has a very low basement. Um, and one of the concerns we have is there's water. It gets
existing water in the basement. And so, we're going to be addressing that with the new construction, with new drainage. But there was concern about pushing the basement slab elevation down because we just didn't feel it was prudent since there's already water issues and we
didn't want to tempt fate. So I mean it's it's under a 7 foot ceiling height down there and and the new house is going to be the same because we're we are you know we're not going down any deeper even though it's going to be new.
So, it's really, you know, not much of a usable being under 7 ft. And we are going to have duct work down there. We're going to have mechanicals down there. So, it's really not going to be a usable living space basement. I
mean, yes, there will be storage and there will be mechanicals. So, in order to get additional space, we are showing a, you know, we are proposing to have a habitable attic. Um, so we would have a
stair going up to the attic with a with a loft open loft flex space. Um, we're calling it a dining al cove. Again, it's no doors, no closet. It's just an open
space. So, you know, it could definitely be a sleeping alco for a guest or someone, but it could also be a flex space, could be a a home office, it could be many, many different things. And there is a full bathroom on that level that we're proposing. Then the
front and the back of that level would be attic with mechanical, with insulation, with the, you know, collar ties, all that. Um, all that. And in the back there's even the dotted line because there's going to be a raised ceiling because the intent is to have a
a tray ceiling above bedroom number one. And so that dotted line represents, you know, you won't even have a level floor back in this area. Um, with the front of the house tried to keep, you know, the intent was to keep it fairly simple.
It's a, if you look at the floor, going back to the floor plan, you can see it's just a nice simple rectangle on the first floor. there is a little bump out in order to get some space and some needed space to have a a the for the kitchen, but um from the outside, you
know, again, trying to keep it um very simple. Um a lot of the houses on that street are very simple. And so just, you know, in keeping with character, but all new finishes, covered front porch, and then set back in the middle, in the
middle of the house would be um where we bump up the ceiling, bump up the roof line in order to get the proposed habitable attic. And and then
so and then in the back we would have a detached garage. It's just a garage. Um there's no living space or anything, but we added a dormer. I added a dormer there because I mean just the relationship between the house, the
family room looking out. Um you know, if you're going going back to, you know, just when I'm in in this family room looking out, what I'm going to see? I'm going to see my garage, you know, right there. And so, I want it to be attractive and um, you know, even though it's opening up onto the patio, auto
court, um, it's going to have several uses in the in the space between the two buildings. So, but and then also as far as the garage is concerned um you know repositioning the garage in order to you
know make it accessible for a car. Um so that's why we did push it back in the lot. Um and that's why we are asking for the variances as far as the um side and
rear yard setback. uh in relationship to you know the property line and then again we are also asking for a variance for the area of the accessory building. Um again the lot is undersized.
um trying to go with a twocar garage to be more um you know modern living. And so um so that's why we are over on the accessory building square footage or
percentage. So that concludes my comments. >> Okay. Does anyone have any questions for this witness? Go ahead. I I'll I'll start with the I don't have a lot but let me let me start because I want to understand >> looking over there
>> I want to I don't understand the the let's just start with the setbacks because I don't what is this to the power line cuz you have all these 39 the 40s to the curb in your calculation but then in your proposed it's 317 31.75
which you're saying is the average to what is that I don't know what I'm looking at >> the right the right way and then add 10 feet till you get to the curb. So, just add 10 feet to that number and that'll be the >> the same the same number with the to the curb. >> What the town has you do is measure from
the curb line because the curb line is visible. It's actually something you can measure from. So, you measure that, but the property line starts 10 feet in from that curb. So you'll see me measure 40 feet to the house, but the setback is
really 30 feet because there's an imaginary line which you can't measure from because you can't see it unless you're a surveyor. So that's that's the difference. >> I got it. Okay. Okay. >> Anybody else? >> You're not on.
>> So >> well I think so the driveway is very long, right? And then the garage is in the very in the rear of the property. So the required
rear lot distance is 5T and you are proposing two feet. >> Correct. >> The garage 2 and 1/2 ft. Um >> the well the rear is >> at the side and three feet two and two and a half. Right. >> Right. So two feet to the rear and two
and a half. So basically this little piece here to the left is the backyard and then here this is like a little driveway patio. >> Correct. >> Okay. H this is a very large house for this size
piece of property. You know that it's a very large house. Um I know that there is it's an undersized lot. I see. But you are also proposing a habitable floor area of 3,440 square ft
where the required is 3220. So you're actually exceeding the required habitable floor area with as you said the property the lot being 30% lower than the required amount. So I'm just trying to square this because this is a
very large house in that very small lot. Um >> well if I could just couple things. Number one is as far as the habitable floor area of that square footage of the 30 the four what is it 3440
almost 400 of that >> is the attic. Right. And we were looking at that um you know again you know with the water issues with not having a usable basement with
and then also part of the thinking was we were looking you know at the house sizes on the street. I mean there there there you know it's a modest it's a modest street and we didn't so and the house is already sitting up a
little bit. We didn't want to start raising the whole entire house out to get >> because you're almost at the 35t. >> Well, we can because we can because I can change the roof roof pitch and change things and we can do that. So, but we didn't, you know, but we like the
form, you know, I like the simple form of the that the gabled roof, but but part of the thinking was we didn't want to start pushing the entire house up in order to try to get a basement underneath there if we could get by with
just taking part of the attic and using it for the same thing. So instead of putting it all in the basement and having even more space than we would have here, >> just, you know, just tuck it under the roof line that we're already going to have and just create a couple of
dormers. So that's that's 400 of the square feet um right there. And you know, I mean, as far as the size of the house, it is still only on the on the second floor, it still is only a three-bedroom
house. I mean, it's not like we >> correct. >> So, right. No, but I'm saying upstairs. >> Oh, sorry. Upstairs. Sorry. >> No, I agree with you. That's that's true. But, but again, I'm just still saying that on the second floor, it's not like there's that much space that we
have the ability to do four bedrooms. And then yes, the you know there is the the space on the first floor for a bedroomedroom for a future you know home home office down the road you know some sort of flex space but but yes it is it
is a four bedroomedroom house. So, [Music] >> uh, carrying on that that theme on the the square footage, um, you know, and and I acknowledge it's an undersized lot, but when it comes to the square footage figure, you know, undersized
usually doesn't mean >> building a bigger house, which means that to to do this, I think we would be required to find um some evidence under C2 that it's not because of a hardship. that you could build a bigger house. Uh,
and it's oversized. So, so we would need to see and that's what I'm not that's asking of the evidence of something where the the benefits and this isn't to the to the to the property owner, but to the community that has to substantially
outweigh the detriment. Um, I haven't heard testimony of other h I've seen the other houses on the block. I I none look like this is some block that has for some reason has everyone has gone over the the limit. It doesn't look that way.
So, uh, I'm looking for some sort of, you know, evidencebased answers so that to be able to justify >> that this is a substantial that this benefit to the community substantially
outweighs us basically violating what the ordinance is in the town for this square footage. >> Right. So, you know, well, I think this does in I think it's in keeping with the existing
neighborhood. All right? Because we talk about this this we can talk about the square footage, but again, if you look at the house, it's an elongated house. So, from the from the street, you know, we're a two-story house. You know, we're not, you know, it's not oversized. It's
not grandiose. It's a very simple gable shape. It's a very, you know, we we have the, you know, the the the floor elevation is going to be very similar to what it is. An open front porch very much in keeping with what the neighbors are. And and then just the very simple
gable shape, which is, you know, it's in keeping it and I think in some cases it's even simpler than some of the other um you know, the other houses on the block. So, driving by this house, it's not like this is an oversized house from
the front that's going to jump out to you. It's what we needed to elongate the house in order to get, you know, again, modern amenities um
to to, you know, to make it a functional house in this day and age. Um, I mean again, you talk to a lot of families having the three bedrooms upstairs is, you know, you see enough of these plants. It's not that common that you see that these
days. I mean, you're people are putting four on occasion five, but mostly four is what you see. And then yes, having the bedroom on the first floor is is is becoming, you know, fairly common these days because it's it it has
some advantages to, you know, visitors from far away, from elderly parents, from uh a flex space, you know, to have a home office or something at home. So, so there are advantages to having that type of space, but again, I do think the
character from the street, from driving by is very much um with what you have in the neighborhood. You know, the houses, you know, the two-story house, open porch, pushed off a little to one side because these houses all do have the uh
or most of them have the um detached garage in the back. So, uh, so I do I do think it's in keeping with the character of the neighborhood. It is just, you know, again, it's we did go deeper, but it's
only I'm going to say it's only a three-bedroom house upstairs. Um, you know, we don't have a living room. You know, we just, you know, there are the certain things like that. And we don't have, you know, again, there are water issues in this area and we don't
have a functioning basement. Um, yeah, let me just jump in for a minute. Um, I mean, the basement doesn't matter. Basements don't count no matter what, whether there was a basement or not. Uh, it's not part of living space. The attic normally wouldn't count, but
now you're turning the attic into living space, so now it does count. Um, the house is I get it that it's a narrow lot. I mean, you also happen to have other I know every every project stands on its own, but you also happen to pick the the
night where there was two other projects that were roughly around the same size and you have one that was definitely exactly the same size lot and that one is a thousand square feet less than what you're proposing here tonight. And that one exceeded its ratio, but for good
reason. This is just way severely oversized. I mean, it's what's pushing the garage in the back. Um, you know, being on the property line, um, it's it just doesn't fit. I mean, I get that, you know, trying to build
modern amenities and this and that, but there's lot sizes that could accommodate all of those things and just in for this, it just doesn't accommodate on that size lot in this area. I I'll chime in a little bit. Um I do
agree that you know your front skate everything you said is is certainly true and I think it won't overwhelm the street as you drive past, but um I I think you're getting a feel and I'm kind of in the same ballpark. They're looking
at some of the numbers, you know, 3440 and we're saying how undersized it is and we understand the rationale, but we're over on coverage. We're over on what I mean 52.3 is a really hard number
to to swallow. um from I think from this side of the table, we understand what you're trying to do and I think you you worked very hard to try to get this to meet all the requirements and the the the wants of the of the uh the owner,
but um I mean I'm I'm seeing seven variances and we're pushing things to all kinds of corners and I don't know I have trouble rationalizing that this is good for the neighborhood I guess is part of where I'm coming from trying to be honest with
you. I think I cut you off. Did you want to say something or >> Yeah, I was just gonna also add on the the the setbacks. You usually there's the existing one side is getting worse. Again, somehow that's got to be a you have an undersized lot and you've seen
like today you've seen our rationale in in other cases. Um, again, it stands on its own, but the the case was made that hey, we're going to we're undersized a lot. So, uh, that's why we're going to
that's why we're seeking a variance, but it's better than what you got now. But here, this isn't the case. It's it under size a lot and it's going to be worse. And I'm sensitive to encroachment because I'm sensitive about neighbors. I always want I always want people in
movies to get what they want, but I I haven't heard a reason that things couldn't be configured so that this garage, which is two to three feet off a neighbor's property, I like it should be that there's no other
way that this is pretty so standard and typical and this is there was just no other way to do it and we really want this to happen in the community. I haven't heard testimony to like that effect that this needs to be done such that we got to stick the neighbors with a with an accessory literally two and
three feet, you know, right off their property line, which is really close. I I don't know if any other board members have anything else >> before I >> just one one quick question I have
>> for uh going back to uh my colleagues questions about the setbacks uh I believe the setbacks were not measured by any surveyor am I correct and also you assume 10 ft from the curb
>> is it correct assum All right. As far as the you're talking about the established front setback. Okay. Um that was measured by me and you know we are still setting the house back
farther than it is right now based on the measurements. And if you drive down the street you know and we can have a but um you know but I measured from the curve and I measured to the houses and stuff. So I'm I'm confident to what it
is but but again and we are farther back and to as far as the you know as far as the setbacks we have improved the the you know the setback the front yard at
the at the front left corner. It does get a little tighter. you know, you know, it was at what 6.79 and we're, you know, a foot closer back here because we, you know, we're bumping it out to get to get that space within
the kitchen. Um, which we could could take off. I mean, as far as, you know, the garage and pushing it back, I mean, to me, to me, it's
I mean, I don't see the benefit, honestly. I don't see the benefit to a neighbor. It's dead space back there anyways that you got to take care of. So whether it's two feet or three I mean five feet or three feet, it's still just dead space either on the side, you know,
whether you're if your neighbor has a fence, it's three feet on the side of his fence. If they don't have a fence, it's, you know, you know, so it's open. It it it's to me it's it's relatively insignificant. Um you know as as far as the neighbors
concerned. Um but again you know if the homeowner wants you know but we've had this this conversation. So >> what's that? >> I'm required to have a onecar garage. >> You're required to have at least a
onecar garage. It doesn't have to be a twocar garage. >> Let me let me let me let me let me >> neighbor was notified and I guess they're not here to say that it's an issue, >> right? Um let me let me just say this at
this point. Um there have been several comments by the board with regard to this application. Um, sometimes when you hear comments from the board, uh, I I I believe that the
comments are always meant to be constructive. Uh, and, um, I I think as you seen tonight, the board does uh, grant relief where appropriate. Uh and in this set of circumstances based upon
the comments by the board, um maybe the applicant wants to um take those comments uh and have um a sit down with uh her
professionals uh or professional uh and discuss if there's any alternatives. Um I I being in the situation you're you're in uh with aging parents and I myself, let
me say that, you know, I I understand and appreciate what you're uh attempting to do. Um it's certainly better than uh what we used to do with the elderly where we just put them away. Although I'd probably like do that with my
mother, but >> she's she's she's too aware. Oh, wait. is on the record. Um, >> scratch that please. >> I already, don't worry, I already changed the insurance policies. Um, but, uh, you know, based on the
comments, sometimes you want to take that and say maybe something can be done, maybe something can't be done. But, uh, sometimes it's always, uh, good to take commentary. So, um, let me ask you this,
uh, question, Miss, uh, Hammond. Uh based upon the comments uh that you just heard from the board, do you want to ask the board to uh for a continuence uh an adjournment so that you can have
that conversation and then come back uh at a future board date in the near future uh and be able to either identify that you're not making any
changes or if you are making changes, you have to provide that to the board and and Miss Hollis can obviously uh give you uh well, M. Emirate knows what he's doing, but uh if there's any changes to provide that to uh to the to the township ahead of time.
>> I've never done this before, so I don't know what that implication is, but I'm thinking that Yeah. I suggest we go out and talk about it >> and then you decide >> you just want to come back. So, so what
right so what I'm saying to you is that um you have the this is your application right so you have the power to to to control it and to say uh based upon the comments I think I want to have the
opportunity to take those comments into consideration and I want to come back at a future board meeting uh with maybe an amended plan maybe not an amended plan. But I want to have that opportunity
because once the board votes, and we've had this situation before, my board members know this. Once the board votes, that's it. Uh the application is either approved or denied. And sometimes I have an applicant who say, "Well, wait a minute. I have one more thought." And
that's not doesn't happen. Once the once the vote is taken. >> Can you explain what happens if it's a negative vote? If it's a negative vote, uh if the board uh decides not in favor of any application, uh what that means is that the uh
applicant that particular application is dead. Uh the applicant can't reapply with the exact same uh plans. They would have to come back with new plans. There's a thing called rescue dicata and I've met my quota under my law license
to speak Latin at least once a day. So under rescue dicata that means you have to have something that's significantly different than your prior application. So you'd have to resubmit all new plans and you'd also have to start over from square one with notices, an application,
a review by the township. Uh that would all start from square one. Yeah, that's right. We >> we understand. I think we're going to take your advice, take the comments, the the helpful comments that you've made, and we will go look at it and decide
what the next step is. >> Mr. Emir is is a professional and he knows what he's doing. So the next available time slot is January as Jackie >> 27th.
>> January 27th. You will not need to renotice. That's you're all done with that. You just have to any revised plans need to get to Jackie 3 weeks in advance. Is that it? Or two week? What is it, >> Mr. Chairman? It would need to go back to the zoning off. >> Oh, that's true. I'm sorry. Yes. Thank
you. >> Before it comes back. >> So you'd want to give it a good 3, four weeks. So by the end of December, you would want to have those any if you decide to revise the plans, have them in so we can go through the process so we can get you in as soon as possible because I'm sure you're anxious to move
forward with however the plans end up. >> Okay. So for thank you. >> So for the record, this matter um Miss uh Hammond, you are requesting an adjournment of this matter until the January date.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Emmer. >> Okay. Motion to adjurnn. >> I'll make a motion to adjurnn. Would someone like to second? Thank you. >> Second, third, fourth, fifth. We did it.