[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] good evening and welcome to the public hearing of the Livingston Zoning Board of Adjustment today is April 10th
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 that grant of the 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 and that that has been granted you too may appeal to Superior Court of the State of New Jersey within
45 days of the notice of decision if you file an appeal I ask that you pro 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 Bullen board of the municipal building in addition to having notice posted notice 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 would like to address the board please come to the front and use the microphone so we we can make sure your comments or questions are part of the
record we will now call the role mr kenny Mr kenya here Mr horn here Mr shout out Mr sherman here Miss Young here Mr weiseman here Mi Miss Khan here
Mr bear here you have quorum thank you um just a quick uh piece of housekeeping um if you are here for the uh minor subdivision at 41 and 51 Overlook Road that has been adjourned to the planning board it was not our
jurisdiction so that's off tonight's uh agenda um okay you'd like to call the first uh applicant yes block 3502 lot 15 to Nolleswood Drive applicant number
2025-9-V Joseph and Linda Duker applicant seeks approval for a rare one-story addition and second floor terrace in violation of the following section 170-99 C4 rar setback 35 ft
required 27.9 ft proposed 7.1 ft variance requested good evening how are you sorry to keep you everyone waiting for a little bit before okay yeah um you want to sway them in
all right why don't we uh have your uh names before we swear in uh my name is John Brower b R O W E R okay hi my name is Linda Dooker d U K E R okay please uh raise your right hand do you swear from tell the truth for the zoning board
tonight yes okay um no sir you're uh testifying as a as an expert yes applic uh architect architect okay can we just have your qualifications on the record briefly yep graduate of NJIT in uh 1992 been
licensed in the state of New Jersey since 1998 i'm a principal partner in the firm of Dasenber Architects since 1998 and I am the architect of record for this project and I assume your licenses are currently in good standing yes does anyone in the board have any questions or objections
regarding this witness there being no objections the witness is accepted as expert in architecture okay please I'll just give you a quick overview of the project um we are in the R4 zone the minimum rear yard setback is 35 ft required uh
presently we're at 41.1 ft and we're proposing 27.9 ft for a requested variance of 7.1 ft uh my clients proposed to construct a one-story rear edition with an open terrace above as part of an alteration to the ground floor to create a separate living area
for use by the applicants Joseph and Linda Dooker the upper level of the home will be occupied by their son and daughter-in-law joseph Dooker is a retired police officer who is handicapped and it's very difficult for him to come and go with the home configured as it currently is the ground floor living arrangements will make it
easier for daily living for the dukers as doors will be larger bathroom access will be easier and egress out of the home will be much safer at ground level uh regarding the C1 uh hardships there's no sight related hardships other than the limitations of the configuration of
the existing home uh and the C2 positive criteria uh the proposed addition is slightly larger in size to the area of the existing deck that um with a space constructed below that um as noted in the uh engineering report there is an increase in lot coverage mainly due to
the proposed widened driveway uh but the project does not require any variances for lot coverage we feel that these factors all contribute to the fact that this proposed project will not substantially impair the intent and purpose of the local ordinance that's it
does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness you you plan to build any more deck or are you removing the deck totally well the existing deck is going to be removed um the new the new addition would be constructed and above that would be another terrace which would be basically
similar to what they have now thank you in that same location so where the deck is underneath that's where the addition will go and then right on top of that essentially that's a when you look at the existing deck that's back there now um the proposed addition is slightly larger than that but from a visual
standpoint that's essentially where the addition will be so I mean just add so it looks like it'll go out like another six feet is that excuse me the addition will go out like another six feet from where it is now like I'm not sure what the exact dimension is there's a 7.1 foot um
variance requested but that's only be based off of the location of the existing corner of the existing house if you look at the cover sheet that has a a sideby-side comparison of where the existing deck is and where the proposed addition is just a question how far does it go to
there's a shed in the back right on the left hand side there's a shed yes how much clearance and that'll say Yeah the clearance between the shed and the addition it's more than 10 ft okay okay so we do maintain that minimum clearance
between the uh between the structures anybody else have any questions on board please i I just wanted to know because I'm looking at the plans versus how many how many feet would you estimate it It sounds like the addition is a few feet more than where the deck is now yes yes
is that correct yes it's like around 3 ft I'm guessing give or take yeah okay any other questions on the board does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness okay um does anybody in the public want to
make any statements regarding this application does anybody in the board want to make any statements regarding this application yeah I would just note because it wasn't mentioned that this is a corner lot it does seem this is much narrower than
than typical um as well as it being that this is the rear lot variance but it's almost like a a side the side of the house um just wanted to point that out okay does anybody on the board want to make a
motion or do you have something else to say yeah the only other thing I was going to say is like just due to the uh lot configuration I mean realistically if the lot was square I mean you'd be talking about a couple of feet for a variance um but the topography of that side lot line makes
it that you need the 7 foot variance um otherwise it would be minimal um anybody else anybody want to make a motion i'll make a motion to approve i'll second it you're up
okay mr cany yes mr horn yes okay Miss Miss Jan yes mr sherman yes okay Mr wiseman yes okay miss Khan yes miss Beer yes motion carries okay thank
you thank you whenever you're ready Mr kenyon to call the second one yep okay the second application block 1404 lot 748 Thory Avenue application number
2025-10-V Sergy Samson Sonic application seeks approval for the second floor addition in violation of the following section 170-87B4 habitable floor area 3220 square ft allowed 3701 ft² proposed 481
481 square ft variance requested all right can you please uh raise your right hands all right do you swear from Tell the Truth for the zoning board tonight yes okay can you individually please state and spell your names sergey
Samsonic can you just spell your name s E R G Y okay and uh ma'am Slana Samson S E T L A N A okay uh and uh you are the uh owners
of the property 48 Dorothy Avenue this is correct okay thank you all right floor is yours tell us what you're doing um our house is an older building and uh it lacks as such uh master bedroom and
master master bathroom so this is the purpose of this addition could you speak a little closer to the mic i'm sorry i'm all the way over here so it's a little tougher for me sorry about this uh as I said our house is an older construction
it lacks master bedroom and master bathroom and uh this is the main purpose of uh doing this addition to introduce this uh new space which is uh common in all more modern
buildings uh we have relative large properties we are asking only for one variance we are under 30% habitable area data relevant metric which is which is
used so yeah we believe that our house will look better and will improve appearance of the whole neighborhood okay and I will be [Laughter] happy i have some questions so it looks
to me on the picture right when I drove by so the house this was the original house and this was did this was added on yes right and then it's it's a long it's a big house right
so explain to me well explain to me exactly what you want to do so do you want to fill this bard in up here yes exactly right currently it looks like a saddle or something which is not really aesthetic so yes typically additions to split
levels is adding the floor uh above this middle part and this is what we're about to do correct right but you want to put almost like a 600 square foot addition on to the house
uh it's small more like 500 I think right now 3100 they want to 3700 right 500 yes 500 square f feet about 481 ft 41 5 almost 500 square f feet okay 41
just just to have the one level with one bedroom bathroom separate from from the others your lot is oversized for an R4 but it's not it's not a lot that can really accommodate a 3,700 square ft
home we are still under uh uh 30% uh which is u which is a required uh ratio between lot area and uh total habitable area yeah I know it's too big
uh let let me try to understand something so the you're making an addition in the middle part of the home correct correct okay
is there have you looked at a reconfiguration of the floor plan that may not yield as much of a square larger square footage as an
alternative to going over the requirement you you understand what I mean yes we have have you looked Have you looked at reconfiguring the home in order to be meet the standard yes we absolutely looked at it uh that
would be Yes uh it um it's it's very difficult uh in the older part of the house the typical layout has bedrooms tied one to another and there is no really space for master
bedroom cutting we were considering reducing bedrooms but that would yield the small and barely habitable bedrooms and that will will not be noticeable improvement yes we can
get room master bedroom which we want but it will not be the size or shape or configuration of what uh can be can be achieved with building the addition so basically we would lose one room totally
if we would make the bedroom bus or walk-in closet together and then we we just we're losing one room in this case if we will stay on the same floor just try to reconfigure i think we hear
what you're saying but I think our problem as a board is the massing of this house once the construction is completed it'll it's going to be a huge house and I think the massing of the house is going to be so large for the size of the property that it's on and as
our attorney pointed out perhaps there's a way to go back and look at the entire home and see if it can be reconfigured because to add on 500 square ft and it I mean we look at the drawings it's going to be huge and again I'm not sure that the size of your property can
accommodate a house of that size we're not extending it uh I mean we're not expanding it uh well it's pretty large i mean it's a pretty big house now it's a pretty big house now i didn't want to talk but it would
it would be the largest house in on the block by far it would be like the largest house which makes it good for the neighborhood because it's good to be in a neighborhood where there are big and uh possibly more expensive hear what you're saying but it also has to fit on the size of the lot and according to how
we're looking at it by putting on this extra 500 square ft the house will be enormous and we have to look at that as a whole um and I hear what you're saying about the you know way to get from one place to another and the master bedroom and the bathroom we hear that but we have to look at the house in its
entirety and we have to see you know um look at the massing and that's I think but if you look at the house right now it looks strange right from even the from aesthetical point of view because it's it's it's a hole in the middle and
again we are not using the more space on on the ground right we just want to make it look like a house not like a hole in the middle part of the problem is there's no we don't have a hardship to you need to have a hardship generally so we're
trying to figure out how to you know you you have an oversized lot and you're going over on the allowable um area so um that's what we're struggling with so normally we need we need we need
we need a rationale i mean obviously everyone wants to have whatever they want for the house but we need a legal rationale to help push these things through and so I think that's what we're starting to struggle with feel free to chime in and I I was going to agree i
mean yeah if you're looking at the you know the the benefits versus the detriments I mean yes the having a house that size um in the in that area um it would be oversized compared to the other
neighboring houses it then leads to the other neighbors wanting to expand and put even larger houses and then making this affecting the entire neighborhood i mean it's not it's not the right size house for that size lot but what about
the neighbors we have a few new houses which are huge on a space very small it mean exactly even smaller than ours so we look at every application as its own right every application is in a silo we don't we look at every application
because each size each property is different each hardship is different um and we can't take the same you know the law is the law but we can also look at things and you know we're talking about our street right so we have a house across of us which new house which is
big there is another house is also just built and the size of the lot not bigger than ours it's a huge house so we not so you're you're excuse me you're in the R4 we didn't start like our house wouldn't be house you're in the R4 zone right
you're in the R4 zone zone and in the R4 zone the minimum lot area was 9375 you're higher than that you're 12,500 um the next the next um the next size up is the R3 which is 15,000 right so you're sort of in between an R4 and
an R3 but the size house that you want to build is even larger than what you would build in an R3 it's a very large house for the size of property for the piece of property that you have houses which are the same big just across us just the same area this the same I hear what you're saying you understand you
just have to let me let me just let me uh explain this the board takes every application based on its own merits right so uh I think you heard from the one that just appeared before you um the
gentleman that was uh speaking on behalf of that applicant identified particular uh issues and um unique circumstances that were present with that particular lot and that particular
structure to justify the relief sought before the board so what the board is trying to convey is that there is a question in their mind at this point that the um that there is a
justification uh to approve the variance um and as I asked the question about your alternatives uh and you've responded back to that um the as I said
the board is uh I know that this board is concerned about as uh other commissioners indicated about massing and about um meeting the the goals of the zoning plan so uh I think when you
look in terms of your own application here you have to say what unique circumstances are present for you that make this necessary to get your relief from the zone whether you have
those or not that's up to you i'm just saying that that's the standard the board has to apply um so just so you understand that's why the board is asking questions like that um despite what other people have done or what other houses look like really the the
important factor is what are you doing on your lot so um just something to keep in mind um you you you All right um I'm I'm sorry Chair you want you have you have other board members that may want to say something
i'll hold does anybody for this moment have any questions or comments along the way on this application they want to add I I just want to if I may yeah please go
ahead we are here for you we're just but we you know we have a yes legal parameters that we have to Yes so um when we are talking about house being massive it is definitely if you look at
the square footage yes uh it's it's big but if uh it's large large number but if you look at the house how it is uh how it looks like now and how the proposed uh structure should look there will be
not so much increase in how massive the house look like because currently the house is as you see on the photo looks like two bigger parts of the structure with a smaller structure in the middle by extending the structure in the middle we
are not increasing visually we are not increasing so much appearance of the house as the number of uh square footage may may suggest
this is this is our argument basically so we will we will look this will look this will make neighborhood look better and this this is for common good of everybody in in the neighborhood and in in the township
understood thank you anybody else have any comments um so I mean I I I think we clearly hear what you what you're saying and we understand what you're saying surely but I mean part of it goes to the
length of the house which is you know 75 ft plus or minus 76 feet whatever it is in length so um I I'm hearing a lot of uncomfortableness trying to figure out how to proceed with this application um
may maybe you could talk to your architect and see what he could do um if you want to you want to try to come back um because I'm not sure if you're going to have all the votes you need um from what I'm hearing so I don't want to if you if you want to go forward with a
vote we could do that um and if it go if it doesn't pass you'd have to come back with something substantially different how that's defined I can't really tell you because every house is on its own so there's no definition of that but if you want to adjourn and talk to your
professionals and see what they can do to help you out or maybe come and help explain things through for us that might be a better path for you I think um any thoughts uh I don't see how much uh we
can improve in terms of what we want to do if you're talking about finding some reasoning uh to do it other than what was pre what uh we try to present today
uh I'm I'm just not sure how to so what can uh the architect propose differently instead of building on the top of this like the hole between those well we can't we can't redesign the house for you to understand that Right
so without like within the reason okay so let me let me just I tried to reconstruct the what had it doesn't let me just let me just say this I I think the in these type of situations the you you've you've heard some commentary from
the board and some friendly uh input from the board chairman about what are your options at this point the board can proceed to a vote tonight if the board votes tonight and denies you
the relief you're requesting you cannot come back to the board and say "We want you to vote again that's not how this works once you once you proceed and you show it and the board votes it down you would have to come
back with something as the chairman indicated is substantially different and chairman's right what's substantially different is somewhat in the mind of the beholder but uh reducing something by five feet or 10
feet is not substantially different um so what the what the friendly suggestion is is that uh perhaps if your um architect
uh can look at this and maybe it remains the same maybe it's different i don't know but bring back the comments from the board to your architect the architect may take those and may make
changes he they may not make any changes but perhaps if the architect then comes back with you at a future board meeting and the architect may be uh provide uh expert testimony as the gentleman before
you before you were on you saw he provided it as an expert and at that point perhaps I'm not saying it will but that would be additional testimony that you could present on your behalf
at that point so it's it's your application you can say to the board please proceed or you can say to the board okay we'll take the commentary back we'll take a look at it and at the next board meeting we can either proceed
with the way you have it or maybe you've made changes and maybe the architect can come and explain them but that's completely your call maybe we'll use your suggestion i'm sorry we will use your suggestion good
okay um so this will be adjourned can we do this at the next Oh no it'll be the May May's full so it would be the June 11th meeting um provide if you have different plans your architects has to have them in four weeks before katherine
the if they change the plans they have to be in four weeks before or we need them 10 days 10 days prior to the meeting but you also need to go back to the zoning department and resubmit the plans for a re-review right if there's any changes right they also need 10 days
so just keep in mind you really need 20 days before a hearing date so 20 days before June 11th the zoning off uh the zoning department will need your revised plans if you are indeed revising plans
so by like May 20th plus or minus they would need to get in that gives you a few weeks to get that together and strained out okay all right thank you thank you so much good luck thank you this this matter is going to be held over for the June 11th date correct
there's no need uh there's no need you do not need to send out last time you sent all those letters and you put the notice in the newspaper you don't have to do that again okay you're you're covered okay all right thank you okay block 6502 lot 8 6 Hastings Lane
application number 20 2025-12-V Hastings 6 LLC applicant seeks approval for an addition violation of the following section 17087CC1 habitable floor ratio 15% allowed
17.5% proposed 2.5% variance requested hi there how are you mr chairman members of the board put your what your mic is not on therefore even though you're talking I can hear you but we can't hear you good evening Mr chairman members of the board my name is Joseph O'Neal here
follow O'Neal i am here on behalf of the Canes Brent and Jordana who are immediately behind me for six Hastings Lane i have a couple of witnesses with me this evening including Mr mlelen who is my engineer he prepared the plot plan
that we're going to be looking at like to proceed right to get up sworn it's good to see you Mr good to see you M yes uh 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 uh sure certainly my
name is Patrick Mlelen mcc L okay and we're going to get Mr mlen's uh qualifications he's a professional engineer i'm uh a graduate of the New Jersey Institute of Technology with n uh
1989 with a bachelor of science and civil engineering uh licensed uh civil engineer in the state of New Jersey since 1994 uh 50% owner of the firm MCB Engineering Associates in Toto since 2002 i've actually had the pleasure to
be before this board about 10 years ago so you probably don't remember me had a little bit more hair then um but also uh approximately 100 land use boards across uh the northern and uh central portion of uh New Jersey many of those applications similar to this uh that
we're here for tonight and I assume your licenses are current and in good standing yes sir all right does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness there be no objection the witness is accepted as expert in engineering thank
you Mr chair all yours can you walk us around the site please sure so the the property tonight that we're talking about is Six Hastings Lane uh the exhibit on on uh at on the TV is showing an existing dwelling that's on
site uh that I understand has been uh removed as part of this activity so we had a we had a home on the property uh it's going to be removed and replaced with a new with a new dwelling uh the property itself is in the R1 zone and it is uh
35,250 square feet which is conforming with the ordinance the um the house that's being proposed along with the associated site improvements uh satisfy all but one of the zoning criteria in the R1 zone uh the one criteria that uh
we don't satisfy is the habitable floor area ratio we we are under the habitable floor area number which is 6200 as you know uh or we're proposing a house with a floor area of 6195 uh but we are we
are over the percentage of 15% that's permitted by zone so we're here tonight asking for relief for that a couple of things about the site I would like to point out that uh while the house that's proposed is actually bigger than the one that was there we are actually reducing
the impervious cover on the property the house that's there uh now has quite a bit of pavement on it uh not just in the front yard but also in the backyard so uh this application is again while the house is going to be bigger is not going to be asking for uh the same impervious
cover that was uh there before so as a result we are reducing the impervious cover by 130 square ft the other upside to that is that um and I know everybody's very sensitive to storm water management these days that uh when when we can take a uh a pavement area
that has the oils in it and and potentially has vehicles parking on it and you replace it with a rooftop uh in this case you actually are doing quite a bit to clean the water that runs off that property so we're getting a a u a a water quality enhancement benefit as a
result of the of the choice of construction that I think is important to point out to the board um we had a uh letter from your engineer uh if I may I can uh there's six comments I'd like to just go through and address for the board if that's okay
yeah please great uh so this is uh the memo from Roco Maruchi and uh your assistant town engineer and the memo is dated February 25 of 2025 the uh first three comments are just commentary uh one it's acknowledging that the property
is not located in a flood zone or riperian buffer it's also acknowledging that there are no municipal easements on the property and also acknowledging that the property is not listed under your ordinance 24-209 which means it does not have uh
steep slopes uh to be of concern so it's a uh it's uh absent of environmental constraints that we see on some of the properties uh item number four is uh advisory pointing out that if if approved by this board we do understand
that the applicant has to then file a lot development plan which gets reviewed by the uh by your municipality the um and we're familiar with that from previous applications and our plan was was designed uh basically to comply with
those criteria so we have addressed all the items we believe that your engineering department will request and and in direct response to this uh this comment again I just want to emphasize that the uh total impervious cover has been reduced so uh as far as storm water
is concerned i believe the application for a major uh uh storm uh drainage design starts at 1,000 new square feet but we're actually reducing the impervious cover so our storm water management is a result of a reduction of the uh impact to the property um if I go
on to page two uh the the fifth bulleted item at the top uh talking about new discharge points including roof leaders sump pumps yard inlets and pool pumps etc uh the project does illustrate that the uh roof leaders we're we're lucky on this project that we have some storm
drain off the front corner of our property all of our roof leaders are going to be connected to a a common leader pipe and connected to that sewer so we're even getting to take the runoff coming from the roof to uh you know to the municipal system directly so that we don't have any concerns for increasing
runoff uh towards the neighbor's property and then uh finally uh an an inquiry that uh saying that there is a pending lot surface drainage permit application for this property currently open with your with your uh building
department and just for the record uh that application was provided by the previous owner of the property while they were pursuing uh a development application but the property has since been sold to our client uh that application has no standing and won't be
continued but we will eventually file a new uh surface drainage permit application should this board act favorably on the application thank you Mr mlullen i have no further questions for this witness does anybody in the board have any questions for this
applicant or this witness sorry does anybody in the public have any uh questions for this witness none um do you want to make a statement or anything i do have another witness oh oh sorry call Mr doerty my
apologies come on up okay mr jordy do you swear and tell truth for the zoning board tonight i do okay can you please state and spell your name for the record alexander Zy last name is D O U G H E R T Y professional planner here on behalf of associates at
101 Avenue Sweet 188 Morse Plains and Mr dhy's appeared before this board February your license is your license is still good Alex yes it is checked your email before you came up yes just come back from the national okay so all good does
anybody on the board have any questions for this witness there being no questions um witness is accepted as an expert in architecture thank you not planner i know that's not a roll sorry congratulations your new degree do
architecture no no no so for this evening for the board um we prepared an exhibit packet um I have handouts for it i do not have it digitally it really is just a consist of three slides for neighborhood continuity this is a new build application um if
you're pleases the board I can pass it out mark exhibit A1 please yes thank you okay all right for the record uh this is a three-page document with aerials um two above and one called bird's eye
yes this was prepared by your firm is that correct yes was prepared by our office um really the uh the the intent of this uh exhibit is really for orientation of the neighborhood um we are in the R1
zone blocks um 6502 lot 3 as you've heard this is a 35,250 ft lot um outlined in yellow as you see on slide one um really the aerial here is uh of what the prior home used to look like which you just saw
some photos prior and to the extent of the concrete you can kind of see on the top one uh here some of that gray behind the house the the lot um you know had excessive excessive amount of uh asphalt so we uh slide two is really the same
just a new label on it that says uh vacant additionally what you'll see is for continuity and comparison um there is a new buildout across the street um as you see in the slide two labeled um 6,200 um new the next slide as we take the
drone out give you a real perspective on where we're at in the property what's going on in the neighborhood um and you know for for some comparisons uh we are here for the uh F that variance really does control the
scale and massing of these structures um when we look at scale and massing um certainly from a planning standpoint you want neighborhood continuity consistency uh we don't want to be proposing a project that is too big for the neighborhood out of character um you
know quality of life in in a neighborhood um it certainly can be related to visual um having that intrusive uh visual um so we believe this is very compatible uh we are 2 and a half% over on the required F it's
section 170-87ccc uh for the local ordinance here and when we look at this application and and we're proposing here you'll see the the additional two homes labeled on that third slide number nine and number 11 uh Cam lot they're around the same range to
6,200 square square feet uh what we're proposing really when we look at the percentage of the 17 and a half versus the 15 at 2 and a half% is a makeup of about 705 square ft uh had the opportunity to sit back here for a little bit the ceiling tiles above my
head are 2 ft by 2 ft so if you take from the light to the light this area it's about what we're looking at but then again that's proportionate throughout the whole building um I will note that you know the prior home was a twocar garage it's a threecar garage it's more of a modern living arrangement
uh consumer expectations for the new world of housing we're dealing with i will say that when we talk about the overall importance of F and why we you know hold strong to F it's about site intensity can the site accommodate the additional F i'm sure this board's heard
that many times over uh what do we mean by that um the intensity as you've heard the lot has historically been home to more impervious coverage than we're proposing so from a buildout perspective this this this house may be larger but the design is is superior design than
what was there uh we are alleviating the uh impervious coverage uh bringing that down uh for more uh sustainable development practices not to have any adverse effects onto the neighbors storm water management is uh concern that many of us throughout the industry uh are
faced with with this application the uh general bulk requirements are met as you've heard we're only here for one variance 2 and a half% over on the uh F everything from front yard sideyard rear yard um building coverage height everything is in compliant this is
really um a design component here again um the habitable floor area uh is is more internal to the building uh we are in bringing a new modern structure to the site to this neighborhood this is a positive investment to the site for the
various impervious coverage regions and and compliant with the general bulk standards we are proposing a single family home and a single family um you know zone when we look at this at the same time has the living modern arrangements that most homeowners are are seeking additions for and
alterations for u I think this adds value to the site which adds value and quality to the neighborhood it's a positive investment for everybody here I think we certainly are in compatible with what we're seeing in this immediate neighborhood um when we look at the the difference here I want to point out
though we are in incompatibility with the uh high floor area um you know that we we are not asking for that variance so for the board for municipalities as a whole you have the floor area ratio and you then you have the ho floor area so you have a second leverage if you will
of control here you know the control scale and massing we're not we're not seeking any other relief other than just the ratio um when we look at this we have a site that has utilities sewer water connection you know the site can accommodate this build out we have an
extensive driveway we have a threecar garage um you know it is a certainly a modern home uh there will be no adverse effects with this with this house from a planning standpoint the intensity of the use here um with this project I think we certainly advanced the goals of the zone
for the single family dwelling you know a positive investment into the site turning over older housing stock which is certainly the case throughout several properties here in the immediate neighborhood um I think we advance uh the goals of the miscellaneous law purpose A uh purpose I particularly for desirable vision environment this is a
very well-designed architecturally uh speaking this this this house is impressive uh certainly purpose C for adequate light air and open space we are not seeking any other bulk dimensions uh so though the house is larger our neighbors u you know surrounding us certainly still maintain the zone intent
and sound planning is rooted in zoning um so with that being said I think we certainly have more efficient use of land um you know and as well as a desirable visual environment i do not see any substantial detriment here uh from a planning standpoint given that all the other mechanisms uh for control
are in place um we are asking for just about 705 ft of additional space spread throughout the house really imperceivable from the public eye in the public realm this house will certainly be in line with the neighborhood the continuity and the intent of the zone i
think the relief really is uh um minimal though it is important to have these discussions i do not think there's going to be any adverse effects and I certainly do think the site can accommodate this additional 705 ft of F um with that being said um the case law is again can the site accommodate the uh
the additional F uh with this new buildout comes best engineering practices as you heard storm water management in that regards um I do not see any adverse effects with this additional F i think the uh criteria has been met um I believe approval will be
warranted and when we look at these uh um F for new home particularly you know we we want to see this these homes in harmony in rhythm with the neighborhood um and again the impacts are minimal if any here um so with that I I'll conclude I'll leave a um the criteras are met and
approval would otherwise be warranted thank you Mr doy very much no further questions for this witness does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness i got one question I guess um I know you say 70 and something square feet 75 yeah
where I'm just trying to figure out where that where that is because I'm coming up with more like 97 i did I did the quick math 17 and a half% of the uh lot area than the 15% of the lot area and the difference between them i I got
705 if I'm wrong I do apologize i'm not trying to mislead the board okay i'm just looking just six because you're at uh 35250 15% allowed is 528750 and now you're 17.5 i'm being
told by my engineer that Mr sherman is correct i do apologize almost almost 98 i might have missed something i do apologize you should leave the math to the engineers thank you very much i do not i was trying to figure out just how many
square feet were actually over so I took the seven out of the plane um but I do I do believe the testimony still holds strong that this is imperceivable from the public realm the setbacks controls are in place the the new buildout is less intensive on the property by way of impervious coverage um so the home is
bigger the the property actually feels a little bit lighter um and the benefits of that does come at the reduction of asphalt on the property um which you know really has impacts on storm water management um but I will say the home is impressive
the design is impressive it meets uh the standard for the neighborhood we have a young family a growing family um you know a family to stay um so there's plenty of room to kind of grow into this home and it certainly adds value to the overall neighborhood i I have a question which really would
be for the architect who's not here but um no access to the attic I assume or is there anything planned whoever wants to try to jump in there no access no access to the attic no access oh okay no access so okay no
problem with um stipulating that in the resolution no problem at all yeah okay well no must be pulled down no there just to be clear it's not that there's no access to the attic that if there were access to the attic that access to
the attic is either through a set of pull down stairs or some other uh movable uh uh board to get into the attic it won't be a a flight of stairs where somebody could easily walk up and
perhaps use it for ping pong there's no uh there's no clearances permitting that in the attic anyway it's just a hatch with a small access way for emergency and for the the floor area ratio and the floor area um they're defined and you know for floors in the attic is clearly
defined as having pull down not having an open staircase so the percentages are are on point this is a pull down on an existing Thank you for the clarify i guess the only other thing that I would want to add to that is that would they be agreeable to a condition of approval
that that will not be turned into that it can't be living space okay yes are there any other questions are there any questions from the public regarding this witness
do you have any other witnesses i do not have any okay i learned my lesson quickly um do you have any statements you want to make well what I'll do is because I have a little bit of a cold losing my voice I'm going to rely on the statements of my witnesses and uh just
present the application as we put it in i think it's a good application want to point out that there's a house right across the street and two other houses in the neighborhood all of this proposed size so it's definitely in keeping with everything there does anybody in the public want to make
any statements does anybody on the board want to make any statements please i just ask because you're relying on the these two other properties here so I'm going back to a question that's okay were there any other circumstances regarding those because they must have gotten the variance like three Hastings
must have so and you said it's the same size so I'm just curious if there's any more in terms of the because you're relying on those properties as fitting into the surrounding neighborhood so I'm wondering were there any other peculiarities with respect to those that we should be aware of because we're asking to rely on Mr weissman I want to
remind you we're complying with all the bulk standards so I don't know if they needed that uh variance or not let me let me just say this what those are existing homes the ones that Mr majority
identified so you know that they're they're existing so whatever their circumstances were what is whatever their circumstances but those are currently existing homes so whatever process they went through if any right we don't know and it's not part of
necessarily part of the decision- making right he said they were the same size so I'm just trying to get more color on what what we're looking at that's when I reference the size um typically F planning we see it more in like the large warehousing uh big anchor tenant
structures when we apply F to homes it really is about the scale size continuity of the neighborhood so we reference those as being you know akin to the size and scale um but the true test for F when we look at it is can the site accommodate that and you know by virtue of that you know we can we're not
asking for any other relief we're not we're not you know actually bringing the site less intense by impervious we have adequate parking adequate setbacks he sight so by intensity of that and for the the uh case law applicable for f I think we we meet the intent of that case
law but for residential um as the uh slide three shows this proposed home is certainly in keeping with the neighborhood yeah thanks thank you okay does anybody want to make a motion i'll make a motion to approve
anybody second i'll second it okay with the conditions of approval as as regarding the act right all those Mr mr horn approved yes
okay miss Khan yes okay mr kenya yes mr sherman yes miss Young yes mr weisman yes
mr bear yes motion carries thank you thank you everyone have a great night you too one uh block 4707 lot 12 11 village drive application number 2025-30-V Javier and Camila
Mayorga application seeks approval for the pool in the violation of the following section 170-99c2 front yard setback 40 ft required 36 proposed 4T variance
requested 17087 CC4 habitable floor area 30% allowed 35.98 person proposed 5.98 variance requested okay uh why don't we have you raise your hand uh do you swear affirm Do you swear
a firm and tell the truth for the zoning board tonight i do sorry okay all right so why don't we get your name state and spell your names for the record jason Warner wer Ner Everclear Pools and Spas camila Mayorga C A M I L A
and uh you are the owner of I am all right and um you're uh testifying as the the pool contractor as expert witness yes as as the as the contractor the builder okay
okay you can It's all yours okay uh so the Mayorgas are seeking to put in a 12x 24 swimming pool in their rear yard um the setback it required is 20 ft we are seeking a setback of 10 ft
which is the variance we're looking for we're in an R4 zone um as per the code a 9,375T lot is required the lot that my orgas have is 7,221 square ft uh which means this lot is undersized by
2,154 square feet which is a difference of about 23 uh% smaller than required which is the hardship that we are uh observing right here uh patio space in the yard has been
minimized 10% rear coverage is allowed we um a total of only 5.91% is being proposed even with the addition of the pool and uh new patio proposed patio furthermore all storm water management guidelines have been observed to mitigate any adverse effect to the
neighbors we're just looking at the some paperwork here that looks a little funny not your fault necessarily i hope my math wasn't off madry it says it says have a floor area wasn't off if you'll catch me oh so just so just so
you know what you know government transparency um that's the new thing now supposedly um only for some um comment over okay uh so on the board's agenda just so you
understand what we're looking at and why I said it didn't something didn't seem right to me you're only putting in a pool correct so there is a notation on our agenda tonight that the request you're making
is not only for the setback but that it's also for habitable floor area ratio which would not apply to a pool uh I'd like to live out by the pool i think my wife would like me to live out by the
pool but that's not habitable floor area so I think that that I'm sorry that was that was a mistake must have been taken from a different denial so I apologize it's no problem but notices were in fact checked and they were correct okay yeah
the denial of application looks okay yes apologies so at the at the end of the day just so everybody's aware don't look at your agenda look at look at your the application that's been submitted which indicates that the only relief that's being sought is a setback and as the
gentleman indicated uh not to reiterate his comment but that is a bulk uh variance and that he is asking or he's stating that the reason for the bulk variance is because of the uh shape uh
and size of the lot and therefore saying that that's a hardship under under C1 yes boil it down thank you sir and you noted that the uh lot was undersized yes sir but about 23 square uh 23% I'm sorry
and if it was full size you'd probably wouldn't be before us or for very minimal we we probably wouldn't be before you i mean you're looking at over uh 2,150 square feet which is quite a lot of space so you would have to imagine that the lot would be wider
that's your So you you have a hardship does anybody else on the board have any questions yeah the the only question I have is like on the survey submitted it shows I mean I know you're asking for the pool within 10 feet of the sideyard
um on the the left side of the house um the survey shows a dead center um but I guess the other question is why can it be dead center the Morgans have two young children and they're trying to maximize usable space for the kids to be able to play safely
in their backyard if this uh lot was a conforming size that wouldn't be an issue because there would be plenty of space for the kids to play but given that we are undersized by 2,154 ft it does you know if we put the pool in the
middle of the yard they're restricted on both sides because you do have patio space that you have to be mindful of with the kids playing it does could create a hazard i mean little kids will be little kids little kids little problems big kids big problems just wait
does anybody else on the board have any questions yeah have you thought about uh landscaping and what's going to go between your neighbor and the pool we can plant trees if that's needed for privacy and any noises that might come from the pool
we already have a line of pine trees on the left we can mimic that on the right side of the uh of the of our house so we could put privacy screening in between the two homes on the side that we are seeking
the setback does anybody in the public have any questions saw you looking at the screen a lot please come up how are you fine i left my cane in my chair my name is Pat Nab NAV my address is 16 Concord Drive
and I'm here in opposition to this improvement based on the uh So this time just questions okay and then we'll let you have a statement if you want to give a statement so you have specific questions please ask at that time at this time I'm sorry you want me to ask them yes ask them questions and then
later on you want to make a statement feel free to make a statement i got it okay um my first question is um let me just flip my paper over here the question that I have first of all was the one that was just mentioned before about the location of the pool
over to the right side which is in clear violation of the side to set back on the side um my next concern would be lighting and I would like to know what arrangements you've made for lighting based on the fact that you have lights in your yard now what type of lighting
do you anticipate putting into this area do you anticipate any landscape lighting i I mean nothing beyond uh simple light inside the pool no it won't be any additional lighting in the in the patio
okay do you you have lighting right now in your backyard for your usage correct you have an up you have an above ground pool in your yard now or have had an above ground pool now have you had lighting in your rear yard for this no but I mean I have like a set of like
how do you call it like bar lights or something like that just when I correct lights when I'm there but they're not always um one of one of the stipulations was that information had to be included about drainage and um uh drainage for the pool and um uh what arrangement you
had made for drainage because of the fact that when this house was built this was a knockdown when this house was built it was double in size the driveway was double in size and your patio is approximately half the size of your house our concerns in the neighborhood
is that the runoff from what has already been in place from this new addition or this new property in addition to now having a pool that's 12x 25 or 12 x 24 in addition to the one I think the plans
say one foot pavers around the outside we need to we need to we need to ask questions so the question so the question was about drainage okay so my concern is what drainage arrangements have you made on your property for the addition of this pool again a solid
surface [Applause] the pool itself does will act as a retention pond if it does rain uh there is minimum patio around the perimeter of the pool and we are still well below the 10% we're even under 6% of coverage
there's about 6 in of space available between where the um water is and the top of the coping so it'd be a significant rainstorm in order to fill that pool um we will have a dispos uh discharge line that can be rolled out to the street from the equipment pad and it
would dis uh for any overflow would go into the street as most pools do with their back wash and things of that nature although we are using a DE cartridge filter not DE we don't use dietious earth i'm sorry did you say it would go out to the street it would go into the front yard which could go to the front yard to the street because this house is not am I not right that
the house is elevated is much higher than the street is it not street level your house is set higher than the street correct so that all of that drainage would go down your front yard down your driveway into the street and then therefore into the the public property the public street correct which would
not negatively affect any neighbors okay uh one other question then regarding this i see you have another variance here you're looking for a bearings for the front of the house is that right no that was a mistake that was already uh addressed that was a mistake okay fine all right um I guess my concern is that
my No I can't express my concern my feeling is that you're putting in a a pool that's too large for the piece of property you have um and um I'm wondering whether it could be reduced in size certainly in length why you don't have it in the other direction and then
again why you don't have it centered in your property i understand the comment you made before about having younger children um is that the only reason well usable space in the yard is a primary concern for our clients uh a 12 a 12 x 24 square foot pool is a very
small pool a standard ingground pool for uh if you go by the usual sizes is 16 by 32 which is 512 square foot this is 288 square feet we did attempt to minimize the size of the pool while still making it usable for the family i mean uh to go much smaller would be I mean it's kind
of a bathtub at that point um to go across the property horizontally we would affect probably both setbacks uh we would trigger um uh one way or another would be here for a variance if we were to go horizontally as opposed to vertically perpendicular to the house
just a quick question for you did you make a comment about the size of the property being unusual or an odd size it's undersized by 23% for what's uh permitted for what's required by the town okay so those are my questions may I make a statement now after we done with all the questions
then we have people come back off of statements fine works see you get stepson whoever else would like to come up next well concerns now or just questions questions for questions for the witness or the applicant
okay i'm Andy Cassie uh 24 Concord Drive and I have a few questions let me just ask where are you in relation to the house i should have asked the right side of of the property the right side okay just so we understand uh as you can as you can see on the map or the diagram
where where do you have your living space it looks like you're overusing the space right now uh for my property the only the only application the only application on for tonight is about the swimming pool okay
so there the any issues with the size of the house the pavers in the back the driveway anything else with regard to the property is not before the board tonight the only thing before the board tonight is the placement of the pool
relative to the sideyard okay that's the jurisdiction of the board tonight all right and that's that I'm fine thank you we'll give you a chance to come back of course ma'am did you want to come up also i don't question okay just we we'll
deal with that then okay does anybody else in the public have any questions for this witness okay um does anybody in the public want to make any statements come on back got to follow the procedures
otherwise otherwise my lawyer sells yells at me difficult because we don't want to not be neighborly we do want to be neighborly um in our neighborhood i'm sorry my name because now it's not question time do you swear from tell truth for the zoning board tonight i do okay can you
do us the favor of just stating and spelling your name for the record one more time fine my name is Pat N Patricia Nave and like Nancy A V as in Victor E nav address 16 Concord Drive go ahead
okay thank you okay um the median lot size in Livingston is just over 15,000 square feet in our neighborhood immediately to this area most of our properties have a footage of
7 or 8,000 square feet which means we're close um there are two homes on Village Drive in our immediate area on this p this map that was sent that are a little bit larger than that so when the pie was cut for Cresmon Hills which is what our development was called when it was originally designed um there were two
homes that got a bigger piece of pie and it's 11 and 13 Village Drive your home and the people next door a little further down on Village Drive some of the homes have a deeper backyard but basically we're between seven and 8,000 square feet um so they do have a bigger piece of property
when the developers have come in they have knocked down smaller houses built larger houses up to the property the the allowed property line which means the space that we had between our homes is no longer what it used to be because places are larger now and we know that they're putting in higher homes and
basement living and everything else um this is just a little bit beyond this pool is a little bit beyond um my I feel I'm speaking only for myself um what is appropriate for your property because so much has been developed already on your
property and um and it's just it's just beyond um and also the other thing that I feel in in our neighbors um we have a lot of water problems in our basements which probably go back to the 1940s when the homes were built we all have water we all have had to uh to remediate this
we've all had to put in some pumps and it's not getting better it's getting worse and it's getting worse because of the size of the homes that are going in and all of the impervious property that's being put in with patios and whatever else is happening and even though you have your situation that you have to solve at your house and I hope
you don't have any water in your basement yet but we all do and so when all of these buildings are being built and you have a pool now on top of that large patio on top of that large house on top of the larger driveway uh we're getting your water and whatever uh uh drainage you have to put in to
accommodate whatever water is not going to be there for because of your pool it's going to be is going to be uh wind up on our property which is what we're all dealing with and so my my my feeling and I'm not you know pulling any punches here is that we have lighting concerns
but our main concern is is water and um and the fact that this is just an overdevelopment of your property and because of the size of it it's going to impact us with lighting and noise and dogs barking and um and other things that impact our quality of life so I
respectfully leave it with that and that's how we feel or how I feel i'm speaking only for myself and um I think that you know I know that you have to I don't know we'd be putting another fence around your pool in addition to the fence you have around your property right now but I just think it's above
and beyond and um not appropriate for the fact that for your for your pleasure and your quality of life perhaps but for the rest of us not necessarily that's it thank you thank you very much would somebody else like to make a statement
please come on up comment yeah comment statement do you swear for untelled truth for the zoning board tonight i do can you please state and spell your name karen Castana c A S T A N H A S okay address 22
Concord Drive the house directly and back okay okay okay i have exactly the same concerns as Pat exactly the water i'm nervous about the drainage i'm worried that we're going to get water in our basement we have had a lot of water
in our basement we've had it looked at by professionals we've had the work done to our basement i understand it's it's not their problem because you know that it's their house but I'm I'm very concerned about the digging of the you know of the lot and the drainage and
what happens if a storm comes what happens if the water flow they have a pool right now the lighting is horrendous in their backyard i've asked them nicely i've gone to their house rang their doorbell asked them "Please can you take down?" They have three four
strings of lights four two in the back their backyard approaches my backyard they're very close to my house the They have stringed lights all the way on the side of their fence it's like Martyra in the backyard it's so bright i have my
shades very tight at night the light shines in to my room where I have to blockade it with things and I'm to the point where I have to call someone and get blackout shades i don't think I should have to go through that expense i've asked them very nicely to please
lower the lights i'm not asking them to remove the lights i asked if they could just lower the lights to their fence they're above the fence they have a sixoot fence okay and their property is very close to my property so I have I
have concerns about that the noise okay they I mean this there's other things where you know they have a dog that barks constantly in the backyard for hours at a time two hours at a time the dog's at their their door scratching on
it now it's not my you know it's not my place to call animal control but I felt bad for the dog you know 100 degree heat in the summer and the and the dog is out there once again these are my concerns is all I'm saying noise okay they have a
We're talking We're talking about variance i get it we're talking about a a a pool right that they're asking for a sideyard variance and that's before the board and I understand and things about and just
to be clear things about lighting the dog barking noise from the neighbor even water on your property okay all those things are not before this board it's
not this board's jurisdiction if you have concerns about the dog barking then as you said that's animal control that is making a complaint with the with uh with the municipal court with the police whatever the case is if they're
violating light lights coming in uh to your home uh you know and it's causing a nuisance that's a different jurisdiction that's before a different um either the through the police through
the municipal court through uh code enforcement that's not before the board it this board what's before this board is simply whether or not that pool should be situated within a
distance less than what's allowed under the ordinance okay just so we're on the same page i'm not saying that your concerns aren't valid okay i'm just saying you have to I'm just want to be clear the board's jurisdiction is about that not about the the board is not
going to and cannot make a determination about whether or not this is a valid variance based upon those other issues which I'll call nuisance issues i understand my my whole point of bringing them up is the pool is infringing upon
my privacy i can't even go into my backyard to read a book because they have a pool right now it's an above the ground pool that's their right i understand that i never complain and the other thing that just just once again
just to be clear the pool is permitted she the the applicant is allowed to have a pool okay the only issue before the board is whether or not where that pool
is being placed is allowed meaning placed in relationship to what I'll call on the picture the right side lot line okay but what about the back what about the back what there's no variance for that
there's no variance that's being violated so if they pushed this pool 10 feet to the left Yeah they wouldn't be here okay it would just be it would be built so it's the other neighbor on the other side so it's No it would if it's in the center there's no variance required right so they they're trying to
move it over just to have more open space to kick a ball or whatever else the kids want to do but the pool itself as our attorney explained and we want to make sure you guys understand um the pool we're not talking about the pool
right the the pool is okay it's just if it's here or if it's here so the other as it was described nuisance issues would just be moved around and hopefully neighbors can work all that out um as
was said that's not our privy that's nothing before us we're only variances that you you don't meet a line in the code and the line in the code is 10 ft is too far to the right and they've given testimony as to why this board
should consider that okay i I hope that No I understand it just it's difficult sometimes it's difficult because and we try to we want to listen to the neighbors we want to listen to the applicants we want to take it all together and try to make rationale decisions here on everyone's behalf and it's unfortunate because we you know we
get along with all of our neighbors i always thought we got along with them we you know we don't really have anything to do with them we tried to be friendly to them i went over hopefully going forward everyone will be on the same page you know what I'm saying but I I you know as far as the pool goes I don't want lights glaring in in my house all
night i don't want pool parties all night long i mean I have some right to privacy too right right and you can if there if they're if people are doing things that are not within municipal code there's other avenues to address that we just can't address that
unfortunately or fortunately probably so all right thank you are there any other comments or statements that people would like to make is there any closing statement you guys would like to make certainly um
while uh we do appreciate her neighbor uh the mayor's neighbors concerns uh as you have stated sir that if we weren't seeking a sideyard variance this pool we wouldn't even be here this pool would probably be permitted already and under construction we are just seeking the
variance because we are an undersized lot um the neighbor to the right hand side is not here um if there is an issue with with concerns with privacy the mayor's Camila had already said we could put a privacy screening um we are well under any coverage concerns um as far as
the rear yard coverage and patio has been minimized so impervious surface uh has been minimized um I know as per DP the pool technically counts as pvious and doesn't count however in a practical
setting you do have 6 in catch basin before it would affect the neighbors um they talk about the right hand side they're not that's I mean it's not it's neither here neither here neither here nor there neither here nor there they
don't actually on the left the one on the right well okay all right this is this is not commentary back and forth got remember this is for lack of a better term a judicial proceeding so we
need to take clear testimony we the board needs to take clear testimony and we can't have back and forth in the group perhaps afterwards however this ends up tonight maybe it would be a good neighborly thing to do to have a nice conversation
and see what can be done into the future to perhaps avoid any future potential conflicts that's just not me as an attorney that's me in my uh role as a failed priest there you go
okay does anybody on the board want to make any statements i'll go okay so thank you and thank you to the neighbors for coming out and for speaking it really means a lot to us when neighbors and residents of Livingston take time out of their busy schedule to come and speak in front of
us so we do appreciate that and we appreciate you coming in front of us so this is an interesting application and as you said you wouldn't be here if the pool was just placed in the middle of your your lot looking at the survey 10T is really
not a lot of space on the right it's really not especially if you were to put plantings in um you don't really have a whole lot of room there um I don't understand why it can't just be in the middle and then you wouldn't be here and you can build the pool
um that's how I look at it and I think that if you were to move it um you can plant on both sides and you can have privacy screening all the way around and that might help the neighbors and that might help you but you would be able to plant green giant arborites and they grow very tall and beautiful the deer
don't eat them and you can just you know do both sides and you can have beautiful screening in a couple of years the neighbors won't even see the lights so that's how I look at it um may um I already have a pine trees on my
left and they take the evergreens and they take way less than 10 ft uh it's probably less than the width of this table so it's very doable to put them even with 10 ft um so I don't see that
as a challenge and as I don't I don't remember the the type of evergreens that you have i don't remember that's not the the the I know landscaping was brought up before but um landscaping is not part of the application so once again you know all
that's before us is whether or not they have made a argument with proofs to place the pool where it is within the setback okay I got a comment so the good news is
you're getting a pool the concern is as Lori had mentioned and I brought up before is the pool not being in the center um I feel that yes 10 feet is minimal um to the sideyard
trees or no trees um the the fact is that it makes it worse for the neighbor on that side of the house with the pool being all the way over there um in the center at least you're equidistant and you wouldn't need to be here at all um I I know what you're saying about wanting
extra space but again you have to deal with the size of the lot that you have and the choices of what you have you can easily build this pool in the middle you could put a fence right along that side of the pool if you wanted um you know which would be the same thing as if you
had trees and you know and then you have space in between there um you're also restricted because of the trees and the fence that's not on your property line uh which pushes that side smaller but again those are all things that affect you that could be remedied i I don't see
a valid reason of why the variance needs to be um approved for the pool these are board comment time any anybody else have any comments or statements on
the board please yeah I I would just add also I think it I'm having the same trial problem finding a good enough reason i guess there there's some reason it's just whether it's strong enough uh but also for me it also goes to the essence of why we have the setback requirement
um and these from the some of the complaints you hear this this is why they have the 20 ft and it's and you're asking for uh an encroachment of 50% of that amount so this is the reason we have the laws in place so it makes it
makes it very difficult because it seems uh that' be a huge burden for for us to go against what what the statute is protect neighbors whether it's existing neighbors that are there now or future neighbors so that whoever's owning that land from now in the future on that lot
so that's what we have that's what I'm thinking about i I would say just move it to exactly where the uh setbacks would be you don't have to move maybe if you don't want to move it all the way to the center but keep the setback so you don't need to variance
okay um I think we're we're in a lull here so I can ask uh this question um so I I I just want to clarify a comment or testimony that was made by
the by the builder for lack of a better term um and just make sure the board understands the the testimony the reason why the pool is placed in the
location it is is to maximize the lawn in the rear yard as opposed to placing it in the middle which
would cause the backyard in essence to be split on either side that's the theory yes sir correct but the pool can
be and I want I want the members to be clear because they've made this comment i just want to be clear if the pool were moved over by 10 ft to be compliant with the right side would it be compliant would that make it compliant with all
the other bulk variances or would you need to request another bulk variance if you moved it over 10 ft because I think that the board is of the opinion and I don't know if we know this but the board is of the opinion
that if you were to move it 10 ft over it would eliminate all variances so that's my question to you and I just want the board to be aware of that information if it does cause any other
variance if you move it over or if it doesn't if the pool were put dead center in the yard we'd touch the setbacks on both sides exactly on the setbacks um I just will reiterate that given this is an
undersized lot by over 2100 square foot if this was a conforming lot it would give us enough room to not have to do that so in meet but barely to the point where I would have to have a surveyor stake the pool otherwise I'm going to have be
back here with an asbuilt i have a It is that tight uh I have a comment actually however I see the lot being irregular and it's wider at the front it's narrower at the end so if it's a regular lot if the line just you
know parallel move they actually basically I was trying to point out they actually lose about 10 feet on the right side because their lot goes it's like a pie so their backyard is narrower i just want to make a comment for this
particular lot um dimension and let me just uh place on the record here because there was some misunderstanding earlier the relief sought is under town ordinance 170-96A subsection 8 for sideyard relief
20 feet is required and 10t is requested yes okay just so we're all on the same page so um Mr chairman yes we need to uh Yeah yeah we need to we need to
move forward mr barbulla has fallen asleep we don't we don't we don't want that to happen i think I think you've heard I mean I'm Go ahead i think you've heard what the board has said and maybe it makes sense to go back and either look
at placing the pool in a different spot making the pool smaller based on the size of your lot um and as Mr sherman said this is the size of your lot and you have to work within the constraints of what your lot is um and you have a
beautiful paper patio back there and you want to have room for your kids and you have all these things so look at what your what what your lot can hold um and I understand what you're saying and I get it but we also have to look at what the best thing is for your particular
lot so my recommendation is to go back and relook at this and again look at the size of the pool look at the placement and maybe come back and see if there's something else that works and that's just Anybody else want to make a statement or
concur or not concur so we kind of know where we are i concur right i think the lot is what the lot is right and looking at what your alternatives are to places to stay within the confines is
advisable i think that's kind of the flavor um we can adjourn this if you want so you can kind of talk about and kind of see if you can come up with something and this will leave this case open so maybe you can figure out something that works maybe a little bit
better and maybe is more acceptable to the members so um we'll and you and it may still I mean we're we're we're going off the cuff here so I
think as indicated you you may need to look at the the lines to be sure so to make a determination tonight on your behalf may be premature is what you're saying we're gonna address i put words into your mouth but I think you agree
with me i couldn't have said it better myself okay so this this matter June 11th june 11th that would be that'll give you time to think about it figure it out and maybe you work it out you don't need to come before us and then that just gets you till you know that'll be on its own and you go forward or you
come before us and we hopefully we can work everything out for you okay so for the members for the members of the public this matter is going to be relisted for June uh 11th no further notice is required this is the notice if
for whatever reason the variance is been removed and they're proceeding without a variance it's not going to come back but if it is coming back with any sort of variance it'll be on June 11th and you can come back at that time should you wish okay thank you sorry about that
thank you yeah okay okay block 6001 lot 4933 Tower Road application number 2025-18-V Dorak Home okay uh application applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family resident in violation
of the following section 17097c2 frontier setback 60 ft required 46 ft proposed for 14 ft variance requested 7087 CC2 habitable floor area 18 person
allowed 26.99 proposed 8.99 variance requested good evening Mr chairman ladies and gentlemen of the board john Barber rule on behalf of the applicant hopefully I can keep you awake and uh move this along a little bit more i have the professionals here at
Amanatra Architect will testify first if Mr wenszel if you could swear him in please do you swear for tell the truth for the zoning board tonight i do all right can you please state and spell your name for the record uh my name is I am Sedra a Y MN last name is Cedra S E D
R A all right and since like the planning board two weeks ago or maybe a month ago there about 287 times right he is a licensed architect mr cedric your license is in good standing today yes correct and we checked about 15 minutes
ago you're still good yes 10 minutes ago based on the fact Mr chairman he's been here many times before I'd ask that you accept Mr cedra as a professional in architecture does anyone in the board have any questions objections regarding this witness there being no objection the witness accepted as expert in
architecture we need to uh Okay so I'll walk you uh through the plans of this house um the first floor consists of the living spaces and uh we also have twocar garage
and we have a guest bedroom with its own bathroom and uh and a closet the area for the first floor is uh the livable area is 2,19 and the garage area is
468 um next to that on the left is the basement plan the basement consists of one big open space is going to be used as a wreck room uh we have also a bedroom with its own egress access um we
don't have a walk out basement uh the basement only only accessible from the from inside the house in the basement we also have a playroom and media room uh the area for the basement uh matches the
area for the first floor which is 2 uh 2,19 um the next page shows the the second floor on the left the second floor consists of uh uh four
bedrooms with its own bathrooms and closet we also have uh a twotory foyer we have a a laundry room and also the the family room being in the center of the house uh it's one story family room uh there is an overlook from the by the
staircase to the family room below but it's only one story um the exterior of the building um it's a colonial style home um we have two towers one on the left one on the
right and the material is uh we're going to use lap siding hardy uh siding and we're going to use also uh vertical board and batton on the top of the gables uh we will use dark roofs uh
black windows uh we have also some Azac panels standing seam metal roof above the garage uh the image next under that is the rear uh elevation where it shows the some some of the windows and the gable end on the right uh as you see the
center piece between the between where the windows are on the left and the right it's coming down with the roof line to make the family room only one story um and the sides is pretty similar to uh to the same pattern that we have
around the house um the second floor area is41 and uh we are applying for 8.99 uh floor area ratio variance the habitable
floor area that's required by code is uh 4,870 uh we are at 4,168 which which we are 72 below the habitable floor area uh we're exceeding the ratio by 8.99 hence
we're here um and um also the we have an open space it's not a big area of open space which is counted twice but only used once which is about 43 square ft um the attic is going to only be accessible
through a pull down stair uh from the second floor also uh we have a height of 7'9 from the attic floor to the underside of the ridge line um with the
collar tie the height is about 5'8 um now in the play the playroom is that also double counted which one the the uh one one story playroom is that the height the the foyer you mean the family
room the family room no the family room was only counted once because of the roof it collapses down to 13 ft at the back and uh Okay Mr pull why don't you get you got the uh the Sinatra mic there so
you can just get a little closer to that usually I talk loud enough that I don't have to worry about it i'll hopefully make sure we get it there you go so uh so we have the one the section is this exhibit is new so we have to add uh call
it A1 so Mark this is A1 color rendering right of the facade and and Aman what we're talking about that extra square footage that uh Livingston has in Terrence County is that uh shown is in the front here is that above the uh
behind that uh balcony area yeah it's past that balcony okay all right i submit Mr sed Cedra for any questions of the board anybody have any questions for this witness
does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness yes it's a qu You have a question yes I do please come forward and please take the mic or he's going to set it up for you trust me I don't we need it for the We
need it for the recording okay all right thank you um Janet Pinto you need that my name okay and I live at 36 Tower Road which is across the street from
33 and um what I'd like to know is I would like to know the exact length and width of the of the actual lot of the of the lot itself or of the
building the lot itself okay hold on one second it's going to show it up right here the width is 85 ft and the depth is 171 uh.03 03 on one side and the other side is 19230
okay thank you sir if you have a question I don't have a problem the board would love to hear it do you want to ask a question don't be shy not yet you don't want to ask a question not yet if you have a question you got to come up please come up please understand this
is a recording so we need your My name is Albert Salier c E L O A L I A J i'm the neighbor next door which 31 Tower Road my question is why this master big house
have to be in small property when all the house over there 29 tower road that's like a big lot and it's 3,000 square ft and this have to be 5,000 ft for what why you have to be so big well um thank you you're welcome
um there's allowances for sizes of houses based on where we are in the zone and this house has come before us for two variances which is the front yard distance from the street to the front yard uh which they planner will I assume
correct discuss and also what's called the habitable floor area ratio which is the uh size of the floors divided by the area of the lot so those are the only two things the other sizes of the house are not before us they meet the zoning
laws so we can only deal with what is outside the zoning laws and that's what their job is to explain to us and prove to us why so I hope that answered your question and
you can come back up and ask more questions now or later whenever you want so thank you at this point then I would like to call Nick as my planner and thank you Maj mr graviano you swear Oh I caught you
drinking do you swear from drinking water that is just for the record uh do you swear for tell truth for the zoning board tonight yes I do okay uh can we please have Nick you're a licensed planner in the state of New Jersey yes I am and you've testified before this
board probably now maybe a hundred times not No not that i wish it was that many times but no not that many times i I have been here pretty frequently we're getting there maybe by the end of 2026 maybe so at any event your planning license is a goodstead and you have been qualified as an expert in planning both
in this in this municipality and many other municipalities throughout the state and as well uh and your license is still good as of tonight yes over over 100 municipalities in 18 different counties license is currently valid nicholas Graviano Graviano Gillis
architects and planners uh just for the record and you have had uh uh you have been hired to review this particular application you're familiar with the site you're also familiar with the architecturals uh in the reference and you've heard the testimony of the architect could you give the board your
uh benefit of your planning expertise in reference to why this particular variance would be suitable for this particular site thank you certainly uh the applicant is before the board this evening for a specific piece of property known as block 601 lot
49 that is a 15,441 square ft lot in the R2 residential zone i would like to note that this zone does require a minimum lot area of 25,000 square feet so the applicant is an undersized
lot by a little bit uh under 10,000 square feet the applicant does have uh pre-existing uh nonconformities with respect to lot width and lot depth that are not being augmented by this
application uh you heard in the intro that the applicant is requesting the front yard setback variance however as per the letter of the zoning ordinance the applicant actually is with conformance but is going to respectfully put on the proofs uh identified by the
municipalities uh zoning and engineering office uh the front yard setback study indicates an average setback of 41.78 ft uh the house presently has a 46.67 ft setback the a excuse me the
applicant is proposing 46 feet so that's certainly within the ordinance aotment for the reduction of the front yard setback uh for the proposed dwelling um that relief can be granted under both the C1 and C2 criteria and I'll get into
the purposes of zoning after I get through the F variance analysis uh the applicant is requesting uh 8.99% uh while that might may seem like a little bit larger number than this applicant is typically requesting the
applicant as the architect indicated is approximately 700 square ft under the uh habitable area requirement of the R2 district uh the R2 district requires a maximum habitable area of
4,870 square ft uh the applicant is at 4,168 square ft one of the beautiful things that makes this slot uh very attractive and and very um uh special in its particular
setting is that it backs up to the golf course um it does a butt open space um so I I did a lot analysis of block 601 and this is a block where you will find some of the larger homes in the
municipality uh ranging everywhere from 4,400 square ft up into 8,388 square ft so this is a neighborhood where uh larger homes are found and you will find throughout the state of New Jersey and through the
country that larger homes abut golf courses and that's what the applicant's proposing this evening is a home that's befitting of its location next to a golf course one of the residents uh touched on a home at at 29 Tower Road i would
like to indicate that that that is a five- bedroomedroom sixbedroom bathroom house with over 4,800 square feet of living space um while that lot is larger it is an irregular lot that the major not the majority but a portion of the lot is actually L-shaped behind the
neighbor next door's lot so in that lot's context the front yard setback and the sideyard setback are exactly similar to what the applicants proposing before you this evening that's certainly a beautiful home that has not caused a substantial detriment to the zone
planner zoning ordinance uh looking at the F variance the applicant must demonstrate that the site can accommodate the proposed use given the increase in F there's certainly no problems associated with the applicant's proposal
before you this evening all of the required setbacks are being met the applicant is actually 2 feet under the permitted height requirement of the district um so there are no substantial impairment to the zone plan or zoning ordinance nor is any light air open
space compromised with the creation of this dwelling so certainly uh that that uh variance can be granted uh furthering purposes of zoning a uh promotion of the public health safety and general welfare the applicant is proposing storm water
management on this lot additionally advancing purpose G sufficient space and appropriate location for variety of residential uses to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens and as I said this is a house a budding open space where you customarily find larger homes and
then lastly you saw the impeccably designed house certainly advances purpose eye a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangements so the two two relief being the two items of relief being requested by the applicant tonight can be granted
uh without substantial impairment to the zone plan or zoning ordinance so we are we're asking for the front yard variance but if you take the averaging as you indicated it really wouldn't even be a variance correct i know the municipality interprets that as a variance but the letter of the law the ordinance is being
met with the applicant's proposal so that basically means so that people can understand is that other houses meet that same setback and that would be that this house would be in keeping with those other houses yes for example house 27 is at 45.43 house 29 is
44.64 31 is at 46.52 35 is 46.63 and 37 is 46.54 and the applicants coming in at 46 where 46.67 exists so we're we're right we're right right there in the hunt of all those others
it's it's pretty much dead on me and then also in terms of one of the members of the public asking about the size of the house this a matter of fact based on the based upon this area and the fact that it's up against the golf course and the various houses that you uh observed
and and indicated this is in between the uh sizes of the houses that have currently been redeveloped in the area is that correct yes yes and it and it's substantially consistent with the house at 29 uh in te in terms of setbacks and and
massing i submit Mr graziano to the board for any questions that the board may have does anybody on the board have any questions for this witness anybody in the public have any questions for this witness no no questions okay oh please
come up and then you all get a chance to make statements later too lev Kegle K I G E L uh question just address
please sir 35 Tower Road next door and I have no objections to build with 10,000 ft house only objection how far it's coming from the street so if you can repeat one more time you mentioned like
46 48 I just missed this part yeah no no problem i'll I'll run over those numbers for you again and we're talking about from the street to the house or Well it's it's from the property line which isn't necessarily the street and that applies for all the houses that are that
are given calculations for um the house as it stands today is set back 46 67 ft okay the proposed house will be 46 ft so the applicant's only bringing it closer to the street by 67 ft so that's like 8
in now the 8 in going forward 8 in forward yes so the neighboring the neighboring houses are at 45.43 no no i I got wrong information i got
information you got coming up 14 ft eight inches no sorry eight inches eight inches i have no question i think we have a heck of a problem just so just just so the gentleman's clear I I I understand i'm apologized no you don't no no no you do not have to apologize
information for confusing i was confused no no it's it's perfectly fine it's a very It's a very valid concern the way the way it gets listed on the agenda just so you understand that 14 feet is what's known as the variance from what
is required to where they actually are what Mr graviano is talking about is something that's actually quite frankly more logical and made more sense to you is where is the house now and where is
it going so Mr graviano to the 8 in 8 in right but there they're I have no more question that's okay thank you no we appreciate that and I'm glad question sir we could clarify that I'm glad I'm glad you mentioned that because I don't think you would give us
14 ft but in any event that is our our application those are my witnesses and um if you want to open up for comments because I think you may have a comment here yes um would anyone like to make a comment comments
would you like to make a comment sir did you want to come back no no comments oh yep they're on the next application oh come on come on please i'm sorry we just have to swear you in first because
you're making a comment it's a very nice smile do you swear tell the truth for the zoning board tonight absolutely i knew you would can you please state and spell your name for the record one more time ma'am my name is Janet middle initial is the letter A
pinto P I N T O address 36 Tower Road go ahead ma'am thank you okay i received something from the lawyer or Rode Homes Incorporated that says that the variance requested was 14
ft correct from what is allowed yes so the the the the rule in the books is 60 foot setback supposed to be back 60 feet however all the existing homes are about 46 feet so what they're doing is
which Mr graviano explained that's why he said all the different numbers this house this all about 46 ft so basically they're keeping it in line with all the houses but that's 14 feet in variance of the law but the law
allows the averaging so that's why that's why you got that letter and that's why they're before us one other question is like every Please the the just just so the resident is aware the zoning ordinance allows the applicant to do that
averaging so the applicant did provide the the setback studies for the neighboring dwellings to come up with that setback that is conformance in conformance with the zoning ordinance so h how far back to the uh golf course is that is that going to be
going i mean what is the size of the the actual structure i mean my house my house is 30 by 40 ft all right so so to put that in context the the municipality requires the applicant to have a rear yard setback of 50 ft the applicant has
a rear yard setback of 80 feet so the applicant has a rear yard setback 30 feet greater than what's required by ordinance okay better get along thank you
thank you we appreciate it well ladies and gentlemen of the board I just leave 11 o'clock that's it you can't go home you're not allowed to leave you're all done you can go home but you can't stay
here despite the fact that the whoever lives in this house may need a lawn mower it's I would like to ask the board to grant the variances i think that we have shown first of all I had as you know I had to let her
know what the difference is between what the ordinance are and that's why I think we had the issue about the 14 ft uh the criteria as testified by Mr graziano shows how this this can be uh it can be built and it can without any violation
to the the nature and extent of your regulations i think that what you're looking at here especially in this area of the Livingston with the the golf course uh this is in the middle of what basically is being rebuilt in that area and uh I I would ask that the board
grant the uh variance as we have met all of the statutory requirements i appreciate your time and effort of staying here late and we have one more thank you thank you does anybody in the board want to make any statements does anybody in the board want to make a motion i'd like to make a statement oh
statements sorry you you raise your hand okay um so thank you very much i just want to express some of my concerns okay so the property is 15,441 square ft so it's really in line
with the R3 zone not really an R2 zone so we're applying the numbers from the R2 zone to an R3 actual size and that's where I have a little bit of a problem because even in an R3 zone the
size house that you would build is 3,220 ft so we're even exceeding that to me this seems like a very large house so while we're looking at the 4,870 ft recommendation that's really for a 25,000 square foot lot and this is
10,000 square feet less than what the R2 sizes so I'm having a little bit of problem looking at this because I'm looking at more as a as an R3 size i understand your concern however and and
yes you could say I can compare but when you look at the testimony of Mr graziano and you look at what has been developed here and you look at the ones that are right across the the way here uh this size is still 700 and some odd square feet less than what could be allowed by
ordinance so I do I I do appreciate your concern i think also though one of the things you have to look at here as Mr graciano testified to is the fact that this is one of the few areas because now I've done quite a few in front of you and I have driven all over in every one
of the different zones this is the one area where you have that o extra open space that golf course that makes makes it even more in terms of the aesthetics which you know you're see variances so I do appreciate your concern but I do believe we still have met the statutory
requirement for the granting of the approval uh but I do appreciate your comments because they've always been pretty pretty succinct and I can appreciate your concern thank you does anybody else want to make any comments
oh I'll throw it out there um uh I I also concur um wi with Lori um it is excessive um for the lot um the this whole area
is even though it's in an R2 zone I mean the whole area is not R2 size lots um it is just even looking at the R3 or basically you're you're what would be allowed technically without a variance
would be 20 2779 square ft um you're looking at a difference of 1388 even if you divided that in half you're coming up with around the same 3500 square feet of an R3 um which is still in excess of the
ratio by far i mean it's it's I get that you're under the the max habitable floor area but you're still far exceeding the ratio and you can't I don't know can it can't it's just very oversized for the lot
i to concur with both my peers here i have the same comment want to take a second i think you're going to the conference yes i saw the white smoke so the conclave is over
the pope hasn't been nominated um we can we can modify the uh size of the variance um I can make a recommendation or I can have a redraw and come back i I miss Barbula I think
for belts and suspenders purposes I think it would make the most sense to adjourn it to the June 11th date um and you can you know as they used to say in the old days sharpen the pencil nobody
uses pencil anymore uh and then you obviously I don't have to tell you you obviously have heard Katherine before about the timing to get it in and have it reviewed we have to do we'd have to present it back to zoning right we have Oh sorry
yeah we lost two already today well the other one might be quick so the only the only other way would be to me to to tell you that we would redraw the property uh to 6% instead of 8.9 yeah i'm not sure yeah i I I think I think the board is probably
I'm just wanted to let I just wanted to throw that fish out there see if it swam what do you think Catherine i don't have the my calendar here um the board is we
have a lot of applications pending which is why we're here today yes is my other one going to be on that date i don't know i don't know um you want to say Well then there's a question about notice okay so Okay so
if we do that we have to renotice then right i don't I don't want Yeah we're trying to avoid that we don't want to do that um hold on let me think a second june 11th Wednesday Wednesday meeting this is a special we were special that
one got moved because people want Tuesday yeah just trying to keep you sharp he's earning his pay today i got him up and running around too no oh no i won't be available jackie's not It's just you know just alo and then if one or two people are out it doesn't
trust me to run the meeting i do i do wow erase that wow that's terrible that's tough tough call that's all good it's all good well the women always run a better
meeting than the men anyhow so I mean so just in case she is here you want to get you're getting that's what my wife tells me yeah you mean we wouldn't have aderond frost and then Miami
this is insane it's like walking a dog at 28 degrees yeah oh that's that's why I'm standing because I had to I had to dig a hole and put the I bought a brand new tree and the the guy said "You better put it in the ground it was
going to die." I said "Why?" He said "Oh it's going to be 22 degrees." Sure enough it was 20 something degrees got to put wrap it with a blanket and and pillow are you kidding me 20 something to But then two days later now it's going
to be 80 makes you crazy well Saturday is supposed to snow in the aderondex so so here's here's here's what we're going to do go ahead we're going to re follow along this is
good stuff uh we're going to relist this the next hearing date is for May 29 okay however we may not have the ability to hear you on May 29 so you may have to be
here on May 29 to ask for a new date at that point at which point we will probably be better to know when the next hearing date may be this way you'll avoid having to renotice okay so the notice tonight
for my friends who left they left before it got good they were happy with the answers um they still want 14 ft so so I liked it more than you guys so for the So for the that's why I was trying to
just cut it to a 6% so so for the record this matter is going to be ris relisted for May 29 okay no new notice is needed and then Mr barba we'll see you one way or
another on the May 29 very good all right well there just so you get you already got an idea we're going to try what we're going to try to cut out so we make make you better presentation right but you know thank you okay lot 11:02 lot five i'm the next one i'm ready 11
Hawthorne Drive application number 2025-9-V Roadak Home Incorporated applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family resident violation of the following section 170-99 C2
frontiard setback 40T required 36 uh ft proposed four feet variance requested 17087 CC4 habitable floor area floor ratio 30% allowed 35.98 proposed
5.98% of variance requested Mr chairman ladies and gentlemen of the board I'd like to present Aman Sadra architect all right previous previously sworn yep and Aman since the last application your your license is still in goodstead
correct from an hour ago correct correct can you please uh tell the board we can accept him as an expert let's put it on the record can you please go over the uh this particular house and uh your uh renderings of what you have presented
here please thank you sure um this is a colonial style home the first floor as you see on the right side uh has an area of 1,556 and consists of the living spaces uh we have a guest bedroom in this level
with its own bathroom and closet we have two car garage uh to the left of that we have the basement it's one big wick room in the basement uh a small office mechanical room and we have a bedroom in the basement as well
uh the second floor consists of four bedrooms with its own bathrooms and closets we have a laundry room um we have uh a twotory open foyer uh which the area for this open space is
about 56 square ft counted twice but only used once uh the attic is only accessible with pull down stair from the hallway at the second floor the area for the livable area for the second floor is
1,584 uh we have a total of floor area ratio of 3,140 and that's below the habitable floor area that's known for this town which is three 3,220 um
the so I'm going to go over uh this exhibit is new K1 uh this is as you see it's a colonial style home with white facades uh we have uh board and batten at the top we have
lap siding at the bottom we have some stone at the base dark windows dark roofs and that's kind of like everything mr chairman I submit Mr sadra for
questioning from the board does anybody in the board have any questions for this witness please so this override the drawings that we have already previously submitted because there's this appears to be
a big difference between that drawing there and what we have in front of us this whole piece particularly uh I'm sorry what was your question i I was trying to reconcile that picture because I'll tell you this is the one that you which you have yes that's the
front so if you go back to the color rendering for a second trying to figure out I think because it's we're not seeing that i can't that piece on the side i don't see that yeah because of the angle the house but that's back yeah
it's set back yeah but step back thank you does anybody else have any questions for this witness um I don't if you said it or not the attic space is pulled down not usable yes exactly the attic is uh
pulled down and um the attic height also from the attic floor to the underside of the ridge is 8 8' 9 and a half uh and that will require a collar tie at 6 ft so just a shallow space people only but
challenged the attic is the third floor where those windows are and the Yeah this is just for statics it's not This is overbuilt dormer it's built on the face of the on the roof the roof okay just to give a look but it's not transparent to the inside
thank you any other questions for this witness anybody in the public have any questions for this witness i guess unless I answered all their questions already oh maybe they'll have more for the next witness we'll see they're holding out okay hands up mr
graiano graviano graviano don't don't you before Mr barbula don't worry about it don't worry i've been battling that for 48 years you know Mr braa don't worry because he's already talked to the bank and they accept checks both as Graviano
and Graiano those checks i'm not no comment i'm not cut out for time so no do you swear for unto truth for this zoning board tonight i do okay mr graviano's uh qualifications as a planner have been
placed on the record and he hasn't gotten any dings on his phone and he's still qualified yes sir so we can accept you as a expert in planning so uh with this application the applicant's requesting the habitable uh floor area ratio variance uh the applicant's
requesting 35.98% where 30% is required uh that's in relation to a specific piece of property known as block 1102 lot 5 the lot contains 8726 square feet it is an undersized lot
for the zone the R4 zone requires 9,375 square ft so the applicant has 93% of the required lot area however the requested habitable floor area ratio variance is at 5.98% so the floor area ratio request is
in um flow with the lot size that's existing on the site today uh the applicant with this application as well is requesting the front yard setback um averaging uh the average of the lots for
comparison are 35.73 the applicant is at 36 ft uh whereas 35.99 exists today so the front yard setback that exists today will be carried forward to the new house uh that relief certainly can be granted under
both the C1 and C2 criteria uh with respect to the habitable floor area ratio variance I would like to note that the applicant's 80 square ft under the habitable floor area this house is a pretty modest house at 3,140 square ft um this lot can
certainly accommodate the increased F the applicant is meeting all required setbacks as well as providing the storm water management drainage system uh on site the proposal certainly advances purposes of AG and II of the municipal land use law without substantial
impairment to the zone planner zoning ordinance Nick's testimony mr chair it's easy for you to say at at 5 minutes to 10 i again can't name a little messed up that's is quite right does anybody in this board have any questions for this witness there being no one in the public
I don't think there's a question from them um oh they left yeah i chased them away um would you like to make any closing statements well I think that basically it's very simple you've heard uh throughout the night what what the criteria is to meet the floor area ratio
this certainly does i believe that with the testimony of our experts this is an appropriate application uh the the neighbors were here we showed everything to them and they decided they left so obviously they must be happy we hope that you're happy with this that this shows that this house is a is a meets
the criteria of the uh municipal land use law it meets the criteria for a floor area ratio it shows that this could easily be built on this particular site and that it is in keeping with the neighborhood it is part and parcel of
the redevelopment of Livingston and if Livingston keeps on getting in the top 10 of New Jersey with all of the real estate notifications you're probably going to be busier and busier so on all of those criterias because we have given you legal justification and planning
justification for the C variances particularly to FAR I'd ask that you approve this application and thank you for staying so late on a special meeting thank you does anybody on the board have any statements to make would someone like to make a motion i'll make a motion
second it to approve well yeah that would be sorry you thought the motion was to adjurnn so really at this point that's coming soon i will second his motion to approve okay mr sherman yes mr horn yes mr kenya yes
okay m yes mr weisman yes okay miss Khan yes mr beer yes motion carries have a good night passover yes zeiss and Pesak to everyone who's celebrating and happy Easter i get
to celebrate both i'm 3% okay you only get one board of mozzarella soup i make a really mean lock ah okay there you go okay that's uh motion to adjurnn for Hanukkah then make Anybody motion to adjurnn i'll make
a motion to adjourn good second both voted with their feet