for better good evening and welcome to the public hearing for the Livingston Zoning Board of adjustment today is February 25th 2025 if you're an applicant for D or variance you should be aware that such a variance can only be granted after
showing that special reasons for the 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'll require affirmative vote of five members of the seven member Board of adjustment other
variance require a majority of four members to Grant this V that variance if you're an applicant for any variance and your variance is denied by this board you have the right to appeal to the superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of notice of decision and that Court May overturn the
decision of this board if you're an objector to any type of variance has been granted you too May appeal to the suprior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of the notice of decision if you do file an appeal I ask that you please provide a copy of your complaint
to the planning administer administrator Jackie Hollis um pursuant to the requirements the open public meeting act also known as the Sunshine Law adequate notice of this meeting was provided to The Star Ledger and West Tribune and a copy was also PL posted on the Bing Board of the
municipal building in addition to having notice posted notice of's meeting was placed on 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 a microphone so we make sure your cont comments or questions upon the record we will now call the role Mr Kenya okay Mr Kenya yes sorry M Mr Kenya Mr
horn he's here but what do we do he's not here right now okay Mr Mr sha is not here either uh Mr Sherman here here miss miss
Yan here Mr wisman here M so here M con Mr Beer here okay we have a quum okay okay um quick housekeeping if you're here for Block 1000 lot 77 Locust
Place application number 202478 DV that has been adjourned to March correct Jackie uh there'll be no Reen notice um you can come back at that time and if you're here for Block 15 11
lot 11 for Maplewood Drive application number 20 25-6 DV that also has been adjourned to March uh the March meeting so there will be no um notification of that one either okay we're going to go a little out of our order here um if you
want to call the first one 43 oood sure so first one 43 o this one was 43 o the maple okay all right so variance the block 20 uh block
2902 543 Oakwood Avenue application number 2024 72- V Maple Builders LLC application seeks approval to construct a new family single family resident in violation of the following
section 17087 bc3 habitable floor area ratio 21% allowed 33 person proposed 12 person variance requested good evening Mr chairman members of the board attorney Rosemary
stone gardy with the law firm at Bay w stra at 290 West Mount Pleasant Avenue here in Livingston on behalf of the applicant Maple Builders LLC um just if I may council do we have six voting members tonight or is it five
I heard the road call so so just for clarity sake and I appreciate you asking that question for obvious reasons uh we have six voting members for your application so we have two alternates they're serving up and they're uh going to hear the matter and be able to vote
on it tonight okay thank you so with that being said um just to give the board a little bit of a road map I plan on calling tonight uh in support of our application for floor area ratio um percentage variant um I
have with me tonight our applicants engineer John manelo I have our client's architect Paulo Dantes and I have our client's professional planner Alexander dowy so with that being said we'd like to council do you swear them all in at
once or you want to swear them in individually usually individually yeah we do them individ I'm looking at the chairman because I'm sort of n to the board my myself so we kind of look at each other like that uh we'll do them individually that's the way I like to do it so let's do that let's do it the way
I like to do it absolutely so at that point we'd like to start with our engineer first okay all right when don't we yeah get them is that on all
right can you um okay you already beat me too raise your do you swear friend and tell the truth for the zoning board tonight I do okay can you do me the favor of stating and spelling your name for the record sure so legal name is Giovani G IO v n
ni I last name manilo m a n i l i o okay and let's have uh the gentleman's qualifications on briefly absolutely um Can by way of background can you tell the board where you received your education and what licenses you currently hold sure so I have a Bachelor of Science and civil engineering from
Syracuse University I've been um a licensed uh engineer in the state of New Jersey for 16 years still in good standing testified in front of numerous boards throughout the state and I believe it was in front of this board uh back in November of last year does anyone in the board have any
questions objections regarding this witness there being no objections the witness is accepted as expert in engineering thank you thank you um can you take us through what exists at the site today please uh sure so I'm going bring up and I just want to verify what
the board has as latest plans we do have one revision on the plans dated um October 14th 2014 um just want to verify that that's you have and that's what's on the screen right now um and I can zoom in so on the plan on the
left side is the existing conditions uh so the site um as as everybody knows is 433 Oakwood Avenue uh zoned R3 um site is rectangular in shape it's about 50 ft wide and and 200 ft deep uh with a lot area of 10,000 square ft um the
currently the lot consists of a 2 and a half um story frame dwelling with an attached garage a wood deck in the rear and a wood porch in the front and a asphalt driveway uh to the left side of the property um all that is being proposed to be uh removed as part of
this application um as far as we know there are no storm water management U measures on the site currently um and there are several pre-existing nonconformities I ities one being lot area so in the in the zone 15,000 ft is required uh where the lot is technically
10,000 ft but per the code only the lot area within 150 ft of the uh front RightWay is counted so uh per the ordinance the lot area is 7,500 Square ft um a minimum front yard setback of 50
ft is required uh where uh you can also use the established front yard setback uh for on this case it is uh 30 uh 29.6 um is what's being is existing as a front yard setback uh where 50 ft is
required or 40 ft is permitted per code uh as a minimum um additionally there is a sidey yard pre-existing nonconformity on the left side uh 10 ft is required where a side yard set back of 5.4 ft is existing um there are no other environmental constraints on the site or
easements that are are known um I am going to hand out I do have a couple exhibit it's it's a new exhibit um and I'll bring it up we'll mark that as A1 yes so for the record A1 is is is it a one
page John what do you want to call your color exhibit one page it's one page and I believe we just call it zoning board exhibit very technical this is uh sorry so it's an exhibit showing an aerial of the general vicinity and then
it's a color rendition of the um the proposed layout of the site just give it a minute there to load hopefully you can blow that up a little bit yep so I just want to show you know the surrounding area so you can see the existing um dwelling on the site and how it lays with the remaining um properties on the
other side of it um rather consistent um I think this is a little outdated this map this is State mapping from uh 2020 so it is probably uh you know four or five years old at this point uh but I do want to draw your attention to the the center of the screen uh so it's just a color rendition of the uh
proposed um improvements uh so we are proposing to construct a new two-story uh single family dwelling uh with a little small uh front porch uh shown here where my Purser is a wood deck in the rear um we would have a two-car garage and a driveway that's uh 19.5 ft
wide um per rsis 2 and a half parking spaces are required for a four-bedroom house we are proposing uh per rsis three and a half spaces for a two-car garage with a driveway in front of it uh additionally we are proposing a drivew system in the rear yard um which will
contain all the um runoff generated by the roof and again that would be submitted to the uh to the township engineer for their review and approval uh if this does get approved um as far as conformance with uh the zoning uh we do have the existing
pre-existing nonconformities for the um lot area which hasn't changed uh we did eliminate some of the pre-existing nonconformities that existed with the the existing house uh so we pushed the house back so it conforms with the front yard setback uh the front yard setback uh proposed is
40.5 uh where 40 feet is required and existing is 29.6 so uh we we took care of that issue uh side yard we do have two sidey yards they're both 10 feet uh we're um 10 ft as required and pre-existing we did have one side yard
that was 5.4 ft so we made that better as well we comply with the total sidey yard uh 15 ft is required 20 ft is proposed uh rear yard 40 ft is required 92.2 is proposed uh we fully conform with the
building coverage um 23.9% is permitted uh we're at 19.7% so we're we're not at the maximum building coverage for this lot um there are two requirements for maximum floor area one is the square footage which is 3520 uh Square ft uh
we're proposing 32 65 so below that number um we are asking for the one variance uh which is the maximum F uh so per uh the code 21 is permitted and this lot is at 33 um I do want to note that if this was a conforming lot we'd be
very close to the 0. 21 that that is permitted uh per the the zoning requirements and then we do also comply with the maximum Building height uh 35 ft is uh permitted and this house is at 30.710833 um that pretty much concludes the uh
overall site layout and variances that are being requested does anybody on the board have any questions for this witness does anybody in the audience in the public have any um questions for this witness I think we're good hey thank you
next up we have our architect do you swear firm tell the truth for the zoning board tonight yes okay can you please State and spell your name for the record sure my name is Paulo Dantes first name is Paulo p a u l o last name
is Dantes d n t a s Mr D and by way of background um you give the board where you receive your education licenses you have and your experience testifying sure in board similar to this yes uh graduated from New Jersey Institute of
Technology in the year 2002 with the Bachelor's of architecture um I have been licensed since 2007 uh have test testifying various boards in Bergen exus Hudson middlex and Union counties and also have appeared here previously in
the Livingston board and uh license is up to date thank you does anyone on the board have any questions or objections regarding this witness there be no objection the witness accept as expert in architecture thank you thank you um on the screen is
this the um updated exhibit with the colorized version of the front elevation sure so this is the was the original um ex exhibit uh with the exception of a001 that has a new rendering so if we may Council we'll
call this A2 updated um rendering which is just the front picture there's been no change to the house itself just the rendering correct correct and then I did bring smaller handout copies as well right so why don't why don't we give one
to miss Hollis and then we'll spread it around to the board Ro me I'll take it I'll take I'll take it go ahead I have additional too do I does anybody need it sides oh wait we got
more I think we're good now thank you can to take us through the design of the house please sure so the property is located 43 Oakwood uh Avenue in Livingston um we're proposing on this project is a new
twostory single family dwelling uh with a building footprint of 9 uh 1,978 squ ft uh liveable of 3,265 square ft uh with a garage of 405 Square ft on our sheet architectural
sheet uh a001 the proposed basement we're we're approximately 1,596 Square ft we're proposing a concrete Ming Foundation full basement which will be partially finished um the remainder of the space will provide the
mechanical area storage area uh that will accommodate the water heater and the furnace uh which will provide the heating cooling for the basement on the first floor uh the partial finish basement will be determined during the permit design phase um this is more to
um accommodate for a recreational space uh for the owner and obviously uh a proposed interior uh steer for access to the first floor sheet a002 which is our first and second floor
we just pressing we have a first floor ceiling height of 9 ft uh the first floor plan will consist of a twostory foyer in the main entrance uh this will give access also has a stair will give access not only to the basement and to the second
floor only the fourar hallway will give uh will provide access to the basement steer access uh to the mud room the two-car garage um an office with with which has a walk-in closet and a bathroom and we're also proposing uh a
mudroom area which will accommodate not only the visitors but also the the homeowners adjacent to the office we're providing open plan concept which consists of the dining area kitchen and a family room with a prefabricated uh
fireplace uh this will is approximately 1,57 73 squ ft of liveable area second floor we're also proposing the 9 ft uh four bedrooms including the master the master will consist of a walk-in
closet um and a master bathroom double sinks toilet room uh toilet and a shower and a and a standing St standing tub I apologize uh this F or livable area is
1,692 square ft here at the second floor we're going to have a drop down a drop down um ladder um where we're proposing a second furnace in the Attic um again this um we also have a laundry
room also in the front we're also proposing is not um Illustrated here but we're also proposing a couple of Trace ceilings not only in the master but also bedroom number one excuse me one second just to make a note that Mr horn has joined us at 8 o00
he'll be able to participate but now not able to vote okay thank you so just to clarify the attic is only accessible by a drop- down stairs and is only utilized for the location of the
second furnace unit correct yeah for mechanical purposes only so there is no full-size attic there's no stairways to the attic no concern um that the attic could be converted into living space right we don't have no walk upstairs or anything like that and that's also reflected in the roof and Peaks you've
done for the roofing system and with the tray ceilings you plan on having in the two bedrooms mentioned as well correct sure some of the tray ceilings will cut up into the ceiling joists and you know bump up into the floor the floor of the attic okay thank you no problem uh
architectural sheet A3 where we have our front elevation uh our total height is going to be 3.71 ft to the top of the main hip roof um based on the average from our engineer the architectural characteristics and material selections
was based on the owner design request we're looking at sum of vertical Hardy Board clap sighting horizontal Hardy plank sighting and some metal roof system over the cover entrance and garage and the main roof will be ashol
shingles uh the proposed facade if I could go to the front the proposed fa front facade design um was not only to create the vertical and horizontal movement but also is to provide various uh facade
depths to eliminate the the monolithic and continuous structures um and also just to provide a little bit more aesthetical pleasing facade uh the garage porch and column are being proposed as a wood accent to bring the warmth into the facade some of the
colors that we have chosen are not going to be final in this scale but this is definitely just to demonstrate that we're looking at a more um toned Earth Tones versus anything uh extravagant thank
you is any anybody the board have any question what's your basement ceiling height the basement ceiling height we have at 8 fo2 any other questions from the board yes yeah I have a question now is there a particular reason because this office looks like it could also be a bedroom is
there if it was labeled a bedroom would that affect our analysis at all I I don't I don't think that would deter from what I'm trying to demonstrate I just think this office um it becomes a multifunctional these days that if we have a guest could be a guest bedroom if
we have a a mother-in-law could be a mother-in-law um but this case we are calling an office because everybody currently is working for okay so it wouldn't change the no no okay and just for clarity we would still meet with rsis standards even if it was
counted as oh of course yes right thank you any other questions from the board does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness I think we're good okay thank you thank you next we'd like to call Alexander Dy our professional planner
do you swear F to tell the truth for the zoning board tonight I do all right can you please State and spell your name for the record Alexander dowy last name is spelled D U G H rty all right sorry sorry Council by way of background can you uh give the board
where you received your edification what licenses you carry and what experience in front of zoning boards you have certainly my education is at a rocker blouse with the Masters in City and Regional plan planning a concentration development Redevelopment certification of public policy my license are current
um both local PP as well as certification aicp I'm the professional development officer for APA New Jersey where I actually review those credits for other planners um I I am the supervising planner for the town of Dover I testify in this capacity on a weekly and daily basis I present at the league of municipalities I present at
the state Redevelopment conference um and I've been accepted in every board and I believe I was in front of this board I want to say about a year and a half ago okay does anyone in the board have any questions objections regarding this witness uh there be no objections the
witness is accepted as expert in professional planning thank you Mr dowy you prepared an exhibit for tonight's hearing yes I have it consists of uh 17 slides of maps and photographs I have them digitally I know there's a couple hard copies um and it's really
the intent is to walk the board through um the neighborhood the scope of of of the project at hand in comparison and then discuss the relief at hand okay so we'll mark what did you label this as2 this one this one no you just called it exhibit this one
okay yep perfect um so before I begin with the exhibit I just want to emphasize the um the the conceptual behind me we're going to see this again throughout this neighborhood um though the AR exural
design is is is really nice and stunning um this is not something that Livingston has not seen or this neighborhood has not seen um so I just want to emphasize that that look um and because you'll see that again so for purpose of the exhibit slide one is really to orientate the
board about where we're at in Livingston I can certainly zoom in a little bit uh we are in that R3 Zone outlined in red approximately where the site is in location um within the R3 Zone um okay this is going to just jump
down so slide two is an uh just uh from njd sh web property outlined in red the takeaway here is you'll start to see here through this exhibit um you know right here on Oakwood um and going up and a little bit on Lee we'll start to see some of these Lots um are a little
bit tighter as they're 50 um by 200 where the surrounding properties are are averaging 100 by 200 um so I'm sorry 100 by 100 this is uh so the um property in question again is outlined in red um and this is your tax
map where we can see it's 50 foot wide some of the properties that I'm going to take the board through for orientation of the neighborhood we're going to look caddy corner across the street we can see um they're they're 50 feet wide um the second property next to our Lot number seven not the adjacent but Lot
number seven I want the board to remember is on 50 foot wide by 200 and then um we'll start to look at some of the uh properties uh particularly lot um lot six on Lee and then we'll look at lot 28 on Lee Road again um orientation
here they're they're approximately 50 foot wide Lots um and and we'll kind of just go from there this so here you see on slide three I believe it is um or four the this is the property in question what currently
exists this structure was built in 1937 per the mod for data on the property so substantially older home um there's there's some of them threr around this top down view of the property as you can see this is that garage here and as the uh um engineer was discussing this
garage currently has a 5 yard approximately about a 5 yard setback uh violation current condition second just to note that Miss Khan has arrived at 808 thank you please continue certainly so there there's um some existing conditions here related to the the site
as far as non-conforming with with the zoning one being that it's under sized by lot area um but we have a setback where um 40 ft is really required here we're at 29.6 and um we have a sidey yard setback where 10 ft is required um we're at 5.4
and that really is right around here where this garage is situated here um so this is a a head-on shot there's that garage again 5T of this garage is is overhanging into the sidey setback a very small modest House Cape
again built 1937 this is block 1302 lot 133 um so we talk about two lots over remember uh if we discussing the again subject site here in red two lots over this house right here that I'm de demonstrating to is on a 50 foot wide lot as you see it's a little bit larger
it kind of extends further back we have um we'll see some other properties where we'll start to see some positive investment and turn over into the older housing stock in this immediate neighborhood again subject property out outlined in red right here labeled two lots over again a new more modern home
we can kind of see some of the houses around are getting uh a little bit larger caddy corner across street over here we'll see a much larger house two larger homes um there's a good variety in in housing so this is directly across the street again our subject site down here in the bottom rightand corner looking across the street kind of
hugging the corner was a new modest house again an older Cape um so it's a good variety from the public real in the street gate uh caddy corner off to the right again a new modest house uh built again I told you we'd see this design uh throughout the neighborhood very similar
design what I want to point the board to is caddy corner to the back on Lee we'll see a very large structure coming up um you know just just above the uh the roof line across the street um so we take the Drone out we give you a a bigger perspective on
what's Happening Here We we'll see all the houses from a top down approach they vary in size and scale um we have some that are older some that are newer some that extend you know further back further up these lots are on 75 foot wide Lots so the houses appear a little bit larger on the public realm um in the
streetcape um just looking up oak wood on the corner again um larger home really extends to the back the capes that are still um hanging around built in the 30s early 40s and again a lot of new development kind of sprinkled throughout the the immediate neighborhood uh what I want to point out
is directly behind us the lots are a lot larger more spaced out so we do have this conjugation of smaller Lots on Lee and the surrounding neighborhood start to open up and and have that bandwidth by way of a a lot size um so again we're here on Lee Street across the street
from uh on on the back of Oak again this is that large house that abutted the uh the neighbor across the street we can kind of see again we had that two-car garage uh happening in the front with the with the stairs again the larger uh building footprint next to the capes um
this is a c across the street from that again you see the the homes kind of start to go into the back when we're limited on lot width um this is um was asked by the applicant himself to really show what I guess would Inspire to
design what you see here on H page 16 slide 16 is a uh a Google image from 2013 of 18 Lee Road uh right here with the with the Cobblestone Frontage and you'll see the existing neighborhood again uh next door you'll see the house with the red shutters
you'll see this house uh in the next slide ch over so this is what it looks like today at 18 Le uh Le Road um again I'll kind of bounce back very similar design what we're proposing here is is very much uh reflective of what we're
seeing um throughout the neighborhood this is the kind of uh Home Improvements that um that that we're pretty much accustomed to seeing throughout the the Northeast um it's a double car garage front loaded um you know with the door on the side and you know the bedrooms on the second floor the first floor pretty
much standard open kitchen living room uh amenities so it's the way of the land what's here and and I think it's important that the board get a real understanding for the the context of the neighborhood and what we're proposing and the integration of that um so with that being said we are here for two
variances one of them is existing condition on lot area we're at 10,000 sare feet where 15 is required we really can't cure that deficiency as you see it's a built built out neighborhood existing conditions here um sites privately owned um we are here for the max habitable FL Flor area uh percent
where 21% is required in the R3 um we're asking for 33% uh with that being said this exhibit I hope shows support that what we're asking for is is not a typical of the neighborhood by way of design when we talk about the relief and the relief
that's uh needed we are here for D4 F variance and the essence of the D4 variance um is pretty straightforward can the site accommodate the additional floor area um with that being said we have sewer connectivity here we have water it's it's a pre-existing lot that
has connections uh we have as we've heard the architect testify whether we look at the office and convert it to a room the Adaptive for use of that space um we'll still meet um rsis which is the parking requirements here so by virtue of this design um for the case law
that's presented for um the F can decide accommodate the additional floor area um by Design and by functionality uh certainly the answer is unequivocally yes one of the things I like to point out to the board is with this design we do cure uh cure two two deficiencies by way of uh sidey yard and front yard
setback so though we're asking for a little bit on on the maximum habital floor area I want to point out to the board there's another second means of control uh here when we talk about floor area and habital floor area we Livingston has a percentage and then they also have a square footage so by square footage what's allowed in the R3
is 3520 Square ft we're under the square footage by way of uh 3,2 265 Square ft so that we might be overun percentage again that's interrelated to the lot itself I would like to tell the board if we had the 15,000 fet we'd be compliant unfortunately we're running those
numbers we're still asking for a little bit but I want to let the board know even if we had a larger lot um and we can max out the um the the floor area by way of square foot that would be telling the board Town sees that the 35 20
square feet as the as really the large home we're under that for the R3 there will be other properties in the R3 throughout Livingston that would whe that would stay under the percentage um but max out on the square footage our percentage is inter integrated to the lot area of deficiency as well but I
want to point out that though we're asking for the percentage we're under in the square footage we're under in the bulk requirements front yard side yard rear yard setback and the like so we're staying within the the back of the napin test if you will can the the bulk requirements we're in those Dimensions we're under the height the R really is
not um asking to uh violate or ask relief of those dimensional requirements and when you look at f f has its history rooted into larger uh um commercial buildings warehousing Walmarts uh you know large Square grocery stores in that
regards when we look at F and its intent in a residential Zone uh we it's really a mechanism designed to control the scale and massing uh so with that this exhibit that that I put together for the board is to show that the scale in massing is certainly uh compatible with the neighborhood with the R3 Zone here
we have a site um where the the special reasons and the benefits of this application when we look at what we're proposing here again we're turning over an older housing stock um what was built in 1937 is not really the standard and expectations of home ownership that we see in 2025 and going forward so we have
an opportunity to revitalize this from a competitive standpoint for um functionality of the site and and the family Arrangements uh we have proven living living environment that certainly outweigh any detriments by way of the F because we still have that square footage control here um it
brings it more into harmony with the neighbors as you see with the photos and the investment coming in the area both visually and functionally we now have a onecar garage converted to a twocc car garage um the pro the project promotes efficient land use and positive Aesthetics all the above would otherwise
promote purposes a c e gii and M of the Miss land use law particularly C adequate light air open space purpose e is appropriate densities location purpose ey is a desirable visual environment again what you see here at 18 Le road is essentially what we're trying to reflect on on Oak on Oakwood
um and we certainly have purpose in um the view of lessening the such cost for more efficient use of land here uh we have again sewer access utility it doesn't make sense to go to Virgin land to try to build a home uh we have a site that we believe can accommodate here
when we look at the negative criteria related to uh this relief as you've heard the architect and the engineer there's no existing storm water management controls this application would otherwise bring that that's an added benefit the site can function and operate efficiently and safely this will be a built to applicable building codes
they certainly have changed since the 1930s so certainly we be advancing purpose a of the safety and the well and general welfare of the Livingston Community overall but I want to just bring back to the D4 here uh when we talk about the uh the essence of the D4 and what the courts have determined in
the Randolph Town Center versus Randol Township is can the site accommodate this additional f um and by way of the functionality of the site I believe it can um with that being said I have taken it a step further for uh enhanced burden proof and looking into the master plan
of the 2018 master plan here and I just want to point out um there are three goals to the master plan that have remained unchanged um goal one to preserve and enhance the Primary Residential character of the community I think this application here is hitting that right on the head and uh um goal
three to preserve and improve the quality of life again we have a dated home 1937 we're bring bringing a modern building Arrangement and functionality to the site here um so with that being said I don't believe this application will will uh erode the intent of the
zoning ordinance we have a single family dwelling uh application and a single uh family detached residential zone so it's against a permitted use and we're under that square footage um so with that I'll conclude I believe the statutory criteria has been met and approval would
otherwise be warranted thank you okay does anybody have any questions for this witness and I assume that the implied that your the comps that you showed your footprint for this property is going to be substantially consistent with the comps of the new houses correctly this
will not be out of character okay anybody else on the board anybody the public have any uh questions for this Witness okay I think we're done with your Witnesses I would just ask the right to reserve after we find out if there's any
comments from the public of course are there any comments any statements from the public no don't see any statements from the public anybody in the board want to make any statements I'll just make a quick one that I do uh
appreciate the um the the roof being designed such a way that doesn't add additional Mass to the to the building um where all these buildings start you know they take over a little bit more we understand the F but by keeping it down I think that helps to tone it down and I that's
appreciated thank you I think that's it any closing statements or yes just in closing um as you heard from the professionals here tonight there was care in designing the house to make sure again that the attic could not be converted into livable
space um as the board is very much aware with your um floor area ratio percentage it does measure from the outside um rather than the interior walls so things like the Portico and so forth are helping bump up that percentage number
that when you look at it as a percent looks bigger than what it actually is this is an undersized lot we did take care to make sure that we complied with all of the bulk requirements and as you heard from the testimony um almost half
of the rear yard is being preserved as rear yard we only cut to that almost 90 foot mark because of the deck not because of the house um we told the applicant if we were coming here tonight in front of the board show exactly what
you're going to build show the deck don't come in be insincere not show a deck when the board knows that everybody puts a deck or a patio on so we wanted to come in with the full proposal so the board knew if they approved it tonight this is exactly what you're going to see
be built at the site and we appreciate your time and consideration thank you thank you there's anybody in the board want to make a motion I'll make a motion to approve I'll second it okay Miss
y yes Mr shman yes Mr KY yes Mr horain not okay uh do be Mr Beer
yes do I call the alternates yeah alates okay M so yes Mr wisman yes okay thank you thank you have a good night good night I'm
pressure over there okay block 55 lot 16 40 what's that Witchwood Road application number 202 24- 62- V Dwight and farhart North over applicant seeks approval for a car
carport an addition in violation of the following section 17- 98 C3 left s side yard setback 10 ft required 9.2 proposed point8 variants requested
17087 BB3 habitable floor area 3520 ft allow 4117 squ ft proposed 599 Square uh Square ft variant requested thank you okay all yours good evening Mr chairman ladies and gentlemen
of the board John barua on behalf of the applicant tonight we have a slightly different situation we have a house that has already built they had received zoning permit and building permits and then during the process there was determined that the these various uh
requirements as filed in the application were overlooked and have to be addressed so tonight in order to do that I have uh planner that I would like Mr wsel to swear in if he would and uh we can go forward with what is uh there on the
site and what the particular variances are I hope that by when you see all this and we address it you'll see that this was uh appropriate for the bar and the variances requested by the municipality the township of Livingston at this with
your permission Mr chairman if Mr wedel can swear in our planner gra do you swear for to tell the truth for the zoning board tonight I do can you please State and spell your name for the record yes my first name is Nicholas with an H last name graviano g r a v is
inv viictor i a n o Mr graviano you are a licensed planner in the state of New Jersey yes I am and you have been qualified as a planner in this municipality probably dozens of times as well as other municipalities uh as a professional planner is that correct
that is correct and your license is in good standing as we sit here or as I stand here and you stand here tonight yes it is Mr chairman I I'd like to present Mr graziana as the planner and ask that you please qualify him itself thank you does anyone of the board have any questions or objections regarding this
witness there being no objections a witness is accepted as an expert in planning thank you thank you so could you go forward and explain the uh project as we now have it on the on the lot uh yes this is an application for a specific piece of property known as
block 55 Lots 16 um it's located in the R3 District um as you heard in the applicant attorney's intro this house is substantially completed uh the applicant decided to add a carport to the right side of the dwelling at that time um was
notified that some variances were were needed on some completed portions of the produ of the project uh the applicant is requesting the following relief from the board this evening uh the first relates to the side yard set back um if you see
on the left portion of the house the applicant extended the house at the existing deficient sidey guard setback which was 9.2 feet whereas 10 ft is required by ordinance uh additionally uh the applicants plans when submitted for
zoning did not account for the double calculation of a two uh story uh room which does not have a floor you know we see that common with the foyers um if you look at the plan the family room
where I have the cursor right here that's approximately 22 feet wide by 27 ft long that is an open ceiling which was not uh double calculated when the applicant submitted uh the zoning permit and the plans to the building department
so the applicant is requesting two c variances before the board this evening I would like to note that this is an oversized lot um the lot areas 20251 Square ft whereas 15,000 ft is required in the R3 District um the
applicant wow requesting the variance for the maximum habitable area um is actually under the F requirement for the zoning District whereas 21% is required in the zone the applicant's uh house as it stands today uh plus the carport
addition uh would be at 20% um the applicant lot sizes is over 5,251 ft larger than what's required by ordinance the applicant is requesting a habitable floor area of 599 Square ft
which is that two-story family room uh which exists today um when when you do the math um the zoning code allows 023 square feet of habitable floor area per one square foot of yard area so if you looked at it that way the appin extra
5,000 square feet would equate to a little bit over 12 100 square feet of living space whereas the applicants only requesting the 599 um these two c variances certainly could be granted under the C2 criteria whereas it relates to a specific piece
of property um the purposes of zoning in the municipal land use law would be Advanced this proposal certainly advances purpose a of the municipal land use law advancements of the public health safety and general welfare it Al also advances purpose G to provide
sufficient space in appropriate location for a variety of residential uses to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens and when you look at the applicant's house it's certainly an appropriate location to extend that Foundation line at the current 9.2 ft it's better
constructionwise and it's better Aesthetics wise and then speaking of Aesthetics it certainly promotes purpose I a desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good Civic design and Arrangement um both of these variances could be granted without substantial impairment to the Zone plan
or the zoning ordinance but as I said this is a different type of application we have an oversized lot we Livingston is one of one of the few towns that has that double counts that double area which we have seen and you did probably 80
applications last year I would have to say probably 50 or 60 of them have the double uh foyer here it's the great room which had which that's why it was that required that space uh but you know it's part of the ordinance and has to be
addressed and that's why we're addressing it now so we have a little different than our normal applications before you in terms of the far and I believe that the the planning criteria of the C2 variants because of the particular site because it follow the old Foundation I think is appropriate
here are there any other items you'd like to address from the uh from the application no there are not in that case Mr chairman I submit Nick for any questions that you may have for the board thank you thank you does anyone on the board have any question questions for this witness
please well sorry couple questions when you say the existing are you you referred a couple times the existing house are you talking the house that has now been built or the original house that was the house that has now been built okay how far the original House
what was the side yard set back on the original home the original home was 9.2 ft the applicant continued that Foundation line for the addition which is at 92 9.2 ft as well and if I understand this correctly looking at this it's a twocc car garage and a
carport yes okay so we have this picture which isn't the greatest picture in the world that was in the packet so it's hard for me I don't know if you have a picture it's hard for me to picture the garage and the carport because I don't have anything show me really it's a two car garage by the plans the applicant
once it his buil tried maneuvering the vehicles it's it's really like an oversized one car garage um so they wanted the carport to provide additional covering for the vehicle which would be parked outside so do you have a picture of what that like I said this is the picture that was given to us I don't see a picture showing me the front of the
house here's the garage the carport was not built so that is not built yet no the applicant um when want deciding to do the card Port went to the zoning office to apply for the carport and there were
variances that needed to be applied for uh so that's why the applicants before the board this evening it was the application for the carport that found that they made the original mistake gotta you know it's you know everybody makes a mistake now now
we're trying to cure it okay and what is again there's a lot of handwritten things on here so the Car Part 14' 9 in wide by 16 feet 4 in deep is that what this is showing me
give me one second because the plan for the carport isn't on the on the drive sorry no that's quite all right want to make sure we give you the right answer to your point it's not a traditional so we don't want we don't
want to say it's 20 by 50 no no sorry the computer wores the computer always has to freeze when you need it you this is what I'm looking at was submitted to us that I'm making my assumption on that's the size of the carport give me one second I'll get
you you have a question let Mr graviano have the opportunity to pull up the plan and be able to respond clarify mat9 say2 bless you God bless you that doesn't match
either that's unless he's going to that could be old that's that's from October I can't find I can't see can't see those the revision
dates see I would want to try it's for wasn't anticipating that question I I didn't have that downloaded but I have my client has it downloaded from the architect showing one car carport 14t
wide by 19.1 ft long I sure it it's on it's on the plan should be it should be what we're
looking at yes looking at the plans that those figures that uh were just provided are correct sorry about that you see you hit us with a question that we what but we had it we tring to make sure you're sharp yeah well you know you're going to keep me awake
right are you good Mr war or you still thinking so I'm okay I'm okay with that I guess my question is if I look at this and maybe it's a question but so I get that but you're I believe you're asking for a sidey Agate uh variance as
well okay I'm good then thank you and just for clarification the existing foundation wall that was extended is still from the original building that's correct chairman the original home was at .2 ft the
foundation was extended at 9.2 ft for know during the construction process yeah just want to make sure which makes more R rational sense from a construction and aesthetic standpoint does anybody else on the board have any questions for this
witness I have a question um just going back to the habitable floor area ratio I know you said that the carport right is supposed to be factored into the floor Warrior ratio I don't see that though on sheet one no it is not it's not
habitable space okay I thought that you said it was factored into the rate the the F well no the the carport triggered the applicants variance request for the sidey setback at 9.2 feet on the other side okay and for the
uncalculated twostory family room okay I got you the carports not triggering any the the need for any relief okay yeah Mr Sharm is no variants for the carport what happened is when he came back for that saying hey it's tough to get in and out for that second car he went in made
application and then the original approvals there was that error found and therefore we're now addressing the error that was found but it's exactly what Nick said it's on the opposite side here's the carport there's where the variance was found on the opposite side a
question um do you know what it does to the pr coverage the adding the carport the Imp it doesn't trigger any variances yeah for lock coverage yes no like I wanted to know if
it uh impacted any imper no we're oversiz we begin with by 5,000 square ft so we're way under this is like I said when at beginning this is very unusual we're always dealing with tight it's like we're trying to get into that size 18 shirt when we're really a 19 here we
got a 20 size shirt and we're only 18 so yeah nothing is triggered the carport we gotta have we got we got to be different once in a while and the carport is it is that pavers or asphalt or hasn't been decided it's going to be the same material as a
driveway which is which which is asphalt asphalt okay I have a question go ahead I I have a question um so you said the carport the not trigger any variance but when from when I look on um this exhibit
um the left side is 9.2 and then the right side original without the carport is 24.9 Ft now the carport is going to take 14.9 so that leaves 10 feet on the side on the right side so aggregate we
get 19.2 ft that's exactly where the 19.2% is calculated so so does that but I think the cport does trigger this one correct if if the board deems that variance uh as being necessary then that
variance could also be granted under the C2 criteria but you know upon the applicant submission to the to the municipality that variance wasn't deemed to be necessary part of the unusual aspect of this particular
application is that this was already submitted and went through building and Zoning so permits were already issued for these things so the variances that are before you the
two that Mr graviano talked about are the two that have been flagged as the ones where relief is required for them to proceed forward I concur with Mr W's assessment any other questions on the
board I got one last question sure um seeing that now you're eliminating the two car garage and building a carport like on the outside with the one car garage and leaving um the extra space in the storage space would your client um
agree to a condition of approval that the garage at the storage space that's noted on the plans that's inside the garage will not be used as habitable space well I don't know whether we need that it is still it's not not going to a onecar garage it's still built as a
two-car garage and it's going to be utilized that way but uh I don't I don't really see that we need to do that kind of condition I mean if they were to put bedrooms or something there that would be a zoning violation so I don't I don't see that as a necessary requirement you
know that would my position any other questions on the board are there any questions for the public please come forward ma'am can you please raise your right hand yes do you swear firm to tell the truth for the zoning board tonight yes I'm asking questions though
okay for questions right oh there questions questions you thrw me off he was motioning at me sorry I was just pointing I thought you wanted her name or something well the name would be yes your name would be nice hi my name is Carol Berger b r g r
and I live at 42 Witchwood Road okay okay keep just keep your voice up ma'am sure thank you not used to this it's okay no don't take your time so I have several questions um this project started three years ago and I know they didn't have correct
permits when they started it I'm pretty surprised to know that um three years later this is coming up when they started the work they started building the addition framing it in April of 2023 so miss Berger we this is time for
for question it's a question oh it's a a question on the just to be clear it's a question wait it's a question on the planner's testimony yes okay and later later on if you want to make a statement y you we get you back for that but it'll
you in okay so I'm trying to understand I know you said that there was a mistake in the math that this is now three years later after or two years after the house was built that this mistake is being found
um but the the sidey guard setback should have always been noticed how how could that be that it wasn't noticed and I know you said 9.2 but where the addition is on the plans that pulled up on the town website shows 9.1 the the plans I relied on showed
9.2 my my testimony is irrelevant of the history from my professional planning standpoint the existing house stands at 9.2 feet the proposed uh the existing addition exists at 9.2 feet neither
condition I think causes a substantial impairment to the Zone planner zoning ordinance or the public good so um I'm I'm also trying to understand I I understand that it's a
Township requirement that existing structures be shown on plans um and I'm trying can you explain why features that are in the process of being constructed or on the variance request are not on the plan for example um I know we talked
about the carport they've also just added a circular ular driveway there is a cinder block structure in the back that looks like a gazebo they added a retaining wall and stone steps and none of that is listed on the plan um so how
can the board make a decision when these things are not even showing on the plan I I can answer that because that has nothing to do with the application that at the end end of the project the applicant has to do an as built so anything that is on the site will be
presented to the mun I pulled this up from um the information about the planning meeting and it says a second copy of your survey survey should be marked with outlines of your proposed addition and and everything in there so that's why I'm asking if it's not on
here the bill the carport is has been submitted and the circular driveway and the structure in the back the circular driveway doesn't have to be on that until everything is completed well what about the other structure in the back if if and when that is actually part of the project that will on a final it's there
will be on a final site plan is not not before the board for it doesn't trigger any decision by the board and the applicant's driveway was included on the plans the circular driveway yes it's not on the plan on the website the driveway was
submitted okay um also um some other questions I have regard the outdoor construction um because I know when when that was was built as I said they they I know that
they did not have the proper permits um but um in the denial for this application Mr maruchi who is um with Town engineering um had a memo attached that he wrote about submitting surface drainage permit applications
verifications of the scope of work etc um and that Al so I wanted to know what if you know what the status of this is is this available for review and he also called out an open pending lot surface drainage permit um and I wanted to know
if you know the status of that because okay Miss Berger you have to you know I know this is you know you don't uh for members of the public when they ask questions it has to be on the on the testimony provided by that particular
witness I know you may have many questions about exper sorry wait you have may have many question questions about how this got to where it is today uh but those questions are really not appropriate for the planner the
questions to the planner are based on his testimony if you have questions about um the history and and and whatnot uh that really is not part of the question the planner and once again uh as the chairman said if you want to make
um a comment at the conclusion of testimony you can certainly do that and in include all of those concerns that you have but those are not really proper questions for the planner himself well my my question is as a planner can can this be approved when these things that
the township engineer had said should be done before it's approved Mr W I'd like to address that if if you agree go ahead if you want to sure this is an active construction project the applicant has the opportunity to satisfy
all of the township Engineers conditions so you know it's not that this F this project is is completed this is an ongoing project and the app can certainly must satisfy all the conditions of the township engineer Co will not be issued until
it's but that's for the engineering and construction Department not these ladies and gentlemen these people here your your fellow citizens decide whether or not the applic approved but in denying it that's what he wrote let me let me add in okay that there's standard
language that's in all denial letters including surface drainage and other things these are things that the applicants the builders have to comply with it's not part of our review it's engineering's review but the our town is very good about making sure water from a
project doesn't increase a project doesn't increase the water flow to your property so they have to prove with engineering calculations based on surface area and everything else and slopes how much water will be going into your property
based on what they built and if they don't satisfy that they have to have dry Wells or other mitigation so there's a whole series of things that happen that are T that no one sees it's not on the website it's not available you can go in and talk to the building department and I'm sure they will discuss and explain
further but I think what people trying to explain and not trying to blow you off is that it's not part of what we're doing today so if otherwise we would never get out of here so it's simply for the sidey yard sitb setback and the habital floor area so that's what's
before us that's what we can legally respond to so I hope that helps you with a little explanation I know it's very confusing not having things on the plan relate to to how everything is going to work right right we're trying to explain how but you could always go into the you
know to the building department and sit down and some concerns and they'll address it you're a citizen and I've speaking with them for three years now okay so all right that's what I hopefully helped a little bit does anybody else want to make any
have any questions can I can I just ask Miss burer which side is 42 on are you on the cport side or the other side the 9.2 side yeah okay okay does anybody in the uh public want to make a
statement please come forward and now you have to be sworn in hold it what was that we have a proper on a photos he wants to hand in some photos he said I was going to talk to him just make sure he has he has photos he wants to go
okay uh all right let me just let's do this first okay you want to make a statement right so let's let's get you sworn in and then we can deal with what you have okay you swear firm that you're going to tell the truth for the zoning board
tonight I do yes okay can you please State and spell your name for the record my name is Mark Berger m a r c b r g e r okay and your address sir 42 whichwood Road okay so in addition to your comment you want to present present certain
photographs to the you want to present certain photographs to the board for them to consider in terms of the uh uh in terms of this application correct in terms of my ask you got to get to in terms of my
ask for in connection with this application yes all right and all right so do you have can I we got a propess to what he's talking about my ask I don't okay well wait wait wait that's you beat me to it um so you're going to make a a statement
about the application and the photos are related to the application correct photo the photos are related to the application and the ver and the and the project generally okay okay now are the are these are these photos that you took
correct okay and um all right well Mr barbula has not had the opportunity to take a look at these may I take a look why don't you take a look I would object that he wants to show you photographs from 2022 to the current showing various construction that's not
before you you're you're you're here to so just so we're very clear had a pro had zoning approval had construction approval went to amend that application the municipality indicated although
you're here for the right side we oops we missed here's the left side that we have to address they immediately came to town got the paperwork and that's what's before you correcting an error because
zoning doesn't zoning can make an error but you still have to comply with it that's one of the few areas of the law that's very interesting a municipality can make an error in inspection or zoning it doesn't change your obligation to comply with the law that's why we're here what went on with the
construction is prejudicial and has nothing to do with why we're here so I would I would say that that those photos should not be admitted well we haven't maybe we're jumping the gun a little bit why don't we get from Mr burer let me
just understand this you're submitting those photos with the profer okay with the point of making uh a point with regard to the left side setback and the side the
habital floor area variances they're requ requesting or are those because you are commenting on the history of the construction on the site because if you're commenting on the history of the construction of the site and if you're
showing pictures the history of the construction of the site that's not proper before the board if you're showing pictures relative to that site relative to those two variances it's a different story it's relative it's
relevant to the variance and conditions that I'm seeking for the granting of the variance in addition much like Mr Sherman's request as far as the
garage there are certain aspects of what's been built here in the on the board of the house that is abing my property line that are relevant to us okay what why don't we do this Mr burer why don't you before we distribute the
photos why don't you go ahead and make your statement and then we'll we'll we'll see where we go with the photos okay and just make sure you get close to the mic so we want to hear you okay sure all right I'm here to express serious
concerns about the requested variance for the north over's property for over two and a half years the project has turned our sight line into a Perpetual construction overview with repeated violations of property rights Town regulations and permit conditions their
act now ask forgiveness object the the I don't usually object when to have residents come forward to concerns because you know what I don't I'm not living here he is however what he's reading to you now is putting before you a a history where where where is he
called the zoning officer did he call the building inspector is he calling wait wait wait wait wait all of which are not time out okay okay all right we Mr burer is you and I are
members of the bar and we are we are trained M of the bar does not matter okay Mr he's a member of the public despite his background he could be uh sanitation worker he could be the king of England doesn't matter he's a member
of the public right you and I are here uh as attorneys on this application um and I would you I understand your point Mr boua um I think it's up to the board to decide whether or not they want to
hear the statement you know statements from the public our statements for them public right okay uh it's a nextdoor neighbor I think he does have uh a point that he would like to make um that in a
maybe uh convoluted way uh will um end up coming to end up coming to The Landing zone so that's that's I I think chairman my suggestion to the board is to allow Mr burer some leeway I
understand Mr is concerned but that's that's quite all right because my objections on the record I have no objection as long as my objection is on the record to may be part of it you know and I'm sure the board knows that items set about with other people do mean
nothing unless you could had those people here before you uh but my my objection is there so I don't have a objection to the board going forward whatever they decide is appropriate because you are the ultimate deciders this anyone on my board have any objections with hearing
this I concur please continue I I'm interested in just sharing some history for purposes of setting a context for the final in final request it's not I'm not talking about that the history in
and of itself Bring It On All Right the act now ask forgiveness later approach has resulted in they are regrading our land to direct water and to direct water flow onto our property installing drainage pipes on our
property without permission and deviating from approved plans you know the standard for granting a variance is one of undue hardship as you all know it should be it should not be hardship created because one didn't comply with permits and regulations in
the first place I before granting a variance we should get a complete and accurate site plan including the circular driveway carport and so forth that my wife mentioned enforcement of compliance no new construction or
modifications occur outside the approved permits and a clear project completion timeline this cannot remain an open-ended peac Mill project disrupting the neighborhood indefinitely it should be done by this
fall specific issues to date in mid 22 the North regraded their entire front and back Lots including unauthorized use and regrading of our property 10 to 15 ft wide all the way up our back property they created improper
drainage channels specifically directing water onto our land as reflected in the application they intentionally declined to mark their property with Stakes prior to regrading the land but there was no question that they were on our property
you'll see that you'll see that noted on the application itself that there was a specific declining to get Stakes so Mr maruchi sent Township engineering Personnel to review um and ultimately mediate this
point and that's when the town discovered the permits filed did not extend to the scope of the work um we also we have privacy and safety concerns there it's in a few different categories nerve noise from the three
new air conditioning units that are on the side of the house that are within that 9.2 I know the township does not have air conditioning restraints I know that but there's still going to be noise under bedroom windows
all right how are we going to mitigate that with there are new lights and a camera on the side of the house facing our house there's no legitimate rationale for a camera where there is neither parking nor a walkway in fact
the only real use is to watch us it was creepily apparent when the north overs called out to us on a couple of occasions via their ring camera while we were walking on our own property we also note and these appointed at my house uh and have access to look in the bedroom
windows should they decide to do so if they re aim it um we also note that there are the new windows on the in the second Flo story that um uh were discussed in the plan these lights are going to be coming into
our wind into our bedroom windows um if ever floors are built there they could look right into our bedroom windows and lastly there's a whole line of trees as I mentioned a whole line of trees up and down the property I'm specifically concerned about the safety
because the trunk of the Tree closest to the road is right on the right of way cut set back naturally if the leaves grow if and there are branches sticking out into the right of away you see you'll see in the pictures that all these trees they're like spruce
trees or junipers they'll form a wall I will not be able to see the road I will not be able to see the traffic there's a big boulder set up right at the end of the trees um a couple of feet into the right of way that's not a way to handle it I would like that end tree removed
because it's it's creating a hazard for my family pulling out of my driveway completely unnecessarily it's designed to fail it's designed to fail because because the branches themselves are already in the right of way all right so it's blocking my view and as the Jun as these trees grow it's just going to
create a wall where I will not be able to see what's coming up the street um we're also interested again in the structural inconsistencies the undocumented cons undocumented construction elements that have to appear apparently at the end
date let me get let me let me get with all this as background let me get to my ask all right no further constructions without the permits denials of additions requested after the the plan is is submitted they're on and on routine inspections to
ensure compliance again you've seen you've heard all these things do it now ask questions later get permissions get forgiveness later we we have to have some sort of level of compliance some sort of level of of inspect periodic inspections and a
mandated deadline for project completion with oversight by a professional contractor fall of this year seems reasonable for for the structure and the grounds in addition to the removal of that camera and addition to the removal of that
tree you know uh Mr mari's points about the the the permits and so forth may let them be at the end let but they have to be complied with I think there should be you know we just have to be checking up on this you can't you can't allow this
to go forward unchecked you can't subscribe to the do it now ask for forgiveness later thank you thank you does anybody else in the public want to make any statements does anybody on the board
want to make any statements I'll make a statement so there's a little bit of em Motion in the room um I thank the burgers for coming and for speaking their peace it means a lot to us we really like when the public comes and expresses what they
feel about any application and to the north overs thank you very much for coming um I think what is in front of us tonight are two variances I'm sorry yes could I just interrupt you one minute that Mrs KH I'd like to address what he
said before you makeig comments sure so do you an idea please thank you so we take BAS Bally sort of a summation first of all if the burgers have a question that they feel that that tree by the street may be blocking there we'll take
it out period will be reviewed for sight distance because a site triangle is extremely important secondarily there have never been violations so that's the other thing third point this was not we did it and
asked for permission we went got zoning got the building permit then went to amend it and they found that they had missed it originally I'm not put throwing anybody from the town under the bus people make mistakes all the time
and that's what happened we didn't go ahead and build it which happens a lot because as you know I represent a number of towns and I have one particular person who I'd love to put in a little box because he goes in he CS trees he builds and then he tries to ask for forgiveness that statement I take
umbrage by Mr burer because there's no violations and this wasn't the case this was we went in to amend the plan then they found it we're not here for that no I just wanted to make sure I wanted to comment on what he said CU four times it's my turn sir excuse me please four
times he said build and ask forgiveness that's not the case we have here so I want to let you know that we're trying to address his concern the concern about the tree is a legitimate concern and we don't want anybody to be blocked for sight so we will take if that's the case
we will remove it as far as cameras we all have the right to have our property surveilled so that's really not even part of the re so what we're looking here is very simple we found we were informed that we had problem we are
addressing the problem I don't believe that this based on an oversized lot that what we have here creates anything that doesn't completely require a approval of our c c variances it's always a problem when you
have a long-term construction but this house is almost done and that's why we're here because this was this was the last part so we we're asking that we feel that we've met the statutory requirement we want to give consideration to safety that he
mentioned because out of the other things that is a legitimate concern so we will address that so that is not an issue and I don't mean to interrupt you but I want want get it before you said that thank you just give me one second um I want to
clear up two points number one M berer there's there's no more your comment is your comment it's not back and forth so there's no more public comment at this point that's number one I can't respond to his ref no no no this is this is this
is not oral argument on an order to show cause I just want to share you the email from Yi about the violations you Mr Burger it's not that time pictures no
um Let me let me let me clear up one other piece that Mr barbula just said and I want to be clear about it Mr Barb are you saying that your client as a if the board was inclined to approve this application that as a condition of
approval that your client will review the sight lines at the end of the driveway to determine whether or not that tree should be removed right if the engineer says that it's a affects his sight line we do not want him to come out of the driveway and be and
prohibited from seeing up and down all right so your your Co would agree that as a condition of approval that's why I wanted to say it because that is out of the statements he made that is a legitimate safety concern we don't want to impose by putting we're just putting Shrubbery but if that Shrubbery causes
an issue we'll move it okay so not an I want to make sure we're absolutely clear with that and through you chairman I think uh commissioner Khan was got a ra well that's why that's M Mr Burger I appreciate it but you really you just
can't keep coming up I I'm I'm I'm sorry I I want to say this no no no it's it's favorable to them Mr Burger e even if it's even if it's favorable to me uh you can thank you uh that'll allow on the record uh but Mr Burger no I we can't we
unfortunately in this type of scenario there's a statement and then there's a statement and then that's it but I think the board has heard your concern and the floor is the Commissioners fine then thank you we we'd like the variance done
I hear you we'd like the variance given so they get the thing done M okay m m Berger why you take let me let me just let me just add this one point of order and um um some of my boards want to call be called
Commissioners um Miss barbou understands you some like Commissioners some like promote women in this work some say comrade I don't know but um but as far as uh just just something
uh informational to Mr burer if any any variance approval in this Township has a one-year sunset provision so if somebody receives approval today they have to meet the requirements of completing the
conditions of the of the variance by in Essence beginning the building of the item which causes the variance within one year so there is a sun there is a sunset provision I want to let you know that I think that doesn't completely
answer your question but I want you to know that and I think uh chairman through you you're still here the commissioner please okay just quickly I will not reiterate everything that everybody has said tonight I think that we've heard a lot um but we are here to look at two
variances we're look we're here to look at a left side yard set setback and habital floor area um as far as the sidey yard setback goes that is a that that that was an existing condition so it's not like we were going to knock the house down and you know move it you know back eight inches that was never going
to happen um again there are mistakes that are made and I get that because we all make mistakes so I understand that was an existing condition the second thing is this is a really large lot it's over 20,000 Square ft so it's in an R3 Zone and it's really the size it's almost in between an R2 and an
R3 so I'm going to say it's like an R3 and a half right um so we have to look at that as well right so that's something that we need to look at so um even with the 4117 square feet proposed when we're looking at the Double height um assuming that the north ORS aren't
going to build a second floor um it's really we're not we're really not looking at um something so egregious so um those are the two variances that we're looking at and um I will look listen hopefully someone else on the on the board has something else to say but
that that's my opinion any other statements on the board I just want to uh say that because the height on the family room is a double story and the way the windows are placed what I can see in the pictures um
just want to be mindful that the second floor is not constructed well that can be a condition of approval that that that's no issue there's not going to be it's done we're not building a second floor on and that volted ceiling yes right you can make that a condition
okay okay yeah I have another Well statement yeah I'm not sure and I defer to our our Council of your statement that anybody could do especially when you're asking for a variance that you can I don't believe you can shine a light and have lights that that can
shine into your neighbor's window you could keep somebody up all night so I think no no I I just Mr wisman I didn't say that I said anybody could have surveillance you cannot by ordinance in Livingston have you could he could he could come out and get a violation he
could have zoning go out and do a violation lights you can have lights all around your house you cannot have it Shine across your property line that's that's not the situation here the fact is that there are lights the fact is that there is a camera and all I said was that you can have you
can surveil your own property but that is a policing issue and that is not what's happening and if it is happening he can easily call up the town you have a very efficient enforcement group here and they would go out at they have to get somebody to agree to go out at night
and see whether or not there because it's it would have to shine like this across the the 10 ft that's not what we have so I'm not saying and please least I hope don't misinterpreting I said you can surveil your property so his request
and I that was in response to his request to make it a condition to remove surveillance cameras I appreciate that clarification so you're saying he would have remedies to the extent first of all we're not we're not shining on his property want to keep our property lit for safety and security purposes and I
can assure you that we will not have Pro the lights shining across into his rooms not happening that he he does abs absolutely as well as any other person the other neighbor too would have absolutely a right if the lights are shining across that's a violation and
you have a lot of violation you you got a very busy municipal court for zoning approvals yeah thank you than you're welcome any other statements from the board anything else you want to add no I've added everything I want to add I
don't want to keep you too long would someone like make a motion I'll make a motion I'll second it I make a motion to approve okay I make a motion to approve I'm sorry with the with the conditions that the uh
second floor not the volted second floor not be made into a livable uh actual constructed floor and the engineer will look at the tree to make sure that there are no sight impediments absolutely got it got better notes than I did okay yes okay Mr Kenya yes Mr horn yes
Mr Sherman yes Miss Yan yes Mr wisman yes okay Mr Beer yes okay motion carries to approve thank you Mr chairman ladies and gentlemen of board I'll go sit down and
come back again thank you all you want M Mr bub do you want to just stay here and get get oh can you take my next one yeah sure I appreciate that thank that number let me just say goodbye to my client and I will get come
right back uh a mon yes I will I will hey on you're ready thank you Mr chairman appreciate that you're welcome and just as we're getting settled I'd like to note that M Yan is stepping out for this uh
application we still have a full compliment yes how are you six trial by combat came out but he never filed a complaint what are you trying to do disconnect her don't disconnect her put
back can you hear me can you hear me does this work oh okay oops sorry I got it thank you block 3000 L 348 montgom Road application number 20257 DV Road act Builders LLC applicant
seeks approval to construct a new single family residence in the violation of the following section 17- 87 cc3 habitable floor ratio 21% allow 25.98 person proposed
4.98 percentage variance requested good evening Mr chairman ladies and gentlemen of board John barbar rule on behalf of the applicant now this one is more like your normal we have an existing Cape Cod if you over in the site you'll see you know that this
particular home is in dire need of Rehabilitation and repair I mean you could see that parts of it were actually the railings Etc were falling apart I think that this application will surely uh enhance the neighborhood and I at
this point I would like to call our architect and ask Mr wnel if he would please swear him in do you swear for tell the truth for the zoning board tonight I do okay and can you please State and spell your name for the record uh my name is Iman sedra
a m uh last name is cedra s d Mr cedra you are a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey yes yes I am and your license is in good standing yes correct and you've testified before this board probably last year about 20 times
yeah at least at this point Mr chairman uh I I know being a little familiar with Mr cedra since you know him would you I'd like to have him qualified as an architect for expert trust me before the board does anyone in the board have any questions objections regarding this witness there being no objections the
witness is accepted as expert in architecture thank you Mr chairman my pleasure Aman could you please uh go over the plans for the board and uh so that they can we can understand the nature of the floor area ratio variance that we're requesting sure um I'm going
to start with the first floor um as you see here on the right uh we enter the house from the entry porch we once we enter we have uh uh two story stair for uh on the left side we have the living room and the dining room on the right
side we have the garage uh walking toward the back of the house we have the kitchen on the left side uh on the right side we have a guest uh bedroom with its own bathroom um also we have a powder room and a
pantry um walking back we have a a on story uh family room and then we exit from the family room with the sliding door to that P you um and um the floor area of this uh first floor is
1,670 square ft uh this is the livable area the garage area is 474 um on the left side of that we have the basement the basement consists of one big open space uh is going to be used for
recreational and uh we have also a bedroom um on the right side with its own egress axis uh we have a bathroom we have a WID bar in the basement as well uh also in the basement you will see on the left side corner the front left side
corner we have the mechanical room and that has additional living space that's in our calculations yes the area for the basement is uh 1,670 um the next sheet consists of the second floor uh the second floor is very very simple consist of four bedrooms
every room has its own uh walk-in closet and bathroom and also we have a laundry room um there is a area of um 22 Square ft uh open to below and that's counted
twice uh but it's only used uh from the first floor so that's the the uh typical uh open area of the foyer exactly accordance to the Livingston that has to be counted it's counted there was a floor correct and uh can you just
address the attic has no living space for um and access could you just go because I know the board is always very interested yes we only have a pull down a steer we don't have any access to the attic just pull down steer um and also
the second floor livable area is 1,78 uh the total floor area ratio is 25% 20 5.98% which is 3,42 um also I I would like to mention that the habitable floor area which is
uh the ordinance calls for 3,520 we are below this number we are at uh 3,42 um looking at the exterior of the building um this is a Colonia style home
we have board and batt on the the second floor um and we have a horizontal um uh Hardy on the bottom level on the first floor um we going to have dark roofs I'll show you the rendering in a second
uh so the first image is the on the right here is the front elevation the one here is the rear elevation and also as you see the family room it's only single story um this this is the right side
elevation and the one at the bottom and that's the showing Ing and agress to the basement correct and um here going uh back on the numbers for the the first floor is 1,670 we have a garage of
474 uh which is 450 not counted so we take 24 uh Square ft and we add it to the floor area ratio uh the second floor is 1,700 8 with total floor area ratio of
3,42 um the next the next image is the outside of the building it's a front view that shows the the building uh we have uh dark midle roofs and the main roof will be asphalt shingle will be a dark roof as
well um you know dark uh black windows and uh we're going to have uh a stone at the base uh just at the porch area and the water table um and uh that's it that's everything oh the the attic also I want
to go over the height of the now measuring from the attic floor to the um to the roof we have 9 ft and we have a collar tie at 6 ft so you know and there is no access to the attic it
just pull down stair the attic will be used for mechanical equipment maybe some light storage so it has 6 feet at the low end and nine at the height correct uh the building height is 34 ft 10 and quarter and we still
meet meet the ordinance correct Mr chairman I submit the architect for questionings from the board does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness please are you I'm assuming you're breaking down the existing house yes we knocking
the house down uh but you're keeping the same side yards as the existing house um let's see that on the site this image here shows the existing house we have one side at
5.74 and the other side at 12.65 the house we proposing we meet the requirement of the side yards which one side we have 10 ft and the other side is 10 ft as well the easy answer is what
have what's there now does not conform in the after it's completely conforming only variants we're asking for is the far so we take encroaching because if you you I'm sure you went there you so where the the side everything's falling down that encroaches so that's all going
to be brought in so it's going to be much better after condition even though it's a bigger house anybody else have any questions from the board does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness please come forward thanks um Phil
shago s c a r a o 180 e Cedar um my lot is 3,33 so my lot is perpendicular to that house I'm on facing e Cedar this property is behind me okay you said the square footage is
3402 out of 3500 I mistaken 342 out of 3,520 and the R3 is 3500 right that's the limit 3500 maximum yeah Max that's the max yeah okay um can you go back to
the uh I'm going to go over here just make just make sure they can hear you need the site or you need what I need this okay um can you scroll up a little please no just for the record he's he's looking at the site plan so
that the record is clear combination site plan survey right um so my property is is here I'm 33 I'm facing you see this my my backyard this is your Li here yes there is an iron pipe which is the
stake this is staked out here on my uh on the survey and the other stake is here this area which separates this property from my property this is not state right this is completely arbitrary we need to
determine where this is going to be location wise okay I have a copy of my survey this is this survey I don't know when the engineers going to come out to State this but
uh for the record I like to be a participant in that to find out where that where that's going to be finally St you can give me your information I will forward it on to the Builder yes because they don't necessarily have to put in metal stakes but it has to be surveyed
for final Co so if you give me your information I will forward it on to the Builder and uh they may it may have already been surveyed if it hasn't been then I'll ask them to contact okay cuz this is posted this is posted this is not public posted but I like to know
accuracy where this is going to be and if it matches my I am telling you if you give me your information okay I will forward it to them and if it hasn't already been surveyed I will ask them to please pull you or try to contact you before they do it okay okay number two
on the architect um the existing house that you're going to knock down correct here's the existing house it's being removed it's being removed it's knocking down right okay so that's that location I mentioned earlier um the difference between that and that
it looks like it's going to be set back about 20 ft is that is that true is compared to what the driveway is it's going to be further back 20 ft the set back here is 31.7 so it's going to be deeper in the
lot let's see the other one the other one the set back is 53.4 right so it's deeper it's going to be 20 ft and on this side you will have more sitb back as opposed to the existing building where you have 5.74 right you're going to have almost
double that on this side so it's going to be more in and that way okay so it's going to be 5T and that way okay so but if you look here do you see this yep that's the almost like that's not me that's my that's my next door neighbor that house is going to be facing my next
door neighbor I understand so I'm going to be facing a driveway exactly so you're all clear the actual this is a better situation than what you have here where where the house en approaching in your 3,400 ft at 3500 I know be that great but can you go back to the
rendering so just 98 Square ft short do you want to see the floor plans or you want to see the outside I want to see the outside so this is just Aesthetics static that's not your house because again we have a property line yeah that's the just the static and I want to find out where this is going to
be exactly cuz we're talking um yeah this this is just to present the house that's it okay so this is going to be further back 20 ft and More in right okay and to face my next door neighbor okay that's all I have thank
you very much for that thank you does anybody else in the public have any questions I have a copy of my survey in my pocket mhm oh I'm sorry didn't mean to turn my back no go ahead I just wanted I
wanted to get his information people turn their back on me all the time I'm used to it no I yeah but it's not it's rude I didn't want mean to turn my back on any I just why 3402 is that like for a 3500 we always like to keep it under
the number so we're we're not completely maxed out that's a long line but if you like us to go to the 3520 we're fine with that 35 I know I had my house done 10 years ago and it's 23 2400 Square ft so
I like i' like a backyard are a we thank you thank you committee okay does anyone in oh no you have work gu sorry right sorry back back to you I got to the end of if there's no other members of the public at this time I'd
like to call my planner Mr W when you're ready Mr graviano do you swear for tell the truth for The Zing board tonight I do okay and we already have Mr gravana qualifications on the record record we had already qualified I think we can accept them you didn't get an email not
not in the last 15 minutes no I think he didn't do anything to lose his license in the last half hour not yet all right Mr gr can you go forward with the uh the zoning requirements and land use justification for this far variance if you would please certainly the applicant
is before the board this evening for a specific piece of property known as block 3000 lot 34 on the municipality's tax maps um the property lies within the R3 res residential Zone uh the existing lot contains 13,956 ft are required in the zone this
is an existing condition not augmented by this application uh the applicant is before the board tonight requesting one single variants related to the habital floor area ratio uh 21% is required 25.98 per is proposed um as indicated in
Mr cedra's testimony this is a dwelling which is under the max habitable floor area of 3520 ft coming in at a little over 3,400 ft at 3,42 Square ft um as you heard in
previous testimony this is an application which uh rectifies deficient side yard setback situations uh 5.74 exists on the one side with a combined of 18.39% for this lot by ordinance I would
also like to note that the applicant is uh extending uh the front yard setback to meet the Zone requirement and is not taking credit for the uh average which could be done uh by code I would also like to note that the applicant's rear
yard is 888.259.3826 uh looking at the habitable FL area ratio variants obviously the proof is whether the site can accommodate the incle uh floor area ratio uh certainly the applicant meets all required setbacks and coverage requirements uh
will be adding storm water management to the property as well as having adequate off street parking so with all those factors combined the site can certainly accommodate the applant request uh for an increased habitable floor area ratio uh certainly advances purposes of zoning
of the municipal land use law specifically purpose a promotion of the public health safety morals and general welfare purpose G sufficient space and appropriate location for a variety of residential uses to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens then lastly Mr ced's
impeccably designed building certainly creates a desirable visual environment um so the board certainly has uh the positive and negative criteria being satisi satisfied to Grant this variance the testimony the planner to the board
does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness so this this is an easy summation we're making a bad situation better we're getting it to meet front
yards side yards it's much more desirable than I'm sure you saw what the house looks like now I was a little surprised when I got out of the car and saw that the side was full ping down so I think that this is uh what based upon Nick's testimony all of the criteria of
the uh special requirements for PR ratio have been met I would ask that this board approves same thank you so much okay and just checking does anybody in the public have any statements to make none does anybody in the board want to make any
statements does anybody want to make a motion I'll make a motion second approve second any motion Mr positive outweighs the negative Mr second okay Mr Sherman yes Mr horn yes
Mr Kenya yes Mr CH is not here M joh Mr Mr wisman yes okay Miss Khan yes and Mr Mr Beer yes okay motion carries thank you Mr chairman ladies and
gentlemen of the board appreciate your consideration I appreciate that you took me uh one at the other I get on the road which one do we take we go back to the which one we fin fin that we got to go back to
the No No but Mr wisman is okay alternate number two Miss so fore on the previous application 2025 7-3 yes
yes thank you sorry we over rep okay block 503 Lot 2 104 sorry 104 Buford Avenue application number 2024 73- V obina and Stella oku yeah okay job
uh application seeks approval for a first floor and second floor addition in violation of the following section 17- 87 bb4 habitable floor area 3220 Square ft
allowed 4,92 ft proposed 872 square feet variance requested perfect hi there hi good welcome AB board yeah um my name is um OBU but I go by Obi um I am the
applicant um I own the property with my wife Stella who is here um so I'm happy to be here this evening um so I guess I would start with um saying obviously I've been in Livingston um you know for the last 13 years or so you sing right
so you know it's a little weird because normally we we just got used to an attorney who can speak freely unfortunately uh attorneys just can drone On and On We're known to do that but when you're going to you're going to provide testimony we have to s you in okay all right happy to do you swear for
and tell Truth for the zoning board tonight I do okay now even though you already gave us your name just for the record can you please State and spell your name again okay yeah so it's Oba first name OB i n n a uh last name is o j u k wuku okay please proceed sir thank you
very much Mr W so as I was saying um been living Livingston now for the I guess last 13 years um in on 104 bford with my family um and um we've kind of come to a point where we we uh feel that you know obviously it's an older house
built in 1957 um it has you know all the trappings of an old house energy in efficient all sorts of things that actually at this point needs improving so we decided to kind of do the work and actually improve it and kind of make it
modern which is and I'm sure we're going to get into it but it's it's more in line with everything that's been happening on bu a lot of new development ments a lot of new improvements there so I think we're hoping to kind of you know move up and make the house a little bit modern um from the 1957 where it was
originally built with all sort of additions that were were made to it so with me here today is my architect uh Mike duster um so I would also kind of call Mike as the expert witness who's going to help me through it and then I also have an exhibit that I also talk
through that I like to kind of walk the board through when the time comes so um I guess Mike um how does walk Mr wo you got a swean yes you swear for and tell the truth for the zoning board tonight I do all right
can you please yeah you probably you're much taller than the last guy so you're going to have to get close to Mike and state and spell your name for the record Michael doer do t r all right uh Miss doer can you just uh quickly give us your
qualifications sure I'm licensed in uh New Jersey and New York work um I've testified on numerous boards um West Caldwell River Edge Philipsburg Irvington name a few um I forgot I have a dual Masters I have a masters in architecture and a Masters of Science
and sustainable design and uh your licenses are all up to date they are all up to date and just uh where did you get your uh degrees from uh the Catholic University of America great uh does anybody on the board have any questions objections
going Jo this witness there be no objection the witness accepted as expert in architecture all yours thank you very much so what I'm going to show you today is essentially what you hav before you
um I'm going to start high level at site plan and then work my way through floor plans as well as elevations so if you refer to page sd01 you will see our lot uh which is 104 Buford Avenue in
Livingston we are lot two block 503 we are within the R4 Zone uh bless you our specific lot is 100 ft wide by 200 feet deep so it's a 20,000 foot lot um which is double the
required lot for our Zone um even within the first 125 ft we have 12,500 ft which is still above the required minimum so the Cur the residence as it currently stands I'm going to try to
zoom in for you is an existing Cape with a garage on the right hand side and there was a a a narrow two-story addition to the rear of the structure so we are proposing to fully
renovate the the entire first floor as well as add an entire second floor to the existing footprint we are also going to be increasing our footprint by 259 square
feet so overall um you'll see our new addition space is to the rear of the home it is this cross-hatched area so tonight we're seeking relief from the maximum habitable floor area requirements the specific Zone has a maximum of
3,220 and as our design currently stands we're sitting at 4,92 so we are 872 square feet above the bulk schedule requirement um I will note that our
design is compliant with every other bulk schedule standard so if you look on the bottom right of your page you'll see our minimum lot area is compliance by double our lot depth of
125 we're at 200 ft our lot width is 75 we're at 100 ft uh our setbacks we are going to essentially be matching the footprint so we are not going to be intensifying or or making worse any of those conditions um our building height
at the proposed is going to be 32.25 ft our building coverage we're well within the 25% that is allowed as well as the only one as well as our um habitable floor area ratio the only variance that we are looking for like I said is the
max habitable floor area uh I would like to to bring to the board's attention that by adding our second floor we are not making the width of our building any wider or the depth of our building any
deeper so with that I will um we'll go to sd02 and I will walk you through our floor plans so we're going to start off at the basement level there's our stairs coming down it leads us to a nice open space you'll
also see a utility room here with a full bathroom and a guest bedroom with a obviously with an egress access the proposed square footage we're we're proposing you can see is this small L shape right here everything else is going to be above the existing
footprint uh the small L is actually going to be a walkout for the basement level if you refer to sheet sd03 you will see the first floor plan we have a new front Portico here
leading into a double height foyer space to our left is a formal living room there's a small pantry below the kitchen area in the middle of the floor plan we have a kitchen area and above that is our proposed living room space we have a dining room to the center of the of the
space as well as guest Suite on the bottom right hand section the garage is actually the exact same size as the existing garage so that'll be existing to remain we will just bring that up to current code we're going to alter the roof on that
coming to the second floor we are proposing four bedrooms one being the master suite so on the right hand side you will see two bedrooms with a Jack and Jill bathroom there's going to be one hallway bathroom as well as a hallway laundry
room on the bottom left you will see the Master Suite on the top of the page you'll see a bedroom with a walk-in closet and there is an office space because ever since covid office space has become a premium on homes um I will point out there is going
to be an attic pull down um the attic has no windows The Attic will not be usable square footage it is solely going to be used for limited storage potentially uh rtu unit up there going to sheet
sd05 you will see the exterior elevation um the homes are going to be clad with a thin stone veneer as well as a stucco the roof will be uh asphalt shingles with some small standing seam metal roof details um the as I previously stated
the max Building height is 32.25 feet um with that I can I can lead it back to to to my client Obie or if the board has any questions I can does anybody on the board have any
questions for this witness I please thank you um I just it's like a question comment actually I just want to confirm so you're basically building on the existing building footprint we are going to be utilizing the existing Foundation because in the
back you have you know it's sort of cut out a lot so you're just going to fill in that space there's going to be a small addition of I want to State it correctly uh 259 square feet of actual addition okay and then you're going up though you're raising that be that'll be on two heights that is correct and then
the height the seal the roof height is what like between the attic space and the and the roof height like just it's a low it shouldn't be that much because it's only 32 feet so it's only 32 exactly right okay so it'll never be habitable floor areait yeah but I just want to make the point just to make sure again I I
apologize if I speak out of T because I'm an expert in that sense but but the point about the the addition because this was something that I was very particular about that it's not going to be an exterior addition it's almost like it's it's actually happening
within the the um I call it like an interior within the footprint so it's not going to lead to any like you're building on the outside and is not going to require like a new a new setback or any of those things it's not going to alter that so we actually spend time kind of trying to think about where
we'll get that and and the other point I I'll make you know even though maybe people think it's not important to make it I actually also um when my kind of designed is the first time I I made the point about having that interior addition and the main reason why I
wanted it was because of that work out to that to that basement and that for me pull back there sorry you have the pool back there right so that yeah so allowed allowed the work for me it was more like a safety issue I I was always very
concerned that look you know if you're if you're kind of stuck in there and something or even if you have like an emergency and you have like emergency responders do they have like an easy in and out to that place I felt that that was going to be if we're going to do this why don't you kind of capture and cover something like that so that was
one of the reasons why I I can of push for that I just want to bring that up I think think without that all that might be maybe we wouldn't have been asking for that but I I feel like it's it's pretty important and helpful and and good and I just have one other question
comment so this is a large lot again another large lot and again it's like a our three and a half right so you're looking at a very large lot and you have a 200 foot deep prop property um so it looks like this it looks like this just
build fill filling in the existing space and going up it looks like it does fill the fill the space exactly and actually I have some of my exhibits to that point exactly I I try to do um a little math um on one of my exhibits where I can essentially looked
at the the lot size and I looked at the required lot size across the firm and I just like a little regression right um and I said look if I and and I can show it because I I did the math if I can if we actually take a 20 ft 20,000 ft um
you know uh lot and put that in the same curve it would actually it will actually support based on the ma that I did about 4,100 or something like that uh Square fet house so I just essentially just thought about it from that cve and it
it's just not um and we're asking for based on that regression we actually asking for um a floor area that is lower than that what the regression implied um and I can point that out I walk through thank you thank
you I have a question um just going back to the the building height just because the numbers don't seem to work um I know you have the 3235 for the height but if you start at
the uh you're back on the sheet you're on yep back there she five yep so like I know you start at like 9 feet 8 and a quarter inches till you hit the first floor and then 9 ft another foot another eight you're other the way up to almost 28 ft and you're saying it's only at
3235 and with an 8 over 12 roof I can't see that being just about 6 feet um so your this nine is actually to the top of the concrete slab that's subgrade so the the the dimension is coming off of the approximate
grade so that's only 6 feet not 17 I I can easily you know make that adjustment but to you know to ensure to the board that we are below that Building height do you know what the attic height is a better question off the top of my head I I do not um if
there's a certain number that you would like me to achieve I can easily adjust the pitch to achieve that but I think the key point on the Artic again we talked about this and again I'll be very you know the I bought to kind of listen to a lot of the the
things that you know prior um you know applications have come before the board I see that the there's a lot of importance and I may not know the fully the reason why just to be honest but I know that there's a lot of um f you know um focus on the Arctic and use I can
guarantee you the Arctic is not meant to kind of be turned into anything where anybody's going to leave or anything so whatever the height is if we have to put that as a condition I'm happy with that but it's not going to be turned into something else like that was not I I I took that away from listening to the
board are you willing to make that a condition of approval that won't be aable space Oh yes absolutely I I'm I'm happy I I I listened and to that away anybody else have any questions anybody in the public have any
questions for this witness OB would you like to present your exhibits no I have yeah okay I think we're good um okay does anybody in the public want to make any
statements anybody on the board want to make any statements anybody in board want to make any a motion I'll a motion to approve second with the the motion to approve is with the condition of approval
space in the correct absolutely Mr Kenya yes who was second one Mr hor Mr horn approved okay uh Mr Sherman yes Miss Yan
yes Mr wisman yes M Khan yes and Mr Beer yes thank you appreciate it thank you so miss so now that we're back at the this has been we we've been we've been doing
a little ping pong tonight with board members coming on board memb now which application we doing you're not miss sudol is not voting on anything else because we're at a full compliment but you can participate
okay block 3203 lot 28 19 B moral Drive application number 2024 76- re John no and Jean Kim application seeks approval for to for the first and
second floor addition in violation of the following section 17- 98 C2 front yard setback 50 50 ft required 48 ft proposed two feet variance
requested 170 d87 BB3 habitable floor area 3520 ft allowed 3807 Square ft proposed 287 ft variance requested 17087 cc3 habitable floor area ratio 21%
allowed 25.3% proposed 44.3% variance request it all right just for the the record do we have uh the applicant here tonight just have your name for the
record sure my name is John no uh first name j o hn last name no no o okay and so Mr no you're going to be presenting uh your uh expert architect tonight right U yeah my architect will be
presenting on my behalf okay all right um all right yeah sure figure to get to it all right okay it's getting late though okay uh do you swear for tell Truth for the zoning board tonight I do okay can you please
State and spell your name for the record yes Daniel dubinet d a n i a l last name dubinet du b i n TT okay and Mr duvet if we can briefly have your qualifications on the record yes uh master's degree
NJIT 1995 I got my license 2001 current and still in effect check my emails and I presented before this board and others in Essex County does anyone this board have any questions objections regarding this
witness there be no objections the witness accepted as expert in architecture and yeah well you know what Mr no just in I'm not sure if you're going to provide any testimony but let's just swear you in just just in case do you swear for and tell the truth for the zoning board tonight I do okay all right
uh so um stanette thank you so much um I actually told myself I was going to speak very slowly and clearly and go through the plans in in uh because normally I I tend to speak very fast and kind of get right to the point so in the
uh in the effort of time I'm going to talk really fast and explain the project as quick as I can um this is a very interesting application we require two variances one is for the front yard setback 50 ft is required 48 ft is
proposed it's a twoot violation and the reason we need that is our front staircase when you walk in the front door you hit the front staircase and it's really Steep and we look for other Solutions so the best solution we can come up with this let's pull the uh
let's pull the front of the house out two feet to allow some extra space I'm sorry I can't be like this too good so this is the portion of the this is the portion of the reason we need the front yard uh front yard setback
variants is to allow us to have a slightly bigger foyer so we could have the door open up and we could increase the the tread depth on the stairs make them not so Steep and so we see there's a very little impact to that so now we have two
other variances as a result of this uh addition renovation to an existing home and uh so I guess I'm jumping ahead but what we want to do and if I I'd like to i' I'd like to show you our existing
floor plan so it's a very modest house um it's a B level so what happens with the B level is the lower the lower level which is 7 fo7 counts as F and all our living spaces on the first floor or up half
flight so you enter in on a midlevel Zone and you either go down to the activities that are kind of commen uh commensurate with a basement and you go up the stairs to the living level and on the living levels kitchen
dining room and living room and three bedrooms one bath and we have a very very small garage at less than 10 ft wide so part of the project uh is to expand the garage to get a two-car garage on the first
floor and expand the living level and the living levels on our first floor and we're basically asking for three bedrooms two baths and a powder room and expand the first floor to
accommodate sensitive okay here's our proposed second floor and again it's very modest in terms of what our ask is uh we had three bedrooms and one bath uh the nose would like uh
the primary bedroom suite so we have uh the primary bedroom suite and two kids bedrooms and a shared bath and we would like a bigger kitchen bigger dining area and we didn't have a family room so we'd like to add a family room if you look at
this uh addition renovation all by itself it would not need the f a habitable floor area but because the lower level counts uh and the basement counts uh that puts us over and so we're
here tonight because we had two options one is to build the addition on peers so the entire first floor would be supported by peers and that space underneath wouldn't count as F and we looked at that but we've already got uh
the space underneath the deck that we're not using so be kind of an unusable space but yeah we would need the F so we the ask is to build Foundation walls around our uh proposed Edition and that brings our f up so the hardship in this
application is really the architectural style so uh having inherited a by level if it was a ranch and we had a basement basements don't count um other ways to expand uh a by level might be to rip off the roof and add a second floor and I
seen those and they're three story looking structures so this seemed like the right way to expand the existing home um and ask uh for the deviation for the F variances we are we
are asking for so you have your habitable FL area ratio which is 3520 Max allowed and we're looking for 3807 we're 200 87 squ ft over what's allowed again if I remove the basement or the
lower level uh we would not need habital floor area the percentage uh Max allow is 21% proposed is 25.3 7 it's a violation of
4.3% we got a 15,000 ft lot and 15,000 ft is the requirement but what makes this site in this project project so uh special is the location and I'm going to let the planner talk about why this location so special and why we think
that the site can handle the additional F and the massing and I just want to show the board if I may I'm going to jump to our and skip over our well this is some
site contacts I'm quite sure the planner will talk about it but this is the this is our subject property 19 balur and you see the adjacent home I I I personally measured so I have uh after the Project's complete we'll have 37 ft
from John's house to the neighbor's house which is a lot of open and airspace uh the neighbors who are adjacent in the back is over 150 ft away and they we have no neighbor to the right and we're on a end of a dead end
Street okay these are renderings that my office did so we took a Google Earth image and we are portraying what the house would look like and so we think that it fits in very well with the neighborhood and the streetscape and that there would be
NE no negative impact by allowing this and that the massing additional Mass works and the site can handle it so we have two views I'd like to show show you part of our project and renovation is to elevate the
roof lines for aesthetic reasons only and we would testify that we would not use the attic for future habitable space it's we have a lot of vaulted ceilings on the first floor so there'll be very small space left as a result of all our
vaulted ceilings but we would like to testify tonight that as a condition of hopeful approval that we would not uh seek to to put habitable space up in the attic so again I think it's a it's an interesting case because I think the
hardship is truly based on the architectural style that we inherited thank you does anybody on the board have any questions for this uh witness yeah I do please uh the and I assume that you're not
changing the height of that first you're calling it basement for but that first level floor is that correct yes and what is the height of that floor 7' 7 in the lower level yeah yes 7' 7 so that'll stay 7 fo right 7 foot s with obviously I'm saying obviously but I just want to
confirm nothing is below that nothing below that okay yes and since we're talking height uh I forgot to mention that the overall height of our roof will be 28 6 in so um we feel good about the massing again
about the height Jackie do we have copies of these renderings I don't see them no I I I'd like to submit that as an exhibit and okay email Jackie so um let me just be clear so you're talking
about uh these superimposed renderings that were not part of the board's packet okay so that's just this one this one page part of this whole slide um is three
slides the drawings you have additional photographs I took um and then the renderings okay so th those are all those would all be new yes okay so we'll call those A1 and we'll call it uh
supplemental architectural and uh you'll Supply that to uh the board if you can email that to uh house we would appreciate
it okay does anybody else have any questions on the board please uh I have a question um you mentioned there are voted ceilings on the second floor uh could you approximately tell us like um what rooms yes I would like to show you
thank you okay so in the bedroom I would like to elevate the ceiling so we see have a tray ceiling in the master bedroom then in the family room high ceiling kitchen uh I like to usually do
the kitchen ceiling around the perimeter at 8 and then push up the center of the ceiling to 10 ft and the existing living room we're planning on vaulting yeah um thank you okay any other questions on the board does anybody in the public have
any questions for this witness okay I think you're good next witness yeah um also have with us uh planner and he can introduce himself he was on a previous case earlier all right do you swear if F tell the truth before the zoning board
tonight tonight I do all right and um D you haven't received any uh emails since you last testified about 15 minutes ago EMA still qualified in the field of planning yes I I think we can accept you thank you um so uh again Alex DY for the
record uh D um professional planner um I did prepare an exhibit packet Council will mark this a to if I'm not mistaken you have handouts for that or you no I just have it digitally um okay email that to yep I have one hard copy
probably should give that to miss holl so much like the uh prior exhibit that um I showed the board this one is is similar context it's Maps photographs um it's 15 slides I'll Breeze through
those a little quickly um as um the architect testified this is uh an application seeking Relief by way of what we believe is a superior design a better uh alternative um than strict adherence um so we'll kind of go through that real briefly but we are seeking a
front yard setback um for 2 feet uh we have habital floor area ratio where 21% is required uh we're at 22.3% so about 1.3% over a slight uptick um with that um we have a uh habital
floor area um where 3520 ft is allowed we're at 387 Square fet so again slight uptick I'd like to tell the board we had that second means of of control here um but unfortunately we are asking for Relief on that and and I think the board will
see uh exactly uh why we're asking for that relief okay just zoom in a little bit for you so again we are in the R3 Zone we're one tax slot block 3203 lot 28 um
very similar to the previous applications location um so here we are on a that end called the sack um I'm going to butcher this balmore drive did I pronounce that right balore drive at the very end of the street we have a large open void which is what this uh
slide two is supposed to represent the Green Space uh we'll kind of go there um just a minute so tax lot here show um the board we're at healthy um standard sized neighborhood um 100 by 100 Lots pretty
consistent with the the neighborhood buildout for the tax tax lot property in question took the Drone out there um this past weekend as I like to visit all my sites essentially what we're trying to avoid here is what's happening to the rear of our site with this house as we
see on stilts um so what the architect was testifying to is we believe we can certainly come into compliance but that does come with um a cab uh putting the the addition on stilts so we believe we have a better design alternative Superior design to that um
so with that being said the the next couple slides really are going to um reflect what's happening there I want to point out to the board we'll see some larger homes with twocc car garages again not a typical of this neighborhood these are larger Lots 100 by 100 some of them have two-car garage um substantial
positive investment coming into this uh in the neighborhood by way of additions and Redevelopment so you kind of see some old older homes with the one car garage and a lot of the newer ones with uh the twocc car garage so um here we are spinning the Drone around we can see just how large that building is in the back our neighbor with the the addition
going up on stilts um just kind of spinning the Drone around um here we are looking in the rear of the subject site again looking at this uh addition uh with with the building on stilts so one of the things I want to point out is with the architect
testified to is currently where it stands today there's really no use underneath the deck we don't want to add an addition here we don't believe there's going to be functional use and enjoy enjoyment of the open space underneath we like to enclose it in add more living space as we've heard this
property does not have a basement by virtue of basement is not submerged underground by by your definition it is a story it does count so we so it's a unique architectural feet that we're trying to uh overcome by way of the older uh split levels and by levels not
having that basement so with that and closing that will give us more functionality of the of the home so going down to next couple slides we'll see there's some larger homes and some mixed uh use homes here right around the corner from the site we have
a home that went extensive renovation very cool um interesting certainly um we can kind of see we have that um addition going up if you will fairly large home another one right up the street um again is on on on bowling a and we see the
more modest contemporary homes that that you know the neighborhood um historically has had so a lot of uh investment coming in again uh another two-car garage here another two-car garage a newer home two-car garage a single so we certainly do have um different variety of housing types and
designs and scales um just a little further up street again here's our neighbor to the rear with that addition on stilts so just a few houses up we can see another house similar to what we're proposing here with the two car garage uh in comparison to what the existing neighborhood looks like um so we kind of
spin the Drone around um this slide you'll see again um uh along uh balore a a little further up um some other houses with with the twostory uh sorry two car car garage another one over here interesting enough in the background here you'll start to see there's a lot
of construction happening in in the neighborhood new development coming a line poking through the trees there so um went ahead took the Drone out there here we have some new construction coming online new housing types again here's that twocc car garage new new housing happening online just up the
street on Martin Road just a little outside uh that neighborhood footprint but nonetheless the neighborhood um is is fairly large for those that live back there um so here's a property in question I took the Drone a little higher to kind of show you the large void open space that we have adjacent to
us if you're looking at the properties off to the right so really nothing off to the right to us large open space um very transformative neighborhood a lot happening here so that we're seeking three variances two of them are related to the F slight uptick that ratio we're
at 1.3% over than what's required and for the floor area by square footage we're at 3 uh 3807 3520 is what permitted again we've heard design and testimony that this is really just encapsulating that that that negative
space that voided making that uh usable space um notably we're talking with the team um if we were to infill F some dirt from what I'm being told I'm a planner not an engineer but if we were to back fill some dirt get the grade up a little bit we can maybe count that as that that
first floor as the basement kind of skirt by the technical definitions we believe that's a lot of extra work we believe this is a superior design that the board can see what we see here um with that the variances that we're seeking the front yard setback is what we would call C2 the benefits as as a
whole outweigh any any detriment here um we believe given that we're the first house or the dead end house you know it's not the middle of the street where we're sticking out or we're super recessed back we don't believe there's going to be any visual void and in detriment from that regards um and not
continuing that line two feet in my professional opinion the naked eye is really not going to pick that up compared to the rest of their neighborhood I don't see that as a as as a substantial detriment here um also with the F the case law on that is really can the site accommodate the
additional floor area uh this is a a unique application we're not creating any veg the bedrooms that are there we're just enhancing them but we're not adding additional bedrooms but what we are adding is an additional garage space so by virtue of the site accomodating that additional F again we have large
open space to to to uh to our right um we're adding a second car garage the bedroom count remains we're just making more functional uh uh I'm sorry usable functional space um with this addition um with that being said we are um vaulting some ceilings on that second
floor to really uh help um there's no um Dormers coming out out in that regard so there's no um real habital space to the attic we have that house on grade so with that um to to confirm to the board I believe this application advances many purposes M land law particularly purpose
I a desirable visual environment I don't believe it's all that desirable for the town to have buildings on stilts it might become an issue down the road um with that being said I don't believe any other purposes in the intent of the Zone plan um have been undermined I certainly do believe we Advanced um two of the
primary goals of the master plan for improving quality life and enhancing the residential character of the community um I do not see any any detriment here with this application again case laws can the site accommodate that and I believe we certainly can by lack of having bedrooms and the increase in the
uh uh parking and drive so with that I'll conclude many benefits to the application particularly purpose ey most notably um with little to no detriments for the uh for the boards I'll conclude with that approval would be warranted thank you any uh anybody in the board
have any comments questions rather for this uh witness I have a question please hi can you just clarify I just want to make sure that these numbers are correct so on the plans you have the habitable floor ratio of 25.3% and I think you said a different
number when you were speaking because you said it was 1.3% over I do apologize you're correct I was I wrote down the notes on the old version so we're at 25.3% okay just slight upt I do apologize okay just wanted to clarify
that okay thank you I said to the wrong anybody else have any questions for this witness anybody in the audience the public have any questions can I call the audience I don't uh anybody in the public want to make any
statements anybody on the board want to make any statements I just want to say um thank you right I think uh it bilateral B levels are difficult uh to make them modifications I think to your point we see some that you know go up and up and up to the sky
and so I think what you've done um hopefully accommodates your family um but I think visually um was a well tweak to a difficult job to work with so thank you I'd also like to just add that you know also the fact that you don't have a
basement um you know it bu levels are hard just for that reason alone and yes it could have been uh another thousand whatever square foot more just of basement so um just wanted to point that
out just want to add one more thing I concur with what my colleague said but I would like to commend you on the roof height of 28.2 um I think that the neighbors will appreciate that and um it's not always necessary to go to 35 ft just because that's where you can go so I appreciate
apprciate that and um I do think that the design is um beautiful for the neighborhood and um thank you okay would anybody like to make a motion motion to approve I'll second okay
Mr Mr horn approved Miss Miss youngan yes Mr Kenya yes Mr Sherman yes Mr wisman yes
Miss Khan yes and Mr Beer yes motion carried I think that's a wrap motion to adjourn oh anybody yeah yeah okay all in favor I for