Good evening and welcome to the public hearing for the Livingston zoning board of adjustment. Today is May 12th, 2026. If you're an applicant for a D or use variance, you should be aware that such a variance can only be granted after showing that special reasons for
the grant of that of the variance exists and the variance can be granted a substantial detriment to the zoning plan of the township of Livingston. We should also be aware that in order to be granted such a variance, you will require an affirmative vote of five members of the seven member board of
adjustment. Other variances require a majority of four members to grant that variance. If you're an applicant for any variant and your variance is denied by this board, you have a right to appeal 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 objector to any type of variance and that has been granted, you too may appeal to the superior court of the state of New Jersey within 45 days of notice of decision. If you do file an appeal, I ask that you please provide a copy of your complaint to the planning
administrator, Jackie Hollis. Pursuant to requirements of the open public meeting act, also known as the sunshine law, adequate notice of the meeting was provided to the star ledger and wests tribune and a copy was also posted on the Boulder board and of the municipal building. In addition to having notice
posted, notice of this meeting was placed on the township's website. Members of the public will have an opportunity to ask questions or to make statements regarding each application at the appropriate time. When the time comes, if you'd like to address the board, please come to the front and use a microphone so we can make sure your
comments or questions are part of the record. To the members of the public, I would like to remind everyone that this board exists for the sole purpose of making adjustments to its township zoning rules. The rules are developed and affirmed by the town council. As a board, we listen to the testimony presented for each application and make
our decision based on the township rules, state guidelines, as well as rulings rulings issued by the New Jersey courts. We are very happy when the public comes forward and ask questions and or make statements. In fact, this board always encourages it. However, as
a board, we are not going to discuss how we reach our our conclusions and how or why we voted for or against an application further than it was required by law. I'd also like to remind the public that communication with board members is limited to the time when we are in session. Please do not me email
or call us. We are volunteers and it's improper to contact us outside these chambers. Thank you for your understanding. We'll now call the role. Mr. Kenya. >> Okay. Mr. Kenya here. Mr. Horn >> here. >> Okay. Mr. Sherman >> here. >> Miss Yun
>> here. >> Mr. Weisman >> here. >> Uh Mr. Beer >> here. >> And we got the quum. >> Okay. Just a quick note from our attorney. >> Okay. Just so everyone's aware, uh there
are only uh seven members of the zoning board present tonight. If you need a >> six >> six There's supposed to be seven. Wow. Okay, I caught up. I caught up. I just did that. See if you were paying attention. You were. >> Uh so there's only there's only six
members present. Uh so if you have an application that requires a Dvariance, you will need five affirmative votes of the six members. Uh so any so that everyone's aware, we will not have more
than six tonight. Uh so chair, >> yes, >> please go to the first uh application. >> Okay. Block 253, lot 1716 West Lawn Road, application number 2026-6-V. Meredith and Joshua Schwarz. Applicant
seeks approval for the first floor addition converting a crawl space on a floor on the floor, sorry, on the top floor into habitable living space and garage converted into living space in violation of the following section 170-98C2
frontier setback 50 ft required. 29.92 ft proposed uh which is existing 20.08 08 variance requested 17087 CC3 habitable floor area ratio 21% allowed
26.87 person proposed 5.87 87 person variance requested garage which is uh variance number 170-3 accessory building uh standard size 12 ft by 20 ft or 20
240 ft 150 ft variance requested. A variance is being requested for the pre-existing nonconforming garage converted into a living space. >> Okay. Uh I just uh if you can hit the button on the base there. Okay.
>> Yes, you're good. Okay. So, uh are you uh Meredith Schwarz? >> I am. >> Okay. I made a I made a big guess, but I was right. Okay. >> All right. And you're the owner of the property and you have with you your architect, >> correct? >> Okay. You can always tell the architects no ties. >> Okay. Um where's Cedra? I was he some
architects not even a jacket, but that's okay. Uh all right. So, uh, you're gonna have your Are you gonna make any statement or you just gonna have your architect speak tonight? >> Um, I'm just gonna say, you know, we >> Okay. So, if you're Let me just swear you in. >> Oh, sorry. >> That's no no worries. You're good. Do you swear for Intel truth for the zoning
board tonight? >> I do. >> Okay. Go ahead, Miss Schwarz. You have something you want to say? >> Um, I just know that you had mentioned u about why we need this variance. Um, I have four young children. Um, our house has outgrown us
or we have outgrown our house. Um, we currently have both my boys and my girls share a room. Um, it's very very tight for all of us and I'm a school counselor myself. Unfortunately, we cannot afford, you know, what Livingston has become,
but we love our community here and we we want to stay here. We're very much ingrained within the community. Um, so doing this variance and doing this in doing this work is really just going to en enhance our livability. Um, here in
town where we very much love um and my kids love and my kids um I really want to raise them here. Um so I just wanted to say that and what reason why we're doing this. That's it. >> Okay. And uh Mr. Schwarz, you have your
architect with you tonight. So we're >> Okay. So we're going to uh swear you in. >> Do you swear from tell truth for this zoning board tonight? >> Yes, I do. >> Okay. Can you just bring the mic over closer? >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> All right. And can you please state and spell your name for the record? >> Yes. It's uh Robert Puzio, Pu Zio. Uh
it's RA Puzzio Architect. Address is 785 Toro Road, Toro, New Jersey. >> Okay. And can we have your qualifications on briefly? >> Yeah. Yeah. I'm a licensed architect in the state of New Jersey for over 20 years. Uh a member of the American
Institute of Architects. Uh uh have a bachelor of architecture uh NJIT and I have testified in numerous boards throughout New Jersey including Newark Summit uh Ridgewood to say so. >> Okay chair does anyone in the board have
any questions or objections regarding this witness? There being no objections the witness is accepted as expert in architecture. >> Great all yours. >> Right. So what we took on here was u in addition towards the house when we're
trying to do as lowest impact uh possible. So we concentrated on adding towards the back of the house. The back of the house the addition is encompasses what right now is existing uh deck area and uh we're taking the sun
room and turning that into an addition. So, the addition is towards the back, 200 f feet on the first floor, and we're going over the existing uh rear of the home and uh obviously over the the one-story addition. And uh the second
story is pretty much u an attic that's being used as a second story. So, it's a story and a half. So, the impact the volume of the house will stay similar to what it is now. Uh as far as the uh
we're maintaining the setbacks uh the existing setbacks and uh uh the front of the house is pretty much staying the same. So there's going to be no u impact from the front of the street, but the rear of the house uh we're adding a
gable and uh we're adding also a dormer on one side. Uh uh this is going the the downstairs. We're uh taking out the the first floor u uh breakfast, kitchen, and the family room and reconfiguring into
an open area. And the upstairs we're uh encomp encompassing the the rent alteration of the existing uh rear bedroom and then we're uh including the new bedrooms at the rear edition.
and and look of the house is going to we're going to maintain the existing uh style and uh and uh vernacular of the home. Does anyone in the board have any questions for this uh witness? Does anybody in the public have any
questions for this witness? Anybody in the public want to make any statements regarding this application? Want to make any closing statements? >> Does anybody on the board want to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second it.
>> Okay. Mr. Horn. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kenny. Yes. M. Mr. Sherman, >> yes. >> Miss Young, >> yes. >> Mr. Wiseman, >> yes. >> Okay. Mr. Beer,
>> yes. >> Motion carries. Congratulations. Good. Thank you. >> Good luck. >> Good luck. Okay. The next one. Block6003, lot three, 115 Feltswood Drive. Application number 2026-13-V.
Zan Juan. Applicant seeks approval for a sing new single family house in violation of the following section 170-87 CC4 habitable floor air ratio 30% allowed 33.4
person proposed 3.4% various requested okay sir can you just hit the green button yeah the button on the base and just bring the microphone as closely okay >> okay >> okay uh are you Mr. and if I mispronounce your name please accept my
apology are you Mr. Uh, Juan. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, you're the owner of the property? >> Yes. >> Okay. And you're going to be testifying with regard to the application tonight? >> Yes. >> Okay. Just you got to keep your voice up so everybody hears you. Okay. >> All right. All right. Uh, let's swear
you in. Do you swear from tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. It's all right. Uh, you're right. Just keep that mic close to you and then why don't you uh go ahead and explain the project to the board.
Um yeah uh good evening everyone. Um so I'm the owner and the applicant for the residential project located at uh 115 Fwood Drive. Um so our property is located in Alpha Zone and consists of
9,633 square foot lot. Um our plan involves first removing the existing one-story house and then building a new two-story house with a full basement. Um our proposal meets all standard zoning
requirements including front side and the rear yard setbacks and also the overall height. Um we are seeking um minor variance regarding the habitable floor area ratio. The current zoning allows for 30% maximum habitable uh
floor area ratio which equals 2,890 ft. Uh we're proposing a total habitable floor ratio of 3,220 ft. Um it's uh 33.4%
ratio. Um we're requesting a additional 3.4 four approximately 303 square ft. Uh the home remains with within the maximum allowable total floor area 3,220
ft for the off zone. Um the primary reason for this requirement request is to accommodate the needs of uh a growing family and the proposed area is reasonable and modest and maintains all required distance from
neighboring properties. Uh for the attic uh the attic is for utility purpose only. It's not going to be used as a habitable living space and a standard pull down stairs uh will be installed to access to the attics. Um
yeah that's all the statement I want to make. U let me know if you have any questions. >> So sir would you uh agree with me that because of the size of your lot that because the what you were saying before
is because the size of your lot that's creating this um habitable floor area ratio condition because your lot is not as big as others in the area. Is that accurate? Um that is true. Yes.
>> Big it's bigger than allowed >> but the um >> what about the to to the adjacent properties? Is it larger? >> I think my lot is uh the third largest in that area but still >> Okay.
>> Wait. And then your your lot line to your to the front of your is that your front of your lot at the top of that picture? >> Yes. >> Okay. So that lot line towards the uh towards well towards the back is on an
angle. Correct. >> That's correct. >> Okay. and um if I may um so another can I make another statement? I'm I'm I'm just I just want to clarify those two points for the board because
want to you're seeking relief uh and under HAB floor area ratio. Okay. And um let me ask you this question. You're you're you have um you can you're parking all your cars on that
lot and uh everything that you currently use the lot for is going to be used for the the two family the um new new single family home, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. Does anyone in the board have any
questions for this witness? Does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness? >> You don't have a question, right? >> He wants you to have a question. Does anyone in the public want to make a statement regarding this application?
Do you want to make any closing statements or you're good? I assume you said everything you wanted to say. Oh yeah, I just want to say um the I guess the reason we want that uh uh extra area is because that bedroom we
added to the first floor and the reason for that is uh we already have a four members in the family. Um but we are immigrants and we have a parents living in other country in China. So they come visit us on a regular basis. So they're
old people. So having that extra living uh bedroom on the first floor will be very convenient for them because they don't have to climb stairs. Um so that's a um a very important thing for us. Uh
um yeah. >> Okay. Does anybody on the board want to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second. So have a Okay. Uh, Mr. Sherman.
>> Yes. >> Miss Yung. >> Yes. >> Okay. Mr. Kenya. Yes. Mr. Horn. >> Yes. >> Okay. Mr. Wiseman. >> Yeah. Yes. said, I'll just add a comment that I having driven around the area and
seeing that area, it does feel like given other houses that look similar to this in the area that this this lot would accommodate this use. Um, so that's why I'm I'm approving. >> Okay. >> All right, Mr. Beer.
>> Yes. >> Let me have a motion. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Block 4204 lot 13 20 Spear Drive application number 2026-15-V 20 Spear Drive LLC applicant seeks
approval for the new single family house in violation of the following section 170-87 CC4 Habitable Floor area should 30% allowed 37.5% proposed 7.5% variance requested U good evening, Mr. Chairman. Um, Mr.
Recording Secretary, my name is Ryan Kennedy from the law firm of Stevens and Lee. Uh, here for the applicant this evening. Um, like many of your cases this evening, this is a floor area case. Unlike the one we just heard though and and maybe as the board attorney was hinting at, this is an undersized lot.
Um and part of the uh discussion will be about um making the home more compatible with the neighborhood for an undersized lot. As you're perhaps used to seeing quite often, uh to my right, your left, we have our architect and planner um who I know have uh qualified many times in
in the past, but I'll um they'll be our two witnesses here uh this evening. >> Okay. So, we're going to start with Mr. EMTT. >> Yes. >> Okay. Uh do you swear for and tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? I do. >> Okay. Mr. Emir has been qualified in the
field of architecture on numerous occasions before this board. Uh your license to practice uh architecture in the state of New Jersey is current and up to date. Correct. >> Yes, it is. >> Chair, um we can accept you as an expert in architecture.
>> Thank you. Okay. Um, so what we are proposing to be built here is a two-story home with a full basement. Um, it will have and I we'll just start with the second
floor. It's going to have four bedrooms upstairs, two bathrooms or I'm sorry, three bathrooms. And then downstairs, family room, open room, family room, kitchen, a flex bedroom, which could
serve as an office or um as a bedroom, a dining area, and a small sitting area along with a twocar garage. Um and there is a small patio out the rear. um small
because we were keeping it backed in order to comply with the rear yard setback. Uh because it is elevated there that the patio is elevated. Um and it will have a full basement. Um the front of the house will have a
covered entry. Um and you know just a a nice traditional two-story home. Um, and Nick's going to go through the zoning, but it does comply with all the zoning requirements other than the the one
variance that we're asking for, which is the habitable floor area. >> And I I see you have attic access, so there'll be no um access up to the attic besides the pull down ladder. >> It would be a pull down ladder only. Yes. >> Excellent. Um, does anybody on the board
have any questions for this witness? Does anybody in the public have any questions for this witness? One down, one to go. >> Okay. >> Do you swear for Intel truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do. >> All right. Uh, even though I forgot to do this with Mr. Emmer, can you please I
apologize. Can you please state and spell your name for the record? >> Yes. First name Nicholas with an H. Last name Graviano. G R A V is in Victor. I A N O. >> All right. Mr. Graviano has been uh qualified in the field of planning on numerous occasions before this board.
Mr. Graviano, your license in the field of professional planning is uh current. You do you have to renew it soon? >> 5:31. >> Okay. So, we're the time the time is drawing near no time like the present. Mr. Graviano, uh no comment. Uh so, Mr.
Graviano has been proved as professional. >> We can accept him as an expert in professional planning. >> Thank you, board. Yeah. >> I just I just want to note uh today is the 23rd year of my father's passing. I always like to give him a little shout out on the nights I'm doing testimony.
He's the one that got me into this biz doing due diligence to see where parking lots were permitted. So, uh that's how I got into the biz. So, I always like to give him a little shout out on today when I'm when I'm out and giving testimony. >> Mayor be be for a blessing.
>> Thank you. Thank you. Um this is a very simple application. I'm not going to get too deep into it. This is a request for a D4 F variance for a specific piece of property known as block 4204 lot 13. Uh that is an undersized lot in the R4
district. This lot encompasses 8,569 square ft where 9,365 square feet is required by code. Uh the house is under the maximum habitable square footage uh limit. So, we're not requesting relief for that, just for the
F. Uh, there are a couple of benefits to this application. I'd like to highlight for the board. The first being, uh, the current sideyard setback sits at 5.2 ft. Uh, whereas 10 ft's required by ordinance. Additionally, the combined
sideyard setback uh, exists today at 18 ft where 21.18 ft would be required by ordinance. So this is a proposal that brings two sideyard setback conditions into conformance. Uh in this instance, the granting of the F varants uh
certainly could be done because the site can accommodate the proposed use uh withstanding the applicant's request uh for the F. All the required setbacks are being met. Uh the front sides and rear setbacks are all being accommodated. Uh this proposal certainly advances
purposes of zoning in municipal land use law. Specifically, purpose A, promotion of the general health, safety, morals, and general welfare. Purpose G, sufficient space and appropriate location for variety of residential uses to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens. And as you see, through the
impeccably designed building and site, it certainly advances uh purpose, eye, desirable visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangements. Uh the F variance could certainly be granted without substantial impairment to the zone plan or zoning ordinance.
Does anybody in the board have any questions for this witness? >> I think I did you mention the front yard setback? I believe you're correcting that too. Just a >> Yes. >> Yes, chairman. Good good note there. You know, it is consistent with the average, but the applicant is bumping it up to 40
feet from 35 1/2 ft. I would also like to note that I I did have the ability to do a parcel analysis of the block. Um there are uh other dwellings that are at the same square footage or or greater than what the applicant's proposing this evening.
>> Great. Thank you. Um any questions from the board? >> Anybody in the public have any questions for this witness? Does anybody in the public want to make any uh statements? Back to you, counselor. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your time
this evening. Much appreciated. Hey, does anybody on the board want to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second. >> Okay, Mr. Kenya. Yep. Mr. Horn, >> approved. >> Okay, Mr. Sherman, >> yes. >> Miss Yun,
>> yes. >> Mr. Wiseman, >> yes. >> Okay. And Mr. Beer, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Congratulations. >> Okay. Okay. Next applicant block 451, lot 167 Carlyel
Drive. Application number 2026-1 17-V, Rodak Home Incorporated. Applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family dwelling in violation of the following section 170 sorry
170-9 C2 frontier setback 40t required 35 ft proposed 5 variance requested >> Richard >> we just have one C variance here for the front yard setback 40T required the
existing set back is 36.24. We're bringing that up a foot and a quarter, so 16 in. Chairman, I thought I'd start with the planner here. We have the architect if necessary. >> Excellent. >> Okay, >> Mr. Graviano.
>> Okay, let's swear just you swear to tell truth for the zoning board tonight. >> I do. >> Okay. Mr. Graviano was just minutes ago uh approved in the field of professional planning. So >> So he remains approved. Yeah, until 5:31. I'm writing that down, Nick. All
right, go ahead, Mr. Skull. >> Yeah, remind me in case I forget. >> You haven't lost your license, I take it, to any disciplinary actions in the last three minutes. No. >> Okay. Thank you. Can you uh give the board your analysis on on this one bulk variance?
>> Yes. Um, this is a very irregularly shaped lot. This is a situation where the existing setback uh is non-conformant. the applicants generally keeping in the range of what's there today. Uh the applicants professionals did have a chance to look uh at the
surrounding front yard setbacks. The average setback is 37.61 ft. The applicants uh requesting 35 ft whereas 40 is required by code. Uh this is a little bit of a um portion of block that curves. So not only do you have an oddly
shaped lot in the front, you have an oddly shaped lot in the rear. Uh the applicant's gone through great care to design the rear and the side of the dwelling to make sure that it conforms to all applicable setback requirements. I think given the circumstances of this application, relief can be granted under
both the C1 and C2 criteria. C1 criteria due to the exceptional situation affecting the specific piece of property. Strict application of the township zoning regulations would create an undue hardship. Additionally, under the C2 criteria, uh where hardship need
not be demonstrated, what must be demonstrated that it relates to a specific piece of property? Here, the specific piece of property uh is an irregularly shaped undersized lot uh in the zoning district. Uh this proposal certainly advances uh purposes of zoning
a G and I specifically in the fact that um this is a home which you know has uh shown signs of deterioration. It was built in 1951. Uh the applicant's proposing a a dwelling which uh will be built to current codes and standards
which will be befitting of of the site and the neighborhood. Uh so both the C1 and C2 variances can be granted without substantial impairment to the zone planner zoning ordinance. >> You think the location bringing it up makes better sense than pushing it back a few feet here?
>> Yes, I think it makes rational sense. Uh the house is only 2600 square feet. So, this isn't a situation where the applicant's trying to to um overdevelop the lot. And and as I said before, the the average setback is 37.61.
And you also have curvature in the street at that location. So, all the houses are aren't in a row at that point. >> Does anyone in the um on the board have any questions for this witness? >> Please. >> Yeah. Um I'm just you know because
having visited it the all the houses are pretty close um and now it's going to come even closer. So it seemed like there was some room like another foot in the back so that you had and still be within your rear yard setback. So, I'm
curious to thinking of why why it was chosen to go a foot up, you know, which is closer than all the other houses in the area and not use that foot in the rear. That might be more of the architect's question, but um that's what
I was curious about. >> We're 35 on the dot. So, Oh, you are okay. Did I really know? Um >> if if you look at the plan, >> we're 35 on the front, not the back. You mean >> No, I'm saying if we push it back, we're going to have a rear yard setback problem. >> But you would you though? >> Yes.
>> Yeah. >> Yeah. Did I miss? >> Yeah. We're We're 35 on the dot at four locations. That's why you have that saw to foundation plan >> to to meet the geometry of the rear yard setback. I think given this circumstance
>> where the average is in the 37 range and the applicants going from 36 to 35, I think the relief's more appropriate in the front yard. What's saw cut? >> Let me just >> saw tooth meaning that there's numerous
jagged parts to that foundation to meet the rear yard setback. >> Oh, and I do see now. Oh, and you that's why you made that jagged, which I liked. Um, >> okay, I've got it. You answered my question. >> Good question. But when you look at the back when I saw it, I'm like, "Yeah,
you're really trying to meet the ordinance here." looking at the other. Yeah. >> Does anybody else have any questions for this witness? Um I I'll make a side comment on the design of the house. It's a little it is
a little cramped in the area, but I do appreciate you kept the roof small. You kind of really made it fit so it's not overwhelming the neighborhood. Um so I I I noted that and I think that was, you know, appreciated. Uh does anyone in the public have any
questions for this witness? Back to you, counselor. >> No further comment. >> Someone on the board want to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Mr. Horn, >> yes. >> Mr. Sherman, >> yes.
>> Mr. Kenya, yes. Mission, >> yes. >> Mr. Weisman, >> yes. >> Mr. Beer, >> yes. >> Motion carries. Okay. Okay. Block 3901, lot 7046 Hillside Avenue. Application number 2026-34-
ROAC Homes Incorporated. Applicant seeks approval to construct a new single family dwelling in violation of the following section. 17087 BB4 habitable floor area 300 3220
ft allowed. 3692 ft proposed 472 ft variance requested. Chairman Richard Skolnick on behalf of the applicant. This is a C variance. Also, the sole variance is on the maximum habitable
floor area on the F because this is a a more than a double size lot. The F is well under at.17 with 30 permitted lot size with 9375 in the R4. We're at 21,719.
So quite a bit extra. I'm going to do the same procedure and ask Mr. Graviano to discuss with the architect here in the cheap seats. >> Okay. And for the record, Mr. Graviano's previously sworn in. He remains sworn in and remains qualified in the field of planning.
>> Agreed. >> Thank you. Uh, you know, Mr. Skolnick uh stole a little bit of my thunder, but this is an application for an extremely oversized lot, 21,719 square ft where 9,375 is is the minimum required. Um so when
you look at this lot, it's certainly the size of two building lots, which would give you 6,440 square ft. Uh the applicant is a asking for a very respectable 3692 square ft on this very large lot. I I would also like
to note anybody who had the privilege of being at the site, this is a situation where the current house is pushed extremely far back to the lot. The applicant is pushing the house forward. The front yard setback today exists at approximately 140 ft uh from the
rightway. The applicant's coming in at 50, which will keep it more in line with the established uh setbacks of the neighborhood. Uh as Mr. Scholic also indicated we're far under the habitable floor area ratio. Uh 30% is permitted. We're at 17%. So I
think given all these factors, uh relief here certainly could be granted under the C2 criteria. Uh in that it relates to over size specific piece of property, it certainly advances purposes of zoning A, G, and I of the municipal land use law with respect to purpose A. It
promotes health, safety, bars, and general welfare by bringing that front yard setback in closer. uh conformance to the surrounding neighbors. Purpose G, it's an oversized lot, certainly sufficient space and appropriate location uh for a variety of residential
uses to meet the needs of New Jersey citizens and through Mr. Sedra's impeccably designed house. It certainly creates a desirable visual environment and creative development techniques. Uh the C variance certainly could be granted without substantial impairment
to the zone plan or zoning ordinance. I have one quick question. Um, it's obviously a very oddly shaped lot. Um, if you cut off the whole top, kind of still works, too. It's a good size lot still, right? So, the whole Yeah, the appendage. That's a good word. >> Yeah. If you cut that off, it's still a
grossly oversized lot. So, um, you know, it does add to the overall square footage, but if even if that's removed, you're far over. You're meeting F as well, >> right? That's what I want to confirm. Thank you. Anyone else on the board have any questions? >> I have a question. Uh, how tall is the
building height? >> The building height is proposed at 32.71. So, it's a little more than 2 feet under what's required by code. >> And then access will be just a pull down. >> Yes. >> There. Great. >> Anybody else have any questions, please? >> Yeah. Um, I'll say it more as a
statement so to give you an opportunity to respond on my concern. Uh my my concern here is that just cuz it's an oversized it is oversized in square footage but the act as you go down the street it looks like
a typical uh R4 although we'll get to just a few houses away it's um R3 um but the actual width is 78 only two over the minimum. So, in terms of the
community feel, right, as the community sees the house, um, you're putting a much larger house than than what's permitted and trying to use all this back unusable
unusable is the wrong word, but blocked in land that I think leads to actually like uh, I forget what it's called, like a town right away that goes behind behind there. Um, so it's like forestlike space that you're being used
to just add more square feet to the front which is the same as all the other houses. So my my fear and that's why I wanted you to address it as a planner. My fear is that you're using this back space of square footage to justify what's going to appear to the community
as a much larger house that's going to appear out of context out of context visav all the neighboring houses on both sides of the block. So I hoping I was hoping you could address that. I I must respectfully disagree with one of your
comments and that I I think the front of the house would remain the same under any if this house is meeting the 3220 I think the front of the house is going to look the same. The applicant could actually design a more imposing house by being 2 feet greater in height. So I
think when you look at it from the streetscape the applicant's accommodating this extra square footage through the depth not through the width out front. So, in terms of neighborhood context, I I don't feel that it's going to have an impact in terms of being a detriment to the neighborhood. I I also
had the ability to do a parcel analysis of this block as well. Um, as you stated, this is a convergence of the R3 and R4 districts. Um, you have one, two, three, four, five, six, seven,
eight, 10. You have 18 houses in this block that are bigger than this house that are equal or bigger than, >> but meaning a portion of which are in the R3 zone. >> Some are in the R3. Right. Okay. Just want to clarify what you were >> but I'm just saying in the neighborhood
context there are houses ranging from 3600 square f feet which are the applicants proposing all the way up to 6,840 square ft. So in terms of neighborhood context given the oversized nature of the lot um I I think the house
is certainly in keeping of neighborhood context. >> So you're saying look if it had to conform it it could just come off the back. That's not going to impact the concern here. I think when you look at many of the houses in the R4 or even in the R3 that they they look like what the
applicant proposed. So I don't think the front from the street would change whether it's 3220 or 36 and change which we're proposing. >> Right. Right. And you feel having a much on this lot using this, it's your
testimony that using the extra space in the back or because of the land size to have a much bigger house on this property is a greater benefit to the computer is a greater benefit to the
community than the negatives of >> I think a big benefit to this application is moving the house forward and making it more in line with the established setback. backs which you do have on the street. >> So I think that is a benefit that in
terms of when you drive down that street now you see that house all the way pushed back. I think now the house looks more out of place than what you're going to have with this proposal tonight. So I I certainly think this is a better design alternative than what exists today
>> and you're actually not pushing it all the way up. It looks like right just you're going to be closer to 50 feet than 40. >> We're given nine we're given an extra nine and a half, >> right? So that might soften your concerns a little bit. >> Yeah. Where does that nine and a half stand with respect to the is it still push back from where you think the other
houses are right now? Are you still set back a little? >> Give me a second. Let me see if that shows >> it's going to be bigger than these other houses. >> Mr. Sra, you want to get sworn in here? Got something to say? here. >> You could go just easier there. All
right. Do you swear truth for the board tonight? >> I do. >> Okay. Please state your name. >> Uh I meant Cedra. Uh last name is Cedra SD. >> Mra has been qualified many occasions. Mract is up to date.
>> Correct. >> Mr. May 31st. >> Okay. >> We can accept them as extra. architecture. >> Uh so the surveyor uh did an average
front study which is giving us an average sit back of 49t.1 49 ft.91 and he um he take he took the average front for the three properties on the
left and the three properties on the right. >> Okay. So, you're going to be right in line, it sounds like, because you're 49.5. Okay. >> Anybody have any other questions for either witness? >> Anybody in the public have any questions for either witness?
>> Chairman, we did speak with the neighbors. They were here before. >> Addressed their concerns. They needed to learn and uh and they went home. >> Okay. I guess you addressed their concerns. >> Well, >> all I had to do was invite them outside. I didn't even have to talk.
>> Um, is anybody in the public want to make a statement regarding this application? Back to you, counselor. >> No submission. >> Would anybody like to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion. >> I'll second.
>> Okay. Uh, wait. Miss Y. >> Yes. >> Okay. Mr. Sherman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Kenya. Yes. Mr. Horn. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay, Mr. Wiseman. >> Yes, >> Mr. Beer. >> Yes. >> Thank you for your time.
>> Thank you, board. >> Block 5301, lot 4527 Windgate Drive. Application number 2026- 24-v Carlos Javier Lear Tore. Applicant seeks approval for a second floor and and a 9
by12 deck in the rear yard in the violation of the following section. 17097 C2 frontier setback 60 ft required 53.25 ft proposed 6.75 ft variance requested 17097 C4 where we are set back
to deck 50 ft required 42.5 ft proposed 7.5 ft variance requested. Okay. So, uh you're uh Mr. Delator, who's the applicant for tonight? Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. Are you going to make a statement tonight? >> Yes.
>> Okay. Let's swear you in. Do you swear for tell truth for the zoning board? >> I do. >> Okay. Uh go ahead and make your statement then I think you have your architect with you, right? >> That's right. Yes. >> Okay. You want to make a statement before we start with the architect? >> Yeah, I can do a brief statement. Go
ahead. >> I don't have much to say. Uh so we've been living in Livingstone for 5 years now. Um renting a house and and we had uh the opportunity to buy this house. Uh we want like uh more space for the family and also for family visiting. So
So that's the main reason why we want uh ask for these varants. >> Thank you. >> Okay. And uh you have your architect tonight. So why don't we get you sworn in? Do you swear firm? Tell the truth for the zoning board tonight? Uh >> I do. >> Okay. Okay. Can you please state and
spell your name for the record? >> Deborah Jones. My company is Q5 Architects. >> All right. And I believe Miss Jones has been uh a month ago. Yes. >> In the field of architecture before this board in the past. Uh your
qualifications uh and your uh been placed on the record previously and your license to practice in the field of architecture in state New Jersey. Is that up to date? >> Yes. >> Okay. We can accept you as expert in architecture. >> Thank you. >> We can accept you an expert in
architecture. >> Okay. So, this is a there the house they purchased is an existing split level house. Probably the largest split level level house I've ever seen in my life. But, um it only has four
bedrooms and two of them are quite small. Um and um the the Mrs. Delator live uh works at home. She needs a home office plus the laundry as typical is in the basement
and they want the laundry more in the area of the living space in the bedroom. So, one of the existing bedrooms is going to be converted to an office, one is going to be converted into a laundry room and then uh we're asking for a second floor addition above the existing
living dining kitchen. It'll be 1400 square feet. Um the existing uh left side of the house is already non-conforming. The house at that point is is not very
deep. It's only like 26 ft. And it's tough to get a bedroom, a hall, and another bedroom. So, we're asking for some relief in the front. And um as far as the house goes, no relief in the back
except a small deck, a 9 by12 deck that it it's a very unusual shaped lot. Um so where the house is, it's very tight in the back. So um that's basically what we're doing.
>> Does anyone on the board have any questions for this witness? >> I have a question. Mhm. >> Um so the rear yard setback if we look at um from the facade of the building to the line it's 50 ft. >> Yes.
>> Gotcha. Thank you. >> I got one just just along the same line. So in reality you're allowed normally the 10 feet for the deck. So basically you're going two feet over is why you're have the bearings. Okay. Does anybody else have any questions?
>> Also, I wanted to just confirm. So, what's the second floor? That's >> just a second floor and it's going to be can't deliver it in the back and in the front. Yeah. >> And that's we're not touching the footprint other than the deck in the back. >> And and I'm assuming you feel you have a hardship because the road seems to
curve. It does. It curves up. So, that's that's what's precipitating this curve in the road. And the original survey we had only showed the the the one dimension. And it wasn't until after I had a new survey done that I saw oops
that you know we did it again. >> Right. >> So, and there's no, as you noted here, there's a pull down attic. >> Yes. >> Staircase. So, not going up to the attic. >> Um, anybody else have any questions for
this witness? Um, does anyone in the public have any questions for this witness? >> Is there any public? >> I wasn't I wasn't expecting anybody. Does anybody in the public want to make a statement >> there? Again, we have no one. Um, do you any closing statements or you're all good? >> No, I'm all good, I think.
>> Okay. Would someone on the board like to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second it. >> Okay. Mr. Kenya, yes. Mr. Sherman, >> yes. >> Okay. Mr. Horn, >> yes. >> Miss Yun, >> yes. Mr. Wiseman.
>> Yes. >> Mr. Embody, sorry, Mr. is not here. Mr. Beer, >> yes. >> Motion carries. >> Okay. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you. I appreciate it. >> Thank you. Good luck. >> Okay. Block 3802, uh, lot 2040 Charles Street, application
number 2026-V, sorry, 2026-11-V. Mohammad Lar Navas, applicant seeks approval for the RAN. Second floor addition in violation of the following section 1709 C2 frontier setback 40T
required 32.5 ft proposed that's existing 7.5 ft variance requested 170-9 C3 aggregated site yard setback 30% required 28.88% 88 person proposed that's existing 1.12 person variance
requested 1709 C3 right side yard setback 10 ft required 8.9 ft proposed 1.05 05 ft variance requested 170-99 C3 left sideyard setback 10 ft
required 9.1 ft proposed which existing 0.9 ft variance requested 170-87 CC4 habitable floor area ratio 30% allowed 40.7% proposed 10.7 person variance requested
>> okay are you Mr. No. >> Yes, I am. >> Okay. So, you'll be testifying on behalf of the application. Um, there's nobody else here, so I'm assuming you're the only person who's going to testify. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, let's get you sworn in. Do you swear or affirm tell truth for the zoning board tonight? >> I do.
>> Okay. Uh, go ahead, Mr. Was. >> Sure. Thank you. Um, good evening everyone. Um, thank you so much first of all for taking time to consider my application today. Um, a quick round of introduction uh about my family. So, we are a family of four. I have two daughters, a four-year-old and a
six-month-old. Um, and they're growing up. Uh, and we need space. Um, and this 1,400 ft² home is running a bit short for us. Um, I want to up bring them in a healthy and spacious environment. Uh, plus me and my wife work from home. So, we need some office space um area as
well. Um, so what we are really trying to do here is that uh we are planning to do a rear and master floor edition. Um, and this is going to be our forever home. Um so this hardship of lack of space is really triggering the these variances which I seek relief on. Uh
firstly talking about the habitable floor area. Uh I would like to mention that this is an undersized R4 lot. Uh the required is um 9375 ft while this existing is 7513 ft².
So my lot is approximately 20% undersized um which is triggering the HFR variance relief that I'm requesting. Um if you talk about the true livable area, it's actually 2901 square ft because we have 154 square ft from the garage that
is counting towards my HFA. Uh about the front uh setback uh this township has a carveout provision which says that uh there can also be an established setback line for the surrounding area. So we tried getting the setbacks of the front front setbacks
of our neighboring houses. So if you can see in this table here uh the only challenge here was that you're supposed to get three houses on each side but the second house on our my left is actually a corner uh house. So we couldn't get a third house. So this is the reason why we are getting here. Uh but uh when we
found out uh the average calculation of these uh seven houses including my my own house uh we were actually uh within the uh um established uh front setback. Uh about the sight setback uh the
required side setback is 10 ft while the prevailing um setback is 9.1. So we are requesting a relief of 1 ft there. Uh the thing is that we want consistency and continuity in the neighborhood. uh you know with consistent and predictable development pattern. So what
we really trying to do here is to square off uh you know u and align the front and side facade of the of the property. Um this box here is basically the rear addition that we are putting here. Um
and then um we are also planning to put a second uh a master basically in this area on top of the current living room. I wanted to show you uh the p picture as well of the property uh in its current
condition today. So this is this is basically the house. Um, so the living room is going to come on top of this uh the master floor is going to come on top of this living room and then there's going to be >> is that is that picture part of the um
submissions? >> It's not but uh I can see if there's a picture anywhere. >> We have we we do have other pictures. >> Give me one second >> that were submitted. >> Yeah, I see photos here. Okay, so
>> there you go. It's behind you now. So this is basically uh the current view. The reason I was showing it on this one was because it was mostly covered in snow. I wanted to give you a clear picture here. Uh but this is basically the living room and we are planning to put a master floor on top of
this. And then at the back which is this we are basically trying to put a kitchen and a and a family room there. That's all. So just >> I'm just trying to understand on
drawing A1 you have uh established setback calculations which were done back in November by um a surveyor. Um, but since then the house to your left
has been demolished and rebuilt. Um, I was at the site. It's further back than your house is. And at least on this picture, it shows it in front of your house. So, where are
we? And where do you have any updates or anything else? Um, cuz obviously you live next door to it. You knew it was ripped down. I'll be honest, I haven't really get these calculation revised because this is a property that has that started their work after I got all of
these documentation in place and got this uh appointment here. Uh but no, I I don't have the latest. >> Yeah. No, >> and it's still under construction. >> It was it was the calculation was on 115, but the drawings dated 27. >> Um it really should have been updated.
So just so you know, uh >> the average of the um front yard setback was 33.4 and my house is 36.8. So I'm already in that safe zone of 2.4. Um but even if we take the assumption that it if it has
gone back, I would say I would still meet that uh average setback which is 33.4. I wouldn't go below that. >> Okay. is my uh yeah >> comment. >> I have question >> please.
>> Um could you walk us um me to uh help me understand uh the front yard setback portion uh where did you get from the existing 36.8 to the 32.5 from the portico to the curb?
>> Sure. >> So which portion um is um that front? Yeah. setback. >> Mhm. So, um the architect basically has mentioned two front setbacks here. Uh one is from the portico. Now, because u my
give me one second. So, the if the portico is basically within 72 in of an area, then you can take the front setback from the house and not the portico. But my current uh portico is basically within the 72 in
mark. So that's why I'm taking it from the house but I have still mentioned both of these setbacks. Uh so from the house it's 36.8 and from the portico it's 32.5. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> Um my next question is on the right uh
right side yard um looks like you took 0.15 in like closer um existing 9.1 and now you are at 8.95. uh what's making that uh 0.186 a little
bit is that >> so if you look at this square basically um by the way initially before we um we decided to go for variance we try to basically follow the town's regulations from each and every angle but the house
that was uh designed by the architect u was really not looking good at all and wasn't really convincing us uh we We basically started the master floor from this point to the back and then we also basically followed the side set back. So
this was like this. It was basically giving a very um a very different type of octagon shape to the house. So we basically tried to u you know follow the u what do you call non-compliant
existing uh sideback. Uh so we we then finally then decided that okay because this is our forever home let's just you know go for a variance. That's why we continued the existing prevailing uh setback and and we basically draw this line drew this line all the way to the back for for our
>> So you're basically extending your right side uh facade but because of your your property line narrows down by like a little that's why you're getting uh uh okay a shorter >> the current house is still back okay >> you know we are just following this line
on both sides and going back okay thank Does anybody else on the board have any questions for this witness? >> I'll skip the public comment section >> of this application. Um, does anybody on the board want to make a
motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> I'll second. >> Okay. Yep. >> Okay. Mr. Canyia, yes. Mr. Young, Miss Yume, >> yes. >> Mr. Horn, >> yes. >> Okay. Mr. Sherman,
>> yes. >> Mr. Wiseman, >> yes. >> Okay, Mr. Beer. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Congratulations. >> Thank you so much. I don't want to go there. We tried our best. >> A motion to adjoin. Ajourned.
>> Yay. >> Yeah. Whatever you want to call it.