You guys can hear me fine. Thank God. moved here in 2022 with our um with our three children um and had a slight change which is kind of you know I'll go through in a minute but um you know essentially why you know we're going to work with this um with this path to
expand our our family knowledge but you know I guess with that um thank you all for the time this evening having the opportunity to present our robotics plan on 62 Western Drive know myself along with my wife Rachel who I think you all know very well at this point the owners of the property and we
really do find it to be the perfect location um you know and essentially you know found our dream home um you know that we'd like to continue living here um you know despite kind of like change comes in life inevitably um you know that prompted us to kind of embark on restoring and expanding our homes um you
know as you all know as well we've received multiple rounds of feedback I think probably over the last nine months or so. Um so really feel this plan at this point is really a you know one of our collective thought maybe not everybody here but um certainly several
board members and and the consultants as well um in terms of providing feedback we know this over the last nine months or so. Um you know we we we came here about about two months ago um and presented presented our plans. Um you know we incorporated the feedback that
we received regarding the number you know the size of variances um that we had in our last plan but our goal was really to maintain the integrity of what we presented you know last time which we really do feel you know embraces um you know compliments historic nature of the home. Um you know as Dan will discuss
shortly we began taking the board's feedback you know very seriously and have worked to develop this latest plan which reduces the number of variances and you know where there are variances required or inevitable you know reduces those those overages to what acceptable
levels. Um, you know, throughout this process, we've worked, you know, with several of the board members, um, you know, consultants, the township staff, and everybody to address concerns along the way. Um, and again, I've done that in this latest proposal. And maybe before I turn it over, just to take a
quick step back, um, you know, the context for why we're adding this to our home and embarking on, you know, creating our forever home here, um, and the modifications that are important to us is Rachel's mother now lives with us, um, due to health issues that she developed in Colorado. the loss of her
husband about a year ago. Um so we really serve this home is meant to serve you know three generations essentially under one roof. Um you know so it's a key goal of ours to you know provide her um you know first floor living accommodations and direct access to the home so we can care for her um you know
on a daily basis going forward. And then secondarily, um you know, my this proposed lab also brings our son down from the third floor down to the second floor. Um so he can live on basically on the same um the same floor as myself and my wife and um and his two siblings. So
with that, I'll I'll wrap up and turn it over to Danny. Um but we hope that when we present here um you know acceptable to you all to to proceed, um you know, with this plan. >> Okay, great. Thank you. And then since you've been here a few times, I wonder if you could just start
with summarizing the changes. Yes. >> From the lab. I don't get asked for that at all. >> Yeah. >> Exactly where I wanted to start. I guess I wanted to give you a brief really brief overview of the project itself and go through the changes we made both
physically and variances that got affected by the physical change and then hopefully uh get you through that and talk about variances but then get you through which I really didn't get a chance to talk about a little bit of the landscaping and kind of take a deeper
dive into the materials that we would like to use windows and get maybe more into the minutiae that we haven't had a chance to have passed. Ultimately, ultimately our goal tonight if if the
board receives the project as a successful approach, the kind of goal on my end and and certainly the carrots would be getting approval with conditions if the minutia which I would love to have gotten to
before, but you know, we talk about windows, we talk about some special details if that that's a possibility. in the back of your mind as we look at this application. The big picture is working. We are so happy to come back. We have some
variances to get for so we still have an unknown ahead of us. So we can get past this and then that and we're happy to come back if that's something that's been done before is say okay well before we order the windows we'd like to have a
window by window maybe consultation with you and we're happy to get feedback on those like we were happy I guess of course feedback on the overall projects. With that being said, the short story is uh it's an addition
to the home in the rear that will accommodate a guest bedroom suite, side entrance, and then uh we want to expand the existing twocar garage. So, it's a threec car uh garage, but it's
detached. So, one of the goals was to leave the garage, but then expand it uh for the third car. And on the second floor, we got to expand and add a bedroom. And we got to add a bedroom by commandeering
some of the master bedroom. And then the addition on top of the addition will allow us to have the additional space which will give us the four bedrooms, three baths. We're coming from a threebedroom, two bath. That's the
project as as an overview. And then I would guess I'll dive into the changes that we had made. Um really quickly if we look at I guess sheet one of 11 which everybody should have it's a cycling
and the first change we made that was significant was we eliminated before previous application we were seeking a rear yard setback and we're going to add to about seven feet and so we've eliminated rear yard setback so we conforming to
the rear yard setback line And that a altered the shape of the addition. So instead of coming back 7 ft, let's say we moved 100 page to the right a little bit. We also reduced some program. So we're able to get the the building
coverage down by eliminating some program made the addition smaller and eliminate the f. So previously we're asking for rear yard setback and floor area ratio. As a result of the comments, we were able to redesign it and
eliminate Fard. One other result that happened which is kind of small but we made the addition for the garage a bit smaller. So previously we're asking for called a 21 by 15t garage and we've now reduced
it to 20 by 13. And I pushed it in even farther off the setback line. Although we didn't eliminate the variances associated with threat, we definitely reduced the ask. Um, let me take you through
some of the quick changes physically. If we jump to sheet three >> and I'm sorry, the plans that you're direct you're directing to and that are up on the large board, those are the same that you previously submitted. >> No changes. >> Thank you.
So if it's easier just to focus on your 11 by7s. If I take you to sheet three of 11, that's our first floor plan. So you could see off to the right is the detached garage. We've made that a little bit smaller than previous and I I
I created before I had the back line of the garage even with our addition. So now I think even architecturally more sensitive uh approach. I moved it in. But so the the addition to the garage clearly looks like an addition to
the garage and obviously that helps push it a little bit further away from the setback line and reducing the size, reduce building coverage, reduce lot coverage and reduce or eliminate the F. Then we look at the plan and
without comparing it back to what we had before, we took seven feet out of the back of the addition which took seven feet out of the cover of the patio, the raised patio where you see a barbecue and where you see like a breakfast table, little seating area that all came
in line. So we're able to maintain the rear yard setback. So the addition actually got a little smaller in massing and scale than previous program. um somewhat stayed the same. But again, the concept is a side entry, a small bedroom, bathroom,
closets, and a lounge area. Now if I take you to the next it should be uh sheet 41 physical changes to the second floor as a a result of the meeting which I
think is a positive for for variances for the board and and potentially uh the look of it. We've eliminated the second floor balcony. I don't know if you remember, but there was a second floor balcony that you would
from the from the from the bedroom, we were able to go onto this balcony. So, we reduced that significant. We put it off into the corner. Um, so we no longer have the large balcony uh with the railings, which that eliminated a lot of building coverage
because that counts as building coverage if you do that. And so, I'll take it to the elevations when we get a chance and you'll see the change for that. Um, and previously we had the entire master bedroom suite in the second floor. So we've now utilized the existing space,
the bedroom, and now as you pass through that bridge, which is very interesting architectural feature. The bridge allows us to connect to the home without, you know, well, physically we're connected, but it doesn't look like it's a mass connection to the home. So I think architecture is
very cool. I think it uh speaks to the historic nature of the home and how sensitive we were to that connection. So, um although a little bit inconvenient to cross a bridge to get to your bathroom closet, uh architecturally, I think it's exciting
for those are the major physical changes to our plan. And the nice thing about it as I said we've eliminated we had seven variances we able to eliminate two setback
we will need building coverage for a small percentage we reduce that significantly. And now we're asking for building coverage. We're about 2% over what's allowed. Lot coverage. We're only.9% of what's allowed.
Now there's a minimum setback for garages, detach garages, which is the requirement 12. We will be at 8.2 ft. The existence at three. So by nudging it over, we made that variance a little bit
more palatable. And fourth variance is called accessory use coverage. Um and again they want for accessory use which is patios and
um actually garages. The detached garages counts as accessory use coverage. Um so 20% they want 20% of your rear yard area to have accessory uses in it. And so the addition being put into the rear yard,
which is a great design for the home, obviously is not great for the backyard. So we have a accessory use coverage and we'll be asking for 8% over what's allowed and rear yard on occupied. The way that figure works, it's 25% of
your lot area. And we're just going to be a little bit uh under on that. We're going to leave 22.5% open. And again, if we were to analyze it, I don't really want to get too deep into the variances
and but a lot of it is a function of the best place of textually locate the mass of the addition that we are and that is the dilemma because now that all sudden start to manipulate some of the
variances but I think as a team we were able to mitigate produce and I believe that when we go for events I'll be able to justify that there's no negative impact in neighbors and neighborhood the
house we did some study about how visible it would be from the street so from western drive the addition is mitigated because it's behind the house and from Taylor road the addition's way off to the side and certainly now today
with the foliage You can't see it. So, you really can't see it in the backyard. And when I get to present the landscaping plan, I'm going to show you that our plan is going to plant greens. We're going to come out the gate like 8 ft tall and stagger them. So, we're going to even screen it
even further. So, I feel like there's no negative impact to the neighbors, the neighborhood as a result of the the variances we need. So, we get to uh hopefully create something that's celebrating the historical nature of the home and get something additional space
and now have project that's well received. Um, and if I may, I would like to take you quickly to the landscaping plan, which is not labeled, but it should be on the back. This was done by uh Lizard Landscaping
Incorporated. The main thing about this plan is if you see where the pool is located on the right hand side of property, we are going to um I guess they're called American holls. They're going to be 10 ft tall. I apologize. So, we're
going to plant uh American hollings 10 ft tall uh part of the field of the pool. The pool is there's no variance associated with the pool as a as a pool. Of course you take the pool value then there's things but so I think the plan
of planting those evergreens on the right side of the property furthers our success yard the other plantings are more lowlying in nature and a little bit more decorative in nature but again primarily
it's the 10 tall American polies on the right side now I would like to take you through the materials you're planning using because that's exciting. Um, if we look to
sheet seven of 11, it'll be fairly easy for me to take you through the materials because the goal is to pull from the house what we have already. So we have a mixture of cedar shapes, stone, brick. Um so those three
materials we're going to use uh we're going to use it in a elegant way so as to extend the aesthetics already. So if we look at the front elevation,
what you're seeing behind the left edition, which is a one story, that addition was done in 2000. Our addition is slightly toleranced in the rear primarily be the cedar shapes painted the color of the house is today. And the
onetory edition that you see all the way to the left will be cladded with stone. um that helped us architecturally I feel like diminish the addition to the left. Um so obviously if I painted in bright color that would make it really clear. So the stone will
help to mask the addition. We're going to have a fence. We're going to have a pool. So the fence um it's aluminum fence. It's 54 in high. um where it's visible from the street, we're going to have the supports made of
the brick ears that would match the brick from the house. And so a lot of the inspiration for the materials obviously are just drawn from the house. Um then if we look at the bottom of the page, we see the rear elevation.
And again, we're going to have a stone base. Anytime there's windows that are in the stone, we're going to treat it with just like the existing house is treated with this brick corbling around it. Um, so as to draw from some of the
inspiration of the details of the house, we plan on installing half round gutters uh and actually change that throughout the house. The existing house has the aluminum K gutters with the CHS to half round gutters.
And then if I just jump to sheet eight of 11, you get a chance to see some of the other views of the house on the top of the page left elevation. This is a very interesting architectural elevation because you get to see on the
second floor going to be a flat roof which is going to be the bridge that takes the second floor. Then we introducing on the lower roofs. We'd like to introduce some standing seam copper. We'll have the upper roof be standing seed copper but you won't
see it. But just to keep it consistent, we're going to redecorate. If you look at that elevation, we have a side porch that currently is made of wood, not so pretty railing. So that railing is going to be inspired by some
photographs we found in the 1880s of what was original. And in our spec sheet, you might have chance to see the drawings of that rail, but it's basically a cena railing with some beautiful turn posts, mahogany top rail, and we're going to make it out of masonry. So
it's a continuity of of connection of the existing house to the proposed addition. And again the way we've connected the house what you see in that elevation where our connection was all modified in 1960
the year 2000. Um so none of our home touches the 1880 one. Then again that one story edition will be platted in stone. The upper portion will be platted in the cedar shapes to match existing. The roof will going to
match existing. The windows will be a Pella traditional series. It's the historic line lights. Um all the historic detailing that window is special for that. I think it's a it's been accepted by the
historic board national park to be a window of choice. Um and again as we move through it, this is where I I wanted to say we would love maybe not tonight but if there was a grill pattern, a window choice, a shape
location that would be something that would be willing to tackle in the future with the board. Um love if you just we had, but I also would love your feedback on that. Um, and now we get to the bottom of the
page, which is the right elevation. So, you see I again, we had a twotory balcony that was off of the second floor. We've eliminated that. Now, we just have a pergola uh for shade and the
balcony is off to the left off of the bridge. Um so it maintains a external space for them but it becomes less than we had before. >> We've eliminated the chimney. We've eliminated the fireplace interior and
exterior so we don't have that feature anymore. Lighting um we plan on minimal minimum exterior lighting. So just we actually try to represent it on on the elevations themselves. just on
the uh outside doors outside the posts. We're going to put lanterns. We're actually going to the copy of the lanterns that are on the garage. It's continuity. It's a very 60 watt incandescent bulb. It's very low
lighting. Um so we don't plan on doing anything other than that. I think that's the story. Um, guess I could open up to questions and or comments. >> Well, I think we want to first hear from
Matt and comments from Ross have any any thought on the proposed? >> Yes. So um after speaking with Barton and uh I had to go back and listen to the the previous meeting. I apologize
for not being here. Yes. But um he did not uh recommend to approve this design uh after speaking with him. He said the design that you had last few months ago I suppose um was perfectly fine and uh that probably if you just came back with that design tonight with um just you
know with the finishes and all the kind of everything that you brought today it would have been approved. That's very interesting because I guess the feedback I got was and not from Martin but feedback from the board was that well we like it conceptually we like it we love it but there's just too
many variants for us to get behind this thing because obviously our next step is to go in front of the variance board. So um happy to maybe I hadn't seen the memo from Barton uh to understand what about this
design he doesn't like. Yeah, it's it's more so the massing just coming off to the left being it's almost looks like one of the earlier iterations. I know you guys are working with the with the tights are back in the rear yard, but um yeah, him and I just thought that the massing was too too large in scale
compared to the to the main house. >> Um viewed from Western Drive which >> uh yes >> sorry on the proposed front. >> What which page is that on? I just want to follow >> I'm trying to understand
>> can can you can you I was trying to understand the differences right so can you tell us >> the prior design you came with >> yes >> how much more is visible of the building being pushed uh to the left. I guess one thing >> I brought the old Okay. So, what is the
I know I know you previously submitted, but what is the date that you're going to show? Right. >> Okay. Uh this date is 3:30 2026 and this is the same exhibit that was submitted in April. Now, of course, we look page
87 here. He actually this falls over. This is what we're proposing. Uh so this piece I don't know if everybody can see it. This piece is existing. >> The addition is behind that and we'll
look at significantly behind that. I think I would love for us to look at the three-dimensional imagery because this is a flat misleading image what it would look like. So, we're going to look at the perspectives in a moment. Um,
so this has been modified and because we had to take seven feet, we've moved it out. So, this probably got extended. So, let's look at what we had. >> I actually thought you connected the garage to the house. Honestly, no, we did not. I know. I'm just telling you that's what I saw when I was looking at
the drawings. I was just really confused. >> We had previously, by the way, I I failed to mention that we had a connecting pergola. We've eliminated that. Um because as this thing grew, we visually didn't want to have it look like it connected. But there's a
significant uh depth perception that we're not meeting two dimensionally. Um so certainly we'll take a look at that. But these are the the differences. So it was higher here,
more sky being blocked. Now it's it's slow down. So And this this came in quite a bit. So the distance from the garage too. >> Yeah. It's like
on the bottom right. Do you think that do you think the rendered elemental views that you were talking about would better explain that too? I do I'm a little like like used. >> Yeah, I think the three we'll look at
some threedimensional imagery. I think that's >> better. So on my 10 of 11 >> Okay. >> Yeah. Almost like just the changes that you made for >> Yes.
from April to today be really helpful and I I did want to just make a comment because I I clearly remember the discussions from that meeting from what I remember >> that people talk to you about the um you know all the setbacks and they were
basically just concerned for you that when you go to the zoning planning board that you would have you know more problems with that application but no one I mean we've asked you to come back with the pool equipment the lighting plans landscaping whether the play set was going away and possibly drainage as the
asks just so you know like that was the intention it wasn't for you to have to redesign I mean that was what I remember was not for you to have to redesign everything so um you know just I'm not criticizing maybe this will be fine just you know that was my impression first we
had that conversation about all variances that's not really our place to advise you on that and then you know and Then we gave you a list of small things like you know just the lighting plan. I mean I have it written in my notes here. You know I ment
have some issues with drainage. So I think there was going to be some drainage issues. You were going to come up with that and and that's where we were supposed to be today. >> Right. >> Yeah. I mean Dan I'm just trying to understand it seems like you pushed uh it forward so you didn't have the rear
set back right and with that pushed everything to the left. take a time and put it somewhere. >> Yeah, I will tell you exactly how much it went to the left, but it didn't go significantly. We reduced building coverage in F. Um I think one really
nice image might be look at the new 10 of 11 because obviously if we're talking about the view from Western that's really the underlying objection to
this I think that's a critical component. Um the takeaway for sure I listen to the tapes I listen to the video was 100% well we're going to
such a complicated case because such a complicated case because I don't need to be here I need to I had this design solved without a variance now the historic court says well we want the addition behind the house Okay. Well, now we're trying to get a lot of
variances and we came up with stuff we like. We know got the blessings and then we the feedback I got was oh my god this now you're going to build the varian we can't really such a egregious
amount of varian overages you know because we have zoning and sensitivity to the neighbors. Um that was my take away and I think my c client's take away was wow we really need to revisit the variances that we're asking for to
get be able to get blessing here. >> Well if you could I mean for me it would be really helpful like you said going through the renderings I think to be just with from the change for each change you do just in in a very simplified form I think that so you don't get caught admiring the details I
think. Okay. >> Okay. >> You're saying that the height hasn't changed, but you're changing the grade. So, you are That's what I was confused about. So, are you not changing the grade enough that the height is now changed above
grade? Because you're saying that you're you're over what the allowable height of the building is. >> No, no, no, not we're not. We're way way under the heat requirement. That's not >> that's not what your chart shows here
because you're saying here, right? You're saying that your existing is 33 in the half. You're saying it's unchanged, but you're saying 32 height allowed. Um,
>> unless you our our existing height of the home is existing, I guess it's 33. Our addition is 4 feet lower than the main bridge. So, >> yeah, but you lower the grade of the property in the back, right? You're lowering the grades.
>> Yeah, but we won't need a height issue. Our our variances will not be to height. >> I just wanted to make sure because it what you wrote here, but you did change the grade. So you are actually unless you did an analysis that you how you
change the grade is >> not affecting the height above grade >> right because if you change the grade you change the height >> above grade the max is 35t so >> okay I just said I'm just saying like the chart isn't correct so if you you are going for several variances so I
would just check I'm not saying I I can't tell you what's right or not right but I'm saying the chart here on your calculation should be checked by your before you go in >> because you are changing the grade of property. Correct? >> I'm just I'm just I'm looking at the
chart. I'm just saying I'm not I'm not that person. I'm historic person, but I'm just looking at the chart and it seems sense. I guess collectively if we look at it's going to be the same sheet. I don't have previous one but I sort of show you here although
it's small pass this around maybe but this image and this image are the ones I'd like to focus on >> is that sorry that's this is >> this is >> um and this is what we had previously. So um in my
professional opinion don't see much change that cause or trigger uh anything from western if you were to travel down you conceive that um and or find that
offensive and or actually massing approach So then the lower one is what we had previously. So we didn't have the lower onetory edition here. >> We were seeking the trellis connection.
>> Daniel, I know this is probably too question. So um can I just show you this is what this this is what I think we're talking about. Yes, we're talking about that's that extra differential. Yes, that's what >> that's what I just could you just walk
through that little like looks like a separate little almost >> small building behind it like or it's not I know it's shed I'm just saying it looks like a separate detached building. Let's look at this. Is that what you're
talking about Matt? The massing on that because that's what sticks out to me and I think you showed that to me. his little Yeah, he was is probably what big fallout was. I'm guessing one of >> Yeah, that's what >> just try to conceptually understand it
as hard as as we can and benefit from all of that. So understand It's just envelop. Think the best way to maybe understand that piece is the one story piece which is
why I talked to about materials about that piece. You can see in the rendering, but we did it padded stone dark color, the dark roof. It really like if I was to do that cedar like we did on the renderings painted the light
color, it was much more unnoticeable object or architectural feature. Once you cl this stone, it really looks like a garden piece and you certainly don't find it I didn't find it as as a visual
perception. Now obviously like we talked about to keep this addition entirely in the backyard and I think it's does more detriment to the site. Um which is comment I kind of took to heart. Um, you know, it's certainly a variance that
I've never been comfortable. I don't know if I've ever asked for a rear yard setback before. Um, so that by eliminating that, I felt like this is a better addition for the neighbors in our neighborhood. Um,
I think it respects the home. I don't think obviously it wasn't even massive in scale um and you know obviously uh the complexity of standing alone and satisfying the board
we are committed to um but at some point you just feel about feeling lost. Well, it's not it's not satisfying us. It's satisfying the secretary of interior standards for rehabilitation of historic properties which talk about the setting of voids against space that pieces a
publicly accessible spaces. So that's talking about the view from the public road. So if that changes significantly by pushing it to the side that's not following SOI standards. And that's why I think throughout this process, you've been talking about
trying to uh keep it to the center as much as possible. You I know you're not pushing it to the other side because you have other stuff going on there, but you know, it's just by removing that portion off the back and satisfying that one variance, you you now have pushed mass
to the side in a way that doesn't apply with SLI qualifications as the Barton is saying is this too. So >> yeah, I didn't get the benefit of that prior to hearing it right now. So a little uh caught off guard to be honest
with you about the comments. Um yeah, we're trying uh obviously be creative. I mean, I I I think it's my opinion in terms of solids and voids and
openness and um imposing on Western Drive, we're significantly far away from Western with the addition of this. So, I feel like that's not something that feels like we diminish the amount of open space around
the structure. I was talking I think from from Barton pushing back behind a front facing garage off of >> Yeah. >> in the back. >> So when you have when you have I'm saying you have your control state your
name for the record. >> Oh sorry Rachel Gary. >> Um you sorry. >> Do you swear and affirm that the testimony you're going to provide this evening with the truth the whole truth and nothing but >> Yes. Um Barton before in the very beginning was uh consulting with us with
one of your board members and was done and was talking to us and having have meetings like swear in um before all this which I I knew to the area new to town not realizing what is and is not allowed
having to be on the preliminary some of the hearing score I was supposed to be on but then them taking us off and asking us to do Zoom calls with them personally. Um on the side um there was the talk of having a front uh garage
which we have one of those designs and what he asked us to do when another board was well in the town we are not allowed to do that. um our last meeting if we want to get to kind of the standards of the board and
what is it not allowed um on our previous meeting Barton called um our my AR our architect personally to say do not come to the meeting you are going to get denied because you of your variances there was calls there was information I have all the information of what was
done that was not supposed to happen which I was not privy to and not told I was trying to do what the board has been guiding us through all through September and things that taking us off, putting us on, taking us off. I said we came in
immediately with a conforming um design. I have found research. I did everything. I've gone to the museum, the open request. I found when the um uh garage was built. Um it's not historic. Um I provided that. The township knows that.
um Al McDonald um with all of that, but I stated now kind of with the town and everything with moving forward in the direction of what is I think um I feel like I've been kind of uh on this wild
like goose chase with uh doing and being respectful um resilient and uh accepting to all the feedback in if we watched the last um report of the um what happened or in the last meeting with the meeting
was it was it's too much you know it's you know we need to come back he was talking about the landscaping which is really not pretty the neighbor with the drainage issue the drainage issue is not on us this is because of the retaining wall of whatever is constructed that
probably needs to be repaired we have if you send someone out there but they have never asked us before if there's any drainage any issues on our right side of the yard no there is not and you they can send anyone out there in the middle. We had we had um reconstructed one of the pipes in the center to help our
neighbors in the back who never complained. There's nothing on the right side. We have done everything respectful everything that has been asked. The last meeting was come back with less variances because we cannot because a letter of support to go to the next step is what we needed what we need from you
guys because of what has transpired of our cooperation and kind of going back and forth with the design of the home. I had done everything that you guys have asked for and more I believe. Um and
I've done my research. I've done everything. And I said, we went from one design that was not going to impede on anything we were doing. And like I said, the garage I have that I have the the open request. I have all of the per even when that permit of that garage when that was built, they didn't go to
zoning. That is not even shouldn't have been allowed back when it was built because it's going over um what is it? This is too close to the side. So that was even done correctly because I checked that with the township and with Alex. So >> m I'm just going to say
>> yeah I'm just I'm sorry I'm kind of because this is we had asked from last excuse me just one second >> as is from last meeting if we look at what was asked it was take it down it wasn't anything of you know from our preliminary one it was we loved it it's
great he even Barnes wrote his letter of you know I should I deem this this should be accepted and then we got the call saying do not come tomorrow night they're having talks and the variances are too much. We can't support that >> and he called. Why would that happen?
And why is all I'm just saying the back of what's been talked and I'm I know I'm being all this stuff. So I'm just saying >> comment on calls that remain. I only want to talk about the testimony here at the commission meeting. And I'm just going to say for the last meeting you had presented us with a lot of information for us to review that
evening. And so we had asked for time to review that. And yes, you're right. We did talk about the variance. There's something we can do with the variance is great. But I would say that we're now reviewing a slightly different plan that we haven't seen before. And the plan that we had seen before was keeping most of the massing behind that.
>> It's it's 7 ft to the left. Also, the addition of what you see from Western Drive if we want to talk about the site on Western and if not if seeing it then why was it back then when they you got in 2000 the addition was allowed. It's completely to the left of the home. It's
an add-on to the street. The Well, I know. Exactly. You No, I know you guys weren't here in 2000 obviously, but I'm just saying if it was allowed back then where you're saying an addition was allowed and it's more of a site that you are going to see from Western Drive when we
have put in hedging and everything in the front. So, one the house is not as visible also from the site because we'd like to have a little bit more privacy, but the addition that was added is more impactful from a sight view. So right now we're trying to like take some of
that or like what seven feet to the left and then also we can't do anything with the garage that was not that in the first place from the backside of in September was told you can't do that. >> You you can't have it detached because this is historic this and I said then I
said huh interesting and I kind of went and did my research and had to find out if it was historic or not. It was not historic. I have the proof. I went to the township even Alice the business commissioner confirmed it's not historic but you guys but we let down this path
and I said I was going by board and all their guidance of what they asked us to do. So when you when you asked me to do a front-facing garage that I know the town is not going to approve and this is you know employee then how am I supposed
to take every and I'm taking everything they're telling us to do. >> Right. Well, I'm I'm trying to help you understand, but our role here is >> No, and I understand and that's why we said it was sent in beforehand. We've had the time to do this, but like we have done everything that you guys have
said and we have said yes to and last meeting it was like I said, Barton asked us for an entire landscape plan which is not really even for the fact that we can't see minimal things like a flower or little bush wanted that which it should not be
a That's that's not the story about that. >> Well, actually in the Star Hills SL park historic district is the definition. >> I know, but I did speak with but I spoke with the lawyer with the HBC board Katherine. I spoke with her past couple
days and I asked her about that and certain things that are minimal the minimal impact of it if it's a small >> we're not talking about bars but I think >> I know about to say I smoke for the record I do want to clarify that I would did not speak for this
commission you know I can tell you what the ordinance says and what says but there is no way at any time that I speak for this commission >> no I was just saying what minimal like or nothing of store. I'm saying the minimal like we want to put like a bush
in, but it was like Barton was telling us on the side like put more, you know, landscaping things are like was minimal and I just like this is the bigger picture. I was like we can go back and forth so many times. >> We can paint a bush here. We're not talking
where we're going of what you proposed here. >> We're we we have a proposal in front of us. Our consultant has expressed some concerns about it. either accept those concerns and and you know say we aren't going to approve it from a historic perspective or we could say we're okay
with it. >> So we have to decide which one we're going to do. I mean, like I said, we're reviewing the plan you presented to us, which is the one before us. No. Okay. >> It just felt like whack-a-ole because it's like Barton tells us to do something, we do it then it's not
acceptable to the board and then we're like put one back and forth on this and then even things like the variances that my understanding is not part of what you guys really review was brought up last time and it inevitably led us to make this change and now we're like back to
square one with Barton saying now he doesn't like it. Like it just >> Well, I think there's some confusion too. It's not that we don't have a ruling overbearances, but we do we there are times where people come in with things, you know, because they're historic properties. They're built where they're built. And so we have gone to
the zoning to support it. And I think that the question was saying, can we support this at zoning? No. If if you want to go with this plan, we're not coming to zoning with you. You know, like we're not going to send a letter to zoning saying, you know, they really
tried. Like that's I think that's what it was. We don't we don't have any authority over zoning. We just say to zoning, yeah, you know, we really worked with this group and they're here. So I think the thing was there was a list of, you know, 20 variances of things that
were non-conforming and that's not something we're going to go back for. You know what I mean? Like that's in they did go back and they reduced the variance. Yes. So, you know, now I'm clear as a zoning rep, I'm not taking a position on whether these changes are
going to be acceptable to the zoning board. Yeah. But I think the purpose was to try and make changes that would reduce the number of variances. >> Yeah. >> So that this board could get behind it or not. It's obviously up to this board whether we would get behind it. >> I mean, I will just say, you know, my
comment on that lower edition looks like another garage. If I was looking at it architecturally, it looks almost like a fourth garage to this plan. If I look at what the rendering is here, you know, it looks as though it's a fourth garage,
right? And Dually, I'm not in favor. >> No, I'm still I'm just saying if you saw the before that it was >> the new one, the little part that pokes out, right? That looks like a side
garage. afford the the floor is if I may. >> Yeah, >> because landscaping we talk about landscaping too much, but if we plant >> like a tree in front of it, >> there's plenty of room to plant in front
of it. And >> I'm just saying we try to move it in to what I just said from last time what you guys I said were it just when we get told from in the very beginning about the garage But that no I'm saying if I
could move the garage and you tell told us like okay hey now from that >> cannot be attached. >> No >> can I so when did Barton send the documents that you never saw? >> Uh no you didn't I sent
I sent them out. Um >> did anybody receive this a comment? I yeah I sent it take notice to all the architects and all the owners with the memos and the complete letter. >> Did anybody receive that? >> I only sent it to architects and owners. Um I said
>> no it wasn't received. So like I would say >> that's the one thing >> from me but >> no it wasn't from you and like I was saying that it's a weird thing is >> I said it was a lot of I'm saying like last time when he called and I don't I said it wasn't allow I don't know a lot
like I said and had I know you're we allowed to talk with Barton on if like for a consulting purposes but that was not what happened um it was with uh board members um is that was not sent um you can if who run the show. Um that was
but I said it's just kind of odd like I said from that last meeting we were so like happy to be like be here because it was like I deem it complete great everything and then we came in and then he was like no and I said I I still and
I said that call that we got before and I don't know but he was just when he told us not to come when he and everyone got the letter the one that you sent we did no one got but the one that was before that where everyone got saying complete
and that he that you would advise the board to accept the plan. Then then when we got the call right beforehand, it was don't we can't accept it anymore. I just said it's been a very wild and like I said experience with I'm just saying a
board a part of the town that where where where does the line get crossed where you say okay for us and then you say with this you I just don't understand anymore really the going back to work >> yeah I I can speak for um for Barton after listening to the again I listened to the previous meeting this morning uh
while driving up here um it from my understanding I don't want to speak for any of the commission members the department definitely made it abundantly clear that that approval or that uh design was approved. It was just the fact that you know all the that's what why the the memo had about like 14 or 15
conditions at the time and then again my understanding of what the board was saying um that they just needed some time to look over the finish schedule and that the uh the design was approved. >> When I went to the town and I sp with I
was specifically told change it and get the variances down. It's and I have meetings and you look at town where it was told and with HPC he said you talked and I was I have I met with him three times in the town and he
stated make the changes in you know then I said it'll kind of go for we accepted the extension I we could have asked until May and just you gave you the time to vote but they they asked us to come and wait to the June meeting because I couldn't we could have asked for it I
that I you know I want to make it inconvenience um respect the process which I have done >> and my architect and my husband but we respected the process we extended it and we said okay that's fine and he said and
I did the town the three meetings I went there and and spoke with him saying okay you know what it's good but let's just get these things off and then you know it'll be you know good to go like this is what we need to do because we need to
have imbalance between the HPC and with zoning and variances and we have been trying to please but it just seems nothing has been ever good enough the entire time and it's very frustrating time and money that we have spent
throughout this all trying to appease it's seven feet to the left we have a garage that I prove that what so I know I'll repeat >> yeah so I We're here. We got your time and I got
your focus. The uh if we boil it down, uh it would be >> okay. This is the design in front of you tonight. And and I could certainly architectually explain why I think scale massing, openness, and voids all um
are acceptable and work with the guidelines of the historic preservation commissioning from my perspective. and and so when we deal with these things okay well what are the solutions planting I do have room to ask it we can ask you with
evergreens is a nice solution and or other items so uh that's when a place where landscaping is significant like we're going to screen the neighbors significant this could be a significant place where your perception of what you see obviously we could lead it into our
our approval that you will maintain it and I planted evergreens. You might not know it's there. Maybe changing the roof line uh turning to a hip roof and and kind of open up the space between the structures. I mean
there solutions to what we see. I mean we certainly work very hard on the planes and variances. So I don't I don't know if there's a solution to that puzzle. >> Did you change that from a flat roof to a gable? like that. Well, okay. Because it just looks so
this drawing to this. >> No, that just looks like it >> we limited a lot of second floor. >> I just was asking, we're just trying to figure it out. >> If you look at the differences, we've eliminated a lot of second floors. We took a lot of programs off the second floor >> and so the scale and massing of of the
addition itself is less. Now, of course, we have more one story. >> And again, I cladded it in stone to help make it disappear from from view. Um, and I would love to offer landscaping and I don't think it' be appropriate to add your roof.
>> No, I wasn't trying to offer Yeah. Can I just I mean the only thing I'm just like on the drawing, you know, the two drawings, the center image on the bottom. >> Okay. So, it's just it's the perspective that you have like the angle.
>> It's just it's really I think that's part of the reason why I'm seeing it. like it's hard to it's hard to see it because it's not it's not one for one. It's not like both the same perspective alignment. So it's hard to see the >> I guess what I'm saying >> that would affect the carrots right what
they see from the backyard. So I guess if we want to as a public >> say what is it what is the effect of this addition to >> now of course we have >> significant from setback >> this is very one story set back
>> the one that we came with before >> AC was going from you to see something from western drive >> well that's a that's a sort of a shade Sure, but it's still a mass that's sticking out at the side.
>> It's softer than >> I understand that. But you have to work. We have to work with the bounds that we're providing. Yeah. >> Well, I think >> we're trying to do something for like I said I like I said an end for like our mom or my mom to have a first like thing
like I said and we've been doing like trying to do this to like I said it's not a hey we're trying to make this mass on our property trying to make it easy for her to be able to like I said live with us and to come into the home and not have to go down the stairs. She's
currently with us and have to go down the stairs. She's 75. You know, if she has to be in a wheelchair, like I said, my I said my personal trouble had ALS for 5 years. If she just needs a wheelchair and she needs to go in there, I want her to be able to go in from the
garage and to get into there easily because I experienced it for five years. So, I'm trying to do something that is I'm just saying for a personal level because this is my home that I live in with my kids, but I'm also trying to be
a good daughter and also my my dad to think about coming in if like I said the size of a wheelchair and one that you have to motoriize to get him through a door and if she needs to be able to do that cuz right now I said we're fortunate that we in our basement we
have like a kitchen like this and she's down there but there's no way else for us to do this without her be having the access and it easy for her to get in. And so I'm trying to make this as I know I'll just say in the personal just I tried so hard with all this
>> and we appreciate that. We're trying to find a solution. We're listening to what you brought here today and it is different than what was brought here the last time. So we react to that. I just want to get comment from Brad who's on the Zoom. >> Brad,
>> can you unmute? >> Sorry. Sorry. Sorry. Um, >> yeah. So, I just I just wanted to make a comment. I know we've been talking a lot about a lot of different things here and um you're down to eight variances. Um,
did we talk how many was it last time to what it is now? Thank you. We had seven. We're down to five. >> There's There's eight now. >> That was previous. >> Sorry. There's five now.
>> Okay. I'm just saying I'm I'm looking at it and there's eight things on the on the zoning calculation that says no, it's not conforming. Am I am I misinterpreting that? >> You updated rear setback and F. So those are correct. Those are not.
>> Let me let me join you. One, two, three, four, five variances on the new chart. >> We don't have that. >> Yeah, we Yeah, I have one that has eight on it. So that's why I'm asking. >> And that would have been sent in. >> The chart on the site plan 514 shows
one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight. >> Is that a new addition? >> On the most recent, there's eight highlighted in Now this would be the 101 >> in the zoning chart the thing repeats itself. So you have in the first section
of the zoning chart building covers and it repeats itself again under accessory use. So uh it's checked but there's only five. >> So if you no fine I appreciate you clarifying that
but so we went from seven variances to five variances. >> Yes, >> it was eight. It was eight before and there's five now, but there's two of them that we can't get rid of because of the >> garage. All of them are 100% result of trying to get this addition to the
graveyard. >> Let me put on the side. that have no grants. So they're all a function a hardship which I don't know if that's a land use legal term but it's a hardship that we're now forced into rear yard
unoccupied restructure. All these things are a result which is uh very interesting but they're a result of satisfying HBC and we're happy to do that. We're happy to do that. been trying and obviously you see the kind of
frustration we're having because I want to create something beautiful. I want to create something for the client. I want you know make something that is historically um satisfying. So at some point we gota >> you know and I think we're at the point
where maybe there's a solution like you have to move forward I think. >> Yeah. So one one comment I would just make you know is that and the board should understand >> F is a is a variance that the zoning board pays a lot of attention to right
by statute we have to have five votes right we can't it's not even we don't even get to vote on it on a majority basis we have to have extra extra votes uh in order for that variance to be approved so I understand the the comments about we're only going from 7
to five But it is important to understand that F is an important variance. >> So that >> so by eliminating the F variance >> that is a positive thing. I'm not taking a position on whether that would be approved or not but just the board should understand that is a significant
variance. >> Um I think we you're getting the feedback from the board. That's why you're here. Um, I just want to make sure that all the board members have spoken, have asked questions, and have received input. So, anyone else here? >> I guess I just I mean, lot coverage and
building coverage have nothing to do with the board, right? That is over. So, I I just want you to make fair statements, right? >> Yeah, that is fair, >> right? >> coverage and or building coverage on top of the drive. >> Okay.
So truth, the fair fair truth which because I have a fully conforming design, it's not something that was acceptable to as a historic addition to the home and it was sitting on top of the existing driveway. We've eliminated
those three garages captive building coverage accessories here. So you know if we were to eliminate the detached garage. >> All right. Well, you heard our feedback. I just want to make sure that uh if there's anyone in the public, if if you're done. >> Well, I only would like to offer to the
board that I think there's a solution always visually, architecturally, if if we take the design that we've got and say, okay, well, we don't love it, but how do I make you feel okay with it? And and I would offer to you uh landscaping.
Um there's no reason that we need to see it, but we need to have it functionally. Um and obviously if andor lowering the roof line, changing the shape could work, maybe that's our solution, and I think they're okay with that. >> So are you proposing to come back with
this revised design? Is that >> not not necessarily? No, because this has been designed that um works for family, right? Um, so if there was a solution, uh, let's say you said, "Okay, we'll have no windows on that elevation." Sure, there was a yes to that.
>> Plant some trees. Uh, lower the pitch. Um, push it back a little bit. >> You're talking about on that small. >> Yeah. I think the issue is now just >> Do you have no windows that I >> I don't think so. >> No. Yeah. I don't think that's >> but I you know in terms of like I think we all have to decide as a board is this
really going to change from before to now if you look at the two does it really affect life does it get them the project like does does the architecture of the home the historic 1880 home still date that and you say
yeah I mean maybe I don't love it but it's not that >> it's not that um >> given the uh >> institution and then >> well it's it's not clear to me how much has actually added. I know you said it's
7 ft but from the plans it looks like it's 20 so I I haven't got an answer. >> Uh the differential is 10 ft one story and push back from the fun side. So it is significantly it's not even with the
addition but we look at it. It's it's pushed back from the edge of the house. Um so it's it's a differential of 10 ft and
it's also one story. sets back quite a bit from the uh from elevation 5t back from this edge and then there's a fence there peers and if landscaping you know I don't like
to use that architecturally but it would mitigate hide minimize the architectural appearance of it if that's a solution Um, so yeah, I was guess we did that. >> Well, I mean, we we've had the comments
from our consultant who is not in favor of this. I think you've heard some comments from here, but >> um, you know, we're trying to help you understand the perspective. So, >> I guess we we do have two options. We could say we got those and then we take
the step uh or we go back and re >> I don't know what revisions I mean we've made so many that >> you're either back or you're to the side like >> just out of curiosity because I never
really asked but if we get a no from the historic preservation commission what then is our next step >> if you want to then submit to revise. It's a >> no. Let's say we we want to contest the
>> Well, what what is the process to say? Okay. Well, >> I mean, if you wanted to appeal it if for the sake of conversation just for the sake of conversation >> if this design is denied, you do have the right of appeal. >> So, you would you would file an appeal,
I believe, with the zoning board. >> Um, so that is your right or you can come back with a different design. Um, you know, you're not barred from coming back just because of this denial, but it
would need to be a different design. >> Yeah, I prefer not. Well, either we get denied and we then or we come back next month. >> I don't know what more we can change. I mean, it also worried last time it was very clear to us that the variance
number and mass needed to change. We come back tonight and we hear no that's not what we said. I part the video I thought everybody here has it was very clear weird that would >> I'm concerned that if we come back for
something else it's like again where it's it's a merrygoround it's you know change this we don't like this you know we we we could do this but now just the way it's done we don't it's just it I don't see the end if if we come back with something else I don't
>> well I think it's on the architect to work with Barton when he's changing the plans and pushing >> we saw for nine months going back and forth. >> If at this point I I don't know how many iterations we have. I don't know how many dollar I don't think we need to argue and make
I don't think that's the I just want to say I don't I think it's a lot of time arguing back and forth. >> No no technical reason. >> Yeah. No. And I said it but I would say when you say to Barton he's the one who guided us into this design.
>> I know. Well, we weren't part of those conversations and I I it doesn't change what's going to happen tonight and >> No, no, no. I was saying that. >> No, but it's gotten very emotional and I'd like you. >> No, no. I like I said, I just wanted I just don't >> This is not about emotions. This is
about us conforming with the standards that we, you know, we're we're not an emotional >> No, I understand it and I did it and I want to, but like also I go like >> and we understand it's frustrating. >> No, no, no. Yeah. I just when he called us that's what >> I know but why did he
>> I don't know no I know no I know but >> he just need we need >> sorry no I apologize so >> I apologize no worries no worries it looks like they're kind of pigeon holding because of the location of the property so from your perspective >> what are their options what could be
done so that they could work around positioning of the house on the property to not have issues with setback or mastering >> yeah I mean it's they're in a tough ations why it is so difficult for HBC and zoning to kind of meet. Um from my understanding from the previous
meeting that design was better than this one for what HBC was asking for. Um I think the trellis and kind of the open pera area kind of shows a lot of what uh our concern was that the building just kind of morphs into
one building. Um it that open space kind of showed that this is the original, this is the this is the newer and that's why uh Barton was pro that design >> and um yeah, I mean I wish I had a better answer, but they're they're in a
tough spot with the rear yard setback and but just going to the left kind of affects the mass. And by the way, if I and I've looked at it, if I take the mass and I just shoot shove it over 10 feet would devastate their windows in their breakfast room. They're already,
you know, the breakfast room when they hit. So the existing house architecture the house >> stain was also concern about that touching the existing home the home that was original >> because it has a stain
that was in the museum. We we had a plan that was actually built on the other side of the home. So you wouldn't see any of it, but that was not approved because touch the existing part of the home or the the original part of the home. >> You wouldn't have seen any of it from Western Drive. But >> he told us not.
>> Yeah. I mean I can I after listening to the meeting uh from what I gathered um again he was okay with it and then at the end he just said, "Hey, let's do a Zoom go over everything one more time." That was not >> that was not as No, I was saying
I think the question is how would people vote? >> And I think we know we would all give our opinion. We all give our opinion as to what we would >> and they can then decide whether they want to push for a vote. Well, I think
like I said, I think you've heard reactions from the board, but I don't >> I don't know that I know where everyone is. >> Well, who's eligible? Not everybody is right. Uh only those who were present at the meeting last time which I have Zachary Davis, Brad Jenkins, Gary Rose,
and Christine Best >> unless you watch that certification watched it. >> So is okay. >> Yeah, I we have a quum and then it's
that um they would in order for approval they would need the majority of those present and able to vote. three final four. >> Yeah, >> but I we do need to have uh the public chime in if there's anyone who is here
that want is interested to voice their opinion on this application. >> Uh yes. >> Y >> So my name is Daniel Mlan. I'm an attorney at Riker Danc and I'm a resident of Morristown and I'm here on behalf of my client. I'm here on behalf
of Gan and Jennifer Mulini and they reside at a Taylor Place short hills, New Jersey. So, I'm just going to read a letter from them. Uh, this is their letter, not my letter. So, it's their words. >> Okay. Before you start, can you send me Have you provided a copy of the letter or can you provide a copy?
>> Yes, I can provide a copy. I don't think a cop's been provided. Okay. >> I talked to him about it and he said that it still needs to be read onto the at least told me. >> Wait, do you have But >> they can they're more than happy to provide a copy of us. I have an email for him right now. I'll tell him to do so after this.
>> I'm sorry, but I'm not an attorney. Is that hearsay? >> Say, yeah, he's an attorney. >> He's an attorney, so he could re >> he can come he can come in and speak on behalf of his client because he's an attorney. >> Okay. Thanks. >> So, it's about historic preservation
commission members. We are reiterating our strong objections to the size and scope of proposed application for 62 Western Drive. The revised project which is on a number of home in the historic district still requires many variances. Our concerns remain that a project needing this many exceptions indicates
to us that it does not align with the goals and mission of why the historic preservation commission exists in the first place. Does the addition maintain a harmonious setting for historically significant property? Does the plan ensure that they fit the character of historic district? The current revisions to the plan significantly change the
western drive facing view of the property. The proposed plan also impacts the view from both Taylor Place and Mullwood Road. The modifications also failed to address the landscaping plan, the pool lighting plan, and the soil and erosion mitigation plan. These issues
were brought on to us by at the prior HPC meeting in April, and we were told they would be addressed. Additionally, the sideyard location of the pool and retaining wall approximately 12 ft from the property line. This location will substantially degrade our privacy and safety while raising the noise and light
pollution. Given the homeowner's admission of rainware issues from 62 Western Drive on several adjacent properties at the April HPC meeting, it is our belief that the retaining wall on the right side of the property will exacerbate the rain and storm flow, storm water flow onto our
property. The overflow from the pool and the backwash discharge location will most likely end up on our property. These issues are unanswered due to a lack of an engineering plan. For these reasons, we respectfully ask the board to consider the long-term negative impact this application has on our
property and the surrounding homes in our historic district neighborhood as a whole. Thank you for listening to our concerns. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. If I may really quickly because I did ring it and I didn't want to labor but since I have it. This is
just a photograph that I took of the pump road so you have it just so I could just address some of the issues. Drainage that's an engineering issue usually as a result of project now we get to control the water versus before it went uncontrolled. So there'll be a positive
aspect of the drainage if there is any negative things that are happening. Now it'll be lessening certainly on our end. Um, and then it's just a very well screened uh, you know, obviously I was going to say this for the bearings, but since I have
it, if I may just mark this exhibit, so there's also a fence being put up, right? Fans and >> Thank you. >> Yeah. And also the same >> also I'm thinking the viewpoint right now too of for privacy. I'm trying to
have or we were trying to um obtain a screening of um the trees and the fencing on the right between our home and theirs is because we have from our existing home right now. I see directly into theirs. I see right into their
kitchen. I see what they, you know, do. I see their like all family meals. I see right into their yard. I see when they put, you know, I mean, we have kids. We have kids. I'm okay. I see right when they pull it every day. But I'm trying to do that. So from my our bedroom and
from the third floor, we don't see it anymore because with the screening and also looking down cuz right now that our viewpoint from the right side of the home is into their home. >> I guess the short story. Thank you. The
short story is very far away. >> It couldn't be in a better spot for them. Um, but I I appreciate your concern. >> This is a stubborn picture though, right? >> No, this is this is uh like Oh, we have I have like You can go on.
>> So, I know for the for the record. Okay. So, first of all, >> who took the picture? When was it? Okay. When was it taken? Uh this one was taken uh taken on >> about a week ago.
>> Uh but yes, but but obviously it's epic. I mean deciduous trees, but there is a sense of privacy and the addition of far away now. >> What is the view from? What is the >> Taylor road? >> Taylor road. Okay. So for the record, I'm marking this is A14. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Yeah, I mean I could it's on where exactly. Yeah, >> but >> thank thank you for that. Is there anyone else from the public that would like to comment on this application? >> All right. Um at this point then we have an application before us and it is up to
the board to recommend to take a vote or if that's do they do you want to vote? >> No, I did not. I don't but I don't know. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> I mean, can we can we discuss
>> we're on hold right now? >> Talk about weekend plans. here for >> you. So you can just say that >> I mean if they ask for a full
>> you know >> I don't know I mean I don't I don't know where everybody lose any No, they need majority of those eligible cont. I mean I pleaded hardship that like I had
>> Yeah. I mean for for any board, you know, is going to base their decision on why, but it does help give context to why, you know, and the design. >> Yeah. It's like somebody
listening can be a hardship for some people are >> if I ever get a fancy tour like that, you know, I have it. I need a >> I'll be surprised they kind of allow I
have a single car garage that was built in 1949. So, it's very very small. Can't fit my car in, but what I have fit my love,
but I'm pretty sure it's very difficult to get very difficult. first. >> Yeah. I mean, I could probably fit my car in my garage, so I don't know if I could get out without having to crawl through the half. >> Yeah. And I'm not that careful driver.
And I have I have a shared driveway with my neighbor. So, and the way like the way I have to park at an angle and every morning. So worried I'm just right into their car. >> Who shared the driveways?
>> Yep. We can resume. >> Okay. I was um so we we we spoke it over. I think that at this point we just don't see how coming back with something else that's going to appease Barton is actually going to solve the issue because if he's okay with the other one we're not that
the variances are too much and we tried to solve that and that's what we have here today. So I this is this is our plan. Um you know I think that where we stand right now is we want to just vote on it. Okay. >> Okay. So, uh we'll then take a vote uh
to approve the application as it has been submitted to the board. Do I have a motion to approve? >> Who can vote? >> We need a motion. >> Well, we have to know who could vote.
>> Brad Jenkins, Gary Rose, and Christine Best. >> Yeah. The only way the only way that somebody could vote tonight is if they can sign a certification that they watched the last hearing um or or every hearing that has happened, not the
conceptual but any actual hearing on the pending application. I believe it was just April. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yeah. So, um >> it was conceptual prior to that. So, if you haven't watched it tonight, then you know you you wouldn't be able to vote
tonight. >> Right. So, I have a motion to approve this application. >> So, move second. >> You mean to approve to vote? >> Yeah. Okay. I'm sorry. I was like motion to vote. >> Yes. Second.
>> So, take a roll call of those who can vote. Zachary Davis, >> no. >> Brad Jenkins, >> no. >> Gary Rosen, >> yes. >> Christine Best,
>> no. >> All right. Well, I'm sorry to say that the applicant has not been approved. Um, as our attorney outlined that you do have a course of action if you want to follow that or you can come back with a revised application agreement.
Sorry about that. It will have to be a new application. They have to come back with a different design and you can vote as long No. For a newation.
>> Yeah. they file this and >> moving moving on to our next whole business application is the application number 578. This is 12 test place block 211054
lot 5. This is a nonurging property in the park district. Uh ying pan and we are the applicants and these are revisions previously approved regulatory application the second floor
another associated exterior >> Matt you're still under oath. >> Yes. Hello sir, if you could state your name uh and relationship the application for the record please. >> My name is Timothy Quie from Forbes
Architects and um the architect and I'm the only one presenting this because I was going to try to make this if that's possible. >> Okay. So could I just begin? >> Yeah. So you're you're explaining some uh
>> Right. So do you swear or from this testimony you're going to provide the same the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> Thank you. >> Um so we came in with this case um maybe I guess it was two years ago that you guys just threw the attention to and and
I think the actual I think we actually and I sent you a letter. that dated May 5th. It kind of outlines everything. I worked with Matt to uh I'm going to say get this letter perfect because that's what Matt wanted me to
do. So, it's it's on our letter head and it's dated May 5th. I don't know if everybody has it. >> I got >> Okay, good. But what it does is it Matt wanted me to walk through exactly what we changed. And that's what I tried to
do. And the only problem I have with this is um I have a board that has the existing or the previously approved and you guys have all this also. >> Did you just turn it so that it can be
seen by the commission member on >> Oh yeah. So um I have the a set of what was the approved application the 66.4 before you guys
have it also. And then I have another set that is what we're calling the amended application. And what I did on it um on this set is I just circled what the list of the items are on my cover letter. So, I'd like to
just kind of run through it sort of quickly or I I guess I should start this off by saying that what we wanted to change is that is um we designed this building, you know,
really Robert and I here, you know, Robert's coming up next, but we designed it with um I'm on my HPC 2. >> I'm sorry. Can you stand on the other side? It can't be seen on
this. I don't know before. I don't know if I'm going to be able to pull it off. Um, but we uh this is my amended application and
we had steps in this area right there because we left the existing first floor of the existing house at the floor elevation that it was. And then when we came to our addition in the rear, we
actually stepped down three steps inside the building. Okay. And the owner who is here, when they really thought about, they just didn't want it. It didn't make sense to them because why do I kind of have a split level house, you know,
where it's like sort of a front to back split a little bit. And um the whole thing didn't make sense. So what they they asked us to come back and modify. We went through a whole series of modifications to try to pull this off
and we finally decided that the smartest way to do it was to lower the floor in the existing front building. So that's what we did. And when I first proposed it to Barton, he was like,
"Oh my god, that's crazy." But I would venture to say, and I wish Barton was with us, that Barton came around to understand that it makes sense. And I think that's what he said in his uh analysis. And Matt, I think you would have some input on this.
But what it allows us to do is to get a first floor that's flat in the building. And that is really with that concept in mind. I'm just going to start from the beginning and go and I'm just going to use the amended plans. But if you have real questions, I'll come back and pick
up the previously approved. >> All right. And when you say amended, do you mean the house recently submitted 514? >> I'm sorry. Cover page says 42. >> Cover page says 423. >> Yeah, it looks like everything's 42. All
right. Good thing. So on my new plans and the existing survey, the proposed survey, it's actually really the same survey. We really haven't changed anything because this is all just small cosmetic
changes to the building. Inside on the I'm going to work off of my letter. At the bottom of the first page in the letter, I say that we have lowered the floor of the original building by 1 foot 10. And that was to eliminate those
stairs that I indicated with this little circle and the blue filter. What that did is that eliminated these three risers at the front of the house. And you can see there how I dotted them out, but I forgot to circle them. Right? But
that's what really happened here. We lowered the floor of this building to match the floor of the balance of the building. Now, I'm just going to blow through these quickly. If I go to the second floor, we actually
didn't make any changes at all. The second floor is exactly in terms of internal plan, exactly the same as it was before. I'm going to just skip the attic area because there's no changes there either. And I'm going to go to my
HPC 5A. Um, this is where you can see the real changes of what happened to this plant. And we have lowered the first floor of the
front the primary building. That is actually even this is part of the primary build of the original building. So we lowered it. So, if you look at this window in what's the foyer, you can see the old sill and I dropped the new
sill down about 1 foot 3 in. I think we probably said no, I didn't give you a height, but I think it dropped about 1 foot three 1 foot three 1 foot three. So, we elongated the windows because we actually just dropped the floor. That
also meant that I eliminated the steps at the front of the house. That was what initially Barton had the issue with. He didn't want me to eliminate the steps. And I'll just get more into that in a second. Then if I move to
the side elevation or you can see on my my left side that we've lowered these two windows, but this is a view that's not really visible from the just so everyone knows. And we lowered these two
window on my rear elevation. We didn't say I didn't write it in the letter because I I didn't notice it, but we actually moved this window sort of towards me about 2 feet. That's
because we thought it looked better on the facade. It was pushed way up into the corner. But this is really the rear elevation. So I would say it's not visible. Let me see if I got anything else.
That's it for that. If I go back to the I'm on the original approved screen, you can kind of see what I'm saying. There's those steps right now. This is the 6624 approved.
All right. No changes right on the second floor. No changes on the third building, but you can see that the sill is higher. In this case, these sills are higher.
There's more front steps. No change on elevation. And this window was pushed over on the left side. We pulled it this way. And oh, and I changed those windows on the dining room side. I elongated this because when we lowered the floor
they would have been up about almost 4 feet. It just was, you know, ridiculous. So, with all that in mind, and I think really the way I I I guess I want to say since Gordon's not here that I sway his opinion, but I
don't know if that's actually true, you know. Um, but you know, the landscape plan is the same as before, but we did a little inventory as I
I went around sort of the historic district, I'm going to say. And well this house which actually I used to live in is about two steps off a grade which is about where we are. This one at
78 and over is three steps like it's not really Barton was concerned initially that the house should be out of out of the ground by about three feet but it's really not true in the district. I
mean, even if you look at 21 chestnut, which I know is right on the corner there, it's pretty house, right? It's literally one step up. It doesn't This doesn't really, I think, seem to be an issue. And there's 45 northern, here's 44
northern. There's 41. Here's 31 Northern. 17 Northern >> Tim. >> Yeah. >> Tim, is this in the P? Is this in the packet? These pictures of the other homes? >> No. No. an exhibit. >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah, come on up.
>> The 17 Northern is the one that actually created the historic that >> Well, I didn't say I shouldn't say created, but forced the sort of forced the historic district to occur actually back in, you know, 1980 or whatever it was.
>> So, I'm sorry. How many how many pages is this exhibit? >> I'm sorry. Yeah, I screwed up. This exhibit is really one page. Well, I guess I have three pages of exhibit that are that I should call A1, I guess. Did that be right?
>> Yeah. Um, and I'll even submit a copy um after >> tonight. >> Okay, I'll just >> Yeah, that's fine. The uh Anyway, so I wasn't even trying hard to do this, just so you know. This was just driving
around one afternoon. I didn't even get out the car to do this. This was I I think it kind of makes sense. My um my owner is also concerned about
the safety issues related to the extra the extra steps. And she's at a point where they don't even really use the front door. They just come in the side door because it's lower. This is, you know, there's snow here in both of these cases.
If I come to my rendering, you can see what's happened. Um, this was the rendering that was approved. >> And this is the amended rendering that we're submitting tonight. You guys have these in your
>> And you can see more steps here and less there. The portico is changed, but that was a conflict that was on our drawing. See, the the actual portico that was approved was a gable front portico.
The rendering had a flat roof. It was just a mistake at the time two years ago. It wasn't like >> is the is the prior imaging there? Because I don't I don't see the
>> I don't give it to you. Can >> we give you both of them? >> It's in my memo. >> Oh, it's in your memo. Okay, that's I just >> Oh, that may be good. >> Yeah, I'm holding Bart's memo. Maybe it's your memo. Maybe that's why I'm getting a better report.
>> Um, >> but anyway, that's all we're really changing. All the other materials are the same. it. I think that um my own I mean it does make a good point that this could be a safety issue that to eliminate the steps and definitely
the steps inside the building are a little bit awkward. It was um and the owner thought it was worth it to come back and seek approval for this. That's really my
entire presentation. I don't know if you had anything. >> Thanks. Thanks. Thanks, Tim. I'm gonna then go to Matt and get his perspective on this. >> Yeah. Um, we didn't see Tony Ping, you know, absolutely. Um,
earth shattering uh in the change. Um, we believe that it made sense. Uh, it does kind of mess with the massing a little bit in the front, but not to an extreme degree, especially after all those photos. Um, you know, it's not abnormal for the houses to be on grade. Um
yeah, I think we we would uh we would recommend to accept this application. >> Thank you, Matt. Uh any board members have questions for Tim? Everyone >> I have a question. Well, I mean I just
have I mean so what why I mean you might have said this already. I apologize. Um, why did you go with the like the cable like um portico versus the flat just I mean because I I don't know personally I
think that it was >> well we just thought the cable looked better. >> Yeah. I think in the original class >> it was on the original. >> Okay. >> It's just that the rendering was >> I got it. >> Okay. >> But I I remember actually talking about that theory.
>> Yeah. because I have a little bit of even though it's about two years ago. >> We're almost to the date two years. >> I think the windows look better longer to be honest. >> Thanks. >> Yeah. No, it looks better. >> I think
anyone else that comments anyone from the public like to comment on this application before us then motion to approve. Yeah, I think we Thank you. Let's take a vote on this uh
amended application. >> Dr. Davis, >> yes. >> Robert Franle, >> yes. >> Brad Jenkins, >> yes. >> Gary Rosen, >> yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Best. >> Yes.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Thanks. >> Yes. >> We're gonna take a pause again. So, we'll take a five minute break. We're back. >> Everyone, we've changed the guard here
uh from old business to new business. Um so, let's get started because it's already been a late night. Right. So, let's start. Uh, application number 6076 Stewart Road, block number 2201,
lot number eight, nonivity property park district. This is a regulatory application to construct house additions, pool, and other associated barrier, etc. If we can have the applicant, of course, and uh any professional warnings, please Catherine.
>> Okay. So, um, I'll swear you on all at the same time, but individually, I need you to state your names for the records, spell your last name, and state your relationship to the application. >> Okay. I'm Anthony Sakoli, spelled S I O
L I. I'm a homeowner. >> I'm Nina Saki. S I O L I. I'm homeowner. And >> Robert Forbes, F O Rs, I'm the architect. Okay. Um, and do you all swear or affirm
that the testimony you're going to buy this evening will be the whole truth and >> Yes, sir. >> Great. Um, I would like to just meet with the attorney for a minute because you guys are pretty close to my
property. Um, >> just make sure I did not receive a notice, but I just want to make sure. Double check that you're not on that. >> This has been one of those. How far are you coming? >> Um, I am.
>> Yes. >> You're off, buddy. >> Oh, wow. Um, >> I mean, you're outside of the 200 foot zone, but if you're more comfortable, um, well, maybe we should ask them. Um,
I live on Western Drive. Um, if you feel uncomfortable with me being here or heading this and voting, let me know. We're going to leave it up to you. >> Yeah. And you can decide this application without any prejudice, you know, as far as
>> Absolutely. Great. >> Um, so I'd like to start uh just Matt, if you could give us your comments, that'd be great. >> Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> Um, um, yes. So, this is a non contributing structure in um, the Short Hills Park Historic District. And so it was constructed in 1968. It is not
on known architected known the house is not recognized the 1979 short historic district nomination report or in the 1987 historic preservation ordinance list the property as non-deative structure within the district. Um although the carriage
house located on the property um does state to the pier significance of the short hills park historic district I don't I don't want to >> perfect um and the reason I did that you this application at one point came in
front of us at some point >> it was for different Okay. >> Okay. >> And a different architect, totally different project. >> I do remember that. So that's why I wanted him just to give a quick history of the house. So, uh, please proceed.
>> Okay, great. So, uh, good evening and thank you everyone, uh, for your time and consideration this evening. I know it's been a long night already. Um, my name is Tony Sakoli. As I said earlier, I'm here with my wife, Lena. Um, Lena and I in August will be married 30
years. Um we both grew up nearby in Union, New Jersey and um like many people who grew up in the area um we used to drive through Shore Hills and admire its beautiful homes, treeline streets and unique character. And at
that time when we were first married, we can only dream of one day living here. 20 years ago, we were fortunate enough to make that uh dream a reality when we moved to Shore Hills and began raising our family here. We have three children,
all who came and grew up through the uh well- reggarded Milurn public school system. Our oldest, Noel, is 23. Uh she graduated from UMass Amherst and works for Urban Outfitters in Philadelphia as a buyer.
Our second child is a daughter, Sarah. She's 20. She currently attends Loyola Marry Mount University uh studying uh in Los Angeles and majoring in marketing. And our youngest PJ is 17, almost 18, and he'll be graduating Milurn High
School this year. Um so like in like a week and uh he'll be attending Villanova University in the fall. He actually was a big uh his favorite thing was to play sports and he was Bill Football's varsity starting quarterback here for two years. So, we're very agreeing to
the community and with the school. You know, for many years, we lived first in the Deerfield section of Shore Hills and uh on Deer Path and uh we built a home there um about 10 years ago, not nine 10 years ago um and raised our family
there. So, we were in the original property, built a home, lived in the new home on that property for a total of 15 16 years. Throughout that time, we always admired the homes and the history
of Old Short Hills District. We felt it represented a special part of the township's heritage and character. And we remember I remember when I was a child, my parents saying, "That's Old Short Hills. That's a beautiful place." So about four years ago, we had the
opportunity to purchase a property on Six Stewart Road. We immediately fell in love with it. It's beautiful landscaping and extraordinary neighborhood. We truly love living there and feel blessed. We
really do. One challenge, however, is that the existing main house is a 1980s. It's there. It's it's there's it's inconclusive. It's 68 or 80. uh contempor it's it's a contemporary structure almost like the Brady Bunch
House that feels very out of place within the historic district. In addition, our home is showing significant wear and is um really in need of major repair. It has deteriorating shingles, decking,
an aging roof. The plumbing and electrical system needs to be upgraded. There's a variety of other maintenance concerns that we need to address to ensure the long-term viability of the property. At the same time, the property includes a wonderful historic cottage which we just absolutely love and we
deeply value it and are committed to preserving it. Our goal within this project with this project has never been to diminish the character of the district at all, but rather to enhance our property and our main structure in a way that better reflects and complements
the historic surroundings that attracted us here in the first place. We see this as an opportunity not only to modernize and repair the home, but also to make it a better architectural neighbor within this historic community.
We've been fortunate to work with a truly exceptional local architect, the best Rob. Rob has helped us thoughtly transform and reimagine both the interior and exterior of the home, creating a design
that we believe is much more consistent with the architectural character of the neighborhood while respecting the property's history and preserving the historic cottage. We hope the project will allow us, our children, and future
generations of family and friends to enjoy this special property for many years to come. Thanks again for your time, your service to our community, and your consideration of our application. With that, I'd like to turn it over Rob
to walk you through the proposal. >> Thanks, Tommy. All right. Thanks, everybody. Um, I'm going to start off just kind of walking you a little bit through the plans that were submitted. Um, just to touch briefly on the previous proposal that I
believe you saw that um, Alison were mentioning. The previous proposal was to demolish the existing preserve the cottage but build a new contemporary um, in its place. What we're doing here is we're trying to we're preserving the
historic eyes, but the intent and what we're doing is to kind of reskin this building and replan this building, but preserve its footprint with a smaller distance um to be like they said a better architectural
neighbor or more contextual with the cottage but still differentiating itself from the cottage. Um the cottage um the guest house was originally part of what is 121 Island Avenue, which is a tutor revival
home. So, the cottage has a tutor revival style. The I'm going to say appears to be an 80s suburban contemporary. I I see something about 1981. I also see
something about 1968. I'm not sure when it was. um has very bold geometric forms that creates this very harsh kind of architectural juxosition between the two styles which is you feel it as you kind
of enter the site and that's kind of what they've always kind of wanted me to remove and blend the site a little bit better. It's kind of a fun project. It's kind of a different kind of a request that you don't get asked too often. Um,
so I'm just going to kind of walk you through what's the the historic part of the site. Um, this is she one they have in your packet. This is the the historic cottage. It's a twocar garage on the bottom level. There's some storage
spaces. And then you walk up a a deck to an upper level that really has kind of a recreation open vaulted space. It's very nice inside. As we get into our proposal, the only things we're really doing there is just a couple windows that we want to replace
and restore before I get to get into the proposed plans. Next, >> the ones that are going to go through these were the same as what was previously submitted? Yes, this is all the same that was previously. I just kind of want to stick with the
cottage for a second. It was just four planes in that elevation. Here are the elevations of the historic cottage on 27 which you have in your packet. You can see the the garage. You can kind of see the steep kind of revival tables that are on the facade. It has a cedar shaped
roof. It has stuckco stuckco finishes on it. All that's been maintained. Nothing is changing with any of that. Here are the other sides. Just wanted to kind of get that on the record. That's
nothing's really being done to that other than a couple windows to show. Then I'm going to just walk through quickly the existing floor plans of the uh existing the contemporary. Um it is a split level. As I get up onto the first floor,
I'll show you some of that. In the basement, you can see the start of how it has a split. One side has slab on grade. The other side is a small basement, not a lot of space down. That's part of the the way the topography on the site was. It was easy
for them to get a basement on the one side, not as easy on the other side. As we come up to the first floor, you can see you enter the you enter the front door really not from
store or it's it's at a point in the road where store and western kind of split and then there's a little flag lot and a driveway that you come down and enter. So the front door is hard to see from the street. Um the whole house the whole site is very landscaped. I'm sure it's very hard to see. You come in on
this kind of higher level which is almost a more utility level where the kitchen laundry are and then you can step down kind of to this space that they love that's bright and airy with the southern sun coming in where they really always want to be hanging out.
But there's this kind of separation because it's on different levels and it's very divided. So that's one of the one of the program changes you'll see as we get to the proposed up here. Uh again, it's splitting again and you have so there's four bedrooms.
The m the primary suite on the one side with a bedroom and then there's two bedrooms on the other side. As I get to the existing elevations, you start to see those bold geometric forms. Right? You can see how where normally you have a gutter line at
that second floor level, right? The vertical wall extends about 27 28 ft. You see a lot of glass, right? Um these kind of canled balconies. I don't know if you got to visit the site, but I'm sure you you notice it's all vertical
cedar siding. Um a lot of rubber roofing. Here's the the southern side that kind of faces and western. Um you can see all the glass sliding doors. There's a balcony here, a lot of glass, right? all
these geometric forms if they were to just carriage house elevation already. All right. So now I'm going to get into the what we're what we're planning to do. But right from the start I had two challenges. One to figure out how I
could drop some of these geometric forms, bring these roof lines down, introduce kind of more traditional or contextual massing hipped roofs or gable roofs. um into the facade and also scale
down that uh vertical facade. So we started off by kind of wanting to wrap a one-story building along this front or onetory roof along this front corner to help to mass that building down from the
kind of front yard um or street side. Um, and then we started to figure out how we could replan this to try to bring the kitchen level down onto this lower level where you would really want to be anywhere. This is really the yard of the house
even though it's the front yard essentially, right? There's a flag lot back here, right? This is where you enter. It's almost like a sideyard for the house, but there's no rear yard. It's a very kind of irregular dist. So, what we've done is we've pulled the front door out a little bit to give it a
little bit more distinguish itself. Added a small front portfill that's about 90 square ft. We come in, we replant this upper level. We then wrap some onestory space that's like a little prep kitchen, pantry, mud room. Uh
doubles as a little bit of a pool bathroom for the pool that we're installing. And this is kind of like an outdoor cupboard space here. which really helps me as we get to the elevations to bring a low roof line to break that that wall. We get to the second floor. Really
externally not doing all that much other than some window changes and replanting the interior. Really just playing with ceiling heights to kind of change the roof lines as we get to this. What I'm going to say is the front elevation which is where
you see the front door. I've left on this HPC. You can see the old dotted lines of the old 20 kind of 27 28 foot vertical wall that we're putting down. We're introducing these hipped roofs. We
have kind of a three bay design that feel very comparable to um a lot of houses in the neighborhood. You can see this onetory roof coming along and wrapping. We have kind of these tall narrow windows, basement windows. Uh
we're using stucco on the facade which will help us blend with the with the um the guest house, but we used the hip roof so that the hip roof falls down and doesn't compete with kind of the steep triangular
um roof of the tutor revival guest house. As you turn towards the historic roadside, here's where we still have all those glass that we kind of previously had. We're just kind of changing them. We have that one story roof. Again, you can see how we've
changed really the roof blocks. We feel like this this proposal is a lot less kind of dramatic to the site than tearing it down. It allows us to really preserve a lot of the landscaping and really just supplement the landscaping against the ones that we've done. Here's
the other facades. This is the proposal for the the guest house. These are the only change we're making. We're not doing anything to the lower level really. We're just changing the we're putting new windows wood pella windows that are in the
proposal for the 78 lights into these kind of the existing finish space. They're getting a little bit of disrepair. They can really the only thing we are doing to the store.
Pull up our rendering real quick. We can see this is from the store roadside where you can see the pool which is all heavily landscaped. You can't really see it from store road. It's very mature landscaping. That's beside those grass. That's the detached
garage in the background. Although when you're actually here, I had them not show some of the landscaping that's here because I wanted you to be able to see the two buildings. It would actually the garage is um unvisible from this. This is the view as you come up the
private ement of the flag lot. This is really the view of the new street. I do have all these with no expl the plant list that the landscape did to supplement with
the landscape plan which again you can see all the existing kind of mature landscaping is Tony and Leah have been all over the landscape architect the inventory and save everything that they possibly can. They spend a lot of time gardening after it.
They love the landscape. It's part of why they bought the site. So everything here we are preserving and we are just kind of supplement there with planting. Then I had I wouldn't you wouldn't normally do a full set of engineering
development in story board but because of the complexities of the mod and the fact that I knew I was going to have some variances that would be triggered um we went ahead and got some engineering there are some variances I think if you
walk into walk through the variances them that's important >> what's accounting for variances Who is one of them? Yes. >> Yeah. >> So, the variances are there's a front yard setback variance
for if you do the average setback in that area. The lot to the right of us is really facing a different direction, but their front yard is 182 feet from Stewart. Then we have the
flag bot to the left of us which is 147 ft. And our house exists at 52 feet. So we end up with a very bad average front yard set back because of these two
houses that are next to us. Um the pool will have a front yard setback. The pool is only technically a front yard. Even though the way that the site's established, it really doesn't feel like a front yard for the way the house is designed and it's very shrub. It's very private. The other ones, we do have a
small building coverage variance. Um, existing, we're at 11.1%. We're allowed 13%, we're going to end up at 14.2%. is really for those porches to help me to kind of hold the building scale down
and that a th00and square foot guest cottage does also count towards all of that. So we are a conforming lot from lot size that's 329,000 ft. We're at existing 30,000. So we're just at a forming lot
size but we have a couple things that were that are kind of not in our favor there balance. Then we have this um the accessories use of the pool I talked about. And then we have this rear yard unoccupied which I had to have the
engineer explain to me about three or four times and still a little confused about it. basically existing because of the way this site is, it has to be 25%. The rear yard has to be 25% of the lot. The rear yard of this
site is going to be right the line runs right through this and actually clips through part of the guest house. So existing today We're supposed to have 7,56 square ft of rear yard unoccupied. It
exists today at 5,406. We're increasing it to 5,754. We're making it better, but it's still variance. Um, so th those are those are our varian
>> I do have a question. Will you repeat the where is the front yard set back? Is it the carriage existing carriage house that put you in that or is it >> No, no, I I don't because this this is really a sidewalk because this is a private
yard really here. So it's the existing house. >> The existing house. >> Okay. >> And we are pulling forward with the porches. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> And that's really the gist of our
proposal. Everything. I think it's a very exciting project. that really I think lets us preserve that site as much as we can and really again create a better architectural neighbor for um the
district. Hope you guys feel the same way your your thoughts. >> Um Matt, now do you want to finish your >> Okay.
Uh yeah. Um so whether it be a 1968 or 1981, um we were, you know, just pretty thrilled that you were taking the time, the effort instead of just bulldozing and trying to do something tasteful and
to have carriage house food. Um yeah, I mean I thought I thought it was well done and we would probably recommend approve this application. >> Thank you. So now I'm going to open it up for comments, questions from the
board. So please feel free. The only question I had is is that I can't because I just on Google Maps I can't see into the yard our space to get a sense of property and there's no images of that and um and also just to
see like an actual image of the existing house and how as you describe it, you know, contemporary it is and also Oh, I didn't I didn't see that. I'm sorry. >> Yeah. >> Oh, you know what? I saw the clusty thing. I was like, okay.
>> So, I I apologize. So, okay. >> Okay. >> I have a color. >> Wow. That's incredible. You have a color. No, it's okay. I that's all I needed to see that it's >> incredibly >> Oh, yeah. No, thank you. Sorry. I just I
I apologize. I'm a little over >> and then um and then then existing here as well. >> I'm going to mark A1 as three pages of photograph. >> Yeah. >> Okay. And if you could just provide them after the in I know we have them in
black and white but still so we have them in color as well digitally right you mean? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And did you have existing the existing um >> the neighbor? No, the tutor the little
cottage >> first of the rest of the >> Okay, now I understand. Does anybody want >> Yeah, that's helpful. Thank you. Um,
I just couldn't get >> Brad, go ahead. >> Yeah, I just have a couple comments and one question. Um, first, um, the the windows on the main house and you have the 6 over6 on the carriage house which
is existing. Um, is there a reason why you didn't carry over those windows for like a uniformity perspective onto the main house? Yeah, I mean I I think it's a little bit like we want to make sure we are still distinguishing this renovation and this new building
essentially from even though it's not new from the original carriage house. So it's we we wanted to kind of open up some of the glass patterns um and the glass patterns that that is there that we're proposing you can see throughout the district too. It just doesn't match
this kind of perpetutor revival that's right next to us. Um, so I think it's kind of nice that there's still a little bit of a difference where like like this building, if you look at the way the sight is, if you can see it,
it's like this building is sitting between the original big house and the carriage house of that large port. Right. So, I think it's nice that it doesn't all blend perfectly. I think it should still have some distinguishing character to
it. Um that was the reasoning behind that's also why we did the hip roots and not the gable route, right? Or other I thought it would have been a little bit too lip um of a design. >> Okay. No, that makes sense. My only other comment is um the dormer on the third floor, that's just an attic,
right? There's not a floor up there. >> There's no floor up there. >> Is there is there a reason why you went with the the rounded roof? I know. I guess from my perspective, it just kind of looks a little out of place a little bit with the rest of the the harder angles on the roof.
>> We uh we played with a lot of different >> there. Fair points. >> We did have some that I think had more angles like you're saying. I think we'd be opening to reooking at that. >> Totally. And we even had it without it
one version without it. Oh, I I respect I mean otherwise I really like the design. I think it's a definite improvement over the very contemporary existing house and it really kind of fits with the carriage house. So otherwise, good job. So thank
you. >> Great. Anyone else? Uh just just a couple comments on Barton's report talks about wood material and uh you know for composite for fiber cement siding the hardy plank it's
smooth right >> yeah so I don't think we have any fiber cement siding proposed we're all stuckco and then for I had noted on the elevations to use oral which I I thought we were allowed to use um that's not
>> wood. It's um it's made of cement, but it looks like wood. It's smooth. It doesn't have texture to it. Discussion with I believe it's okay. >> Yeah, that that that comment was in regards to the borrow, but
>> I just had a couple questions. Certainly, you know, the pool I I understand that's your biggest piece of your yard. So, um, I appreciate what you're doing in the pool, though. We'll need a vents, of course. And how how
does that look? And are you putting it directly around the pool or in the landscaping? Did I miss that? >> No. Well, it's on the um remind me again the existing fencing that's in the landscape. What is it? What is it again?
What's it deer gun? >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I walk by there. So, I >> fence, but the deer still get through. Yes. Yeah, >> there's two there. So, >> okay. >> The engineer does show >> the engineer shows on his plan uh the
fence running through the land. It's supposed to run through the landscaping. So, totally unseen, >> but completely through. So, even on the front of the house, that's through landscaping. So, there's no entrance. >> The entrance the entrance would be from the driveway.
>> Yeah. the vehicle here. It would run down through the landscaping edge unseen and come up and turns in right here in front of where we're proposing the pool is going to go. >> Okay. So, there is existing now, but
then you're just going to use the same and follow it around from landscaping or is it already there? >> I mean, it's already there, but I think we have to turn it right into the uh into the to the house. So we have to make existing it can take. >> Yeah. >> So it turns into the house. It's on the
side though, right? Park where the equipment's going to go. >> Yeah. >> But yeah, we're going to run it through the existing area. >> And a zoning question. I And that might be something we need to ask Gary. Is the deer fence now acceptable as a team?
>> Do you know? >> I'm not sure. Um >> because I I know there were some new changes but you might just oh if it is then we can use some of that. >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Perfect. Um also just one suggestion um certainly uh you have guest house here which really it is a kind of a wreck house or you have recreation. That word throws a lot of people off and no one's allowed to have I think a guest house or
unless that's changed. Is that in a carriage house or above a garage? Is that still >> they they still are >> and certainly if it were grand but I you might want to look into that because um I know that's
>> like re refframing it or renaming it or >> maybe because you don't you're not using it as guest, right? It looks like a wrap room, not with a bed and >> people don't live there. We just >> kitchen and all that. Okay. Yeah, just
just a suggestion because I ran into it myself. So, >> I should use cabbage house. That's >> okay. Any more questions? We went through Barton's suggestions and I we're okay. Perfect. Um, any more questions
for the or comments? I'd like to make a comment. It's certainly like Brad said and and everyone else, it's uh it's uh you've done a incredible job here with this house. Um, very excited that you
actually didn't tear it down and disturb all of that beautiful landscaping. I think you may have a challenge NW with the pool because unfortunately the way that house is sitting it it is kind of in your front yard versus a shared
driveway. Um but certainly that's something that you know maybe we explain to someone kind of this I don't want to call it a hardship but that is the only place to put a bowl. Um, so we
appreciate that. Great idea. Uh, and love it on that side of the house where it's utilizing the sun unlike my own pool which were in the shade. Okay. So, any other questions? I think at this point we'll Yeah. Oh, yes. Is there
anyone in the public that would like to comment or have any questions? Right. Hearing none. Um, do I hear a motion to approve with the changes that were mentioned? Should we go through those briefly or? >> Yeah, and just confirm the fencing as
well. >> Yes, fencing. Um, what else did I think there was something else, wasn't it? Oh, uh, the the plans, right? Let me look up Barton's. Um,
so you agreed to the specified uh material, right? And what is the name of that? >> Um, the architectural construction documents, if we could just get a copy to us of those. Uh, oh, we didn't ask
about paint, by the way. Have you guys decided >> the the rendering is a pretty pretty close representation of where we're headed, right? She was >> as far as paint go. >> The windows not the windows are not Can you tell? I don't know.
>> Well, the the windows are se like a sage color >> which is what we're trying >> not black. That's nice actually that you can see a little the sage color. But that the idea is like it's kind of like an off-white kind of cream stuck
>> and then like a sage. >> So we can we document that at this point? Off white kind of green. >> Yeah. Yep. Yep. That's what the cottage is going. She painted the match.
And I think that's it. Is there anything? Perfect. So, do I hear a motion to approve with request of the board and uh our professional? >> So, moved. Okay. Very quiet. She's
asleep over there. I do have to. >> Okay. Second. Okay. Um Sarah, please. Alison Canfield, >> yes. >> Zachary Davis, >> yes. >> Robert Franle, >> yes. >> Fred Jenkins, >> yes. >> Gary Rosen, >> yes.
>> Salem, >> yes. >> Elizabeth, >> congratulations. >> We appreciate it. >> Oh, we don't have a good night. Yeah, we're very excited. >> Congratulations.
Really pretty. >> Okay, let's move to application. >> Let's move to application number 6425 Hobart Avenue to one one lot number three. The non
contributing property instruction. Uh this is a regulatory application to construct an addition over the existing split level home. Another associated exterior improvements if we can have the applicants and
beach and your professional floor in her one minute. Okay. Um, if you could state your names for the record, spell your last name, and then I'll swear you both in at the same time.
>> Last name is B I J A Y. >> Um, and and Mr. Cl, you're the architect and are you the homeowner? >> Yes. >> Okay. And do you both swear or affirm that the testimony you're going to provide this evening is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?
>> Yes. >> Please proceed. All right. Hi, my name is Jay and uh I'm the owner of 165 cohort. Sorry, my husband had to leave with me today. It's still a school day. Um so we have been here we moved during
the co time. So we've been here for almost five and years now and uh we love the neighborhood. Um and it's not we bought it initially because my husband still had to go into the city and the proximity to the train station is
fantastic. Um uh but we have had so much of the neighbors and everybody just love the neighborhood a lot and we would like to continue to live there. I have my son, my younger one just started in kindergarten in Glenwood so we have a
long way to go. Uh so uh I uh we wanted to make some uh new additions to the house so that we can keep living in the same house and that's what we're here for. So that's it. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, um 165 Hobbart it, um needs
variances. It's a very small lot on the uh in the zone. Zoning is actually in the packet. It's just just so you get an idea what's going on here. It's um I'm not going to really go through it at this point, but
I just wanted you to know because I know there's a lot of zoning talk this evening that the required lot size is 20,000 and this lot is about 9,400. It's about actually a little less than
half the park lot size. So, what we're proposing to do or I guess I should take you through the drawings, right? It's an infill split. I don't know. It's probably built in the late 60s, early 70s, >> 50s.
>> 50. >> And you come in the garage level. I'm on the e drawings, the existing drawings. Come in, you go down to a small basement or up to the main the primary living
area, right? And then you had the kitchen, the living room, the front door on that primary level. You go up half a level again over the garage. There's three bedrooms, two bathroom.
The the building on the facade is really the garage and the lower level, primary living area, and then the bedroom. Our proposal is to add over the living area side of the building right side
the balance of the elevations you know it's it's right there by um you know right by uh the tennis courts rackets club >> but right two down from >> it's right opposite to the rackets
>> right right behind >> yeah right behind That little window is right there. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> And it's two doors further down. It's where the old >> post office. >> The post office. >> It's right next to
>> Oh, it's literally >> the one next to me is the old post office. >> Oh, post I know which building on >> Yeah, I worked in that. >> Yeah, they have the green giants right there. So the uh next to us on the if I'm facing Hobart right hand side is the
old post which console. >> So now I'm on my BOA1 sheet and I guess we just prepped this up to go to the board of adjustment because we didn't call them HBC sheets. I don't know why but anyway that's really kind of the
same sort of a thing in terms of the way we format our drawings. So on my first sheet, my BOA1, we add a second floor on this right side, right, which is really a new primary
bedroom suite. And then we added on the left side in sort of dormant area as we brought the roof across because we're doing that thing where we're trying to take a um split which is basically two buildings. One going this way and
another going this way and we're trying to pull the roof across it so that it looks more like a homogeneous building less like a split. That's what that move is. But remember, there's a 4 and a half
foot difference in floor elevation. So now I'm on my like primary living level at on VA2. You see the kitchen, dining area, living room, and you walk
up half a flight to get to those same three bedrooms that I showed you before. And all we did was cut in a new stair in the front there so that we could get up to this new second floor. It's really
a half flight from a stair. I actually like I'm sort of a split level fan. Actually, I don't think it's a bad design even though I think everybody else does, but I I don't think it's bad that you're only half a flight away from the bedroom. I think it sort
of makes sense. So I come up and I hit the second floor, our new second floor sheet here. I walk into the primary bedroom, closets, primary bath. I come
this way into a closet. And now to get additional storage space, we have to go up half a flight of stairs into that area. or in the front we go up another half a flight to get to this
little finished storage area. This could all just be one area. Both of these two stairways are going to the same place, right? It's just that the back area is part of somebody's closet. That's what's
going on. So, if I go to my elevations, I'm on my DOA4 now. Our front doors remained. Our garage doors have remained. Our two um bedrooms have remained. And there's you can see our
new stairway cutting in here coming up to our new primary bedroom suite over our existing living room. We're extending the chimney because, you know, we're going higher. Our old building
is probably right around there. And now we're coming through. And when we got onto this side, this is that thing I was talking about before where we extend the roof through the building so that we lose that split bifurcation
kind of of one gable and the other gable colliding. So now we come through the building. But when we do, all of this area here becomes sort of added dormer space because remember we have to go up another half flight to get there. And
we're making the roof look continuous. Now Martin's actually or maybe Matt, I'm not sure who actually commented. And I think they're actually right that maybe the skylights are a bad idea here. And I think I think uh just looking at it,
it's probably a shed dormer is the right answer because it seems silly to add another peak into this building, but the shed dormer would work. Get rid of the skylights because she's trying to drive light down into the foyer and that would
get rid of it. The shed dormer would actually look good on the celebration. So anyway, that's our new build. All the materials match existing as we come up. When we come on to the side, you can see my old building and then my new building coming through. And we just bring our
new building across. This deck and this sun room in the back is all existing. The first floor I come into the rear of the building. You see, we brought the gable through. We sort of have that low that low dormer because we're trying to
maintain this sort of low ridge height. And then when we come onto our left elevation, you see our this cable running through as we go rear. If I look at this thing on, we did a rendering for you and you can
see how we've taken our building and we added this new dormers. We picked up the roof, made it one continuous roof, brought our other gable over the two garages this way, and then these are the two skylights that Horton was really
talking about that we think he's right. They should really or maybe matter. I keep looking at you thinking you're um but that uh it would make sense that they that should be, you know, a shed or
landscape plan. And that's really my um complete application. The um if I go back to the my initial application itself, it's basically what
I said in the cover letter is actually ideally trying to add a a new floor level on top of this existing house. It's really to give us a primary bedroom suite and then gives us a little storage area now on the left side where
previously that storage area was unatt. That's all that's occurred. We also included all the the windows would be simulated divided flight windows thermal pane. The u windows would be you know white. The
rendering is a good example of what's going on here. All the trim is wood. The existing house wood trim and uh the brick for the chimney would match the existing. All of our materials
match. This is a an addition to a building that would look like it was built this way. It's not a isolated addition to maintain a historic building.
This is really expanding that making it look reasonable as it goes along. And that's it again. >> Thank you. >> Um Matt, any comments? >> No, I think um yeah, one of our big
comments was, you know, consider shallow pitch shed dorm instead of the skylights and sounds like Tim was on board with it. Um, besides that, uh, you know, just the normal no one grain fiber cement sighting is allowed. Um,
yeah, we would recommend this application for approval. >> Thank you. Um, just quickly, uh, the color that you're showing on the rendering, is that the color you're >> Well, that's the color of the color of the >> the house right now.
>> Okay. But >> that's why we would like to continue with. Okay. All right. Uh, any questions or comments on the board? >> Um, I know this is non-conforming, but
can you make suggestions on the on the stonework? >> Yeah. >> Being um >> like the existence. >> Yeah. No. Well, that's you mean the new stonework? >> That's ex >> only on the chimney. Is that correct? >> I'm talking about the front the
stonework stone veneer. >> Yes. So it just >> there's a stone there's a stone. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. So some some of the stones in here like for I mean for me doesn't I mean I
know this is anforming house and but I think that you know just just like you know comment on my the shed line. There was just a couple things for me that makes it feel like it doesn't sit as well into the neighborhood. Like so design's beautiful overall. Um, and and
I I would probably say I don't know if those are the existing garage doors or newer ones. >> Those are all existing. >> Okay. So, you're I Okay, so then that's comments I'm going to leave out, but um I think maybe the stonework just I don't know something that feels >> the stonework is existing.
>> Yeah, >> I'm just looking at is it painted white? >> It's funny because it doesn't >> it looks like it's painted white. Oh, just it's the way the photo looks. >> This is all existing. This is Okay. Okay. Well, then you then you answered my question and I have no comments. So,
um, thank you. >> Yeah. Yeah, that's why. >> Yeah. So, I'm fine. >> Okay. Um, any more questions? Is there anyone in the public? Any comments, questions?
>> Okay. Having none. Um, do I hear a motion to approve this application? >> Good. >> Second. >> Thank you. Okay. >> When can I just before we vote on that? >> Can we get a picture?
>> Can we just Can we vote to approve but with the shed dormer and not the skylights? Because I kind of think that's okay. >> Yes. Um they braced me to you know they wanted to move forward on >> I just wanted to make sure
>> that's all right with all the recommendations made by our professional or any of the board members and I think we know what those are listed ready okay perfect um so Sarah roll please
>> yes >> Davis >> yes >> Robert Frankle >> yes >> Brad Jenkins Yes. >> Gary Rosen. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Best. >> Yes. >> All right, let's move.
>> Congratulations. Yes. Congratulations. >> Okay. Application number 64311 road block number 2111 lot number 14. the contributing property in the short hill uh park historic district.
>> Yeah, this is the regulatory application to construct a house uh house additions, demolish existing garage to construct two and a halfcar garage and other associated exterior site improvements. If we can have the applicant and
professionals sworn in as they're getting the boards done. Okay. >> Again, we can have you sworn in. >> All right. You can state your name, spell your last names. Oh, I've got the time. I've got the spelling your name already, but you can skip that. Let's
take your um your relationship to the application as well. >> Last name S I D A Clark. >> Oh um and do you both swear or affirm that the testimony you're going to provide this evening will be the truth of the whole truth and that is not the truth.
>> Yes. >> Please proceed. >> Okay. Uh my name is Padu and my wife Ma and I as the owners of this property which in the north uh we moved in this property 25 with our 5-year-old son who just
started kindergarten right after that and one year old daughter started take care um so ever since then we've absolutely grown in love with this neighborhood and the kids getting a lot of unstructured time speaks in the country like in
particular today or previously kids will play. So also we are totally committed to the neighborhood and raising our kids here. Garden space uh not just the people and the kids obviously but also the beautiful homes here and the
historic nature beautiful homes here. So I have come here to request what is the addition to your existing home which is centered on three pieces which obviously tend to go brief detail over but very quickly um these are in lounge. So my
parents and my wife parent we intend for them to come here often already in the nine months here my parents have stayed with us for three months and they gave back for them to come here later this year. So a small lounge for them to keep their belongings and so on would go a long way in staying organized space. It's number one. Number two is um
extending our garage from single car garage or two car garage mean a lot to us at this stage where two young kids and thirdly having an office room because the existing bedrooms are all occupied with the kids and my parents lost come here. So an office room would
go a long way for me to work from home which happens at least two days a week. Um so that's it. take over and thank you so much for the time and energy you're spending in. >> Okay, this site is 11 window. It's on
the corner of Windom and it's like two doors to the right of where we just were the other side of window again like sort of looking at the dance courts for the record. Uh it's a
1930s, you know, um Buddha revival, I guess you call it. You know, that whole area is really t revival. And initially in the original um analysis that David Gibson did um in
1980 for the historic district that initially, you know, what was submitted for to the national register I guess would you call it the uh this was not listed as a significant
product for a security revival from the 30s it's you know some would call it a sort of mock builder that's sort of a architectural term for intuitive revival and um
you know the historic district was really from its initial intent was trying to capture houses built sort of between 1880 and 1920. This is a little this whole area is a little too late, but I I think in um
the I'm going to say Barton's report, but I guess it's really the firm's report that was completed maybe about four or five years ago. I think it was this was added by Barton or by Barton's office as a significant
structure and and all of these tutors have been added as structures. Although I just want everybody to realize that that's Barton's report which is great because Barton is an expert and it's even better because he's not here to
counteract contradict me but it's not a As I understand it, and Matt may have much more information, it's not actually an approved report by or not an accepted as a national report. This is a a local
report that was completed by a esteemed preservation architect. But I think that is true, right? is not hasn't been accepted on a state or a national level
as a actual district. And I I think you guys pretty much know this because you're probably familiar with this some of the other work. And I'm only saying that because part of what is saying in this case is
that the garage is sort of a historic structure and he doesn't want us to remove it. And I think maybe that does make sense. And I think the way to go further really with this case is I'd love to be able to
set up like a Zoom call with Matt and maybe a couple people on uh the video if that's possible. Anybody that could join when whatever you could really do and trying to talk about this and figure out the best way to proceed because there's
other things that are going on here. The neighbors here who is concerned about encroachment into the right side. The um this site is also again in this R4 district where it's required to have a
20,000 foot lot. I think this lot's only about 8,000 square ft. So it needs variance approval also. I don't mean to interrupt you, but would you prefer that >> we listen to
the neighbor and then give you guys a chance to work with Barton because as I read the report, I mean, he's not recommending this to be approved at this time. >> I I think it'd be great to do. I'd like to just run everybody through real
quick. >> Are you sure? Because >> like I'll do it in five minutes. >> Okay. >> Okay. And then we can have >> We want the We want to hear from the neighbor. >> Did you want to hear from the neighbor first? >> No. Go ahead. Run through it so she can >> I'll do it quick. But I I think that that's the best way to proceed. I don't
know how to I don't know if Tuesday's the day still. I just don't know how it works at this point, but I'd really like to move this along because >> okay, >> my client's pushing me. >> Right. >> Anyway, the existing building, right? There's an existing bedroom on the first floor. There's this existing covered
porch that we're talking about enclosing. And then here's that existing garage. And then there's in the front here what we call a sun room, which was obviously a big front porch that at some point in time was, you know, it's a slab on grade. I mean,
it was definitely a front porch. Then I get up to the second floor, and this is really a three-bedroom house. And that's what my client is talking about. He's got his two kids here. is they're in this primary room and they really have
kind of what I mean I guess it's great to have a primary bathroom in the house but it's a really small primary bathroom. We're not asking to expand this upper level at all. This is the roof of the garage and the roof of the porch below
the existing building. You know, it's a nice revival. It's got um a nice scale to it. It has this little kickup in the middle in those front windows that Martin is actually or maybe it was Matt, I don't know, is
talking about in um because we straightened it. than the other elevations of the existing building. If I come now to my new work, I plotted actually the neighbor's house
on the um onto our survey. So, we can and his his site is very tight like the back corner of their original like sleeping porch area that was an old sleeping porch on the left side is only like 3.49 49 ft off
the property line and then it kicks on an angle. It's about 7.53. But our building right now is kind of forward of it. If you look where I put that little 700 number,
that box is the garage. And then you see how we've kind of encapsulated it with the new building. I think that's what Barton doesn't like because it's like we're totally losing the existing garage. Then over here in the lower left is that
little enclosed porch that we were talking about, you know, finishing. Now, if I come to my BOA2 sheet, that's the existing garage guarded. And you can see our new our new garage. You can see how close we
are really to the property line. and we come into a little mud room, powder room, and we added an office there. That's really where we are. This is that enclosed area. We're trying to give sort of a wing for the in-laws to be in with
their bed. And the elevations, you know, we've left the front elevation, although we're replacing all the windows. And that little kick that I showed you in the front two, that's been replaced and flattened now. And there's a lot of Art
has a lot of comments on this that I think my client is willing to really look at better. Probably better suited on a Zoom. There's my new garage. Again, it's a one-story building. We come our new garage, right, our existing
building. And when we're all done, you know, this thing is really like this garage is pull forward towards some property. These front yard are our new garage, the existing sun room and our
building. And I'm done. I just wanted to give you a case just so if anybody gets on the Zoom with us, you sort of know where we started. Yeah, we have we have a couple things going on and certainly the fact that you would like to uh you
know talk to Barton and work out some of these things I think it would be a little better. I don't disagree that uh neighbor you're approaching even just with that little bit um even though the garage part is cool but the wraparound.
So I do agree. Um, can we talk? Can the neighbors so anyone here >> want to come up and so before we swear you just do we have these I don't know renderings do we have these two
>> oh yeah yeah >> wait >> should be like the last page of the application >> the application >> I didn't look but they should be okay >> I don't want to end up >> okay
>> now they're in here >> okay Thank. >> Okay, sir. And if you could state your um first and last name, spell your last name for the record. >> My name is Trisha. K U N T. >> Um and do you swear or affirm that the testimony you want to provide this
evening will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> So, I live right here. My house is not in the picture, but it's like really close is some of the numbers um that mentioned. Um, so I live at 151 Hobart Avenue. Um, and I've lived there for 5
years now with my family. Uh, I absolutely love living in the historic district. Um, walk around the neighborhood three times a day when I'm working from home. Um, I love the house next to me. It's a beautiful house.
So, um, but I just wanted to express uh some of the concerns I have with the proposed addition. Uh some of them are more broad-based and outside of the view of the historic commission, but uh I'll still mention them anyway. Um the
property uh the garage is right now at 9 8 or 8 9 ft away from the boundary line and when extension is done they'll be within 4T. Um, and I guess my house is also pretty old and it's as was mentioned in part
it's 4 ft in other parts it's 9 ft from the boundary line. So it'll be so close that this will start looking like town homes really. I lived in a town home before and that's not what uh what this neighborhood looks like. It's it's a
historic neighborhood has a great character which is why we all love to live here. Um so my my broader point uh is it's the houses how this get too close to each other right these are small dots m I'm I'm think or something
like that and uh the proposed lot is even smaller so uh I I think these are two words the second point I wanted to make was uh the the window of the proposed office is really next to my windows as well
>> and we'll be able not only we'll be able to see each other I guess we'll be able to hear each other too, which I don't think is is uh is good. We also have mature trees right now, so that's why it's a bit of a a natural curtain between the two homes. When the
extension is done, I don't know what the my I'm wondering the trees will survive the extension. Uh that's number three. Number four, which is important, is we live in a high water table area. My other neighbor um has water logging
issues every time it rains. I think people who have put uh dry wells when they did construction that messed up the area and so then every little bit of rain his yard turns soggy. I have two sun bumps in my basement in 2011 under
the previous owner. Two sun bumps and they really run a lot when it rains. So um when they do the session it's going to change some of that water issues I guess. Um
and um I think the previous owner of this this house 11 extended the driveway. I I don't know if it was approved or what, but when they rep the driveway they extended it a little bit. I think it's extens. Uh so um that hasn't caused issues, but
like adding some more covered area that may potentially change some of these water logging issues. And then visually adding a garage pulls the whole house forward a little bit. I guess that means everybody now will try to build in the
front including somebody who'll buy my house someday can easily try to add a th00and square to two uh two stories. So those were the five points I wanted to make. Um I think it's a beautiful house. It's perfect for
the lot but building any more would just take up a lot more lot space. I don't know if the lock coverage and all this not getting technical because I don't understand that stuff yet. Uh but I think there are a lot of unintended consequences for what's being proposed
here. Um and uh for all these reasons I would ask the commission to take a closer look at this and I can't make a recommendation but I think you all are where I stand uh with this. So thank you very much. We again I think this is great service you guys do for the city.
they walk to this neighborhood every day. It's a beautiful name. Thank you very much for keeping us doing all the work you're doing to keep the neighborhood. >> Thank you. Thank you. Um so Tim, I think at this point um you heard
some of the the issues and and maybe having Yeah. >> Um you know, addressing some of the landscaping issues. Yeah, I brought everything. >> Okay. And you know, maybe that's something that this board would like to
hear forward. Engineering issues. I know sometimes when you do an addition, the engineering piece or storm water, it actually improves because that person has to put in additional dry wells, etc. But it would be nice if it's if it's not
pushing too hard, maybe kind of address that at the next meeting. Um, Yeah. Okay. So, what do we do to move them to the next?
>> Um, I guess we can carry, but I think July we made it full. >> There's, as far as I know, we have two anticipated for July. Let's uh let's look at it and we will get back with you.
>> They're gonna have to read us that >> or carry till July. We could we could always push me later. >> Does that make sense? >> Yeah. >> You can always carry it out to July. >> Yeah, we can we can do that because if something opens up
in July, right? >> Okay, perfect. July >> carrying July 21st um at the Melbourne Library uh without further notice. >> Thank you. Thanks everybody. >> Thanks.
>> I think really just I'll run through really quick guys. Uh the application 80 has to be carried in front of July. right? Yes. Um
the advisory reviewed to the zoning board of 389. I hope you guys had a chance to look at what we were given. Is there anyone here to present this? If there's not um so
again, >> we're being asked you're being we're being asked to come in now. going there on Monday. >> Yes. Because we would have to hurry up and be right to >> I know it doesn't make sense. Um
>> did anybody just have any comments on >> Okay, real quick. >> I'll be back. >> Okay. >> Okay. I'm just looking at it just generally, but I I'm this is just is
I was cartoon like, so I use that word um because it's the best word that came to my mind to to take a historic building that's very miniature and add on but looks like, you know, kind of a train
to it. I'm going to just keep it really simple like that. And I'm also just, you know, just a it's just so disproportionate besides the fact we don't need more housing. There's plenty of it and I know that's not relatively
historic nature, but um just to listen to the HBC. >> Um okay. And so just just to clarify the comic um disproportionate in size or >> it's disproportionate in size. It's it's just it's visually just completely
inappropriate and it makes the metropolitan look mild. Um I I just I don't even want to use an architectural technical term. I mean it's it's just it's probably one of the hardest buildings to look at.
>> Substantial messy. Thank you so much. That's a really great and I'm concerned about um just flooding in the downtown. we have such a flooding problem and to have that much more impervious coverage especially when it's not something we have to do because of um you know high
density housing the low income housing so I just I hope they think twice about >> so what I'd like to do here and any other comments from the board and then what I'd like to do is have uh because there was no one present to answer some
of these questions for us we know um that I don't know. I think what what we'd like to do is put any comments that any of us have about this building and shoot it back to then Matt Barton to uh write
the report. Our professionals has to be done before Monday. Um, but I'd like them to concentrate historically if I think it's somewhere between it
cross building. I think we're all familiar with this building >> and now they're gluing putting something attached to it on the back of it. So, you know, I think just to out of respect, I think we should at least let
them um >> explain this. >> Go ahead. We're just saying I have to leave. I have to leave. >> Oh, you got to go. I'm so sorry.
>> So, we're gonna we're gonna take a quick vote so we can pass it on to you. Is that all right? So, do I hear a motion to allow Bartman to summarize a report for the zoning? >> Motion second. >> Second.
>> All in favor? >> I. >> Perfect. >> Let's just adopt the date. Okay guys, we have to move to the library. >> Yes. Starting in August. No, >> July 21st. Oh, July 21st. Yeah.
Yeah. >> Last meeting here. >> Okay. So, did you anybody's looking in second or third week th Thursday? >> Either one of them work for everybody. Can we just pick the second and vote on it?
>> Okay. Do I hear a motion to approve uh the second Thursday of every month? >> Perfect. Second. >> All in fa. Go ahead. Take >> all. >> Yes. >> Zachary Davis.
>> Yes. >> Robert Franco. >> Yes. >> Brad Jenkins. >> Yes. >> Gary Rosen. >> Yes. >> Justin. >> Yes. >> Christine Best. >> Yes. >> Awesome. Okay. Um, yes.
>> Good. I mean these ordinances are going to this my understanding is I don't know that we have another meeting prior to this but they were these are things that have been discussed in past meetings and to them so this is just an opportunity if there are any additional comments on the ordinance
>> what about this application update is something we can do over email >> well I know I mean any conversation that is had about um changes to the checklist and application have to be done for
>> it's kind of >> because I think there was the confusion of her saying oh our application was >> so I think in order to have conversation we have to carry that one >> one suggestion I have is just we usually
get a zoning table from like Tim and established architects but I think getting the zoning table is helpful for this community too because I think things like F you know give you a sense of passing it's also frankly helpful for zoning because it means people have to
think about these things before they come to zoning and get the so so we should require same zoning table >> on that check >> it might be existing that we are waiting so let's let's make those yes we can
talk about it some more and the ordinance they've already gone through uh planning So let's just >> yeah's com or >> Yeah. I just don't have it yet. It's got
to be just directly to me. Yeah. Okay. So we sent it to >> Yeah. So we're going to take a vote that we're going to carry all of this. So do I hear a motion that we will carry the application update and the historic designations? Motion to approve. >> Yeah.
>> Yeah. He's too tired. Okay. Second. >> Second. He's approved. >> All in favor? >> I We're gonna adjourn this meeting. Thank Thanks, Brad. Thanks, Brad. >> Good night, everyone. I've never closed a club