oh yeah all right we're on the air uh we're on the air guys Jerry we're on the air okay all right I I declare the Zoning Board of adjustment regular meeting to order at on October 1st 2024 at 7:32 p.m. call to order and statement of
compliance adequate notice of this meeting has been provided by posting a copy of the public meeting dates on the municipal Bolton board and website by sending a copy to the EA Sentinel and Courier News newspapers and by filing a copy with the municipal clerk standard board procedures any hearing conducted
by the board is a quasi judicial proceeding any questions or comments must be limited to issues that are relevant to what the board May legally consider in reaching a decision and theorum appropriate to a Judicial hearing must be maintained at all times meeting cut off announcement is made
that as a matter of procedure it is the intention of the zoning Board of adjustment not to continue any matter 10:30 p.m. at any regular or special meeting of the board unless a motion is passed by the members then present to extend the meeting to a later specified
cut off time electronic devices all in attendance are requested to take their phones and mute them please so um they do not ring during the meeting and interrupt everyone uh Pledge of Allegiance Gary you're sitting in that
seat why don't you lead us pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible liberty and justice for all thank you okay GL
call yes Mr ronio here miss Brennan is excused this evening Mr ganakas here Mr Flatley here Mr Rosenberg is excused this evening Mr Watts is excused this evening Miss Collins here Vice chair Groff is excused this evening and
chairman GCT here chairman we have a quorum yes and I hope Tom gets better soon he's under the weather is anyone else under the weather or just indisposed um I think they were oh yes Mr Watts was under theather oh I hope all of them feel better yes but yes
other work conflicts I believe all right and I uh I also hear that our uh our board engineer I'm no I'm sorry board planner our engineer is here our board planner is having car trouble in W not here tonight but our uh D our worthy
engineer will step in and and cover for her wear two hats yes um so uh we have many minutes to go over and um they have been provided to us and they are the minutes of June 18th
the minutes of July 2nd the minutes of August 20th the minutes of September 8th uh 3rd I'm sorry and the minutes of September 17th uh they seem to be pretty simple they're not uh that complicated um you want to take a second and just look at them I know they were
just put here on the dis but on the Das um I I had a chance to look at them uh earlier um anybody have a problem with them I was accused or absent for a
couple of them yes yes I know we might have at least two board members who were at all them I was at all them yes who were with us thank God Jerry you you were here uh so yeah I was uh uh not here for the first half of June 18th I
saw the rules you can even wiggle through with one guy really right really that's for for Resolutions yeah that's for Resolutions yes that's for Resolutions not for not for the hearing I thought it was for the minutes too uh it might be yes for the minutes yeah for
the minutes yes yes I think it's the minutes too as long as somebody's here that was here all right uh for the June 18th minutes uh the first half uh that was the
um who do we hear on the first half oh that was the uh Tron Ron right right right okay The Uncommon thread um for that yeah I was I was not here for that I'll move the minutes anyway for June 18th okay fine do I hear a second for
June 18 18 I'll second okay uh all in favor I okay all right June July 2nd everybody was here except Mr Flatley Mr Rosenberg who's not here now so basically anyone else but Mr Flatley
have any issues with the minutes if not can I hear a motion to move the July 2nd meeting minutes motion to move do I hear second do I have a okay all in favor I okay August
20th Jessica Tom Flatley watt Mr Watts okay so everybody but uh Mr Flatley again because the other two people aren't even here so uh do I hear a motion to move the August 20th 24 minutes somebody okay I'll move them
okay I wasn't here for this one you weren't August 20th you're uh Southfield your name says Gary Jus over here over there does wasn't maybe we you weren't there on um the 20th yeah you
sure it was the mother daughter slash well no the August 20th remember the echo Sentinel had mixed up newspaper right so we had to we had to bump the mother daughter to the 300 South norfield to uh September for the first time she was here last well it's in the
minutes that that's who we heard no it's in the minutes that we carried it yeah that we carried you weren here to carry it all right fine uh Jerry moved in who wants to Second it somebody second it I'll second
it you Meredith you can second it I'll second it okay thank you all in favor I September 3rd 2024 Gary you weren't here and Tom wasn't here and Randle wasn't here so Jerry you want to move that one sure
okay and Meredith you want to Second it second okay all in favor I okay now we've got the September 17th and Meredith you can't do either on this one so I'll move them and I'll and I'll second all right all in favor Gary
was here too I I okay good Gary you did show up at the at the August 20th I'm on the video right now yeah you did you forgot I'm just mixed up because I see yeah I know you're mixed up all right that's okay you got them
you got them approve you okay yeah they're fine they're good they're good and devil the exensions for all those who weren't at respective meetings so we're all good we made it through the minutes yeah now we've got the resolutions now we have to resolve
things now with the first resolution Teresa Gallow 300 South northv Road Millington New Jersey block 10104 lot 5.01 application number 24-10 Z One z z z
uh the hearing date was September 3rd the board action was September 3rd and the memorialization will be today October 1st there's one there's one um one what one addition that I need to make on the last page on page nine okay on be it further resolved for the votes
um for the absent it should be gianakas watts and flatly G oh and flatly you left out flatly y I'm I'm adding in flatly is amended all right so the eligible to vote are chairman GCT Mr ronio and Miss
Collins on this okay out of those people that are eligible do I hear a uh a motion to move these I'll move it okay second second all right roll call Mr Rono yes Miss Crawford yes Miss Colin sorry Crawford Colin and uh chairman
gret yes motion carries okay now we have the uh the one uh Kyle um Henry same I needed to add flatly absent on this one okay all right and
same voters on this one okay all right so flatly was okay all right okay somebody want to move this
one in one second okay take your time I will move it okay Gary you want a second no Gary's there Gary I'll second it okay um W call Mr Rono yes Miss Collins yes chairman G
yes motion cares okay now we've got the next one Charles Mahia this one was September 17 this eligible for this our chairman
correct Mr arono Mr Flatley and Mr Gan oh Mr Flatley is eligible for this okay good um all right the kitchen bump out right yes this is the kitchen bump out I'll move Okay resolution for 2411 Z yes I'll
second it all right okay uh roll call please Mr ronio yes Mr ganakas yes Mr flatl yes chairman gett yes motion carries okay the next one is eigor sh sh shilman stif from him 131 ring
Hill Drive mington New Jersey block 10101 lot 6 occasion 2414 Z same same this chairman correct Mr ronio Mr Flatley and Mr Okay who wants to move it Okay who wants to second I'll second it okay okay roll call Mr Rono yes Mr
Flatley yes Mr gakis yes chairman GCT yes motion carries that go over I'll sign with resoltion all right resolutions are done now we get into the me of the subject here all right now we
have the first first application is a bulk variance block 13407 lot 26 Zone R3 67 Cottage Place application number 24-15 Z Chad and Joe Miller appli
proposes to construct an addition to an existing single family dwelling are they here tonight come on up and while they're approaching if I may Mr chairman have a seat right there yes the did have an opportunity to review the notice found the content to
be sufficient found it to be timely served certified mail September 20 published September 19th both at least 10 days prior to this evening so the board does have jurisdiction to hear and decide the application at the appropriate time with your permission
I'll swear all the witnesses in as well as our engineer right if you'll all please raise your right hand as well as our engineer Miss vo and who's also our planner this evening uh do all of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth and
nothing but the truth I do yes thank you all thank you Mr chairman thank you all right uh Mr Mrs Miller uh and who is your witness so our architect Mike okay uh can I have your credential so we can uh U accept you as a qualified architect
do yes put the mic up to your I I just need to ver just verbally State them on the record you can hold the mic you you can pick the mic up and hold it yeah there you go do you want my like ID number or just no no just state that you're currently licensed where you went
to school and how many boards you've been in front of uh Anthony Michael Tedesco currently licensed architect uh went to school in Temple University and this is my third board appearance oh very good and your licenses in the state
of New Jersey remains a good standing yes and you were accepted by those other land use boards as an expert in the field of architecture leure yes okay we'll accept you as one also you can keep that mic in your hand cuz they have one there okay now could you give us a brief description of what you're going
to do sure sure so Chad Miller this is my wife Jill than you so we're looking to expand on our residents from uh work from home scenarios needing a little more office space and then also for some extra room for when family visits we're looking to add an addition on and that should be within the we okay um so the
rooms are going to be just go over on the record the rooms are going to be used for the addition sure so we're going to have um a larger room well larger relatively speaking the larger room on the pl is going to double as an office and likely some sort of bedroom
at times and then there's additional bathroom that's on the plan as well and then within our current footprint we're actually going to be reshuffling like the laundry room area as well and putting that in the addition well it's part yes it's going to be moving basically from where it is now to a small part of the addition okay yes all
right so it's basically a bathroom a room using uh as an office/bedroom and a par partially the uh laundry room yes okay and it's going to go over what that's there so you want so I can speak to that then obviously as well so right
now we have a brick like patio of sorts that is on the ground um that was there when we moved in and then we do have a portion of the back porch wood back porch that it's actually going to go over as well so we're going to be removing some of that back porch to put the room rooms over
okay uh okay and how many rooms does your house currently have bedrooms yeah bedrooms and how many other rooms 11 rooms total 11 and this is going to be make a 12 correct okay
correct well not counting the bathroom right right I'm not counting the bathroom I counted bathrooms that's fine okay okay so 13 counting baths okay um all right uh then if your architect can
give us some more information yep so uh as you know we're located in the R3 zoning District uh single family R5 use and what we're proposing is a one-story Edition at the rear of the property uh
the total square foot is 540 square ft uh I know based off of the engineers comments there's a little bit of a discrepancy um but I think there was a little bit of confusion because in the existing back uh portion where the
kitchen is it's an existing twoot can lever um so it is 540 square foot and the uh so the R3 Zone uh typically has a requirement
of uh 20,000 square foot for a lot size uh thir lot is under siiz and 15587 ft and as a result of the undersized lot we have an existing non-conforming lot coverage uh the
existing is 31.8% where 20% is required and our new addition increases the non-conforming lot coverage uh bringing to a total of 32% which is a 33
square foot increase I'm sorry is it 32% EXA if I may Mr chairman 32% exactly or 32.3% uh it would be see the paper submitted says
32.3 correct so the other one thing I do have a change which was again was the proposed lot uh coverage total which I think the numbers were calculated a little bit
different but I do have a revision and okay you want to mark that as what A1 A1 if it's uh this these are new plans that were Mark 181 and give it to Deborah and you can hand the rest to us and what's
the uh date on that so the date was July 23rd 2024 that's that's in the packet that's in the package is that the last revised date or updated since July that's revision two no that's
revision one so is that different than what you had I have the first issue and then a revision yeah I have issue a issue number one Revis July 2324 yeah we already have July 23 and how does that differ does that differ what you have in
your hand or not sorry the date is the same but it is a new it is revision one the drawing is labeled G 1.01 so it's different from what you guys already receiv received okay so Market A1 give one copy to Deborah and the rest to us it's just this page is
different yes okay okay so you can Market A1 there and just to get to the point uh what exactly is the the revised well let let them to coverage so we you get the right percentage let him pass it out then I'll oh I didn't realize he had extra cop
yeah thank you and you can get one too uh oh my God sorry thank you I do have two larger sets if anyone wants to see that you can okay I keep
forgetting all right so what as as our a student attorney had mentioned would you point out the differences to us so the difference is in the one that you originally received the proposed total was
5,000 uh 5,031 square foot and lot coverage and this one is 4,983 square foot and how did that come about it was in is that all in the
overhang 210 of 3 see so the only difference was just the way it was calculated all the numbers remain the same
okay is it exactly 32% now it is yes but so the 30 48 square ft difference right yeah from the total number so all the numbers in the chart
remain the same yes it was a math error it was just a math error oh okay all right if that that's the case good I mean and then this also accounts for the the overhang over the deck being combined impervious so only one of those
two is correct right okay yeah that was included in the uh existing house which it's noted includes overhang okay very good so then it's excluded from the deck coverage so it's not duplicate correct okay good well I'm glad we cleared that up so
anything else um I guess per one of the comments we received the existing Uh Wood steps which comment on what report uh it was on the number two on the planners
September 27 it was the Phillips and yeah the planning and real estate consult sorry trying to move us along too quick my apologies it was under the planning review comments number two paragraph two uh number three number three
okay my fo off gas so the existing wood steps in the rear are existing and they're just used to get to the lower part of the property okay all right so that answers that mhm um
okay and number four the chain link fence uh we there is no chain link fence to clarify so I don't know what that comment was for then on the neighbor's side yard is there a chain leg fence on someone's
side yard there's a the Poston rail yeah the post and rail fence Poston rail okay well let's change that to poon rail does it in fact um extend onto any part of your client's property no
okay okay uh is it and it it's the neighbors because there's a mashing pet post and rail fence on the other side right there fence their fence does not come on our property okay but that the one on the facing the house to the left is theirs
and then the one on the right side of your improvements is yours you could pull that microphone closer to you uh on the edge of your table yeah that way it's which I guess I should too yeah that good okay sorry about our microphone situation it's fine it's
great great no it isn't uh was this the fence we're talking about it's only been like this for 10 years we're working on it yeah good it's a it's a work in progress so that's on that oh we're talking about that fence that's um just
to clarify that's on your survey that looks like it's it's extending into your property over here corre okay and actually it's not that's on our property that's our fence your that's your fence okay all right those not the neighbor's fence on your property your Pence on your property okay all right sounds good
is that your hot tub or is that your neighbor's hot tub that fortunately is ours Okay good does your neighbor get to use it if they want to okay good all right enough for our okay so have do you uh Joe yes to your knowledge have they
uh satisfied uh the planner's um uh initial problem issues on her plan yes I believe so okay all right now anything on the ran CLE uh the engineers plans that you have to
address uh there was nothing that we need to address now okay um Mr engineer do you have any pro issue or issues or questions of the
applicant's expert um one second I'm just tracking through the law coverage change yard modifications um no I I think just for the benefit of the board not in their testimony but for the benefit of the board's understanding the you know the
applicants seeking laot coverage where 20% Max and and we're talking about 32% now corrected correct 31.8% prior right um that that exists
exceedance is documented through prior zoning approvals okay um is that a question or is no they are they are so dating as recently as 2020 okay but with approvals through uh the zoning office
with the prior zoning officer so we when we look at in my letter in 3.2 we discuss storm water management we're looking at specifically the requested improvements now um not the total extent of
exceedances from the original you know come kind of cumulative to be Beyond 1,000 square ft is that what you're saying they would be cumulative to over 1,000 square ft but being that they are lawfully existing improvements with zoning
approvals then we're only looking at the current proposal for this limited Improvement now which is less than a thousand so is less than which is why I note them as exempt oh okay thank you right exempt from any storm order from storm water
for this application in front of us because the the others are historical improvements taken care of yeah and they they have some zoning permit approvals and and other approvals and I looked at Aerials looking at from prior to their purchase of the property and well
documenting back into the 90s that the deck and the other improvements behind the home have been there okay very good so we're not looking at a cumulative disturbance that has to be corrected over a thousand not related to this application but what about a sequence of
you know applications that are I guess small and we we deem them like you say exemp and then after accumulation does it does it matter does it start to matter um talking about this application no so in
the generality of that if they were all under my legacy I would make note of the sequential changes in history of the project in under the existing same code conditions so we have to be careful to
look back at only since the storm waterer management code adopted mindor development standards understood so and that's that's all that's in front of us today is just this small portion of improvements not the full exceedence of their lot coverage thank you thank you
ask one more were the other improvements prior to this application done in the at the zoning level or just a construction per was one 2020 zoning approval for a deck and what what was that approv with the hot tub the slab for the hot tub
okay rather di Minimus size Improvement and the others the the deck and everything else that is part of those exceedances were all well documented in aerial dating back you know into the 90s but that they were done they weren't done with zoning board approval they were done with construction board
approval I'm trying to figure um I don't have the full history on them but they seem to be part of essentially the original improvements of the development of the home oh okay I understand what you're saying or shortly thereafter and perhaps prior to any changes in our zoning okay bulk
standards for this s okay what what sort of erosion and settlement control measures are you talking about um well you know generally even though it's just an improvement of an addition you're going to want to look at the gradient area to make sure that a
cell fence is installed okay all right just so that you verbally state that on for them okay yeah all right um all right any member of the public got asked a question or two before we go to public thank Mr chairman the uh is the shed being eliminated or relocated
the shed is being relocated and where is the shed being relocated to it being located just shifted over uh with a minimum of a 10t setback so it'll in a conforming location correct and the greenhouse the greenhouse is going to be
removed entirely yes was the greenhouse previously in a conforming location and I asked that not only of you but also of our engineer uh the existing Greenhouse was 11.9 ft off the off the property so was
conformed so it was conforming reason I asked was to see if you were eliminating an existing non-conformity you're not you're eliminating an existing Conformity but that's fine um and relocating the shed the the um uh in the event that the board grants the approval
uh would the applicant stipulate to the color architectural style and materials of the exterior of the addition being substantially similar to that of the balance of the exterior of the home yes thank you it was in harmony so
they agreed on a pink color already that's right yeah that's right harmonious literally exciting color yeah uh nothing further Mr chairman thank you thank you any member of the public would like to ask uh their uh architect questions speak now over I hold your
piece all right hearing no member of the public I close it to the public can I ask a question yeah I'm just I was just opening it to the public I wasn't sure if we were supposed to go before them I didn't get no no I just wanted to know all right go ahead all right so um so there's there's no they're exempt
from having to do anything to mitigate the storm water um a storm water management plan right they don't have to correct right they're below the below the no a big question is that so the why is I don't know but what do they need
what would they need to do I don't know you got you got a lot of lot coverage now compared to you know what's supposed to be there and I understand that you know it's a lot undersized I I didn't mean that I was just but we don't even know what I mean we have no information
as to what could be done I mean is the property uh rain Garden would be you know is the property situated such that so it's going to drain on someone else's property no actually there's in the whole back of the property there's a
exempt vacant land okay so it's not the the property is not draining on anybody else's property or sloping on anyone else's property Road below is um starts with a T Tang Tanglewood okay so your house is beyond
where the CLD Act is Tanglewood went no there but there's there's vacant and there's woods and then there's another other people's backyard it's over 200 ft away though I believe angle back there but the the CAC goes a little bit a
little bit further now right because it's over 200 feet away they might not know what you're doing until it's done well the people that are within the 200 no them oh yeah get oh he he's talking to the mic no he's got the television
they're having trouble hearing it public on the yeah so right against the mic the people within was it 200 ft that we notified was that correct yes they've been notified of the changes everyone within 200t right so but the people in Tanglewood are Beyond 200 feet some of
them okay there were two two residences on Tangle wood that were notified that were with the 200 ft of our property I I think what Mr G gankas and the rest of the board is concerned with is that any any additional uh coverage on your
property would not cause any uh adverse water conditions on someone else's property with a with a finished house on it you know somebody living there so and what I what I'll do to interject here um there's a standard comment that I put in
many of these letters relating to additions um it's not in this letter it's in our letter for the next applicant so I'll read it from there but this would be the the condition would be all roof leader downspouts for the existing principal dwelling and the proposed addition shall maintain
existing drainage patterns without adverse impact to adjacent properties and that's subject to your review and approval right so so I will stipulates so that as condition of approval should the board so Grant the approval yes okay so just just to clarify for you the existing locate one of the existing
locations of your down spouts exiting the home currently right the gutters you'll tie your addition into a similar location either to the same pipe or to to locate at the same so something draining off this back brick patio area
and your driveway you're going to want to match that okay and just don't send the water out to the front to the driveway that comes out to the street or somewhere else okay great yep the pitch is to the rear of your property is that correct in that in that area yes they're m already be a seepage pit on that
property so Joe if there is should they try to tie into that um I is that what you're directing them to do is that what you were saying because that would be ideal wouldn't it if I
mean if there is is there evidence of one no but just when they were building those homes they probably on many of them yeah uh as long as it has I don't want to require it because if it doesn't have overflow opportunity it'll create a
bigger issue I'd rather freely discharge but yeah if if you do tie in underground with your roof leaders to some structure for infiltration um you can follow up with me if if you find the evidence of it and then we can discuss tying into it or not
tying into it okay like like I said it all boils down to not flooding someone else's property Fair it's reasonable I mean if there's a lot of vacant land behind you in the next house and it's all wooded it'll probably dispersed through that but I mean that you know
there's other houses out there that are right next to another house and and we want to avoid that right um any other questions from the board okay um any other questions from our engineer no okay any questions or
comments from the public of this application no hearing none I'm going to close it to the public okay uh would you like to give us a summation say it either summation sum up
what you want uh either your client or the two of you just to give us a little overview of summary of your case summary of what you know so um for our previous comments we're looking for to add this addition we submitted the paperwork and it sounds like for the most part we're in
agreement with the items that we discussed if we can address those if needed um that we're we're good to go with the next phase and we wait your uh approval so in other words you're good with the uh the overall Aesthetics of the outside you're good with the
drainage of your down leaders being either connected to or going out in an area that's not going to adversely affect someone else's property uh and that's with the approval of our engineer and uh We've clarified your um uh lot
coverage issue so that's down to 33 uh We've clarified issues concerning those wooden steps and the removal of the uh uh of the um Greenhouse right okay okay I guess uh and uh you don't anticipate that this uh adversely
affects the neighborhood in any any manner no not at all okay and uh you're not adversely uh uh affecting uh the anything to do with our master plan or ordinances no okay all right uh would you like to happy to Tee It Up real
quick with your permission thank you Mr chairman it's uh application for the addition seeking one bulk variance 32% lot coverage versus 31.8% existing 20% maximum permitted applicant is
stipulated to all the conditions uh uh of approval that were offered uh including but not limited to those in the van CLE engineering memo of September 26 the uh uh Phils planning memo of September 22nd as well
as as the chairman just stated the uh architectural style color and materials of the exterior of the addition not of being substantially not I got the word not being substantially similar to the balance of the exterior of the dwelling as well as the roof leaders uh and
related issues uh being subject to the review and approval of our engineer from a storm water runoff perspective uh and and if the board finds that the applicant has met the burden of proof positive or negative criteria for either C1 undo hardship
relief perhaps given the undersized nature of the lot both lot area and lot width if I recall correctly certainly lot area H uh uh and or uh the C2 criteria the benefits substantially outweighing the detriments on the
positive criteria the negative criteria as always the two prongs no substantial detriment to the public good and no substantial impairment of the Zone plan and zoning ordinance uh then it's a vote in the affirmative if not it's a vote in the
negative do I hear a motion to approve uh set application I'm I'll move the uh that that application do I hear a second second okay no deliberations right to vote just you not deliberating tonight no okay and that's with all stipulated
two conditions correct correct thank you okay Mr arono yes Mr Flatley yes Mr ganis we don't get to deliberate you can you can say want to you can say what you want on the floor you can do that okay I
I think it's a really uh wellth thought out addition and I approve it thank you thank you all right Miss Collins yes and chairman G yeah I too think it's a nice addition and it will serve your purposes
and will not detriment anything in the neighborhood I vote Yes motion carries okay thank you guys thank you thank you very much appreciate it good luck now it's for you've been in front of we'll be in touch what's
that you say need time to I don't want to go home watch the debate or something like we [Music] I my own on for today right said you jokes
[Applause] all right the uh next application is a bulk variance block 10901 lot 13 Zone R4 439 Valley Road application number
24-17 Z David Santos applicant proposes to construct an addition to an existing single family dwelling is the applicant here come on forward you can sit right here and you can pull up another chair for the yeah you can pull up another
chair somewhere I'm sure we have Jo does say Joe doesn't need two chairs no he doesn't need two chairs pull up another one just make sure to speak clearly into the mic so that anybody who's watching at home can here thank you I think we may have some
future land use professionals use this yeah they can share that chair okay now um give us your legal blessing uh as with the last
application did have an opportunity to review the notice found it to be sufficient both in content and timely served certified mail September 21 uh published September 19th both at least 10 days prior to the this evening so as
with the prior matter this the board does have jurisdiction to hear and decide this matter this evening thank you would you swear everyone in again I will swear in everyone who will be testifying if you'll raise your right hand do all of you swear to God or affirm that the testimony you're about
to give is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth do and even if a few people were sworn in that may not be testifying under oath there's nothing wrong with that as far as I'm concerned it is a family room it is that's right that's right it's a family room that's right so um we may hear some of the
benefits okay chairman before I just want to make a quick notice on the notice that was sent out yes um had 20% allowable but that was incorrect it should have been 25% oh right okay all right Z okay so and thank you for that just to on the
record we are clarifying that to 25% cover and from a notice and jurisdictional perspective under the Pond Run and pearlmont cases as my colleagues down there no the uh that the notice was sufficient uh uh for members of the public to understand the
application and to seek further information and come should they so desire and apparently some did so all right uh okay so uh Mr Santos or Mrs Santos would you
like to just sum up or not sum up but like give us a explanation of what you're doing sure uh we're actually extending uh our living room uh to the side of the house which is on the first floor um it's going be primarily for uh as you can see we have
two children here a fraction of our family there uh we're trying to expand it um a little bit more to the side to to accommodate uh you know having guests over family over and especially for our kids it's be primarily used as a living
room area um that's pretty much it that's just and what is there now uh yes okay no there's no appropriate surfaces there okay and what's going to be under this uh space this will be a conrete slab is it's call
space yes what's the height of the call space 3T 3 ft okay so it's a true CW space are you going to have any access from the out exterior to that uh I believe no can I okay no door okay or
anything no door to get underneath there no not that I know all right um go ahead who is your expert uh Dan fortunado I am the architect would you like to just go through your qualifications sure um I'm a licensed architect in New York New
Jersey and Pennsylvania in good standing I uh a graduate of Ohio State University and Bachelor's in architecture and a graduate of Drex University Bachelor's in architecture I'm sorry industrial design from Ohio State and Drex University was architecture um I have not been in front of this board but I
have been in front of many boards before just last week I was in Bridgewater okay you're so deemed an expert um would you like to just go over yeah I'll I'll uh pick up um it is a crawl space and uh is about 3 feet above grade okay uh for the
uh that's the height of the first floor so we're matching flush with the existing first floor and answer you a question about access there are two existing windows that are on the side of the house that will be used as crawl space access okay not that they didn't have to get in there there's no Plumbing or anything in this addition so it's just going to essentially be access
there have to get to something relating maybe to insulation okay the uh the addition uh as Mr Santos mentioned was essentially going off the side of the house we are opening up the wall on the side of the house we have a couple of columns that are shown there for structural but basically for the most
part the entire side of the house is being opened up to allow this family room to uh open to the existing dining room and living room space we are um proposing on a volted ceiling in the space to give more height more volume and the uh the uh application will also
have a fireplace on the side of it uh that will be a uh a gas burning fireplace the um front porch also just want to make a note we are rebuilding the front porch in kind uh we are increasing it by 3 square feet hence 6
in we're bringing it Forward 6 in only because of just the way had to work with the framing of the house but uh that's going to be rebuilt as well if I may Mr chair just on that one note though not encroaching on the front yard side uh step it's encroaching by 6
in so we have that 49.5 uh front yard setback now I noticed that was not uh mentioned in the van CLE uh document here but um I just wanted to bring that to the board's attention that it is encroaching um just six in take it
than the applicant albeit arguably the Minimus is asking for a front yard setback in addition to the uh lock coverage deviation and I believe we have a shed size overage as well so the okay um let's discuss that real quick because
there are sure I don't want to get into all of it I'll let you get into the testimony and we'll address some of the discrepancies as we go but um the existing the the N 49.5 feets foot setb is shown in your
your zoning table dated 61124 submitted with your 61124 site plan as part of the application package um that that's referencing on your site plan which
appears to use templin survey the 495 is an existing nonconformity to the front yard the front of the dwelling the existing dwelling cor that's correct the 487 I wasn't following the 487 no that's
that's the uh typo that's that's incorrect we okay so that's that's 58 yes it's 58 ft 4 in is the actual addition so it's to the addition right it's well beyond yeah the setback line so then the front yard setback remains to 49 and a half that's correct okay I
thought you said you were adding to the porch extension no no maybe what I meant to clarify was that it goes over six inches beyond the setback line it's a pre-existing preexisting building tearing it down and rebuilding it in cont as it is as it is
okay yeah that was confusing sound like adding no variance we the variant we added was subtracted no for the front yard so that remains so that remains 495 cuz you're just removing and replacing in kind correct the front porch okay
okay and is that to because it needs rebuilding or it it uh it's pretty much un well unsafe I didn't think it was safe but all right I understand with the owners agreement it a safer loc safer steps okay go
ahead go ahead uh the only other item on the uh application was a shed in the back I also want to bring that to the board's attention it wasn't nothing uh I'm sorry anything I had to do with the project I just wanted to bring to the attention because uh van CLE U brought it up on
their review as well um and that was also from uh Phillips Philips price as well they indicated about the shed in the back and how far is that from the property lines it doesn't have any dimensions on this uh there is not uh dimensions on this at all um I be honest
for today's hearing I was uh just really just privy to the shed being an issue I was only here tonight about the addition itself um I don't know if you want to sh some light on there I believe it's I want to say 10 to 15t away from the
proper both sides both sides okay is your is your drawing to scale this drawing here that we have this this was the engineers templ engineering survey is to can you scale it uh then I mean uh I can't scale it
here but uh I have a mini version but your your drawing should be a scale that's what I meant full size Joe do you have a did you scale it to tell us if what it is on the site plan I don't have one on I think I have one is there one
there 10 ft from your lot to the lot 12 and looks like the oh use my yeah it's not it's not 10 ft it's it's a little uh it's less than that okay yeah probably seven fetish we
don't yeah I don't have a scale on that do you know the size of the shed uh it's 160t so big 10 by 16 it was there before you purchased yes it's
only there from where it's shown in the 25t rear yard back line appear to be what said from where it's shown on the plan yeah and then
relative to the 25 ft rear yard stepback back line yeah it wouldn't appear to be from just scaling that it wouldn't appear to be 10 ft off of each property line and 10's the minimum okay so maybe even for a for a
shed of conforming size right would you stipulate able to relocate or SE is it in a condition it could be relocated yeah I mean yeah I guess you can I mean what is it what is it constructed of and what is it sit on
right now sitting on papers okay okay all right so on each corner so could physically it could physically be no no yeah I mean I mean where is
you're not having it on a slab where you have to move a whole slab yeah it's also oversized too so you may wish to address some of the deviations if you can yeah I yeah I know that now when I see the you know the
zoning supposed be 100 in yeah well so all right Deb you want to you want to join me for this one um we're talking per
code it's 100 right we haven't yet revised per code it says 100ct it's 100 which was the prior DCA requirement for obtaining a permit for a shed so it used to match in our code to what construction permits
require okay it no longer does cuz DCA is now out of 200 ft 200 sare fet 200 square ft okay so any this shed if permed today would not would not require a construction permit to construct so what do we do about that
so I'm just providing okay that background for the benefit of a potential positive and negative detriment of OB Rel to so the one thing that they might want to do is either get a variance for the setback of it or move
it yeah and with the request for the deviation from our code which doesn't align witha requirement for a construction permit they do need variance relief for so they need a variance for the size and they need a variance for the set the setback if you
choose not to move it right and I would so and just to clarify historically we have not been making residents go for variances if they have a shed between 100 and 200 foot in zoning you knowly
for zoning permit um it we have not been making them go for a variance uh because the if lock coverage because of the UCC change correct if they're if all the other things as far as bulk standards match in these cases the board has typically historically granted the variances against the code
since they're here anyway okay all right fine but what about the setback well that's up to the board that's right so the does the applicant would you the applicant prefer to ask the board for a
variance for let it sit where it is i' rather do the VAR simply for the fact that we needed to move this we need to move it to 25t from the back correct no no no you would it would be 10 ft from both corners
it's like 3T yeah right roughly speaking prob it would probably be moving relocating anywhere between 3 to 4 feet in each Direction inward to your property um here let me ask you a couple questions about it there's an existing chain link
fence along that property line and then a wood fence says clear in the rear is the the wood fence um is the same as the fence that shown in your photo so it's an enclosed
fence it and so then along that neighboring property line to your your driveway to the right sorry to the left of the home when facing uh is that that fence is the same is that that fence is is essentially
board on board screening that white fence F right now is actually right against the chain fence there okay in okay so your your entire rear yard is is fully screened to the height of that fence exactly okay would
you would you say that from a potential detriment to your neighbor for the location of the shed not meeting the setback that the that the fence provides adequate screening to reduce any potential
detriments from your neighbor does it I'm sorry does it do we know how tall the fence is and how tall the shed is fence is 6 to 6ot and approxim me how tall is the shed the shed is about I say with the roof the
about maybe so you're only seeing two feet of the shed above the V so okay so so so the fence and its fully screening nature helps offset the potential detriment any any sight line of the of the of the shed
okay and certainly the board will hear from all members of the public as well before making any determination on any right right I just want to know while we're on this topic is is there a reason why you would be opposed to just moving it the two feet to make it conforming I mean just the cost of it and you know
try to find some to move it keep talking the mic you're going to have construction Crews on premise anyway right yeah okay yes yeah you have to talk directly into the mic because we're hearing that people on the our big audience can you know has to hear you so
goad yeah well like you said that makes sense I mean if the construction crew is there there yeah absolutely Mo I mean it's only it's only on Corner blocks yeah there's no stone underneath or anything like like I said it was basically I would say like like a
12 in by by by 5 in papers comete papers that are Each corner and two in the middle is it a wooden shed it is wood and the bottom the bottom framing is uh is okay so it's definitely not wood on the bottom so
it's it's not rotting or falling apart it's in good shape okay it's I steal when was it put there uh was it there when you bought the house no we we put it in ourselves okay okay so so if you were to relocate it you would argue to the board that among other things that
would eliminate an existing deviation and that the board might want to view that as a benefit I agree yes I test that okay um the reason why that was brought up was because of the coverage and that's why we're here no I understand so
I just wanted to put but along with the coverage we're also dealing with the location of it right I was just bringing it up only because it was added in here on the coverage uh essentially that's uh that's it for my testimony okay uh Mr engineer do you
have any questions comments I do um let me so I'll start with I think um more broad conversation before getting into both my letter and the planner's letter um in discussion with the
planner we had realized that there's some discrepancies in what's a part of the application packet documents um as well as then your submitted architecturals um the the architectural
plans that were submitted are ated 9928 2022 without revision and include um an enlargement of the zoning table that's in that plan set and then in the application
package there uh there's another there's a zoning table 611 2024 by your by your office as well as a site plan dated the same um as well as then the
survey by it is templin I believe um and and so when we look at the lot coverage um there's some discrepancies in the law coverage the impervious
coverage in both of your zoning tables from 22 as well as 6 1124 now and with the prior survey which 2021 is that is that when you purchased
the home no 2019 okay um so it it appears your site plan is you utilizing that that survey and your note references that you're not offering warranty to its
accuracy um but you're pulling I guess your own law coverage Cals on existing as opposed to what's on the survey so that's correct yes what we basically were doing is using the
templin survey for the uh exactly what you see for the boundary survey and for what's on the property the square footage numbers we take off of when we measure the house itself and uh we didn't uh which I I know the engineer van CLE and did not do they just took
probably scaled it off the site plan so there might be a slight discrepancy on the numbers there because we actually measured the house it's self um and as I said so the the coverage the coverage calculations that I took into consideration for comment
2.13 with 31.8% was from your your impervious coverage table and dated 2022 right um I I didn't realize there they were different than what was in the
611 I went to your plan because it's the only plan I have and so when I look at the 31.8 to the 3290 I don't have an architectural plan that shows that illustrates that is
there a change in the architecturals proposed from 22 to 24 no not that I'm aware of uh we basically took the existing house itself first floor and then we added our 367 foot addition onto the
project so I'm I'm comfortable with the evolution of the prior survey being less than your 2022 plan in impervious coverage and then now more conservatively on the 2024 zoning
chart and your proposal just wanted to clarify for the board and the record that we're looking at 32.9% currently and then you you also identified that that the existing condition was
30.93 which is a good 2% higher than what the 2021 survey indicated bottom line what numbers are correct I'm getting a little confused I believe
it's it'd be I don't know what's correct I can't testify to what's correct but what I would say is most conservative is existing is 30.93 and proposed is 32.9 okay from the 611 2024 zoning table
and site plan by fortunado okay so that includes the shed that includes all ovious coverage am I correct in assuming that yes okay so what we're doing we're giving a variance for the exist between the existing
30.93 the addition uh of 1.97 to a total of 32.9 so let's have that discussion okay I didn't see a record of zoning
history submitted with the application for prior approvals that provides the variance for the 25% to 30.93 existing okay so the only thing that's permitted is the
25 everything else is non first I'll just I'll ask the current owners of the house the applicants since your time of purchase in 2019 have you made any improvements other than the shed yeah then uh we
actually put the brick patio that's in the backyard as well okay there there's the uh there's the change okay was the pool there before uh that we made no okay so the brick patio was
documented in the survey in 2021 correct okay and the shed was as well so in those first two years of owning the home those improvements were all there agre um you've you've made no applications to this board since your ownership uh as
far as the pool we did a permit approved everything but as far as but not to the zoning board right not the zoning board no right I guess the umru constru cool but as far as a brick patio I I
didn't previously the driveway actually it was it was driveway came from the side and turned into the patio into the patio it was gravel okay we redid that you redid the gravel as a patio right we just put
Pap yeah and then we extend a little bit more with the patio yes so to go to our stairs okay so you said the the pool was was submitted construction permits and there was a zoning approval as well there was no zoning no zoning so
was construction permits peral they just approved okay um no there was a zoning there was okay yep so de that what year was that uh that was uh ju July of 2020 okay so does that zoning officer at the
time was Tom deia does that approval identify an existing non-conforming total loot coverage that no it doesn't the it was missed by does it have does it have a survey with it yes okay and is that survey show most of the improvements
that we see in the 2021 survey that's submitted with the application here um I don't know if I can pull it up hold on let me try I just I want to be able to give similar to the last convers ation I want to be able to give the applicant the credit for anything that has a zoning approval that may be lawfully
existing m c can you raise your right hand pleas do you swear to God or from the testimony about to give in the capacity of zoning officer currently is the truth the whole truth or nothing but the truth I do thank you good c um so so what what I'm getting similar
to the conversation we had the last application right we have a th000 foot threshold right and so if we have just like the last applicant had a zoning approval that didn't address nonconformities of the of the impervious
coverage it was essentially then accepted at the time I'd like to give them the benefit of of those with that prior 2020 approval so that I can accurately assess whether or not we have a, sare foot threshold and need to
discuss storm water management tonight okay all right can I ask a question about the picture the where all the chairs are what is that material that is a White Rock White Rock so where do the papers end and where does the White Rock
begin is that if I were to draw a line across that line right there where it says brick patio right where it says gravel that's that's where the so it's almost like a fire pit sized area that's that's what we made B what we did with I'm sorry I don't have a label no
not in the picture on the on the yeah on the survey um Sur when we did the pool we put the White Rock Around the above ground pool speaking of which I think one of the notes of the emails that was sent over it says in ground pool it's not really in ground pool it's an above
it's above ground pool corre um and as far that we put the White Rock you know for drainers purposes you know when water spills out the pool uh so we had so much left over I don't know what to do with it so we did we just got the rock and threw it right there so both
gazebos that have pavers underneath them yes and then um extends all the way yeah the pavers go across and they actually have a jog in it according to your plan I'm sorry what do mean like jog oh okay you that's slight area it's
yeah s like a rectangle yeah so where that rectangle is that's where the addition is going in front of that yeah not all not all the way but no I know yeah yeah so yeah that's that's where I'm going with that so you're going to use most of that patio area for
the addition right and then do you plan to increase the patio area at any point in the future no that's it done that's it okay so whatever is left of the patio on these plans is how you would expect it to stay I agreed because you have a kind
of a large area now that you're used to you're going to shrink that down by quite a bit I mean you are you saying the the addition going on top of the patio no no it is the side all on the side none of the patio is going yeah the Shaded part right there that's going to be the
addition and then the right behind is still will be the patio break up I asked from that originally it's grass anywhere okay I just want to make sure not anywhere where that gazebo no no okay doesn't extend beyond the back of the house
agre okay okay uh does do any members of the public have questions of chairman I did have a couple if everybody else is done I'm sorry if all the board members and Mr did you cover both memos um I'm sorry yes no you may not have there one
of the comments so uh in the planner comments number three clarify similarity to in mine uh in 2.21 that the f is compliant um so there would be a
revision to your zoning table right because you'll have you'll have you'll have the the first uh whatever it was 2000 or so yes I'll fix that um and then what exactly where is that you're talking uh so the the
section of the code for f uh on the zoning table it was just reference to the percentage but that percentage is added um on the the F table in which which one is that of those the third at the bottom for ratio
[Applause] table so there's a 211 171.8cm of the additional okay so they are fully compliant there well within that number Joe and I will clarify so the survey that was submitted in
2020 uh was dated April 18th 2019 and it did not have the widen driveway the brick patio the gravel the frame shed uh the it had like it had none of
this it was just what they submitted for the pool so the're very it's very likely that they probably were not over impervious coverage at that time so can that be printed and entered as an exhibit of the board yes I I'll go print it right
now yeah could you do that please B1 couple copies we're going to take a short five minute brief recession sure e e e
e e e e e e e e e no big deal all right we're back on the air we're back on the air we're back on
the air at uh 10 minutes 29 the entire board is back yes the entire board is backk you okay so based on what we just was were provided with and what the sight the
um the site plan looked like on 61124 there seems to be some differences between so those two so we our discussions prior to the break we had established that the templin 2021 survey um
showed essentially the existing conditions yeah right of of some of the improvements that were done to the LW and then to today so in comparison to the 2019 templin survey
uh would you say that this survey is reflective of the status of the property at the time of your purchase yes okay um there are no zoning statistics on here for what the lot coverage was it would appear
that it would be substantially Less close closer to or in conformance with our 25% lock coverage requirement um so I would re recommend that we consider the
full length of the variance for all impervious coverage exceeding 25% at this time okay as opposed from the existing conditions as submitted in the zoning charts yeah I I I know personally I see that the driveway looks a little
different right the um the obviously the back patio got got bigger and the gravel area and the shed was added so there seems to be aside from this addition that's propos there seems to be additions without that you know or
increased imperious even without the addition yes okay so that so you're saying that their Varian is from 25 up to what they're doing now yeah 32.9 30 and so then from if I may from a legal perspective that would be true even if it was under someone else's ownership a
prior owner right uh uh uh not just because of the fact that it was under your ownership even was we prior owner in which some of those increased es to the impervious coverage were created uh given that they were not with prior approvals they do
not constitutes what's considered an ex a pre-existing nonconformity they did not pre-exist the ordinance requirement for a 25% maximum permitted coverage so I concur with the engineer
so along with that um in my letter item 3.2 had previously noted you would be exempt from storm water management um the the total cumulative amount that we're now looking at would
exceed this th000 square foot so I anticipate that that's no longer true and will require stor order management measures for minor development which would be 4 in of runoff over all increased impervious
so that will and that volume then to be infiltrated so that will be essentially a drywell system or some other infiltration system to collect your roof runoff and then recharge that in your yard in some location um that will be
from an existing condition of square footage uh impervious coverage from what's shown on the 2019 survey all the way to the proposed so if that number is lower than 25% % say it was
23.5% it'll be the full extent to the current proposed condition or if it was over 25 or would whatever it is whatever this whatever this plan shows as coverage square footage it'll be the difference between this
2019 to the current proposal and just for the record the current survey dated 611 2024 is accurate to your architect's knowledge and to your yes to mine yes yeah so we're just we
want to be careful with that and what protect the um liabilities of Mr fortunato's firm okay that that site plan is utilizing the 2021 templin
survey okay right and then making its own zoning assessment of that that plan so there's a deviation there of the 208 8.2 to the 30 93 okay so what I'm hearing is perhaps there should be another survey
done the or another site plan another another site plan done B yeah B yeah uh we right we'll start with 2019 plan yeah and then Mr fortunato's reassessment of the zoning statistics for the current
plan um which appear to be right now at 30.93 with with what's on 611 right but there is the matter of the AC units and pads to be identified and located from the planner review comment 4 that may
cumulatively add to that right now I'm sorry the the unit the AC unit is right on the side of the house where the where the where the addition would be so where so where would it relocate to it would move right adjacent right to it right but then the pad would still be
impervious cor right so it's not so it's not covered in your impervious CS right now for 30.93 so it would be cumulatively added or it would alternatively go on a patio area that's already impervious do we have an estimate if I may Mr chairman
of the square footage of those pads so that we can get I mean might we need a more accurate percentage than 32.9 gener 3x3 pad by square feet right there's one or two I forgot which one one okay so I think that's comfortably
going to live you within that 31% okay coverage okay so it's not going to be a a l.9 it's not going to be a large enough so 31 on the 30.9 existing right so then the 32.9 I think you're you're living
comfortably within the 33 Okay 33% okay so we're going to 33% coverage we're going to have to add something let's add1 0.1 for the what's the nine over the so what would your be what would your
suggestion as our engineer be as far as what storm water management mitigation so that 9 Square ft over the 18796 is only 05% so 33 would be so it's 32.9 so it's
32.9 is where we anticipate to be at I think we should leave a little bit of Room 33 make it 33 okay right that's the request of the applicant yes yes okay and then so is the rest of it Joe
then it's a it's a minor so then it becom some water purposes and and it's subject to your review and approval yes and do you find it to be uh feasible that they can uh if the app if the board approves the application that as a
condition of approval they can uh uh satis feasibly satisfy that storm water management obligation uh ultimately to your review and approval yes as a minor as a minor and they have the roof leader downspout
obligation as well although I guess that would be subsumed within the minor probably it would be subsumed within the minor it's typically I have that comment in exempt or non-exempt right storm water management situations um there are some other comments that I could provide
you the benefit of those standard comments for your reference as you're making the revisions and and is that something that the applicant understands and the architect understands because there's going to be revisions to the plans and
that you can in an informed way stipulate to as a condition of approval yes yes so we need to get a storm waterer management designed basically on this project so it would be 4 in over the total cumulative increase from whatever the 2019 plan existing
condition is up to the current proposal so I would revise your zoning statistics from 2019 to to date okay as existing versus proposed and the soil erosion and
and any other uh agency approv so other agencies um I had missed the exemption notice was provided by the county so that's already received and then they are still exempt from Soil Conservation District as the activity currently since everything else is stabilized it's less
than 5,000 is less than 5,000 so while it may not be lawfully existing it's not going to be disturbed and exceed for their jurisdiction Y and that should conclude my letter as well as the board planners letter yeah I
think she ended with the uh air conditioning units yes that was yes two else is that sure sure thank you Mr chairman uh the uh we talked about the pictures uh who took them when and are they inacurate depiction of what presently exists uh I took them myself
and I took them I believe a week before I put the application is okay and nothing's changed in between nothing has changed at all okay and um after ask 160 because you're asking for uh a permission after
the fact to have an oversized ship had 160 squ ft I know that there were some there's a reason why we have 100 squ ft uh so what is the shed utilized for uh you can you can you can ask my wife uh she loves hen point to the children I
don't want to make any assumption so uh for storage a lot of storage for a lot of decorations and and pool storage yes okay pool and decorations St pool toys they toys things like that okay stuff that you can't put in your garage when they turn 18 half that stuff will be out
of the shed so there you go okay and then they'll get cars yeah that's it that's it um thank you nothing further any member of the public would like to ask their expert or the applicant any questions
come on uh could I ask you to hand her that microphone actually bring the whole stand over because it needs uh it needs to be sitting on that uh for the record would you state your name and address um Anar Rizzo 134 King
Drive I'm actually L where that the lot right behind there right behind right on the other side of the vinyl fence um and what is your question of their exp my main concern is water um so you have a question concerning that okay I have a question concerning coverage where the
water's going to wind up um moved here 35 years ago not a process so that she can ask questions now she has comments yes I will well hold on I'm you all right to make it easy your question is where is the water going to the water
going to go stop right there uh our expert just got done saying and and to his credit he picked that up what's going to happen is they're going to do a water management plan which is going to include capturing the water off their roof and off of any improv surface going
into what I would assume would be some sort of a underwater uh uh underground underground uh uh system sstn and it will be captured on their property and dispersed slowly under their property uh the the board is very conscious of not allowing
people to put water on other people's property and not flooding out other people especially if there's a grade that goes downhill or some other Factor um so that is going to be addressed okay uh do you have any other questions
pertaining to this application as to to uh it its size or or color or shape or whatever no color shape doesn't matter to me okay so your question was as to water water and uh I I you know it's a little bit confusing if you listen to
this but that is going to be addressed we were just going over the fact that it will have to be addressed based on what we saw on the 2019 plan and what we saw on this plan there is a substantial change of that amount so and it was more
than uh the uh th000 Square ft okay so will I know or will I have access to the information what CH information okay yeah this stuff will be filed and it will be in the zoning office so you will have you will have notice um okay you
will be able to make a comment at the end if you wish to okay thanks Shar can I ask one yes question of our our board engineer just to and it might be helpful to the m public M wait a minute hold on is there anybody else in the public okay you can take the m back now the the the
[Applause] um Mr VR uh is the standard for the storm water management even for a minor development such that there can be no
increase in the volume or in the rate of flow of storm water runoff from the property to any adjacent property so for a minor development it's a
slightly lesser and simplified standard of Simply 4 Ines of of runoff the volume quantity that's calculated for all new impervious surfaces so in this proposed
condition we're capturing the history of any improvements to lot since 2019 um that is to then be recharged into the ground so then that instead of running off as it does today or since those improvements were constructed in
2019 that is now reduced in this specific condition uh the other part of any of these approvals would be that the improvements to the lot and the point of discharge for these improvements is not to have adverse impact on the neighbor
so if after constructed there's an unintended consequence of drain AG to a neighbor that was unforeseen during our discussions and deliberations of the board as part of my final inspection on the asilt of the property uh before
signing off of final cosos that would be a potential for mitigation to be addressed by your contractor and for M Rizzo and any other members of The public's benefit then that is essentially what you will be looking for
uh if there's an approval post approval uh to ensure that it uh the storm water runoff meets those standards that's what you'll be looking for as an engineer on behalf of the uh the board the board yes
um first in resolution compliance with the design and then second in final acceptance of your improvements before you get your final cosos from the construction Department okay thank you thank uh hearing no other questions or
comments or questions that this point from the public I'm going to close it to questioning of the public um any board members have any additional questions of either their architect our engineer or the applicants themselves no okay yeah I have one yeah
go ahead um Joe can you explain the difference between this application and the one that we just saw that seem to both kind of have uh an increased uh are over what the standards are for
those lots so first um the relative time frame if we look at we now have a 2019 with B exhibit B1 we have 2019 evidence of what
the lot coverage was we have a confident understanding that the zoning has not changed the bulk standards have not changed and the impervious coverage has been 25% for this period of time so we're assessing this application against that
standard from that point and addressing any any existing non-conformities that were not approved not prior approved variances so we're looking at the full extent of it in the prior application we have a documented history um in some of
the zoning permits that were on file as well as through looking at Aerials and I went back and looked at aerial imagery into the point into the 9s when it was too blurry to be able to see in detail but to see that the
improvements behind that house of the deck and others appear to be part of some of the original construction and development of that subdivision um and that dates back to a time where the bulk standards may have been different um so in short so we looking
at an undersized lot in both scenarios but the undersized lot on the other application had different bulk standards that applied to those improvements that went in lawfully at at those prior times I think that's is that the key that that
that you had sufficient evidence that determined in the other application every application is different that u a good amount quote unquote of the impervious coverage that exceeded the maximum permitted um had been approved
approved in lawfully Andor or or was a pre-existing non-conforming condition and therefore not subject to the uh the magnitude of the deviation whereas here it appears that there's sufficient proof to our engineer of the opposite that
okay all of the exceedence above the 25% uh occurred without prior approval and not and was uh nor was it a pre-existing non-conformity it didn't pre-exist the ordinance uh uh setting a 25% maximum on lock coverage would that
be a fair generalization of the comparison of the two applications yes okay thank you sure good question any other questions okay uh would you like to sum up your application um well I'd like to
ask a question sure um right right now for today um if this approves goes through um is the owner after 30 days allowed to apply for a building permit for the addition pending the storm Water Management design for a CO is that what I heard
today so so in other words if if this is approved tonight the addition portion tonight they could apply for building permit start construction however that storm water management is contingent upon a CO no so we would need to we see revised we see need to see revised to
accept for resolution compliance so you need a storm water management design then before yes next okay and and the revised coverage number okay you have to figure out the coverage for the 2019 and how it changed right because we need to make sure right that by the reev revised
bulk standard assessment we're any potential approval to what we called 33% is confirmed on the plans and in resolution compliance before so the resolution compliance of the board is a prior approval required to obtain the
construction permits right um if we can get through that first iteration and there's a back and forth on some of the storm water M just to finalize the design I would be in a position and i' I have been previously as the township engineer as well that I can work with
the applicant on the technical Nuance to allow for say footings and Foundation permits to start some of the construction but not be able to release all of the construction permits until that's all fully satisfied okay so we we need to get through that first resubmission before we can discuss where
the the line is between clearing to construction I understand okay um before we go into summation uh any of the public want to comment on this application could you I could I trouble you to put the mic back I'm sorry you're going to have to pay and if
you could just give us your name and address again and then I'll swear you in Anna Rizo 134 King Drive and please raise your right hand do you swear to God that the testimony you're about to give is the truth the whole truth of nothing but the truth yes I do thank you please proceed okay okay I don't have
any concerns about the Cosmetics of what you know they have a family I know they need room um but I am concerned about water I've lived in this town for 35 years moved in here did not have a problem I understand change um people
need to grow and and develop HS and whatever um and also climate change but in the last 10 years I have to panic every time I hear that we're getting a few inches of rain I can't have nothing on my floor in my basement I don't have
a shed in my backyard I pay for storage units somewhere else too to to hold my decorations because I'm just as you know gung-ho about all that um my main concern is my basement my property I now get I even have sink holes in my yard
that didn't exist there anymore before like there are divots and parts of my yard that fill with water when it rains now and I didn't have it in the past let me ask you a question um when did you first moved in there 19 1989 89 when did that when up to what
point did you start having problems when after that I probably didn't have problems until we had I have to go back and look at the history some of the major storms probably like 96 97 okay so you had problems prior to
2019 yeah okay uh what changed from ' 89 to 96 or when those we had what we called back then the 100-year storms that's when I had a problem other than that a normal rainstorm 2 3 Ines never
had an issue and since that 96 or 97 had you have you you continue to have issues with your basement yes excuse me were there was there a lot of building that went on in your neighborhood I was just going to ask that yes built-in pools to be Theon yes it is the common threat um
when I first moved in there weren't those six homes there weren't the six Homes at the end of the street that was all Woods oh so actually you've had actual building of homes around property bu built-in pools have been approved extensions have been approved I mean I
have W myself but I stayed within the confines of whatever I didn't need any um Varian variances CU I stayed within the time the footprint so a lot of the area around you that you used to absorb the rainwater has now been right L Drive
was never all that was not there all of that was Woods when I first moved here now is your what is the grade between your property and the mine is lower yours is lower than Lower lill Road I mean than Valley Road Valley Road King Drive is slightly lower low okay it all
runs through you to the river it all runs through our backyards to the river exactly um does it how was your property situated to those houses that were built at is are you downhill from them too the ones that were were built at the end of King Drive are lower okay but they were
built what I don't I can't remember exactly when but they were built and they were built differently and I know one home after that they had to go in and tear up all of the front yard and they put the tar paper in the tar on it because they were getting water down there too no I was just I I'm just
trying to figure out for the for the benefit of the board and it just to figure out where your your flow of water how itow it the end of King DF slopes down too okay how about on the other side of King Drive well on the other side of King Drive you had that old
farmhouse that was there that was knocked down that's now W that's an empty lot still and then you have the river then we have the river right so between you have a road empty lot property and then the river what's to your left my left if I I mean actually to the right of your house looking at
the if I'm looking there's a home either side either side okay uh and it continues to go downhill from your house to okay all right um but my basement is what's going to block whatever's coming
out of I understand uh you know hopefully by by the methods if this is so approved by the methods of what our engineer stated capturing the water from their property that hopefully will help some of your issue I can't say it'll
help all of it because I don't I can't I don't know exactly where your water's coming from right uh obviously other things have changed in the neighborhood um we we try to be conscious of that um that area all along the pic River has
issues obviously I mean the closer you are to the river the further you are in grade down from someone else um you know it's inevitable unfortunately are there are there any more recent in the last
fiveyear period um specific changes in drainage the in your yard receiving from others or or any other adverse impacts you you would note more recently more recently I have I
have issues that um actually I have I have a patio and like where the water like the lands the patio is slightly lower than the yard and that corner of my house and the patio I do get like a
few inches of rain of water if it rains heavily and then over towards more towards the fence area I there seems to be like the the uh soil underneath it may have eroded or something because there's like a little dip and that section seems to flood when it rains
badly and I actually have like that corner of the yard I've let nature just kind of take over my old vegetable garden because I can no longer do it and there's just kind of weeds and things there and I put a little flower garden in the other corner absorb some of the water yeah with those
areas that hold water would you say it's more of what the rainfall that falls directly in those areas retained in those areas or is that migrating from other properties to those locations I mean what you're asking me those that I
probably migrating because I'm downhill you know okay from if you're looking at your house you're downhill from the left I'm downhill from Valley Road from Valley Road the back of your house the back of my house and that's where I'm having all my issues is the
back I also have like um I've also planted like vegetation along the back of my house in in the one spot to try to catch things before they come in have you noticed when it rains any flow of water coming from any direction of
Valley Road no I haven't looked okay no I'm just saying no I I really haven't paid attention there's grass there I'm not I understand but sometimes if there's a heavy you actually notice like water okay so you haven't really you haven't seen any particular flow of water CU I haven't
bar paid attention to it you're just noticing now an erosion yeah and I get puddles in certain spots now okay all right um okay well that helps I mean at least it lets us know that there is an issue right hopefully uh will be
somewhat mitigated by someone else doing another property doing something on it um did your property only back up to the applicant's property or does it okay what's to the left and right of the applicant on Valley Road there two other
homes on two do those homes uh are they higher or lower than they're probably the same elevation but I know the house if I'm looking that way to the right when they built their extension I was friends with the the leas at that time they had to put in one of those pits in
their base in their backyard did that seem to help anything in your yard well it it's not a direct flow to my yard so I wouldn't know but I know that they had to install one then okay do you notice any ponding or puddling in neighbor's yards uh that are to your area they the
other house on that side no on your street on my street no I haven't I don't look at other people's too many I'm just curious if any other neighbor mentioned that no no okay so obviously Joe this is something that you're going to consider when you yes talk about the this is our
engineer he'll he'll consider this when he talks about uh the the storm water mitigation plan with the applicant and their architect and then where potentially the Overflow from that unit would be directed towards right and we're talking about collecting the water
from the prior construction of the also the shed and the patio and the other things the black top whatever correct right so so hopefully it'll improve your situation yeah that's what we look to do I mean you know sometimes by having
people come to this board we actually help a water flow situation okay uh by by by adjusting it and putting in updated methods of of keeping the water so but I do appreciate your comments and your observations thank you thank
you anybody else from the audience okay going once going twice close to the audience for comments uh Joe do you have anything else you might want to add I'm good okay um all right uh would your architect like to say
something no I I had that question earlier so you answer okay I wasn't sure I just wanted to make sure and the applicants would you like to sum up just explain I mean um uh prior from from the per previous survey understand we did
substantial you know stuff to to to the property um just you know for us try to beautify the property that it was before that there was Weeds all over the place grass all over the place so we we tried our best to make
the no and I understand that just to let you know what what is done to make it look better is fine but sometimes that sometimes causes water runoff that you may not been aware of yeah the water
she's mentioning our other neighbors say they have water issues as well close to the river people deep with their basement they construction and they get water in basement isn't further in so we don't have any issues with water but that's
just something to yeah you do understand why we're concerned with that and and uh want water either sure and you know possibly why you know the the engineer working with your expert and your Builder will come up with some solution
to hopefully uh control any water run off that might come off your property to any of the power properties behind you on King Drive there was water issues in the front of our driver we first moved in and we had to contact the County okay they came out to see it because there's tons of water right cuz that's a County
Road okay yeah that that whole strip of land next to the river has issues so and uh it's it's a ongoing issue that we're always looking at um so to sum up would you say that you're addition is to
benefit the use of your house I agree yes and the solely the addition in your in your testimony from what I've gathered is not going to detriment the neighborhood absolutely not no um excuse me and would you say that your
addition is not going to be adverse to our ordinances or our master plan no okay and any additions for impervious is going to be handled by your mitigating of the water yes AG um would you like to T sure happy to
do so Mr chairman again the variance Rel Lea being sought to be precise now uh the lock coverage deviation is 33% requested versus 25% maximum permitted irrespective of
what's existing because none of it is quote unquote pre-existing uh as well as a shed size variance an oversized shed of 160 ft versus 100 uh Square ft maximum
permitted shed location the the I'm sorry and shed location well the location they've agreed to uh move oh they are going to move and that's going to be a condition of uh just want to make sure that I know but the uh uh as mentioned they're arguing that's a benefit uh I'm sorry can I as far you
said the 160 Square ft compared to 100t didn't we agree that would be the new rules now is square no technically you still need that variance we're just going to give you the variance better you get a variance than you don't get it had it had it apparently had it been your only deviation you wouldn't have been sent
here um but since it was not your only deviation give we have to give you a variance to cover technically you still need that variance so uh again uh lock coverage 33% versus 25% maximum permitted oversized shed 160 ft versus
100 sare ft permitted the conditions stipulated to by by the applicant include relocating there we went relocating the shed to a fully conforming location uh and I do have other conditions but did you have another item
of relief Joe no it was whether or not we were relocating or we're going with the two side and rear yard setback variances oh he's they stipulated to relocating to add a benefit to the uh to their application elimin ating an existing
nonconformity uh in hopes of getting the relief for the lock coverage deviation of 8% uh and the oversized shed As I understood it yeah relocating meaning 10 ft away from you may only have to relocated 2 feet or one foot but it has to be at
least 10 ft right to a conforming location meaning it doesn't deviate from the setback requirements um the conditions of approval again relocating the shed to a fully performing location as well as all the items set forth in
the planers memo of September 27 and the engineers memo of September 27 as amended uh because our engineer amended the uh memo to include among other things the fact that the storm water mitigation uh or the storm water is not
uh Exempted it does constitute a minor development uh and uh all storm water management will be subject to the review and approval of our engineer uh as well as as the site plan will be revised uh to make the appropriate revisions uh by utilizing as
a base uh or basis the 2019 survey as opposed to the 2021 survey uh and otherwise I think the conditions in the report stay the same and I think those are all the conditions
correct Joe correct okay uh so again if it's uh uh if the board wishes to Grant it'll be a motion in a second and a majority vote to Grant both uh both both the items of relief the barrance relief
as well as with all the stipulated two conditions Meredith would you like to start off with deliberations I would well first off I think that the addition that you're proposing looks great I think it's you know it's a nice to stud it's something that's going to
be beneficial to you and it's not overly burdensome it's it's something that will you know C improve the the market value of your home it looks nice um and then there's the uh you there's this whole
conversation too about the the um down spouts and storm water storm water management design um which I think is really important and we seem very aable to it which I think is good um you know you've come here tonight we we you know
ran into this thing with looking at the the site with the improvements that have been made the course that liveed there but we we' worked it out and we've had a transparent discussion about it um I think uh you know there's you know been
some discussion from the public obviously the concern about the storm water runoff because that's that's certainly an issue if you if you're in Long Hill um but you've been um you've been open and and uh um aable to want to
work with us and uh I think that you pending some some kind of uh storm water management design uh this would be something that I would absolutely Grant permission for iove Gary I think you said that really
well I was like I'm thinking of I'm thinking of these words and you're saying them so it's almost like I don't have to say it's like I don't have to say anything but I I I do think that um us getting together and taking a look at the history of the property revealed
that uh improvements can be made and I'm confident that the working with the engineer and the architect uh will hopefully improve things for the neighbors and and the area um so I Echo everything that you say and I add those little
pieces thank you uh Tom first of all thank you for coming in I thought it was a very complete presentation in many respects um number one I think um your your attempts will beautify the neighborhood and number two
I think frankly the neighborhood will be better after you complete the conditions under this requirement uh than before so thank you well done Jerry um I think the applicant has satisfied both the positive and the negative criteria
required for approval I think that um thank you by the way for your good presentation and your architect and I want to also thank our board professionals on this case I think they gotten every we through it and I think they did a good job so thank you to all of that um but I think that uh with with
the guidance we received from our engineer the storm water management plan um will actually make the situation over there better um you know neighbor will get less water we're improving the the shed location thank you for doing that that's the right thing to do there rather than you get a variance for that
it's minor but it's it matters again you're improving your neighbor situation so um with with all that said you're not definitely not impairing our uh our Zone intent or our ordinance or anything like that I think it it's suitable it improves the neighborhood but I good
luck with the application thank you I also uh concur with my fellow board members uh I appreciate your willingness and your flexibility to work with us uh concerning the shed location and also concerning any water runoff um we are
very concerned with that we uh as as your neighbor in the back stated over the years things gotten worse and worse because of whatever you know just actually building more houses just theg grade the the water uh constantly
infiltrating so I believe what you're going to be doing on your property will be a benefit to your neighbors so uh it's actually going to uh probably usually mitigate a lot of that water issue that that' be coming off your property at least can't control other
issues but at least that so I would also be in favor of it did Mr flatlake get a chance to deliver yeah yes he did oh he did I'm sorry you didn't hear him to you zone out I I was focused no pun intended no pun intended okay well planned I'm
sorry oh boy all right enough well planed all right do I hear a motion to uh approve this uh I'll move okay do I have a second second roll call okay Mr aronia yes Miss Collins yes Mr junakis
yes Mr Flatley yes chairman GRE yes motion carries okay thank you guys thank you board and I want to say one more thing Deborah behind me right a lot of help for me good I want to thank you for all our help also good yesk thank you for that because it makes us feel good
that uh our public impression is good yes thank you I thank you we'll be in touch I go home and get some rest now now the work debate than you guys
please we will congrats that was really handled well thank you guys yes it's a joint effort there thank you Joe thank you yeah thanks for working with us Jo you guys want to St
no that's what need okay um anybody need a break CU I want to get done with uh nobody needs another break okay good let's go into our next uh issue that we needed to deal with was finalizing our
rules for the Zoning Board of adjustment adopted hopefully October 1st 2024 now from what I do before 2025 yes uh from what I understand this version is a culmination of all the problem all
the issues and the discussions we've had two or three times in the past concerning these um if anyone did anyone have a chance to read it all through or at least I did not okay that's ien I haven't even looked at it okay the final version I looked at
along the way but away this weekend so I did not I understand but taking the fact that I am assuming that this final version culminated in what we had discussed in the past and what we fixed
um do you have the other versions of um I don't know if I have an old Redline hard copy at least think I purposefully didn't bring them so it's not to get confused so I think let me see I just don't like the fact that we're not allowed to discuss
moood points that's all we do here no not I'm only kidding R self-deprecatory humor yeah there is that's love it forcable right the board professionals don't have
to abide by that one yeah it's our favorite so is the plan that we're voting these in now or we sit with these for a little bit okay well that's we can carry it yeah yeah we can carry it I that's why I'm asking our old ones still apply yeah I I think can't wear shorts
right no I don't want to see your legs um I I would say based on the fact that there has been a not a large not a adequate time to really look him over uh let let's let's carry this to the next
meeting uh review them uh compare them to the last Redline one we had and make sure that all the did you proof read as far as the difference yeah no no both Chris and I but but and also you may have a may have
more board members yes we only have a bear just but I mean I'm taking your word that that whatever we fixed the last time he's in this version yes so we're not looking for mistakes we're just looking to the the uh I resent that
um but no I I I'm seriously speaking uh you you're confident in and telling us that whatever is in here is what we discussed and the changes were made at try to slip some stuff yes didn't try to slip anything that's right that's you didn't say that the board board attorney
rates right exactly but U I think there's something I'm I'm the only board attorney for the next 200 years I think but you I know uh so I think let's let's hold off until the next time we meet and have everybody
read it feel comfortable with it and I I think based on that I think we'll be able to adopt it then uh because you know I I just want to make sure that everybody's comfortable with it because this is an important document I mean it is something that we are going to use as
a guideline and how to uh proceed in the future you know with our procedures and everything and our the way we conduct ourselves so and and while uh there's requirement to have board rules each and every year uh uh once you're comfortable
it's reasonable to assume that 2025 and thereafter just weop little few if any modifications might need to be made or might want to be made yeah well that's why we did this because there were a lot of modifications that I made from the last time we looked at them and things
that legally came up or things that we that we hadn't considered or hadn't uh you know really put in there adequately so all right that considered um let's discuss the next meeting and dates well I just what for
board secretary report everybody got a copy of the how busy you are oh I also emailed it this just kind of gives you an idea and I did update this today with um the new board dates hoping that everybody agrees to those board dates um
but yeah we're pretty much busy through the end of the year so so let's go over that let's we have to vote on those new dates so reiterating for the record um we do not have a meeting on Election Day this year that was in the schedule voted
in January that everybody voted on for 2024 the next board the next zoning board meeting was scheduled for November 19th however uh that is the league of municipalities in Atlantic City so all all of your board professionals will not
be in attendance so it's hard to hold a meeting without your board professionals yeah I would say so so I would ask the board consider based on the poll that I took uh on from through email that the board considered cancelling November 19th and adding a new date of November
Tuesday November 26th that's contingent upon that's two days prior to Thanksgiving so if anybody's heading out of town so that's what I was going to say I didn't reply to that email because I can't give a definite that I'll be here on any of those days at this point as we
get closer I will obviously you and Mr ganakas were the only two that didn't respond to me and everybody else said they could be here good so then there's a meeting how about you then I'm good you're good okay sorry I didn't respond
so what dates are we adding now so you're only adding Tuesday the 26th why aren't we adding uh the aren't we adding 11 we're not adding 1117 no oh oh okay we're cancelling the
so the vote will be to cancel 1119 and add 1126 okay all right so we only have to cancel one and add one at this cor okay and 11:26 it looks like we're going to be hearing uh Mitchell Road and 12 Al Al
Maria Court right yes okay and addition impervious and addition impervious oh okay what are we what are we using 115 for 115 is not election day when when you're canceling correct that
was already that was already we didn't have that didn't have to be canceled we never scheduled it correct and then the next one after that is well I thought we'd vote on November 1 and then go to December so we move the 19th to the 26th essentially correct and now I had the fifth on my calendar well let's let's
let's have the let's do November 1st all right do I hear a motion to uh okay otherwise okay uh move to eliminate to eliminate so the so the motion would be to eliminate uh November 19th and add to eliminate November 19th and add November
26th yes which will have to be Sunshine notice yeah do we have do we have that motion somebody make that motion I'll move it okay second okay all in favor all in favor yeah I okay I okay so now
11:26 is added in place of 1119 now the next one now so December um it was brought to my attention recently and as I mentioned and I just again reiterating for the record that uh our scheduled zoning board meeting for December 3rd happens
to be the will be the volunteer dinner for Long Hill yes so you should all go to that and enjoy yourselves right thus um we only have since we only had one meeting scheduled already for December which is normal for the board um I had
suggested moving it and everybody um had said December 17th seems to work Tuesday December 17th and the planning board graciously gave up that no no that because the planning board has the week before you oh okay so the planning board didn't have to give anything up for this oh so that would have been our that
would not have been a meeting but we're putting that on correct okay so this vote would be to this motion would be to cancel December 3rd and add December 17th and again you'll be sunshing December 17th if the motion passes correct do I hear a motion to cancel
December 3rd and add December 17th I make a motion to do that second do I hear a second second okay all in favor I okay done thank you board okay okay so sounds like we're covering our bases
here so our yes our next is 10:15 yes 10:15 which is a normal meeting okay okay for two apps yes we got a addition and a new house and they both F Elli all right yeah that yeah and then you have and then you have to and then you have a
planning well actually you don't have to go to the planning board meeting on the 22nd the board of adjustment has three meetings left in the calendar year four uh no you're right three oh my gosh cuz I forgot today's October 1st October 15th November 26th and December 17th
yeah only three more meetings yeah so pat yourself on the back you help a lot yeah let let me uh just reiterate that uh hopefully if everyone reads over the B laws we can pass them before we do the
uh motion uh if everybody has if any if I'll ask if anybody has any problems or questions with it but hopefully we can add that to the agenda and like a minute or a resolution thing and we can do it before the applications okay you want to do it before the applications next meeting okay great unless there's issue
then we can bump it to the end of the meeting no I can I can send out an email and just say if anybody has an issue to email