All right, Mr. Chairman, we're on the air. Uh, thank you. Call to order the planning board uh meeting for May 13th. It is now 7:31. Miss Coun, could you please Oh, I
got 7:28 over there. I got 73. I got 7:33. I know to split the difference 7:30. That's perfect. That's perfect. Okay. Could you please uh read the statements? Happy to. Thank you very much. Number one, call to order and statement of compliance. Adequate notice of this meeting or hearing has been
provided by posting a copy of the public meeting and hearing dates on the municipal bulletin board and website by sending a copy to the Echo Sentinel newspaper and by filing a copy with the municipal clerk. Number two, standard board procedures. Any meeting or hearing conducted by the board is a quasi
judicial proceeding. Any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to the what the board may legally consider in reaching a decision and decorum appropriate to a judicial meeting or hearing must be maintained at all times. Number three, meeting cutoff. announcement is made that at as a matter
of procedure, it is the intention of the planning board not to continue any matter past 10:30 p.m. at any regular or special meeting or hearing of the board unless a motion is passed by the members then present to extend the meeting or hearing to a later specified cutoff time. Number four, electronic devices.
All in attendance are asked to mute cell phones or any electronic devices as to not interrupt the proceedings. Number five, pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. And now roll call. Where's my Miss Dill? Present. Mr. Hams here. Committeeman Lavender present. Mr. Lavareria present. Miss Ojins here. Mr.
Opala is excused this evening. Vice Chairman Jones aka acting chairman present. And Chairman Richardson is excused this evening. Chairman, we have a quorum. Thank you very much. Uh so the next item on the agenda is an application. It's a minor subdivision
for block 11602, lot 16, zone R4, 334 Main Avenue. application number is 25-05 P is in pop
before we red on this one. Y sorry uh before we get started is there anyone who needs to point of order. Yeah, thank you very So I think um as we now have five members at the board I thank you Theresa turning up I'm going to recuse
myself from this application because I feel personal friendship with the applicant. So if that's okay with everybody I sit back there go or in there come back for the rest of the meeting or go to Chentos for a beer one of them. Well thank you for that Mr.
hands. If you do retire to the conference room, I ask that you please leave my dinner where it is. Inventory. Thank you very much. Good luck to everybody. Thank you. Any other members that care to make a statement or we keep
Yes. Do we want to swear in? Yeah. But before we do, actually, I I uh this is a first for me. I thought we did have the notice already, but I don't have it in front of me. The uh so if that can be brought, my apologies. I've I always pre-review the notice. Thought I I
looked at everything over the weekend. Thought I did and I guess I didn't. Uh so uh bear with me one second. Should have done this sooner. April 17. Uh so we have the notice was published April 17, more than 10 days in
advance. Uh as per the affidavit, it was sent certified mail at least 10 days prior to this evening as well. I'm looking for that date. Maybe counselor can uh applicants counselor can
uh expedite. It looks like it might have been April 14th certified mail pursuant to the slips. You have my copy at this point. I have your copy. Okay, great. I did you well? All right. I'm not going to uh so it was timely served and the notice does provide name, date, and time
of application all accurately. Uh it also summarizes the relief sought construction of a subdivision of the lot has most if not all of the
variance relief at issue accurately cited as the plans availability uh listed as well. So uh without further ado and I apologize for the ado we already took. Uh the notice is sufficient both in content and timely
served and published. So the board does have jurisdiction to hear and decide the application this evening. And I didn't mean for the chairman to deliver but thank you Mr. Chairman for delivering that service here. Thank you. So we can proceed and I can swear in the witnesses
either after Mr. Zelli's opening or before whatever works. Uh we can do it now. That's fine. Okay. And we have uh we have three witnesses. Uh and they are the applicant, Mr. Hollows, and is that the architect? Yes.
Mr. Mr. Ford professionals, our planner and and engineer. If they'll raise their right hand as well, all five of you, thank you to all of you. Swear to God, affirm testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. I do. Thank you all. Now, I finally got my formalities out of the
way, Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Sir you good evening Mr. Chair, members of the board, board professionals Frederick Zelli Postpollock on behalf of the applicants. Uh this is for Sabato Gerard and Irene Jordano regarding 334
Main Avenue, block 11602, lot 16 located in your R4 zone. Subject property is a corner lot located at the southwest corner of Main Avenue and Mars Street in the Sterling section of the township. The applicant's family has owned and resided in the existing single family home which fronts on Main Avenue uh for
almost four decades since 1986. Uh the applicants uh reside there as I said um Sam as we refer to you Sam and Gerard with their daughter Irene. Uh the applicants wish to raise the two existing deteriorating accessory barn/gages
uh subdivide the property in order to create a building lot fronting on Mars Street and then construct a new modestized three-bedroom single family home on the new lot uh for Irene and her family to live in. Uh the property is undersized for the R4 zone. Uh under the
current ordinance, 20,000 ft is required and we have 17920. Uh nonetheless, it exactly double the size of the most of the immediately surrounding properties uh which are all 8,960 ft presumably because the lot was a double lot under the original zoning
for the neighborhood and we're guessing the original zoning was 8,960 square ft. Um, while the proposed lots could in theory be made equal in area, doing so would require a rear uh yard setback variance for the remainder
lot. The still has the house on it uh and would also require sacrificing a significant part of the backyard for parking. Uh we're therefore instead proposing a 10,000 square foot corner lot uh with the existing homestead facing Main Avenue. That would be lot
1601 on the plans. uh and a 7,920 foot building lot facing Morris Street, lot 1602 on the plans, which would be your new building lot. In addition to the minor subdivision approval itself, the project requires the following variance relief. Both
variants for lot area for 1601 remainder lot permitting 10,000 square feet where 20,000 is required under the ordinance again with 8,960 being the prevailing lot size in the neighborhood. Two, bulk variants for lot area for 1602. Same
thing, permitting 7,920 instead of 20,000. Three, bulk variants for lot width for 1602 permitting 79.2 ft where 100 ft is required. Uh 50 ft is uh pretty common in the neighborhood. Uh so again, we are uh not compliant there,
but we are certainly a lot closer than u what's actually required under the zone. Number four, bolt variants for front yard setback for 1602 permitting 26.4 feet where 50 is required. Uh 20 to 30 feet is actually prevailing on the
southern side of Mara Street. Number five, bulk variance for lot coverage for 1601. That's the remainder lot. Uh there was a typo in our plans. Um we are showing 31.6% being required. We realized today actually
that the garage was still listed in the calculations. So once that was taken out as it should have been, we were actually down to 26.65% in a 25% zone. So we still need the variance, but we are much much closer than uh than we were what we thought we were. And then finally of
both variance for not providing at least a single family uh single car garage uh as required by section LU124.4A2 of your ordinance. And those are the six variances that we would need for this subdivision. I have three witnesses this evening, all sworn in
already. Sabado Sam Jordano, one of our applicants, John Caputo, our architect, and Bill Hollows, our engineer and planner, uh, who will be testifying in that order. Unless anyone has any questions from me, ask that all board members just hold all
questions until Okay. Mr. Janto, you are up. So, what we're going to do is put this close to you. Very well. Sam, where do you presently reside? 334 Main Avenue, Sterling. Okay. In New
Jersey, that is because I've seen it elsewhere. And where, just in normal terms, in the Sterling section, where is that physically located? It's in downtown Sterling. Um, and I basically didn't move far since I came to this country. I went on Essex Street, Central Avenue. I
came back to Main Street. That's my story so far. And you're at the southwest corner of Mars. It's a south It's It's on the southwest side of um and um on the corner of Morris and on Main Street. Yeah. And just to follow through on your
history a little bit, who who in your family has owned this property since the 80s? I was one of the original owners and together with my brother and my parents were there as well. Um and then um afterwards it was just myself, my my
wife Derarda and um my parents and of course with my children um since n well since we had our first child in 1987 and that's where we've been. And fast forward to now who who owns the
property now? My wife and myself. Okay. Your daughter's name's on the she's under she's she's under there as well. Yes. It's just because she has a baby on her hands over there. She could still come here and you know Yeah. True. Correct you here. Okay. Uh she she's been part of it. Yeah. Okay. Now, we're
gonna have Mr. Hollows describe the property, the technical details of it. Uh but just in your own words, would you tell the board what's where the you told us where it is, but what buildings are located on the property? How's it laid out? So, the the main house um it's
probably been there prior to 1900. So, it has the large barn which is faces um Morris Street. Uh and then the garage is all the way in the back right corner of the property. Um behind the garage
there's also a shed um which um it's it's you know it's I've always considered that to be a nice lot with all of those items on there, but there of course um always wanted also get rid of them to be able to clean it up and
maybe uh I'm at the point where I could possibly do that. Um so you're flipping through the photographs now. These I'm just going to tell the board these are the photographs that we submitted with our application. They should be in the same order uh stapled that the board has them. So what I'm going to do is ask you
first of all I'm going to represent I took them shortly before the application obviously when snow was still on the ground. Uh they were accurate at the time and you'll tell us if they still are subject to the snow not being there. But what I'm going to do is ask you to go through each one and just tell the
board what is shown in the photograph. So the first photograph is the on the left hand side of the of the photograph is the house. the main house and basically in the center where the cars are is the a large barn called quote
unquote garage and then on the all the way to the right side in the back is a two um two bay garage and cannot see in this photo but there's also a shed in the back. Okay. Then the other photo is just basically the rundown garage as a
close-up photo. Um, and then a closeup, much closer up photo of the garages. Um, and then a side view from the
garages that you see the side barn and also the house on the back there on the right side. So, in that photograph, we're facing Main Avenue but on the opposite side of the barn. Yep. To the left of this barn here is the Mar Street.
And then this is a much closeup of that house barn. And one more. This is a view from the back of the barn. Uh the backyard uh right behind the house looking towards
Morris Street and actually facing north. And that's your patio area behind the house. Correct. Okay. Mhm. And the other one is the back of our home. And um and this is of course this is what
faces Main Avenue. And from the other picture is a photograph taken from Mara Street. The side and the northern side of your house. This is the north side of the home. Yep. The left side is again Main Avenue and
this is a right from Main Avenue um the front of the house. Okay. Thank you. And seasonal differences aside, the property still looks like this today. Exactly. Okay. Now, we're here tonight because as
you've described, you'd like to subdivide the property, be able to develop the um western side. Yes. Okay. Correct. All right. And tell us why you'd like to do that. Oh, um basically I consider myself a family man and I
like to keep my children together. I've been trying to do that for a while and uh I have three daughters. Um one lives in Long Hill Road. uh the oldest one, the middle one here, the child with the child here. She's been with us and um
that's Irene. And in in the home, I uh I have another daughter that lives with us. Um if I could keep my children close together and even next door is even better. Um I'm not getting any younger. Neither is my wife. So I I support uh I
ex I don't expect to support but I hope that I will get the support in the older days that God willing and that's the main reason of um of wanting to do this um in addition to uh if this gets done it also gets the area gets cleaned up as
well and the thought is to demolish the three accessory buildings. Exactly. Subdivide and build a new house. Is that accurate? Correct. Okay. Just for the board's understanding, what what are you using the accessory buildings now for now, if anything? In in this barn,
there's some storage area of old uh some old things that I had other than that and and it'll be dumped away probably whatever that I cannot use. So, you don't need to replace that space, so to speak. Okay. No.
Uh and you've engaged uh John Caputo as your architect to design a new house. That's correct. Okay. and he's going to tell us the details of the design, but if you would just in your own words, tell us what the house is going to have. Uh bas a three-bedroom, um a great room,
um with a kitchen area, um a bathroom downstairs, uh and it's going to have two bathrooms upstairs or maybe three, I think, upstairs. Feed the plants. Show three. Three. Yeah. Um and believe is a little um out co in
the back. a little pet uh area that entrance areas. Okay. Now, the house does not feature either attached or detached garage. No, it does not. We um we uh never really had a garage. So, you
got a bunch of them. You just don't use them for Is that fair? Correct. Um much easier to get in and out, you know, to move. Um and that has not been a problem over these years. You've been there for 40 years. I don't know. I don't don't
never really had the need for it to be honest. And is there in your experience living there all this time, is there plenty of uh parking along Mara Street uh if need be? Absolutely. Absolutely. Now we really have any any any problems about parking. Okay. Thank you. I have
nothing further for Mr. Jordano at this time. Did you want to write on it? Continue. You don't need to open it to the public for questions. Sorry. It discretion of the chair, we can have questioning after each witness and then public comment at
the end or we can have questioning after all three witnesses. Uh uh certainly also, you know, the board may have questions as well, particular witnesses, but I already told the board that they'll hold all questions to the end. So do the same with the public. the board professionals would will abide by
that advice as well. And Mr. Caputo, you are up once you set up. Use the mobile. Thank you. You please Thank you, Fred. If you would please begin by giving us your professional and educational background.
Uh yes. Um my name is John Caputo. I live here in Long Hill. Um, I have a masters of architecture, uh, degree from Cornell University, uh, a ma masters of design from the graduate school of design at Harvard University. Um, lived here for in Long
Hill for 15 years now and hold a current Just make sure to hold the mic. Yes. Uh, currently hold a registered um, hold a hold a New Jersey license for as a register. Okay. And that license is in good standing this evening. It's in good standing as of today, sir. I'm sorry. Did you say AIA or RA? Um, RA. So,
registered with with state and uh not. Have you ever testified in uh before a land use board previously and been accepted as an expert in the field of architecture? Uh, I have um in front of Madison um and
Springfield most recently. There you go. Uh burrow or township? Madison. Uh Madison is a burrow. Burrow. Right. Okay. Uh that's right. There's only one, isn't there? It is. I I had an app there myself not too long
ago. I should know that uh the the uh defer to the chair. Okay. Accepted. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Mr. Caputo, you were tasked with designing the new home as Mr. Jano has testified. Uh that's correct. That's correct. Um and my
understanding that's going to be facing on Morris Street. That's your understanding as well. I hope Mor Morris is the front. uh what we're considering the front side of the uh the residence. Yes. Okay. Um would you please first describe the existing buildings from an architectural perspective that are on
the lot all of them? Um yes. The the the buildings that uh Mr. Jordano mentioned the um what he he calls the barn which is the largest in the photos is a two-story uh post and beam structure. Um, it's hard to estimate the date of
con construction, but well over 100 years. Um, it is old. However, I don't believe it has historical significance. And just for the record, uh, you are either presently or about to be a member
of the historic preservation. Newly newly appointed member of the HPAC. Thank you. Here in town. Um unfortunately the condition is problematic of this structure. Um it's uh it's it's m it's constructed out of
rough hune columns which have over the years uh deteriorated. Um and the first floor is racking severely of the barn probably about five or seven degrees out of plum. Presents a safety hazard as it
stands now. Um, and I don't believe that my client has used the barn uh ever to park in. Um, and I' I'd recommend that actually uh he not pull a car in there because operation of the door would be difficult. Um, the other structure um
which is actually two two structures. It's a freestanding singlestory garage um is even in worse shape. Uh the racking there is um probably 15 to 20 degrees. Um and
it's uh that building is located pretty close to the uh the property line in the south southwest corner. Um and the third structure is a is a shed, which is fine, but um uh the applicant wishes to uh to clean up that
corner of the property by demolishing everything. And finally, one more thing before you go into your design. Uh could you tell us about the other homes uh in the immediate vicinity along Morris Street and so forth and give us uh from an architectural perspective what kind of
homes are they? What's what sizes, what scale and so forth. Sure. When we when we approached the uh the process of design um uh we considered carefully the the composition of these homes especially in Morris Street. because this this house is is
meant to front the side street, not not Main Avenue. On Main on Main Avenue, you see a lot of front porches, uh wraparound porches, mixed use, but this is this is meant to be part of um side street. On Morris, you see a lot of uh
older Cape Cod style, small colonial uh and smaller modest ranch houses. Um most of them are approximately 25 to 30 feet off of the right ofway uh off on
Maine. Um and you see a mixture of properties with and without garage. Um it wouldn't be unusual to have a house without a detached or attached garage on Morris. Okay. And now if you would please take
us through your design. Sure. is um this is these are the same sheets that everyone has. Would it be better to turn it towards the board or for the cameras? Leave that up to the board. Okay. Okay. So, wi with um with Mr. Jordano's
uh goals of keeping his family close in mind. Uh we designed a uh conventionally framed two-story structure. Uh type 5V construction, typical single family residential. Um the the layout of the
building is uh uh very is is modest. Uh three bedrooms upstairs, one large multi-purpose room downstairs, combined kitchen living with a fireplace. Um, and then a dining um a dining and a living
room, more of a formal uh part of the house to to the to the right or or west. Can you point those rooms out to us on Yeah. Yeah. On the second second floor, we have a large a larger master bedroom to the right of the house when you're looking from the street. Two bedrooms on
the uh on the upstairs. Um four full baths. Uh again, with the with the uh the idea of um uh my client being able to to um to host family and friends, uh a master
suite with a that's fully enclosed and a uh a bedroom that has its own bathroom attached. Uh which is why the extra bathroom um was added to the plan. Uh on the first floor, a fireplace to the left facing front. facing from
the front with a large um uh gathering den area with with a breakfast nook and um a kitchen with an island. uh to the back. Um because we've been trying to work on the footprint of the house and
keeping it um extremely compact. Uh we have a terrace that is um also covered uh to um with a second floor uh office
den um that utilizes the same footprint. Um Mr. Jordana commented that he he would really like an office that that um on the second floor that's that's more private and that this is a perfect place for it. That would be the wind in the top right elevation. That would be the
window above the open porch. Yep. So right here these two arched um openings almost like a portico that's a covered covered terrace. Um and then that office is up here. Okay. um talk about materials a little bit.
Sure. Uh what with the understanding of what's um what we see on the uh in the Sterling neighborhood and uh uh with the understanding of of of the goals of the master plan um with the
Sterling downtown district, uh we we are going for something here that's a little bit different. Um we're not trying to match uh the other houses on the street. Although in scale we are trying to be very consistent. Um and with modern
construction methods um it's important to the client especially to um to have a uh a stone look. Um I wouldn't call this a tutor style. I don't I'm not sure. Um
but but that's that's the the idea of what we're going for. Um the Mr. Jordan Jordano uh has a heritage of of use of stone and uh solid
materials. Um and uh he's willing to um splurge a little bit to use real stone um in veneer form potentially to make to give the the feel to give the house an earthy feel. Um, and then some other materials, a vertical siding to to
finish out the the the rest of the front and um uh conventional uh siding for the rest of the house to save cost. Um the uh uh the overall height should me talk
about height and bulk. Okay. So um in order to to maintain this modest um scale, we have uh brought the front eaves down fairly low uh compared to what you would expect on a a full
two-story house. So that the the front uh gutter line would be um approximately 17 ft above grade. Uh and and overall the the the ridge is only at
268 I believe from from grade. So from the h from the front and especially from the corner turning off of main uh off of main uh the bulk of the house will will feel shorter. Um while you know still
inside like uh keeping a full 9 foot floor to ceiling height on the first floor and 8 foot floor to ceiling on the second. Um, the concession here is we won't have a full attic. Um, so it's not a full 2 and a half story house under
zoning. It's it's it's a real compact silhouette, which is what we were going for. Um, overall that's that's the that's the theme here to try to be modest. And you've indicated that you're not trying to mimic uh the styles already on Morris Street, but you are
trying to be consistent and complimentary. Is that fair to say? I would agree. I would agree that we're trying to be complimementaryary um uh and uh Sterling in particular is benefits
from a variety of um building materials, surfaces, and um uh finishes. Um that's what we're trying to do here. We'll we'll giving our clients something that we that he'll be proud of. But you did
say that in terms of scale, you are deliberately trying to be consistent with Mars. Absolutely. That's that's our number one priority. Uh and let's just discuss the uh the garage situation briefly. Uh why did you not design the house with the garage?
To uh to continue the the the discussion of being modest um a modern garage with with car sizes these days. um requires a 14x 22 24 ft footprint. Um
which would uh essentially um use most of this living living and dining area on the first floor. Um, if the garage were to be placed at grade,
um, we feel like having a true, um, first first living floor with with what we're saying is four full rooms is more important. Um, and the situation on on Morris
um, lends itself to parallel parking along the street, which is what my client does now. Um, and we also believe that that Main Avenue is is is provides ample parking as well. All right. Thank you. I have
nothing further for Mr. Caputo at this time, Mr. Hollowos. Mr. Hollow, you've presented before us before, have you not? I have maybe once, right? A couple of times probably. You just want to give a quick
uh certification. Yeah, I'm a licensed professional engineer, land surveyor, and planner in the state of New Jersey. My license is up to date. Um, my office is at 192 Central Avenue in Sterling and I and Murphy and Hollands has been in business for over 40 years and I have
been up and down Springfield Avenue, Valley Road, uh, testifying at municipalities. I was in Westfield last night. So, thank you. Okay. Um, I will let you loose on engineering and then we'll do a
planning later. Sounds good. Mhm. Uh just so just for the record then Mr. Chairman, we've accepted him as a professional engineer and planner both. Correct. Both engineer. Might as well accept him as a surveyor too. There you go. Surveyor. Yeah. To create the lot.
The property that we're talking about. That's a good point. Creating is at the southwesterly corner intersection of Main Avenue and Morris Street. And it's the uh right under Morris on the drawings you have. This is the area map. The property is 100 ft
wide on Main Avenue and 17 interrupt. Just just for the record to to uh do it right. This just give us the last revised date or the date of this. Is it August 12, 2024? August 12, 2024. Okay. So everybody can make sure then we're
referring to the uh correct and site, excuse me, subdivision plans uh that you prepared uh and that were submitted more than 10 days ago. So they don't have to be marked as an exhibit. Thank you. Confirm. I'm looking at 124.
And again, the subject properties at that southwesterly corner of Main Avenue and Morris Street. It's 100 ft wide on Main Avenue, 179.2 ft on Morris Street. Um it is basically a residential
neighborhood with the except exception of the property directly across from uh our on Main Avenue directly across from the subject property and that is a building um there's actually a couple of
buildings on that parcel now recently a subject of a planning uh zoning board application and um it has some uh office space in and retail space in that and then the rest is uh residential and then
there's a residential home behind it. And that's probably one of the only only two lots that meet the uh 100 by 200 foot the 20,000 foot criteria. I think there's one other one
um to the west of our subject property that is a 25,000 square ft. Other than that, all the lots are less than 10,000 square feet or equal to 10,000 square feet um in this neighborhood. This this was a old map
that was filed in 1897 and the lots were pretty much 50 by 150 or some of them were 50 by 200 but they were in 50 foot increments. Is it accurate that a lot of the lots uh particularly the ones facing uh Main
Avenue are that exact number we spoke of before that 8,960? That's correct. They're 50 ft wide and the lot area comes out to 8,960 with the exception of the little Cape Cod that um is just up from the corner of Mercer Street and
that's on a 5,000 foot lot. And our lot is actually exactly double that. So it's basically a double lot from back in the day. Yes. Thank you. Now go to the existing conditions
A1. This is colorized drawing of sheet two and it's the existing conditions plan that you have in your drawings and we just colorize it so it help you take a look at at what's on the property.
Um, we've talked about the the home that Mr. Geodano has. That's the house. Um, this is A1. A1. It's a colorized version of sheet two. Sheet two. Of sheet two. Thank you. And you can see that uh the house we're
speaking of where Mr. Gino lives is to the south of the property uh facing Main Street. It's a two-story dwelling. The barn that is in the most disrepair. It's kind of in the middle of
the lot. Um it's got a gravel drive that accesses to that barn. And then back in the southwest corner of the property, you've got the garage with a shed behind it. There are a few scattered trees around. There's a hedge on the south
side and then kind of gets into an little overgrown area behind the that garage. And then it's we've got a rock garden kind of uh situation going on and then some shrubs behind the house. The front of the house has a
porch on it, an open porch. And then the rest of the property is lawn. Um, you had to have really the gravel area is a parking area that usually has some cars in it. And then there's parking on Main Avenue and on
Mar Street as well. And on Mars Street. Yes. Let me just go through a few uh check off items here. No wetlands on the property or wetlands buffers. There are no wetlands. No open waters or steep slopes. There's no steep slopes. It is not in the flood plane. And this is the
part of Sterling that is on the little null. As you go come from Valley Road, you kind of go uphill and then as you go past this property going north towards the railroad tracks, it goes back down. So this is on the the high side. So
we're not subject to the ordinance dealing with the flood zones at all. No, we're not. Any other environmental constraints of any kind? Not that I'm aware of and not that I saw in the field. And do we anticipate taking down any trees in connection with this project?
No. Just clearing out the brush in the back. All right. Thank you. And to our west is the driveway uh for the adjoining property. I'm going to go
to what we're going to call A2. Okay. Colorize what? Colorize sheet three. Just for the record, sheet two is the existing conditions. Sheet three, the we call it subdivision. Subdivision.
Okay. Not proposed, but subdivision. Okay. This is the subdivision drawing where we're showing what the lot that we would like to create. And we also show the proposed new house. And I'll go through that and then I'll try to go through I'll go through the variances
and then show you where they are. And we have Mr. Jared down's uh house. Well, let's let's go over what the lots are and then we can describe what's in them. The uh corner lot, the existing house lot, we've designated as lot
16.01. It'll be 100 by 100t lot. It'll have 10,000 square feet. So, it's very much similar to what's in the neighborhood or even a little larger than some of the homes or some of the lots in that neighborhood. The proposed new building
lot would be 79.2 ft by 100 ft deep, 7,920 ft. just a little bit under that uh 8,960 is it square feet uh that is kind
of prevalent in this neighborhood. So that while you're discussing that, can you tell us why we're not just dividing it evenly? We we're trying to match up lot coverage somewhat to get get a lot that
uh meets the ordinance as close as we can as far as coverage, which is always seems to be a big item and not just Long Hill, but all the municipalities around here. So, we're trying to get the coverage kind of so that it's 25 or
close to 25. And I'll go through those numbers. And it also fits the the houses. In this case, Mr. Gano's house that he lives in. It's kind of it's longer. It's deeper than it is wide. And the uh house that we're proposing is
wider, but not as deep because it fits the the streetscape a little bit better. It's also fair to say that the parking area for the remainder lot would have to take up a lot of the backyard then if you had to squeeze it over onto that side. That's correct. Okay.
So, we we've come here's the you know the size of the lots, the width, the dimensions, and here's Mr. Geodano's house lot. We're going to remove the patio that he has in the
back because he's got the open porch that they can sit in, sit on. And then we're proposing a walkway. Actually, there is a walkway there now. We're just going to relocate it. We're going to have to relocate some of the uh
uh the stone garden area. And then we're proposing a parking area for the car for a car, two cars actually. It's 18 ft wide by 20 ft deep. And this is where we come up with
u the lot coverage of 26.65 65 because we had in our listing of uh coverage cover impervious coverages we had added in the garage that was going to be removed. So, and that's the
calculation on sheet one. That's on sheet one. Okay. And I'm I'll go through the variances since we're talking about the uh the house lot, the existing house lot. Uh lot area. We're proposing 10,000 square feet where 20,000 is
required. And the front yard setback is required is 50 feet and existing non-conforming condition is 9.6 ft to Main Avenue and 48.8 ft to Morris. The minimum sideyard it's 10 ft
was required. We're existing as 9 ft and now the coverage is down to 26.65. The second lot is the proposed new building lot. The garage will be removed that's in the southwest corner along with the
shed. The gravel drive that services the uh the barn building that will be removed along with the barn. And this is the house that was described to you. We have it in dark brown. And then gray is a
again an 18 foot by 20 foot parking area for cars. So they're off the street although there is on street parking in this area uh both on main and Mars. Mr. Hollows, in your observations of
this neighborhood, have you observed uh a good number of detached garages on the various lots? Yes. If we were to do that, is it fair to say that we would end up not only probably causing a coverage issue, but also using an awful lot of the yard space that the family
would not be able to enjoy then? That would be correct. All right. I wanted to go through the variances requested for this uh building lot. Um first one would be lot area. We're proposing 7920 square feet whereas
20,000 is required required by the ordinance. Minimum lot width is 100t is required by the ordinance. We're at 79.2. The front yard 50 ft is required. We're proposing a front yard setback of
25 ft. And the reason I'm requesting or my plan has shows that is that the houses on Morris Street on this side of Morris Street, the south side of Morris Street going towards Payic are
going to the west. Those homes sit at approximately 25 ft. Um about a year ago, we did a plan before the zoning board for a house that had burned on that street. And um again,
that house was at 25 ft. And it's just about every house going towards PG Street with with the exception of the last two which are newer style homes. These are smaller homes on on Mars and
they sit at 25 ft. if they have a garage, it's a detached garage with a long driveway. Um, but the last two homes are newer vintage homes and they sit at the 50 ft. When you get the corner, Pose and
um, Morris, that house is an older home and the garage sticks out. So, it's about 25 ft off the street. So, if I could ask a question, Mr. Chairman, just for clarification, cuz I thought you say I thought I heard you say for lot 16002, the new uh home lot, uh the front yard
setback was going to be 25 ft, but it's listed at 26.4. That's just the placement of the house. We're really requesting at 25 ft. I going to put my surveyor's hat on. It's hard. ft. Told you we can we can
stake out a house at 25 ft. It's not going to necessarily always get built at 25 ft because, you know, with with our tapes and things that we have as surveyors, the guy who's laying it out has got a 25 foot tape or maybe a 100 foot tape with some cuts and breaks in
it that he's taped together. So we we try to get a half a foot to a foot of uh free area so to speak so if they do twist the house or um go a little bit forward. So simple point being you you
you're asking for 25 not 26.4. Correct. Yes. Okay. That's fine. Certainly could be amended at this time. Yes. Um the other variances, oh actually we
comply to the sideyard, we complied to the rear yard, we comply to the rear yard set back. Um and this house is does or proposed lot development is under the 25% coverage.
And where are we exactly? As exact as we can be at this point. 23 All right. 23. Sorry, I didn't mean to put you on the spot. I think it's 23 something. 23.8.
So, we haven't designed it right up to the, you know, 24.99. We're There's some leeway in there. No, we didn't design it all the way up there. And um it already has a uh a terrace, so it has some sort of outdoor space in the rear of the
house. But if we were to include uh a detached garage, not only would you have uh the coverage afforded by that building, but then you would have a long driveway presumably having to get to it uh and we'd be sub substantially over on coverage. Is that fair to say? That
would be fair to say. Yes. Now, when we put this lot development together for the proposed new house, um there is a storm drainage system at the corner of Morris Street and Main Avenue. And knowing that the soils are poor in
Sterling, it's a it's a clay soil and dry wells don't work very well in clay or or they don't work at all, we were proposing to have a put an easement across the uh existing house lot 16.01. And in that we would we would
take the roof leaders and pipe them down to the inlet at the corner of Maine and Morris. So that that's what we did regarding storm water management because it's just not going to work
here. So we we're planning on piping the roof leaders to the to the inlet and then it would go through the system down to the river. I think that's the plan. Um, put your planner's hat on.
Actually, Mr. Chair, before you do, there was a report from our engineer. Has everything I'm sorry. Yes, I did mean to do that report first and then there's Lanny's later. You want to get through it and then we'll get into it or I just figure before you switch from engineering. No, that No, that's actually a way I had it
and I just missed it. Sorry. Mr. Holl, you reviewed Mr. Vuch's report as I did. Okay. Just and just so the board if the board were to approve this um we would file deeds for these for each lot and also the deed would include
the proposed uh drainage easement across the uh the house lot. So um we'll stick on the the storm water subject. So um noted at the beginning of the application was the clarification
that the impervious coverage was going to get further reduced and revised. right to to be closer to the 25. When I ran those numbers, I saw that the total net increase on the combined parent lot
was 120 ft. So, I'm going to strike my comments 44 and 45. Uh while the application in 43 is a statement that it is defined as a minor development because of its total
disturbance. Um with my engineering discretion would consider this dimminimous impact on the storm water and consider it exempt from providing the recharge requirement specifically for the same reasons noted as the viability. um as well as then the good
faith efforts of cleaning up the lot coverage in both and providing balance lots um being only at 120 square ft. So we're talking about the size of a very small shed in increase on the on the total property. Um I am also in support
of making a connection to the catch basin in the street. Um the lot itself, the the proposed new lot does drain shallow towards Morris and then again Morris being relatively flat towards
that corner. Uh so making a direct connection allows that water to ensure it gets into that system and below grade and not flooding into any of the streets. um where that water would more likely pond in Morris before it has the ability to get out to the the basins. So
keeping Morris high and dry so to speak from the impacts of the Morris and Maine Morris. Exactly. So it's the catch basin on Main Avenue, not on Morris. So it's it's to keep it in
inside the uh parent lot and 1601 and then connecting at that location through the easement. Through the easement. Correct. Um and 46 was for a discussion regarding
um the propensity of these roof leader discharges directly to the main main avenue curb cuts. So in in your experience in this area and developing this area, you find that to be be relatively common? Yes. Yeah. So the the
existing structure does have roof leaders that discharge that area. So and again main avenues draining into Maine and then finding its way into the catch basins. there's no need to modify the existing configuration, but um promoting
the the new home direct connection um is the most practical way to manage the storm water coming off that lot in any relative detriments that might come into Morris or to the neighboring property.
Um and Really? That's it? I'm going to make a recommendation. Conditions. Yeah. Rest. Rest are stipulated conditions. Well, they're conditions to be stipulated. Yeah. Yes. Yes. Yes. That's basically 31
through 36, 41, and 47 through 52. Correct. So, Mr. Well, let's just clarify. 33 32 um I didn't see a reference to a noted survey on the set. Is the survey inclusive of the set as
No, we actually have a separate survey. That'll just be stipulated in a note revision. Yep. And I'm satisfied. Skip back and start with that. Mr. Hollows, I'm going to ask you a few questions that
are designed to get us what we need in terms of planning if you would assist me with that. Uh you've indicated that your license as a professional planner is in good standing this evening. Correct. Correct. Uh since we are seeking a subdivision that we don't have to do, we can't
exactly uh go for a C1. So, we're going to be talking about a C2. Is that accurate? That would be accurate. Okay. So, under the flexible uh criterion, we're looking for benefits that outweigh the detriments. I'm sorry, just just so I'm clear, the uh I might have missed it. The uh uh the recognition that it
can only be a C2 as opposed to a C1 is because any hardship would be self-created by virtue of the subdivision of the conforming lot. Correct. Okay. Thank you. At least as the non-conformities that we're creating. Obviously, there's some that pre-exist we're not seeking variances in the first place. So
okay, Mr. Holl is looking at the uh at the benefits. Uh, in your professional opinion as a licensed planner, would replacing the existing deteriorating accessory buildings uh with a new single family home promote public health, safety, morals, general welfare uh in
pursuant of the uh purpose A under uh yeah, I think the the fact that we're taking down something that's going to fall down not in the probably the near future and putting up something new that's attractive is certainly meets
that criter. area and in I realize you're not an architect, but we did hear architectural testimony as to the condition of the existing buildings and based upon that would you agree that raising those buildings uh does provide safety benefits and uh removing a danger
that we have at this point. I don't have to be an architect to know that. Just look take a look at it and uh I guess that's the engineer's hat. Please tell us when uh and then also focusing on purpose C. Uh in your professional opinion, would
replacing these two buildings uh with a single modestized home provide adequate light air and open space on the property? Yes, it would. We we meet the sideyards. Um we meet the streetscape as far as front yard set back and we meet the rear yard setback.
Uh focusing on purpose E. Uh, in your professional opinion, would enabling a senior citizen couple to continue to live in their home of almost 40 years while having their daughter and her family living on an adjacent lot promote the establishment of appropriate population densities and concentrations,
contributing to their well-being and to that of their neighbors and the community in general? Yes, I think that's very uh very good thing to do. and focusing on purpose I. Uh do you believe that removing the two uh deteriorated and I think by all accounts
unsightely accessory buildings at this point replacing the same with an attractive new home uh that would complement other homes in the surrounding neighborhood. Uh do you believe that would promote a desirable visual visual environment through creative development techniques and good civic design and arrangement? Yes, I do.
And again trying to meet this the streetscape of Morris Street. um with an attractive home on it. And then finally, do you believe the uh proposal of uh adding a new home uh to the street would uh serve to assisting
conservative property values and improving the housing stock of the neighborhood uh which is deemed by our Supreme Court as being a purpose of land use under homebuilders league versus Township of Berlin 81 New Jersey 127 1979.
Yes, I do. Let's focus on the detriments. Uh given the dimensions of the other lots in the immediate neighborhood and the size, scale, and designs of the homes situated on them, uh do you see any detriment resulting from the project that would be that would not be outweighed by the benefits you've already discussed? No, I
I think I've gone through that trying to talk about the neighborhood and the size of the lots and um you know, we're we're kind of just a little bit under that kind of average of 8960. We're at 7920. Um and then a 10,000 foot lot
really kind of matches the other lots in the neighborhood. So I don't think if you drove down Morris Street you would know whether the lot size of any of the lots whether it be 8960 or whether it be 10,000 or whether it be 7920. You know
you're going to I think the width is really the thing that you're going to see and I think the setback again matching the streetscape is is an important element. And do you see any detriment uh arising from there not being a singlecar garage on this
particular property? No, because again when you drive down Morris Street and especially on this side because these are the older homes and that the garages are in the back and you you sometimes you really have to look to see the garage. You see the driveway going off but you don't see the
garage. Um so I I don't think that it would be really and most of the garages that I see are smaller type garages. They're they're probably used more for storage than they are for the cars and because they just aren't big enough um with
today's cars. So, and obviously the benefit that you've already discussed of not having the additional coverage that would be created by a detached garage itself plus a long driveway to get to it. Yeah, we probably would be 30 or over if
we put that in. And then just focusing on the negative criteria. Uh do you believe that these variances can be granted without any substantial detriment to the public good? I do again and that's has to do with the fact that this these the both of the
lots really kind of fit the neighborhood. There's there's no question in my mind and as well no substantial detriment to the purpose of the zone plan or the zoning ordinance that you could see. No. All right. Thank you. Um have you had occasion to review Miss Leaney's report?
I have. Okay. Would you take us through that? Unless you'd like to take you through it, whichever works for the two of you. Um I don't think I have any any items there. No, I just have a a couple of questions. Okay. Okay. Um can you
just uh go over again how big the driveways are on each of the lots? I have them as 18 feet wide. 18 feet wide. Wide. Okay. And what's the depth? I said 20. I'm sorry. Uh
1601 from Mars, excuse from Main Avenue is 20 ft. Did you say I That's what I earlier testified to. I just scaled it at 22 18 ft wide by 22 ft deep. I just want to make sure we're getting on the record which one you're talking about.
I'm sorry. Both of the lots 1601 and 1602. Well, that 1601 from Main Avenue was 22 ft uh depth. And then are you coming up with the same one on uh for 1602 off Mars Street? They're both off. They're both off Mars Street. They both
They both come off of Mars. I'm sorry. Both off Mars. My bad. This one here. Okay. But you got the same 22 fee for both. Yes. Mr. Holl, just to be clear, those measurements are from the property line, not from the McAdam, right? Yes. Correct. They're from the rightway line. And there's no sidewalk, right? There is
no sidewalk. So, are you familiar with RSIs? Yes. Do you know what the dimensions are for if if uh to be counted um garage spaces to be counted as one and a half or two
spaces? Do you know what those dimensions are? Not top of my head. Okay. Well, they're they're 18 by 20. So that so that's just I guess in a sense you're consistent with RSIs minus the actual garage. So I
guess the question I would ask you is do you think then it's this is a better zoning alternative to not have the garages um visv like impervious coverage and um maybe streetscape you know um whatever
consistency of the streetscape. Do you think that then this is a better zoning alternative? Zoning alternative? I do because it because you've got the u you know the new home. It's going to look like to me it's going to look like the other homes on the south side. The
north side's a little bit different other than right across the street there's a a canopy with a bunch of parking spaces under the canopy which is different than anything else in the area. But I I think that what we're proposing is
fits more street. And obviously if you were to add garages, the impervious coverage would go up by another at least 5%. Okay. And it's two variances, right? I in my letter I only put there was one variance, but it's two
because both lots are not going to have garages, right? Yeah. Although on601 it's an existing condition, but it's not. We're not constructing. It's not an existing condition. You have a garage. Well, yeah. Okay. I'll I'll buy
that. Since we don't actually use it as a garage, I didn't really think about it, but yeah, that that Mr. Hollage, you would agree with that also? Yes. Okay. So, we should add that as a seventh just Yeah. an additional variance. Can you just clarify what? Okay. So, you need um
the our ordinance requires that you need to have a uh in this zone, you need to have a part a garage um for up to one for one car garage. What I put in my letter and I I think what um Mr. Deli noted was that the new house wouldn't
have a garage and um so that variance was required. The existing lot currently does have a garage. It's not used as a garage, but they have one, but they're removing it. And so, technically, really, they need the same variance
because what, you know, even if they weren't using it to park cars, they did have one. So, they need to get variance relief. Not exactly. So, the no minimum single car garage for the lot variance uh is required for each of the two
correct lots, the 1601 and the proposed lot 162. And is it expected? I know you you mentioned that the the applicant currently parks on Morris Street, but they could people could park on the
driveways, right? Pre presently or as proposed? Yeah. Either way. I mean, certainly we've proposed parking for four vehicles total between the two lots. Correct. Correct. Okay. All right. Thank you. Nothing further for Mr. Hollows with any
of his hats. Thank you very much. I'll turn it over to the planning board. Uh any questions? We'll start to my far right. Mr. I always get to go first. Yes. Um well, you answered some of my questions. I was
curious about why the two lots were not just sized equally to match a lot of the neighborhood. and your explanation makes sense to me to make the 100x100 lot to get closer to 25% coverage, which makes
sense. So, that was one of my questions. And then Joe kind of answered my other question about the runoff going across the property to the drain and why you would do that as opposed to just letting it run off the property normal. And he
gave me a good explanation for that. So th those were my two primary questions. Um I wondered a little bit about the stone front because most of the houses in that neighborhood are not constructed that way, but the architect described
his thought process behind doing it a little bit different. So that was more curiosity than a concern. So that was questions I had. Thank you. Oh, there was one other um you said no trees were going to come
down and I thought there was one that would be almost right where the parking space on the new lot would be, but if you're saying it's not in that parking space, we show it colored in That's the green spot. Huh? Yeah, that's the green
spot. And I could slide that over. Yeah, if need be to keep the tree. Okay. We just kept it kept it in line with the house, but we could actually move it over. The green is the canopy. Yes. Right. Okay.
Next, uh, most of my questions also got answered. How many parking spaces? And there's the four. Um, I just wanted to clarify also that there is no overnight parking between 2 am and 5:00 a.m. anywhere in town. Uh that's my
interpretation of the ordinance. So you can't can park on Mars Street or or Main Avenue. Um but with four spots if you feel that's sufficient for your cars uh between the the two households, the
existing and the new. Um I'm going to make the assumption that this is not in conflict with our current sewer capacity van. uh that that we can accommodate this additional dwelling. Yeah. So the
additional dwelling would with the new created lot would uh characterize under one of the uh NJAC exemptions in the sewer ban exemption list. So there is enough so yeah they'll have the ability to speak with American Water and have
service to the property. And so that's coming down the road. And hopefully by the time they ask for that, they won't even have to ask for the ban. Yeah. Because we are on track. Um trees, that was the other thing. But you went through that. And the township
um has no plans to construct any curbing on Mars Street that we know of. No, we don't have any current plans for improvements on Morris in that block. That's all I had. Thank you.
Yeah. I also didn't have any questions as of now. You answered most of them. I also Thank you for bringing the colorcoded uh it helps visualize because I was trying to figure out the driveways and so this helped perfectly. Uh that was my only question.
No question. No, thank you. Great information. Thank you very much. Um yep, you went through all my question. Uh the driveway there's asphalt. Yes. And even if it was gravel, it would still count the same as in previous coverage. Yeah, just trying to get a
picture of what's going to be seen from the street. Uh, thanks for that. Answered all my other questions. That's why I waited for everyone to go ahead and speak. Um, regarding the um, significance of the barn, I know you're
a new member of HPAC, but uh, there is no historical value nod for the for the uh, the barn. I would lack or not think that the garage barn.
Well, first of all, it's not it's not in the worker's village. Uh, we're too far down. It's outside the worker's village. Um the we I'm not speaking for the the advisory committee here. I'm speaking for myself. Um but we uh architectural
um it's a uh it appears that it's always been part of a res residence from and I I don't believe there's any any When you say part of a residence, you mean someone's living in there at one point or just part of the existing uh footprint for the main house that's on
the I I feel like it's it's always been an accessory to to a residence and it wasn't like a blacksmith shop or a general store or of that nature. No, I don't No, we don't believe it's it it was commercial at all.
But otherwise, we don't have any firm history of the building. Okay. Thank you. Um take me through my questions and the board members. Do you have any I don't know if Joe had any. I just wanted to get No, you guys let me go first. I
think we I know you went on the engineer. I don't know if you have any planner or No. Why would I stay in somebody else's lane? I know. Come on. Well, it doesn't doesn't slow me down any, Mr. Chairman. You want me to You want me You want me to do the attorney summary? Fine line between uh
between planning criteria and law, right? I'm the kind of one comes from the other. Um so th this is a corner lot and uh there are
at least two other lots uh of the same size or larger. One of them happens to be a corner lot right across the street. Correct. That's correct. And do you derive any intention or pattern from the corner lots being larger than the
interior lots along Main Avenue? Mr. Hollis, we should probably in connection with that note that the corner lot across the street was recently created to be a much larger lot. It was created out of three smaller lots that uh another mutual client has now merged and consolidated. So, that
was not that big a lot. Uh now, now is it was actually three lots. Proper noted. I'm sure it helped the witness answer the question, but go ahead. No, actually that's correct. That in fact um we appeared before the zoning board two
times for this building. Once for uh a facade change to make the building look a little bit more attractive and the second time was to um he's got some empty rental space that now is going to be converted to uh residential space.
Both applications actually both applications took it to more residential and um at that time I think the first application it was to be merged as one lot and then the second application was
actually done um the deed was recorded a deed of consolidation was recorded for that lot but that's the only one in this area if you've got um again the smaller lots going north on um Main Avenue. And you can tell when
you look at the houses that that they're the older homes that were here for quite some time along Maine. You're talking along Maine. Yes. And they subdivided over time. Well, they were I think they sold these in 50 foot increments way back when. And
then the the smaller homes like on Morris, if you go up there, you can see that there's some smaller homes and then you got a double lot. Um he he was feeling flush, so he decided I'm going to buy two rather than one. But um the houses are on quite a few of them
are on on the smaller lots. You can see the vintage of the house compared to some of the newer ones on the street again. And it and they get pushed back, the newer ones. Um that's again why we want to hold up to that uh 25 foot on Mars Street. And
uh the two proposed lots from the original lot. What is the what would be the lot depth for each lot? I suspect they'll be the same. But yeah, the first one's 100 by 100 and then the second one the depth is 100 feet because it's
that's how wide the lot is. So these are 100. Yeah. What what are uh what is do you have any idea what the average depth of the lots along either Maine or Mars in this neighborhood? We'll call the neighborhood the 200 foot property
owners list. Uh what the average is? No, I I don't have have that. Some of them are some of them are 179 almost two. According to the 1897 map, the lots on
Uh the west side going north are 179 feet deep. 179. So they match up with our our lot. You're you're going going north across the street on Mars going towards the railroad. They're
179.2 feet. That's why we've described as a double lot. It's a double lot from the perspective of Maine too long. And then that you carry you can carry that down south too. We're splitting it in a different direction. Correct. Splitting
it down the middle and making two narrower lots. We're making two wider lots with less depth. Correct. Which mirrors which mirrors the main and Mercer corner. Uh near in the in the lot widths of 100
and then 79. Right. But what are the what are the lot depths of those two on main and Mercer that have less depth than the other ones on Mercer? One's 100 more than Yeah. 100 and 100 and then the other's 150. 150 each. Uh, no. The
corner is 100 like the sub the proposed 1601 because there's the 50 foot lot there. But then the other is that extra 50 deep. Would it be fair to say that that the corner of Mercer and Maine, the southwest corner of Mercer and Maine, is
the only other lot with a depth uh of only 100 ft. That's lot 22. Uh lot 22. Yeah, 21 and 22 have a depth of 100 ft. Yeah. Oh, yeah. 21 does as
well. The rest have significantly more than that depth. Yeah. Well, these other lots going south from RPQ would be 179.2, but again, they're 50 ft wide. They're not they're not 100 feet.
Understood. Narrower, but longer. Yes. the the uh the two propos the existing home and the location of the proposed dwelling on602. Are there any issues? I'll ask an
open-ended question. uh with respect to the fact that they're not aligned uh and specifically visually one one lot is going to
be looking at another's backyard and and uh while we while the board is well knows grants variance relief, it doesn't do so for a specific duration or for specific occupants of a specific home. Once the relief is granted down
the road, uh one day perhaps no one with the same last name as the applicant may own both homes. Uh the the um does that present any issues from your perspective as a planner? I don't think so because it it it's greater than 35 ft
um from the new proposed property line to the back of the house that faces on Maine. And there's enough space in there that you could put some landscaping for screening. It's not like there's no space. You've got quite a bit of space to to do it.
So from your perspective, landscape and or other buffering and screening can be provided to minimize any potential detriment from the off setting so to
speak of the uh two homes because generally am I correct people prefer not to have other people looking at their backyards or what have you. Yeah, I think well again you can put a fence up, you can put screening in that
space. Um, and it's still a pretty good size area. Um, don't we have the backyards looking at each other, which is what you would have on parallel streets anywhere? That's just it's just Yeah, I guess you get the juxapos. Often
times corner lots end up having side yards as their backyard. Understood. What what I'm saying is we don't in this situation. We have from the back of the uh existing home, you're looking at the backyard of the new home. From the back of That's true. It's not fronting Mars. The the
driveway is coming from Mars, but the house is fronting me. It's actually situated pretty well cuz the rear yards are No, I'll I'll take that back. It threw me off with the uh the driveway. Joys and challenges of a corner lot. Yeah. Well, um
the uh nothing further. Thank you. Um I will now turn it to uh questions from the public to anything that has beenified any anyone from the public.
I heard a yes behind the come on up. if you could just state your name and street address for the record when you get the microphone. Marilyn Shriber. I live at 348 Main Avenue Sterling.
Okay. And and do you have questions first? Okay. And then I'll swear you in later if and when you have comments. Uh, I'm I haven't heard if there's going to be a basement on this house. The questions would have to be for the witnesses so they could answer. All
right. So, Mr. Caputo, if you would hear me. Good question. Do you have another mic? Deb. Yeah. Just share. Deb, you don't have another handheld mic? No. Just pass back and forth. We'll pass back and forth. Okay. This is a this is a short answer.
We're going for a full basement. Um full basement because of the uh the elevation of the lot. We don't have flood concerns. That's my question. Is that all? That's my problem. Can Can you switch the mics back and forth? I live I live at 348 Maine. Are
we done with the question? Now you wish to make a comment. It's downhill from the Can you raise your right hand? Do you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to provide is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but
the truth? Yes, I do. Thank you. Please proceed. Okay. Um I have an issue with water now at my house. I'm lower than this proposed house of I've lived here for 60 years.
And up until just maybe five, six years ago, uh I rarely had any water coming into my basement. Sometimes and when we had a hundredyear flood or something, I'd get some seepage. Several years ago, a tiny house
on Main Avenue was enlarged to about four or five times its original size. I believe it's the house next to yours. I don't know. Since then, I have been having water coming into my
basement with any heavy rain. It's becoming a real problem. Number one, I'm getting older and it's harder for me to control it. I now have to put what they call quick d quick dam
bags on the side of my house um inside to contain any water that's coming in and I'm afraid that with this house having a full basement it's only going to exacerbate the problem for me.
Exactly. Where on that map is your house? All right. Here's Mercer. One, two, three. Y, it's lot 20. 20. Mr. Hollows, if you could borrow the microphone for a second, I think we can
address Miss Shriber's concern. We are capturing certainly all all roof water. Is the construction of a basement likely to create any kind of problem? I don't see that. And most likely we would have a sump pump in there that would get um piped into this
our proposed uh piping to the through the easement. Um but we're collecting all the water from the roof of this house. And right now the the barn and the other garage, they they just come down on the ground and and go actually in a southern
Yeah. downhill in a southerntherly direction. That will no longer be the case. We will have all the roof leaders connected to a pipe that will go into the storm drainage system that's on Main Avenue. So it's going into the street storm sewers. Street storm sewers.
Would you classif we would have less runoff from our property going to in the other direction towards your property. The basement itself displaces water where water can go.
Well, we're going to have a pump for planning to put a sump pump. So, if there is any water that is being displaced from the bathtub of the basement, that can uh potentially fill
the u the sump pump that would now be pushed and discharged to the uh storm water uh mitigation that you're planning to do with the That would be the that would be the plan. I mean, I would recommend it to anyone in this area to have a sump pump. What we don't know is
with the new house that you mentioned since that was built, we don't know if there was a sump pump put in that building when it's basement was created or modified or whatever. And that's when you noticed that you started seeing water. As soon as that house was built,
you're doing deduction. I mean, they have a full basement when we Where's that house on that map? one that you're referring to. I believe Yeah, this is yours. It's right next to Mr. Jano's residence.
18. Yes. We would have no objection to a condition of approval uh providing that we do uh outfit the basement with some pumps. Got it already. That's going to solve the problem. It's going to displace a large part
of dirt in the ground. I'm not worried about Can you give her the mic? Yes. Is it picking it up? I'm worried about the ground water the the the water table in that area.
Any little thing changes it. I mean, for 50 years I had no problem. And now I have a big problem. And I'm getting older. I can't. this is getting tougher for me to contain the water that's coming into my
house. Um, and and uh just a point of interest, I the two houses on the corner of Mercer and Maine when there they were fairly recently built, they don't have basements. They weren't permitted to
have basements. And when we put in a garage, a detached garage to our house, we were not permitted to pave in front of it because of the groundwater issue, groundwater or impervious lock coverage.
Was it the lot coverage that was the concern and that's why you couldn't? I I can't answer that. I just know we weren't permitted to do it. Are any of Mr. Hollow, any of those properties in the flood zone? The one on the corner um
might be when you say the one on the corner I'm sorry Mercer and meer lot 22. So is it fair to say that you would not construct a basement in a in a flood zone? That's correct. Yeah.
So is your ask is your ask that they not construct a basement rather on a slab. I I What knowledge do you have of the of the approvals and basement of the house next to this to the
applicant's house? I just want to make sure I I don't I don't understand what you're asking me. So, you're you're making a statement about the house next to the applicants, and I just want to make sure that all of this information is correct because we don't I think we're all trying to think about what was approved and what was discussed when
that addition and basement was built, but we don't know. And are you like, how are you aware that there's a basement there that maybe takes up the whole property? I'm just curious how you know or what not how you know, but what what you know. Well, I I know the size of the
house is far greater than it was initially. It was a tiny little hundred-year-old house or even older, and now it's a very large house. Uh I I don't know how I know there's a basement other than people have talked
about it because it's affected other people and then it affected my other neighbor. I think I'm just I'm I think we're all trying to hear you and I'm just trying to figure out it's hard to make a decision based on not knowing whether
the basement is actually causing issue. But you would have the record of that, right? whether that house hasn't been No, the the the planning board wouldn't have a record and also we don't know as of yet unless somebody happens to know whether that was part of a a land use
board approval or whe or that home or whether it was just a permit that was derived from you know just for building permit or something. We don't know. Say you're not having an issue. I'm just trying to make sure that I can't answer that question. No, it's okay. I'm just trying to make sure that the issue that
you're having it would actually even be resolved by this. That's all I'm Okay. impacted by it. Right. And the board can only operate with the evidence before. Yeah. Am I allowed? Talk to your attorney. Since you're not an engineer either, I'm
going to advise you not to. question perhaps this will help. Um so Mr. Hollowos the the proposed mitigation includes some pump
for discharging the displaced groundwater from a basement as well as then the all roof leaders. So the majority of the impervious coverage created on the lot all both of those combined discharging to the the sewers.
That would be correct. So you confident in the statement that there will be a significant reduction in infiltr infiltration of storm water runoff on the property that would adversely affect the groundwater table of the neighbors.
Yes. because we have two structures that just the roof leader well it comes down it's just splash block or just goes into the on the ground and then will go in a southerntherly direction towards Valley Road. Is that another way of saying that there's going to be less water runoff as
opposed to the same or more? Yes. As so less less overland runoff as well as then less infiltration and influence to the groundwater table. Correct. than the current condition. Correct. Just just
out of interest, when you create the bathtub of the basement, is there a crushed stone up against the wall of the basement? And the reason why I'm asking that is if
water, however disturbed, will have a pathway to uh uh get to the sump pump and actually pull more water away from the property as opposed to um just letting the water just get displaced
because there's nowhere for it to go. There is a gravel bed underneath the house. Um, and what a lot of builders do is they actually run perforated pipe around the perimeter of the outside and then they pipe it inside to where the
sump pump pit is and then it uh then it discharges also in the basement. Does that include a French drain in the basement sometimes? Yes. But the sump pump pit itself is lower than the goes lower than the gravel. I think we all
know that Long Hill has a challenge when it comes to flood water. So, we're trying to do the best we can with the information that we have to try and get a solution that doesn't worsen your now sit your current situation. And I think that's what we're trying to problem
solve here. I I can be sympathetic because I didn't get water in my basement until um a couple years ago. And the the water is not necessarily coming from the sky. It's coming from the water table. It's coming from the
ground up. So all the gutters and leaders that on the two bigger houses next to me didn't solve the problem of the water coming up from the bottom. So I hear what you're saying. I mean my
As of book today, but two days ago, there was water sitting on top of my there's visible water in my backyard. It's not wasn't absorbed. We're having biblical rain of the last week. Yeah. And the soil is not forgiving.
Can you do a sump pump and a forgive me I don't Can you do a sump pump and a French drain? Does that help? The French the French drain creates the conduit for the water to move around the foundation, not create hydrostatic pressure. And the sump pump is then essentially connected
to that that drain system. So it can once the water gets to the pump, it then creates a siphoning effect to pull the rest of. You can do both. It they they complement each other. Usually you do both. Usually you do both. Is that an option? They complent each other and the leaders.
Okay. So you're relieving the pressure underneath the slab for with the sump pump, but then by having the French drains and connecting it to the sump area, you're allowing relief of pressure from the sidewalls as well. And also appropriated pipe around the outside
helps yeah improve where is the u where is the water traveling once the sump pump captures it specifically. So then that's going to the as proposed to the connection in our main avenue sewer. Okay. So it's going at to main avenue to the
storm drain to the back of the storm drain and passing all that house is bar and then right. So and then it'll eventually flow out to our offs without impact back into the groundwater system. So it's fair to say right now that the accessory buildings that old barn which is actually pretty big. It's currently
dumping water into the property which is just making its way down through the properties now. And with these two buildings they're going to be capturing the water some pumping it out to Maine. Is it fair to say that you're going to have less of a problem that you're going to be alleviating the pressure on the
properties below? Yes. And that's that was the line of questioning I I asked Mr. Hollows as well. Correct. Um and maybe can answer. I just wanted to confirm. Uh that's that's what the building code requires as well. Um it
requires waterproofing to make it a tub. Um a line of uh crushed crushed gravel and then uh gravel t uh drain tile. I think it is around the entire uphill side. And the point is to to take any net water um and relieve relieve the
pressure from both the sides and below. Um we got a stipulation that the building code would have taken care of anyway perhaps, but still good to get it. Yeah. The um the lot that was being discussed with the improvements a few years ago, 338
neighboring to the subject lot. Um, I was looking through aerial historic imagery. Approximately 2018, summer of 2018 was when that construction commenced and was completed by the end of the year. Looks like the
dwelling increased. Uh, it d more than doubled in size at that time. And so it would be reasonable to have seen an increase in the storm water runoff that then was allowed to then infiltrate
and then impact the groundwater in the area. So as we look at this proposal, we we look to shed that water and get it into our storm system so that it's not a detriment to any of the specific neighbors.
And it is to the best of your knowledge the storm management pipes along Main Street are in good working order. Correct. Yeah. And and what you see commonly along Main Avenue, we were discussing earlier with these curb cuts that have
pipe penetrations. That's a mixed bag of roof leaders or some pumps directly. more commonly there at some point in the property that the sump pump is connecting to them as well. So if a
property does have the sump pump, there's usually nowhere to alleviate that water as it discharges outside of your foundation. It then recirculates back and you're just playing a game with the pump. So getting it out to the street is uh something we have to be
cautious of as a township because we don't want to create icing conditions. It's why when there's an opportunity to connect directly to the catch basin, it's more advantageous. So hopefully this project's not contributing to the challenges that
you're seeing. Am I understanding that I I am looking into Well, this is a just a question because I'm not understanding what you're saying. The French drain can be the the runoff
from the French drain will go into the sewer system on the proposed on the proposed home or any home because I thought that's not permitted storm water sewer system. Yes. So the storm for the storm sewer
system. Yes. So where's this? All right. The reason I'm asking this is because I'm looking into a French drain and I was under the impression that it could not go towards the street. It it had to discharge to the back. It Yeah. So it it should
discharge to the rear. If it was if there was an opportunity for a connection to a catch basin along your frontage, then that could be reviewed and for approval. Okay. Um, and in this case, that's why
that's specifically why they're creating the easement is to provide that access to that corner catch basin without crossing other other third party property. So, they're much closer to the catch bas. All right. Okay. So, what we
what we when I put on my other hat since we're wearing hats today, everybody, right? When I put on my other hat as township engineer, um the concern for an application to seek relief from your se your sump pump discharging towards the front would be that that water is going
to go into the gutter line and it's going to create an issue in the winter during freezing and create unsafe conditions. So, one of the alternatives is if a direct connection to a catch basin, which is only really afforded when there's a structure in front of the property.
Okay. Okay. Hopefully that helps helps you and this project doesn't contribute. Do you have any other questions or No, but um I mean All right. I I don't know from the
public. Sorry. Any anything else before I go to Well, I guess I was I was hoping there might be the possibility of not having a base a full base uh or any basement in the house you're proposing. We'll take that under adisement. Okay. Thank you. Definitely.
Any other member? Is this a question or testimony? Comment. Okay. Swear them in. Yep. Please raise your right hand. Do you swear to God or affirm testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Yes.
Please give us your name and address as well. Okay. My name is George Debner, 1968 Valley Road, Millington. And I would just like to make a comment about the situation. I think he should be able to do what he wants to do with his property. And I think we should find
a way to ease her concerns about her property. Now, my experiences are varied over my years, and I think the engineer can probably provide a drawing showing that there's 10 inches of gravel underneath
the floor and that the floor is a floating floor with a French drain around the outside of the perimeter of the foundation so that all the water will indeed go to the French drain and the pump and then go out into the curb cut so that it it
won't impact your property as much as you think it may happen. Now, I've seen this done before and it's worked many times, but it requires, you know, a little bit of drawing and a little bit of extra stone and stuff, which I'm sure everybody can manage to work through that. And another thing is when the hole
is dug for the foundation in this type of soil, there's a high lom content and it's very claylike. So, as the excavator is digging the pit or for the tub out for the foundation, it can't be sheared.
It has to be pulled. Because when you dig through a heavy lom soil straight down, the side of the bucket creates a clay barrier that will impede the flow of water. So when the excavator digs this
hole, and this should be done at the same time one of the initial inspections for the foundation is done is that the side is dug open with the bucket. I'm sure you know what I'm talking about because, you know, so I just wanted to offer this opinion up to to try to help
smooth things over because I think he has a right and it sounds like it's a good plan for his house and you know, her concerns need to be addressed and I think that that really in my opinion would allay your concerns and it's not that much more of a cost onto the
construction. That's all I really have to say. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you very much for that. Any other members of the public? Seeing none. Wait. Oh, I don't know if he's just letting him sit down. Let him sit down. Yeah. All right. So, I'll
close the uh comment and question from the public. You want me to tear it up? Just about. Any other questions from any other testimony or anything that we've heard? Hearing none. Do you want to give us a summation? Sure. Well, I'm sorry. Actually, maybe Mr. Zeli wants to
actually No, that's a good point though. We should let him go first. All right. Uh I'll do the quick version. Complete. We are we're dealing with a C2 C2 variance for all for all seven now variances. Uh purposes A, C, E, and I
are satisfied we believe in terms of the benefits uh as well as the uh general benefit of uh improving the housing stock uh and conserving property values. uh we don't see any detriment uh and likewise under the negative criteria we really don't see any detrimental effect
let alone substantial detrimental effect uh to the zone plan or to the public good. Uh so we believe that even with these seven variances um this is a good project. It uh represents sound planning purposes. Uh we thank you for hearing us this evening and we'd appreciate a positive vote. Thank you. Mr. Hollis,
could you just do me a favor and just take down that sign so we can see everybody? Thank you. The whistle is wet. I'm ready to go. Mr. Sure. The the uh um so as I understand
it, this is an application for a minor subdivision, one lot to two for single family dwellings and seven bulk variances. A lot area variance for proposed lot 16001 of 10,000 square ft versus 20,000 square ft minimum lot
area. A lot area variance for lot 16.02 O2 uh proposed 7,920 square ft uh versus a 20,000 square ft lot area minimum. Lot width
variance for lot 16002 79.2 ft lot width versus 100 ft lot width minimum. uh front yard setback for proposed lot 1602 25 ft uh proposed front yard setback
whereas 50 ft minimum is required uh lot coverage for proposed lot 1601 uh of 26.65% 65% versus 25% maximum permitted. And the final two variances, no single car
garage provided for either of the two proposed lots 161 and602. Those are all bulk variances. You heard the arguments with respect in the planning testimony uh and other testimony with respect to the C2 bases.
Um the conditions of approval should it be a motion to approve uh would include all the items listed in the May 8th uh actually I think there was just one actually testimonial item listed in May 8th uh memorand of our planner Miss
Lehaney uh and uh all the items listed in the May 9th uh memo of our engineer uh and the only additional uh condition that I have in my notes if um quickly reviewing them correctly uh
are the uh stipulation to install the sump pump in the basement of proposed lot 16002 with French drain and piping associated therew with notwithstanding the fact that it may be required by the building code. Nevertheless, I don't
think I had any other uh conditions that were stipulated to other than the ones in the reports. Um and it is a majority for passage. Uh and we have two, four, five. Three out of five is my math uh for passage. Uh if it is a motion to
grant, I'll assume it's with all the stipulated two conditions. Just for point of clarity on the sump pump and continued drainage under the um under the property uh that is to be connected to the um pipe uh that will take the
water through the easement to the uh storm water. Not to be not to be dropped out into the street or elsewhere on the property. Oh, no, no, no. To to the drain the corner of, uh, Maine and Mars. Yes. Or near the inlet near the corner
of Main, wherever that is. Okay. So, at this point, uh, open to discussion. Um, I'll start with, uh, Mr. Lav meeting Lavender. Anything you would like to raise or considerations or even the, uh, advisement by one resident whether to
have a basement or not? I'm in favor as is as stated. Still, um I'm in favor as stated. I'm very sympathetic to the uh resident's comment, but it's hard to know without having seen or been a part of the previous application, whether there was
one or not with the um other house on Main Avenue, like what is actually the cause of that. So, I can rely on, you know, the experts testimony that the uh some pump, the French drain, and then the leaders would hopefully actually
alleviate some of this storm water issues. So, I'm in favor as is also. Thank you, Miss Ojen. Um, I'm in favor for the same reasons that Miss Still gave, I think, with these additional actions to to mitigate the groundwater
situation for um for a resident in the area that it's an appropriate application and and I appreciate her bringing her concerns to uh to light. Mr. L, I'm in favor.
Um, and I I think the steps that were taken and were part of the plan really try to keep uh make a better condition than the current condition for this property which is what we should
always be trying to achieve. So I I I appreciate that fact was taken or that path was taken. Thank you. Uh I too am Yes. Oh, we started. I'm sorry. We went all the
way because he said that I only have to pay attention. Uh I two am in favor. Uh for one, it is meeting the um the master plan as we have just made those revisions in uh two years ago. It
is taking uh some I'll call them unsightly buildings, maybe rather dangerous buildings and uh taking them down and putting up uh uh what I believe is a home that will u enhance the neighborhood. Uh so I can appreciate
that. I am extremely sympathetic to the resident that is uh having water problems and uh I am comfortable with uh what the engineers have said with regards to um uh the mitigating factors and how to remove some of that challenge
that we have just in this town alone to hopefully lessen and hopefully she's actually come away with some information on how to address uh her her issue a little bit better. So I'm in favor of the applicant uh proposal. Uh I'm going to Mr. Diamond hopefully gets you out of
the doghouse. And so your wife looks very young and I wish her a happy Mother's Day as well as your daughter. Um so hopefully you won't have a quiet ride home tonight. Um so with that, um I'd like to see a
motion. Um and then we'll do a second and then do a vote. Yeah. Motion to approve as, uh stated by councel. Okay. Call the role. Committee Lavender. Yes. Miss Dill, yes. Mr.
Lavario, yes. Miss Ojins, yes. Acting chairman Jones, yes. Motion carries. Congratulations. Thank you all very much. Have a wonderful evening. Thank you. Thank you all. Well done. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Does somebody want
to bring Mr. Han back to the There he is. He couldn't wait. [Laughter] I did not. No problem. That's good. All right. Uh we still have business to
conduct. [Music] Um, so as as you're exiting the the the courtroom, uh, we're going to continue with our business. Um, number eight, we have, uh, the meeting minutes. We have three minutes to go through. That's
March 25th, April 8th, and April 22nd. We'll start with the LA the latter and work our way forward. For March 25th, Uh excused is Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Opaka, and Mr. Engineer Joe doesn't get to say
anything. So, uh any concerns, questions, amendments for the March 25th M uh minutes? No. Says all in favor, right? Well, a motion. Motion and all in favor. Make a motion to approve. I second. Okay. So, it's
Mr. Lavender and then Mr. Hanss. All in favor? I I Thank you very much. April 8th. Uh, excused are same culprits, Mr. Mitchell and Mr. Okaka. And this time, Miss Leaney doesn't get the same.
Apologies there. Any amendments, changes, concerns to the minute for April 8th? Okay. Go ahead, Mr. H. part of another comment later um on secondary ordinance 5625.
I'm sorry 565. Yeah. 565 565 or 566. 566. 56. You said 565. You said 565. So which one? Yeah. Which one you would we
[Music] talking we need to do a breathalyzer before. Okay. No, my main point here and it's going to be a later subject is that we did discuss altering some aspects of that ordinance.
You want to clarify what that alter 155.4 There's no reference in the minutes here. So therefore, I think it would be worthy of recogn these regulations shall not apply to flags United States of America or to permitted home office uses. Well, he's
talking about he talked about strikes at that part of the Can you just send me that again, David? Then I'll add it to the minutes. Yeah, exactly. So, I think it's worth noting something that we said we didn't think was appropriate and that'll be a conversation later about
committee and what to do with this particular Yeah, we do have an action on the back side of that. Yeah. But but just for clarification sake so that the sake that the board can vote on the minutes now should you wish that to vote on the minutes now. uh if you could just once
more clarify exactly what you're adding to the minutes. So within the ordinance right 155.4 There's a not there's a section that talks about flag emblem and other insignia of a nation
state. These regulations do not apply to flag United States of America. So meaning you can have basically as many as you want. That's the way I read that. Or to permitted home use home office use. It just seemed like an odd
inclusion in your audience to permit home office uses it. And and you and your your recollection is that the board decided to recommend striking the portion for permitted home office use. Correct. Right. No, my recollection as well. I
just want to make sure. Yeah. So that so then now if the now the board can vote knowing what the clarification is if that's the only clarification. So it's someone can make a motion uh with the motion to adopt as amended. As amended.
Can I have a motion to adopt as amended? I have a motion to adopt as amended. Seconds. All in favor? I. Thank you very much. And going to the final 22nd uh minutes. Any changes? And
only uh Mr. Mitchell is excused. And well, Mr. have a minor point on this one. So I said under eight review um OC review. Oh, I messed
up the numbers. Oh no, I forgot it was out of order. Yeah. Yeah, I'm sorry. Can Can you do that one again? Yeah. Number eight on the first page. On the first page, right? Second line after number eight. Vice chairman final point. And note the
previous propose changes to 171 regarding change updates at H. I just think it's worth adding what 171 is if you look at the Oh, so put the put the title of 171. Yeah, it's land use. It's only
in the minutes we just looked at. You do actually have it specified section 171. Yeah, I had to look it up. Wait, where did I put that? You you put it on the other one. Oh, the the the one before.
Yeah. Okay. So, I'll specify it again on this one. Yeah, it might be worth just Okay. So, can I have a motion uh to approve as amended? And ju if I may, Joe, just for clarification, since apparently we're doubling them up, that's both for the regular board
minutes as well as the executive session minutes for April that we're voting for April 22nd. I'll make a motion to adopt as amended. Second, Mr. Lavender. And just so just clarification for everybody, the executive session minutes
do not go on the website. They're not available to the public until after the everything is done said and done with the litigation and board attorney were approves everything is said and done. Correct. And just also as a point of clarification, I can't approve the
executive session minutes because you weren't there included. Correct. Right. So you'll be listed as a partial abstension since we combined them. Next time we won't combine them. So I have a I have a motion. I have a second. All in favor? Hi. Hi. Thank you
very much. All right. Moving on to uh my favorite topic called the ORC. Um why don't we start with um the item that's uh been sent down to us from the TC. This is or the township
committee. This is regarding um commercial parking in residential zones. It is LU124.2 two garages and parking of commercial vehicles in a single family residential zone. Um before you you have the
worksheet. Uh just like to call out that um in the master plan chapter 1 introduction section 1.3 challenges and opportunities page 15 item number 11 the following statement is written. A significant number of outdoor storage
areas exist for material and construction vehicles. Most are nonconforming uses in both business and residential zones. So if uh if you listen to the township committee meeting uh two weeks ago, um this was brought up
by uh the mayor as well as uh committeeman Burlesa. I believe committeeman Lavender opined on this as well as deputy mayor uh Berseria also opined on this and uh it's regarding the parking of commercial vehicles. So as it
states right now, no commercial vehicle shall be parked outdoors overnight in any single family residential zone. Not more than one commercial vehicle not exceeding a load capacity of 1 one and a half tons may be garageed properly according to the bulk standards of each
lot in a residential zone and no commercial vehicle exceeding such loading capacity may be stored or garageed. Um so the so the TC has asked us to take a look at this to see how it uh does it conform or is it
non-conforming with the uh master plan and if there's any recommendations uh coming from uh the planning board. So um can I just confirm I'm sorry because we've talked about garages so many times. This is different. This is different. Okay. Thank you. We did talk
about garages today in the application. Yes. Um there is in the worksheet there is a historical uh uh previous ordinances that have changed the acting ordinance now. So if you wanted to see what those changes were I did highlight those in yellow so you can see they're
minor changes mostly word smithing uh through the document. Um I'll I'll pause there for any comments. I don't know miss uh committeeman Lavender if there's anything you want to opine on this. Keep going. Yep. Okay. So there are several recommendations uh that are being uh
presented. One of those is to allow one commercial vehicle on a property in any or all residential zones. It's also to um another recommendation is use weight limit as a guidance and one of the
suggested numbers I believe was uh was 10,000 I think it's what pulling capacity or 10,000 in weight. Yeah. So, so thank you. Maybe I should kind of create some parameters here and I'll I'll comment first on the exist existing ordinances
because they are out of date and in particular [Music] um in our code book there's a definition on what a commercial vehicle is and apparently the town attempted to define
it with some specious characteristics. we really should be referring to NJSA39 call 1.1 which is the state's definition of what a commercial vehicle is as opposed to lucking something out of the air. That's the first thing. The
second thing is um the current or current ordinance specifies a loading capacity of one and a half tons. That's kind of a faulty parameter to go on as well because loading capacity of pickup trucks change as
models change. Um really what we should be looking at is something like uh gross vehicle weight rating which is the weight of the vehicle plus the weight of the fuel plus the weight of the passengers plus the maximum weight of the payload. And that's a very standard
number. It can be enforced. You the code enforcement officer opens up the door on the driver's side looks at the sticker inside the door. GVWR is a very standard um rating and it also neatly classifies along with the kinds of pickup trucks
that contractors tend to have. For example, F-150, F-250, F350, Ram 1500, Ram 2500, Silverado 1500, right? That that's the way the numbers go. Um and so, you know, we've
had a situation in town. You folks probably have contractors living in your neighborhood. I know I live next door to one who had his pickup truck there all the time. Jeff Arnold Puing up the street. No one ever complained about this. This was sort of a little bit of a self-inflicted wound
um by an overzealous committee member who thought he was following an initiative to beautify the town. Little diddy. No. 21 tickets would be handed out and there'd be a pitchfork mob coming in on right on pickup trucks and
was pretty interesting. And so anyway, um the majority of the committee really didn't know that that happened. Wouldn't have recommended that it did. Uh but it did. And now we're in a position where we need to kind of mop up the mess,
right, and clean up this ordinance. And right now, we're ignoring all violations while we have an attempt to do this. So I did a little bit of research. first was on, you know, rationally what kind of trucks are you looking to
provide for? We all know we don't want dump trucks. We don't want cranes, right? We know we've got um folks with with utility vans and pickup trucks. And we know it's not going to be a Ford F-150. It's going to be a 250 or 350
because these folks are going to go down to 22. They're going to pull a trailer. You know, they need to have that power, right? Um, and those trucks aren't that much bigger than the than the one and a half ton varieties which aren't one and a half tons anymore. Um, I looked at
Bridgewater and apparently Bridgewwater went through this exact same thing in 2020. For some reason, um, they realized they weren't enforcing an ordinance they didn't know they had, but they needed to clean it up. And they I I sent a copy of
that out and so you could see it. It's It's very sensible. Yeah. You can park them, try to hide them. They can be in your driveway, just one if it belongs to the resident and that's their vehicle. Mhm. Right. And because that's what we have and this is a bluecollar town,
right? It's one of the strengths of this town. Um these are the folks that they've got a snow plow in front in the winter and they're out in the middle of the night helping us all out. They're the ones that are unplugging our drains or pumping out our basement when it floods. They're the ones that are out
there doing electrical work, etc., etc. We want to encourage this and not discourage it, but we also don't want to create a mess. So, anyway, that's the background. It's a little bit of research that I've done. I'd recommend um if you haven't seen it, maybe um you
could forward it out to the committee. Bridgewaters, I I've got it up here. I could kind of read through it real quick. Uh, but I'll stop there and want to hear what the rest of the board thinks. Thank you for that background. I didn't know and I like vehemently agree
with everything you said because I come from a long line of family, fathers, aunt, fathers, uncles, brothers, every cousins who all have utility trucks. So, I very much so support this like self-employed, you know. So,
um, I would like to see the return. Yep. I will send that out. I um I lived in a condominium condominium and there was a row of garages and then there were parking spaces in front of garages and no
commercial vehicles were allowed to be parked anywhere in the parking lot and it created a number of hardships but that was a different situation because they were lined up next to each other and they they enforced it. Is that your
HOA? Uh the HOA. Yeah. the condominium association, but you know, they were next to each other and and they were garages. It was just too big to fit into the garage, but it really was not an unsightly truck. It's just they were not willing to uh to bend the rules. You
classify like we consider ourselves to be a semi-ural community still, right? No, we changed the classification. We did. Yeah. No, didn't we change that? I think
we're going to I don't think however. Yeah. Okay. For this speech, for this for this engagement, I thought that was changed. And they were just pickup trucks, right? They weren't trucks that had like landscaping racks on a side. It was like um a
transit truck, you know, the the ones that are utility box truck, right? Okay. Okay. which nice looking vehicles when they're when they're clean. Yeah. You know, they're dressed up nice and you know,
but they're work trucks, you know, and they're people are working out of them. Yeah. Mr. L. So, um I I agree with I listened to a lot of what happened at the committee meeting. It was pretty interesting.
um the the town has the need for this for people who just want to work and we we shouldn't be causing them an undue hardship and that's clearly what this does. So I I'd like to see the
Bridgewater piece. I'm curious about how you deal with the change the changes that occur to what becomes a commercial vehicle or not. you know, because as we've seen over time, people are driving bigger and bigger trucks as a personal
vehicle. Um, and the commercial ve commercial commercial pickup trucks getting bigger and bigger, too. So, we have to be cognizant of that. So, figuring out how to define it, I I think's going to be the tricky piece. Maybe you got an idea. I'd like to
respond to that. And so, that's where I think the the folks in Bridgewater did excellent work on this. Um, and so one of the things they talk about, [Music] um, heavy duty pickup truck and van conversions with a gross vehicle weight
rating of 14,000 pounds or less are permitted, provided that such vehicles are to be used as utility vehicles, parenthesis, for trade purposes, and further provided that such vehicles either have an opened or enclosed bed with neither racks nor stakes. Now,
14,000 uh pounds gross vehicle weight rating is the highest capability pickup truck before you get into ones where you put boxes on the back. So, it's an F 350. Mhm. Right. And so, an F350 is
maximum gross vehicle weight of 14,000 lbs. Now, again, that's curb weight, which is the the truck and the engine, the fuel, which is about 400 lb, right? plus the passengers, which could be another thousand, plus the payload, which could
be, you know, another 3,000. So, it adds up. 14,000 sounds like a lot, but that's everything. And that thousand in people weight, that's like a crew cab. Yeah. Extended cap, right? Right. Okay. Scott, of those 21 residents who got um
violation notices, would they all have been exempted had this ordinance been in place? I can't tell you that affirmatively because I don't know what vehicles they have, but just understanding what I see around town and I did drive around and look, um
I think this would have to this would cover if not all of them, most of them. Yeah. Okay. So, um I'm trying to understand if you have a closed back on a utility vehicle. Is
that in or out in Bridgewater? I'm assuming it's anything that you can walk into, not a van. So, it's not a van. We're talking about a pickup truck that might have an enclosure in the back. You know, you have the utilities with toolboxes on the side and then you sometimes you'll see a door in the back
and you go up into the back of the Utility vans is what they used to call them. So it says examples of permitted permitted vehicles include but are not limited to minivans, full-size and heavy duty pickups, utility vans, multi-purpose vehicles, um and then it goes on. Okay. So the
list is pretty extensive. Yeah. And it's it's it's pretty specific. All right. And then I just want to make sure about this whole advertising thing, right? Because that I I think you have to do that by law if you have a commercial
vehicle, right? You have to have an it has to be there has to be a license on there, right? Registered as commercial vehicle, right? And if I'm not mistaken, the Bridgewater covers that too by saying that you should try to move it where it's not in sight or screen, but not sitting out in front like additional
advertisement that hey, you know, I'm I'm a plumber or I'm a carpenter or a landscaper, right? It's not sitting out there as as advertisements. It's you went home and you parked your car in the drive. I think it says in the driveway at least 5 feet away. Yeah, they they even cover that. It says the vehicle
shall not obstruct any pedestrian or vehicle vehicular traffic and be no closer than 5 feet from a side or rear property line to the extent feasible. The vehicle shall be shall be screened by a combination of fencing and/or landscaping to provide year- round screening. Wherever possible, the
vehicle shall be parked in a side or rear yard. So even then it's giving some wiggle room, right? It's it's giving guidance on what should be, but it's not. The only thing it doesn't talk about is trailers. It does mention in the titles. It mentions in the titles because they
replace the previous which probably did and that's that is something that you know we need to we need to dig in deeper on that. Yeah. Trailers are covered in a different part of a different ordinance though. Yeah. And the Bridgewater is where I'm referring to because that's the example that we're using that seems to be pretty uh comprehensive with
things like trailers, boats, that those are covered in a different area. Yeah. And and some of those is recreational versus some of those are used for actual work. Right. But to Bob's point, we have personal vehicles in town
which are 350s with dies, right? people are are pulling boats and so it's sort of in congruous to you know that's okay but if you have your plumber's license on there it's not okay. Right. Exactly. Yeah. And that was one of my points as
well about duties in particular because there were some other ordinances who talk about duties where they say two axles only. So there's some further definition. So regardless of how we define this I think and I'm sure we're not defining it right now because we
don't have the knowledge and how we should really present it. the concept of non-commercial garage if possible if not out of sight or within the do within the lot lines so
it's not at the front of the driveway I think that all makes perfectly good sense in now some folks have more than one so they park on the street that may be a different subject but in terms of parking in a residential only then I think um just the clarification of the
points we discussed and I think we should be good to go. I don't see any reason why not to do this. So, what I would like to do is send around the Bridgewater, send around what we believe are the drafted recommendations
which will take mostly the context of what might be in the Bridgewater because it seems to be a good foundation sound and make sure that our recommendations are somehow covered and if they're not, we need to think about the language that needs to go in for that. And I'll send that around for everyone to do homework
so that way we can come back at our next meeting and be ready to send something up to uh the TC after we discuss it one more time. Sure. Yeah, makes sense. No, it's up to you. No, we don't have to comment on this. Or is it my my leisure? Your discretion.
My discretion. Come on up. Make sure you get a mic right there. Yeah, it's not it's not a public hearing. It's just discussion of the or No, no, but you're allowed to with discretion of the chair. The chair would appreciate your input. Uh my name
is George Deer. 1968 Valley Road. 1968 Valley Road. Yeah. As of today, were you born in 68 or 59? [Laughter] I'll take 68. 69. So, I I think you're going down the
correct road because, you know, I think one commercial vehicle because like my son, he uses their vehicle to go back and forth to work and that's a tremendous savings. That's worth about $5,000 a year on somebody's pay. You
know what I mean? And I really think it needs to be addressed that, you know, guys who live here and they bring their vehicle home, I'm not talking dump trucks and trailers and excavators and all that stuff. We're talking like a guy going to work with his with his name on
anti-shake case, you know, only it's his truck, you know, and the uh registration of a commercial vehicle says it all. Yeah. If it's a commercial registration, then it's a commercial vehicle. And if you're allowed one, you're allowed one.
And when you go up into the scale is just no dump trucks, you know, and uh a pickup truck can be registered as a personal vehicle. It just is a different insurance rate and you know, you have to have it inspected, all these types of
things. But I appreciate you going in the right direction and hopefully we can get this resolved. And so you're not issuing tickets now. So I think there were warnings first. There were warnings sent out. There were warning sent out, but no code enforcement's holding off on
anything till we figure this out. Okay. So, he could still park at the house. Yes, he may. Okay. Thank you. Makes life a lot easier. Fleet of trucks. No, no, no. We don't want We don't want He's been parking there for eight years since he got the job. He's 10 years.
And it's it's always back off the road, you know, back by the garage, you know, and uh in the winter time, it's generally put in the garage so he doesn't have to clean the snow off. And we don't, you know, don't run a business out of the house or anything like that. His truck's always clean, well-maintained. You know, all of these
things matter because you don't want, you know, you don't want somebody putting all kinds of stuff in their backyard. And just for clarification, it would fit under the criteria that we discussed. It's a Yes, it's a regular pickup truck, I guess, or Yeah, it's it's a van. It's a service van. It's a
2023 Ford Transit van. Ford, right? So, I'm just curious. Did you get a warning? No. I got a a notice saying that if you don't find a place to park your vehicle, you're going to get a ticket on such and such date. So, very abrasive, but that
sounds like a Yeah. And then, you know, it adds a burden already onto a bluecollar worker where he has to go find a spot to be close to home and pay $500 a month to park a vehicle. So, that adds an additional burden on an already
overworked class of people. I'm a white collar worker and I got to ride New Jersey Transit. Oh, I feel bad for you. I used to do that. Well, we appreciate you're sitting here for two and a half hours. Everyone's intention is headed in the right direction. Yes. I I think so. I'm glad I came so that I could hear it
and, you know, no longer be worried about such things, you know, and trust that you'll do the right thing. Yeah. And I'm glad you're here to to hear us talking about it because we want people to know that we are addressing concerns. Well, I heard it through the grapevine that you were going to talk about it and that there was plans of foot to change
things, you know, but I just wanted to come and show my support and see what actually hear what's going on. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate it. You can always play this back later on YouTube. Oh, I watch just fast forward it. I I can't I got to watch my cat and dog videos.
I'm watching the cat videos. Okay. All right. I've already apologized for one uh wife who Happy Mother's Day. Now everyone knows I'm a cat video guy. Um
we got one more ordinance to talk about. This is groundf flooror apartments move to resolution. While you're about to call that up, hoping I still have power. I want to give some quick stats and I'm going to pass that over to you, Mr. uh Mr. Lavender for TC in case you want to
show progress as to what the what we're doing here on the ORC. Pull this up. This actually kind of goes to a comment uh Teresa that you made wanting to know how we're doing with as far as progress in making a dent.
So when you say resolution, you're talking about moving ordinance. Moving draft ordinance. Draft resolution. You keep saying resolution. It's it's like from revolution. Thanks. Revolution. Um I agree with your comment that it could be 12.
Careful. Careful. Just write that for the record. I'm going to play that back on YouTube. So So just so just to give You're going to beat out the cat video. Thank you. So, just to give some stats, we have two approved while still need to
be amended, two approved um uh resolutions that have been sent to the TC and and signed off. We are working to send HPAC another one uh which will do in two weeks time. Um we're also No, we did send that one up. Sorry. So, that should be at the PC, not this meeting. I
think it'll be the next meeting. I haven't seen the actual ordinance on that. So, no, I haven't sent anything. No. Okay. We'll work through that. I have I don't have it in this format. No, you don't have um Wait, sorry. What is this? Hack. The change in the HPAC. Oh,
the name changes for HPAC. Well, I I did that. Yeah, we did. And we voted it last week. It was in one of the minutes. No, I know that, but I don't remember seeing this. I'll have to go back to my notes. I'll I'll send it to you. Oh my god, it's getting so Okay, I'll send it to So, that's three. Now, we have um we're
going to work on a draft resolution for houses of worship. So that's four. We now uh will also be working on a draft resolution for zoning name changes which uh has seven it addresses seven items
within the master plan. It also addresses the zone map changes that will be going to Mr. VH that touches 39 line items uh within that. And there's also the uh the chairman uh of the planning
board is also working with map uh changes um ground for apartments. So right now we're up to 39 36 7 8 9 10. So that's uh 40 changes that were I'm sorry 40 five changes that we're looking to make and
address within the master plan. We're also going to do the ground floor apartment which you have in front of you today. So that's another one. So that's 41 we're up to. Then we're going to start discussing the residential zones. There's a new one. The BD zone permitted use. There's five more setbacks on for the BD zone. That's another one that
we're going to do. And then we're going to get a list of stuff from the zoning board of adjustment when they hand down their items, which one of them is generators. Uh and then the other and then the last one is sheds. So you're looking at almost 60 items that we're
touching and there's over 300 items in the master plan itself. So we're like little less than 25%. So we are so the what little work that you may see coming across as onesie twoosies there's a big effect that's
happening on the back end. So we are doing a lion share and that's only through the first quarter and half of or the first month of the second quarter. So a lot of work is being done. Pardon the interruption. If you don't mind just tomorrow, like tomorrow or Thursday, if
you could send me an email and clarify. Yes. What meets what is currently ready to go to TC? I will do that. And then I'll get it to them ASAP and it'll be on their agenda for the 28th. That's perfectly fine. Yep. I will do that. And I'll put Liz on that so she keeps me
honest. Thank you for that. And and Mr. Lavender, I'll send you the stats in case you want to go through those. Please. Thank you. So I'll now turn it over to Miss Laney. Yeah, sure. Thank you. So I took um what the ORC had done which was really extremely helpful in
the um sort of template that you've been using to organize um the information and your your thought processes and I basically you know put all the preamble which I sort of cribed very much from
your um template and then used the um you know what what the proposal was which we discussed last time and and Teresa can probably um fill you in a little bit more, but to address some of the concerns that were raised by the
board, Teresa added some information about um you know, screening and also a definition for ground floor um which I think you know addressed some of the the concerns. I when I was doing this
thought of two things that I just wanted to run by everybody which is that it currently this section is called apartments and business zones and then it specifically talks about the village and hamlet and so and then we have other
business zones we have the BD zone on Valley Road etc. So, I would suggest that we actually rename this to uh apartments in the village and hamlet zones because I think it's a little bit more we're not talking about Valley Road. We're we're talking about the the
h the villages in the hamlet. Yeah. I I think it's not just villages and I'm just trying I thought I would have caught that so I'm just trying to see if I did but I think absolutely and I think even just villages because I'm trying to
we have MH it's in the MA you know which is the Myersville Hamlet. So which by the way the dash should come out of that because when I update Oh when we update the try to make it all consistent. Okay. Yeah. whatever village villages and hamlets or but I agree with you. I I
know I I thought if we just said villages we'd be ignoring the hamlet. That's poor hamlet. I know. Um and the other just comment I had was the last sentence in the amendment which says the gross density of all apartments on the
lot shall not exceed 3/4 three units per quarter acre. And I would recommend that it you do 12 units per acre just because t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t t typically density expressed in, you know, full acre and it just becomes um
like you're trying to be cute like we're just doing three but per quarter acre, you know. So I I'd recommend that you be 12 dwelling units per acre. Do we not address this somewhere else in our ordinances about the number of units per acre?
Why do I why do I feel like that's somewhere else in our code? Well, density lit as as was just said, let density is defined as number of dwelling units per acre, right? So, it would be in affordable housing. It's utilized all the time as you know a measure of yeah,
you know, multif family housing. It could be in the zones the the affordable housing zones are pretty specific about the density. I'm happy with the suggestion. I just don't want us to be conflicting somewhere. I I don't And I know we're calling out specific zones, you know, specific hamlets and villages.
It It's It's 12 units per acre and it was Millington. Oh, I'm sorry. Millington is 12 12 dwelling units maximum, not to exceed per acre. I think that was that's ta that was ta but that
was for the whole Millington village. I remember where did five come from? The five was in the existing ordinance. It says five dwelling in its perimeter. And so the the issue of course in a lot of these villages is that the lot sizes are so small. Yeah. That as soon as you know
if they have five there it's like there's 20 dwelling units per acre because it's the lots are so small and they may have four or five units but then that translates to something much greater and it when you put it in terms of acres sorry and it takes it away. So
yeah, sorry. I What I mean is the five dwelling units per acre that's in the existing ordinance is really low on size. Yeah. And because when it translates to actual um on the
ground conditions, you have small lots already. 12 12 per acre. Right. So per acre is it's 12 per acre throughout all many of our orans. Yeah. Nobody uses per corn. No. No. It's it's usually like if
you're trying to be cute by being like we're not being that dentist. If you were trying to hide it. Yeah. You're trying to make it look like you're not you're not going so high. You would say per quarter acre. Well, so the reason I actually I think I and we actually originally did that was almost naively to make it resemble the size of the of
the zone zone actually there. doesn't make a difference, which makes sense. It It does make sense what you I understand why you did it, but I I just think it's it's a little bit more uh consistent with what we've done elsewhere. What's the zone?
Well, it's all the five. Oh, so you're asking what the minimum lot size is. Yeah. No, dwelling units. Right now it's currently all those zones have the five dwelling units per acre per acre. So now we're going to 12. I
guess Millington a lot more. Well, so the right because five five per acre necessitated variance relief to come to the board because most of those blocks at say 310 of an acre are less than two units. Are we doing too much to open it up too much especially
somewhere and does it serve purpose here trying to address the first can be well I mean if you take the density out let's just say and you just keep everything else in
and then you have the bulk standards of the zone, right? So, these buildings can only be a certain height, be a certain, you know, I don't know, floor area ratio or whatever, and you leave this density out. Um, you could do that because I
personally don't like them to be screwed in different places as opposed to keeping focus under the B standard and whatever else. So, we're not Are you saying strike the sentence, David? The last sentence. I wonder if
ourselves up too much. I think there's a little bit sensitivity. It's a hand. I mean, we're going from five for a now almost two and a half times 12. I think it's a bit too much. I think it's
too much. And you should be density should be not snuck away down here. It should be more visible elsewhere. But this is in the hamlets, right? This is not the R zones we're talking about. Correct. So it's the village focused
area on small lots already. It's not like we already have an acre. I think should be No, because we're addressing it that we don't have one. We don't have any acre properties in the hamlets. No, no, no. I
don't understand. I'm just saying the language elsewhere. You mean within this ordinance or just elsewhere? elsewhere. We're talking about apartments and businesses, right? I think we were just trying that
sentence is already there. Yeah. I I mean I the only thing I could say is if essentially if we took it out then we'd be relying on the zone bulk standards which maybe is fine. you have these other standards in here and maybe it accomplishes the same thing because you're you're already limiting what a
building looks like in terms of make sure we're not contradicting something too. Obviously 12 person is a lot trying to find the master plan. I
know it's I I understand you what your concern is but but I I think we should be straightforward about it too but it's not to exceed. It's not a you will do.
Yes. But the zoning under the actual zone itself should define that that's not so this way Meyersville can have its own right maybe eight maybe in I think it's I think it's stuck in
here under subject so it's stuck in here because there was something there that nobody was meeting so we tried to I think address But it just maybe take it out and put it. So what if we took it out? What
would like what would the what would it be in Myersville based on the bulk standard? I don't know. I I don't I would have to look at sort of what the typical lot sizes are in Myersville just to get a sense if if what you're saying I mean I'm not trying to challenge you.
I can't believe what you're saying, but just to make sure that what that what you're saying is true that like at 12 dwelling units will be, you know, crazy in Myersville where it might not be crazy in Sterling. Exactly. I mean, can we just run that exercise? Yeah, I think
let's just No, that's fine. And and but let's run the exercise. Okay. And then see how that maps out because we may walk away and say, you know what, we were good with what we just what we're proposing. or we say no that we we we're off we're off center and we need to just recalibrate. You're saying you'd like
each each village to have an opportunity to have a different number for the density. That's what we do. I think that's what we do, right? Well, that had an overlay. I
think so. specific lots within the zone as opposed to tucked away in here. I can do 12 got to find they have to find an acre to do 12.
Well, we have to look it get some more understand. Yeah. I mean I um the other zones that you're talking about were very specific typically affordable housing zones that had a density because they had to that's an
overlay volunt but I also you raised an intriguing question which is maybe we don't even need a density if we're going to say we're we're doing you know standard standards. Yeah.
And then my last point is eight just remind me why eight dwellings exist more than eight question why no more than eight dwellings you have to do the oh I think we were looking at the um the application that went on 224 226 and
they had eight or 10 residential units and then so then they required commercial on the bottom So that's like use that as a baseline. So using an actual application for it before.
All right. So the takeaway sounds like a little bit of an exercise to just see what uh each of the villages and hamlets might show. Yeah. Why? We may be off. We may be spot on. We don't know. Right. Well, it may or may not be there
depending on the a little bit of analysis. Okay. Okay. I did I saw that um parking also. You addressed the parking Liz because the there was an issue about accessory
apartments versus accessory dwelling units and a difference in apartments being two parking spaces per unit. Yeah, we were going to use the RSI for that, right? The the RSI is I actually was just doing 124.1 which doesn't have the
parking in it. That's what I that's what I did for right now. That's another amendment. Is that another one for the orc? It's Well, I think Teresa did the work on it, right? Well, I I need to look I don't want to cut you off. Yeah,
it was just when you did it, it was accessory dwelling units versus apartments and it was based on um accessory dwelling units being 50% of one space where if they're
considered truly apartments, then it's two parking spaces per unit. I've got to look exactly the RSIS. It's done on by the bedroom by the kind of the building type and then by the bedroom. So what you see in Sterling would probably it's
not garden apartment, but it's like a stacked townhouse. Garden apartment tends to be the default that I turn to in RSIS when looking at the units that don't fit right in the
box of right the units in RSI. Garden Apartments is most commonly referenced for parking standard on these types of units. And so then the RSI is what it does. It'll say, "Okay, for garden apartments that are have studios and onebedrooms, the obligation is this many
parking spaces per apartment. For a two-bedroom, it's this many. For threebedroom or more or you know, three bedroom, it's this. And anything above three that so it's based on bedrooms, dwelling units or apartment, right? and
and based and and versus square footage. I mean, the idea, of course, is that if you have three bedrooms, you potentially could have three free drivers, I guess. I mean, you know, and I'm happy to work on that. There's a few that are queued up
next, but the but driving through a bunch of these towns there almost every lot has a driveway if not a driveway that leads into like a further I haven't I personally haven't observed parking to be like some sort of pressing issue where all of a sudden there's going to
have to be like a lot of street parking, right? Because they all have they're all like because they're all already built as existing homes that have driveways. They're not built like normal cityscapes that don't have Well, I think this commercial I think it's appropriate for Sterling Village. When I look at
Sterling Village, when I look at Millington, not so much. When I look at Meyersville, not so much. So, I think the way too No, I wouldn't. Okay. Well, then but we know Millington Village and look at
the businesses. Look at carb where the the plumber is and there's apartments upstairs and there's commercial downstairs. If he were to turn one of those into commercial, where are those people going to park? There's no parking. Um if the bank, well, the bank
would have plenty of parking, but you've got Sterling Village, you've got a true linear downtown. It's not true in the other villages. But I guess my point is there's already a parking ordinance that exists. It's just
it it exists already and so we might need to update it because of this. But it's a separate ordinance that I just don't think is going to be like tomorrow all of a sudden everything everything chang because there's a state standard and
then our own ordinance which you said does it reflect the state standard? Do we reference it? We do reference it, but I think it we um we reference it saying it applies, but then we provide our own standards. So, so maybe we should just update it and just mirror the state.
Yep. So, an idea. Okay. So, we still have a little bit of homework to do on that. Okay. So, we're not sending anything to the TC, but I will send you a list of where I think things are. Liz will keep me honest and
we'll start. Okay. That takes care of uh some old business with a little bit of new business. Does anyone else have any old business or new business? Two old businesses. One was one we discussed
earlier. And what do we do about this? This is the flags flag that committed office. I think accepted it without state language in it and if they did accept it then
that's by law we now go back and say maybe we want to reink that after do we just send another amendment up to well you you you made the recommendation both the
uh consistency determination and the recommendation. Apparently, the governing body adopted the ordinance without the recommendation, without striking the language requested to be struck. It is the ordinance as it presently stands. Um, there's nothing
stopping the planning board from uh sending or having Deb send a communication respectfully requesting once again that they amend the ordinance to strike that language out if that is the desire of the planning board. And uh
we could do a simple motion second majority vote to should you wish to have Deb send that recommendation to the governing body. Yeah, there's no more master plan consistency review to do. So we got we had already struck it, but
somehow it made its way back in. Well, that in a form of a letter or I'll run it by you default. Just just a letter say yes is fine or memo, whatever. Just anybody want to make a motion if if that's the desire. Obviously that's all right for a quick comment. Does anyone uh want to use the opportunity to
comment whether to oppose that motion? None. I get a motion. Motion second. I'll second it. Is it all in favor or is it a Well, it's not a resolution. So, uh All in favor? All in favor is fine. As
long as we can delineate whether we have a majority or not. Fair enough. All in favor? I. Any nays? I think we got a majority. Thank you. Any other business? Part two second a
measurement to car earlier on from this the um state plan discussion and we had that separate conversation about the water and the town 10 towns or whatever. Morris County and we asked Cheryl was going to
consider writing to Morris County. Now I think there may be a different opinion to that approach. So So I uh informed our township administrator of the request.
Um we discussed it briefly and um thought that it was more appropriate that the request come from township committee as opposed to our planning board as a request on behalf of the
township. Um, so it was a matter to be brought to an agenda session for discussion with the committee and then they could uh take it either in public session as a discussion or
um essentially I think have the administrator and I would be the ones as the point of communication, but the request would be from them for us to reach out to the county as opposed to the planning board asking township engineers office to reach out to the
county regarding that matter. Just it seemed like the more appropriate body to ask for that effort to be made on their behalf. How do we go about articulating that to
the township committee for them to then make a decision? Anyone have Q tips that I could hand over to Mr. Lavender to make sure you heard what I just said? play back the tape on YouTube. Yeah. No, I I mean I think it's it's on it's it's
a topic that's not lost. Um it's on the table and I'll remind our administrator about it and so that we'll make sure that it comes to the nearest agenda discussion. I just would allow you just to Yeah. And
I think that so I don't want to I don't want to sound like I'm not willing to make the effort, right? I support the effort, but
the discussion that we had in brief was really over the the desire that this board is expressing is a position of the township to enter into some form of agreement or
coalition with other municipalities in our in our county. And to do that, that should be more clearly endorsed by our governing body than a function of our planning board. Steps outside our jurisdiction respectfully. That's fine. So,
so similarly to asking our secretary to send a letter to the governing body, then I'm planning board is recommending it to the governing body and the and I'll be the one carrying that message to our administrator and whatever they decide they decide that's fair. Yeah. As long as the message gets Yep. Absolutely. Pushed along that' be great.
Good. Mr. Hands, you want to bring up a happy note? Happy note. I took the course and I passed the test. Congratulations. Is that why you got promoted to now? Totally separate. Had nothing
to congratulations. [Music] Five painfully boring hours. Liz was there. I know you were. You went to my session. I You were You were there. you and and your lunch. Oh, really? Oh, your
lunch is good. But the person Well, that is there was some real time. No. No. Can I have a motion to adjourn? So move. Second. Second. I favor. I
Very good.